The Ethics of Medical Homicide and Mutilation — John Shaqi
The Ethics of Medical Homicide and MutilationO'Malley, Austin
Religion
The Ethics of Medical Homicide and Mutilation
O'Malley, Austin
Medical ethics
This is (1) evidently nothing but an application of the Lex Talionis,
with no thought whatever of the biological animation, as such, of
the fetus. It means that if a fully formed fetus be aborted, either
no real damage is done, as such a child is viable; or the formed
child may be maimed, and then the Lex Talionis is to be applied. If
the fetus is not fully formed it is not a fit subject of the Lex
Talionis since it cannot lose an eye, a tooth, and so on, because it
lacks these organs and therefore the law of retaliation is not to be
enforced.
(2) Suppose, however, the writer of the text as the Septuagint has
it did think with St. Alphonsus that the formed fetus is animated,
and the unformed is not animated, even then the conclusion drawn
by St. Alphonsus is not warranted by the text. The laws of Exodus
do not teach embryology, physiology, or any other part of physical
science; and no authority worth a hearing holds that the Scriptures
were intended to be infallible treatises on obstetrics or astronomy.
Like the other parts of the Bible, the laws of Exodus presuppose the
unscientific biological, astronomical, and other physical notions of
the time in which they were written--the moral truth is the matter
the Scripture is dealing with; there no inaccuracy is to be found.
St. John (1:13) speaks of those who believe in Christ's name, "Qui
non _ex sanguinibus_, neque ex voluntate carnis, neque ex voluntate
viri, sed ex Deo nati sunt." Here he expresses the contemporary
notion, which is also the Thomistic opinion, that men are generated
from the specialized blood of their parents. He was interested
solely in conveying the truth that those who received Christ were
regenerated by him, not through heredity; and he does so, although
the biology is inexact. If St. Alphonsus's conclusion is valid as
from the text of Exodus, then men are generated _ex sanguinibus_, and
so on indefinitely.
The Massoretic text of this passage seems to be the best preserved:
"If men fight, and one hurt a woman who is with child, and her child
come forth, yet there is no mischief, he [who struck her] shall be
mulcted in a fine; whatsoever the husband of the woman layeth upon
him he shall pay according to the judges. But if there be mischief,
then he shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand
for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe
for stripe." Here the Hebrew text follows the Lex Talionis exactly.
If, in a brawl, a man's pregnant wife is struck and abortion results,
the offender pays the penalty. If the abortion does not kill or maim
the child, the culprit is fined by the Sanhedrim; if the child is
killed or maimed, then the penalty is according to the Lex Talionis.
In the Hebrew text also there is no mention of a distinction between
a _foetus formatus_ and _non formatus_.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account