Update

Conference Report on "Bioethics and Human Destiny: Jewish and Christian Perspectives"

The conference, Bioethics and Human Destiny: Jewish and Christian Perspectives, was developed to encourage discussion of the ultimate future of humans. Twelve renowned scholars from varying faith traditions were invited to re-examine the relevant teachings of their own faith on eschatology, to share those teachings with each other, and to apply those teachings to their own lives and chosen professions.

The conference opened on Sunday, February 2, 1997, at the Arrowhead Springs Conference Center in San Bernardino, California. The first speaker was Dr. John Lantos, associate professor of pediatrics and associate director of the MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics at the University of Chicago. Dr. Lantos centered his presentation on the case of a 17-year-old Orthodox Jewish girl with vaginal cancer. The recommended treatment, a hysterectomy, would have left the girl infertile. Jewish law mandates that treatment is obligatory yet the girl still refused treatment. However, after the girl's rabbi told her that if God wanted her to have a baby, she would, she consented to the treatment. Dr. Lantos takes the position that medicine is a moral enterprise and, therefore, should go beyond the technical aspects of treatment. He hopes to be more like the rabbi in his thinking and encourages all of medicine to do so as well.

Marsha Fowler, a professor at Azusa Pacific University, spoke on "Bioethics in the 'Nous.'" Dr. Fowler asserted in her presentation that constructive thought must do more than reclaim our embodiness as terra animata. She believes that we must seek to restore a notion of humanity as terra animata coram deo, bringing together our theology and our piety/spirituality. Dr. Fowler concluded that once we restore a notion of the life of faith as one of animated earth before God, the religious voice can speak for and to both the theoretician and the recipient of care.

Rabbi Elliot Dorff addressed the role of hope in Jewish bioethics. Rabbi Dorff is rector and professor of philosophy at the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, California. He concluded that, in Jewish law, God is the moral compass, judge, and enforcer, and illness is one of the punishments God inflicts for sin. This aspect of Jewish theology can undermine the hope of the ill. However, God is also the Healer, and that can buttress the hope of the sick. Balancing these perspectives is the ongoing task not only of Jewish theologians, but also of rabbis and other Jews as they minister to the sick. God commands Jews to save people from harm, providing healing, when possible, as an agent and partner with God. Furthermore, since God owns the bodies of Jews throughout life--and even in death-- it is the obligation of every Jew to preserve health when possible.

The final speaker on Sunday was John B. Cobb Jr., emeritus professor at the Claremont School of Theology and co-director of the Claremont Center for Process Studies. Dr. Cobb's presentation on Christian eschatology concentrated mainly on concern for God's will to be done on earth, and the belief in life after death. Dr. Cobb believes it would be better for humans to discern what God is doing instead of striving for control over life. The struggle against death has become inappropriate for many people. The dread is no longer of death, but of continued life beyond its natural term in a condition rendering it meaningless and burdensome. If we can discern God working in the world, we may be able to work with God to achieve His purposes. This may lead us to seek to define the natural term of life and the nature of a good death as the completion of such a life. Dr. Cobb hopes this will guide medical research and practice in new directions.

Beginning the Monday presentations, Roy Branson, senior research fellow at the Kennedy Institute of Ethics at Georgetown University spoke about "Visions of Justice and the Healing of Nations." Dr. Branson believes both healing and biomedical ethics take place only if there is an encompassing vision. Ethics of virtue and obligation are necessary, but beyond that, people must glimpse a moral vision--a horizon of imagination that draws communities from perception of facts to concerted action. Without a vision, the question, ethics, and a moral community perish.

The next presenter, Margaret Mohrmann, Associate Professor of Pediatrics and lecturer in religious studies at the University of Virginia, spoke about attitudes toward the suffering and death of children, and how those attitudes reveal assumptions and beliefs about human destiny common to people both within and without organized religion. The death of a child is regarded differently from that of an elderly person. The mourning is for something more than the loss of a loved person; it is partly for the loss of an important piece of our own future, our own destiny. The intricate entanglements of the destinies of child, parent, and physician that come into play at times of pediatric medical crisis may be impossible to uncoil fully, but explicit attention to the confusion seems at least a minimal requirement for ethical medical practice and, therefore, for bioethics. Theology also needs to call bioethicists to question the moral weight of argument based on a presumed human need to live a "full" life.

Alan Verhey, the Evert J. and Hattie E. Blekkink Professor of Religion at Hope College, was the next speaker. Dr. Verhey spoke on the topic, "Resurrection and the Redemption of our Bodies: Toward a Watchful Medicine." Medicine resists death. It creates a language, but not necessarily the language of the patient; and if the patient doesn't speak this language, then he or she feels alienated. Death threatens our relationship with God, making us feel like abandoned children. The last word belongs to death, so we are right to be fearful of it. However, Christians believe that the last word belongs to God. Life is not the ultimate good. Christ walked willingly into suffering, therefore we should not be afraid to suffer as well. Watchfulness in medicine will bring a more carefree care.

Sidney Callahan spoke next on the topic, "Faith, Suffering, and a Good Death." Dr. Callahan is an author, psychologist, and professor of psychology at Mercy College. She contends that the convictions of Christian ethicists on the meaning of necessary suffering can be conveyed to others. While Christian faith may make death and suffering more of an affront to human beings believed to be destined for eternal life, the meaning and values of solidarity accorded to suffering in Christian faith may be recognized and appreciated by all reasonable human beings of good will facing the inevitable suffering of the dying process.

"People of the Land, People of the Spirit" was the topic of the next speaker, Karen Baker-Fletcher. Dr. Baker-Fletcher is Associate Professor of Theology and Culture at Claremont School of Theology, and Associate Professor of Religion at Claremont Graduate School. She believes that bioethics and social ethics are deeply interrelated. This is particularly clear in the area of "environmental racism,"a term coined by the Reverend Benjamin Chavis, to describe the racialized hierarchy of environmental abuses. Dr. Baker-Fletcher wants us to recognize that we are all people of the land and people of God--people of dust and Spirit. Therefore, we are responsible for acting out a holistic, inclusive love for humanity and the earth, for society and the planet.

David Feldman, Director of The Jewish Center of Teaneck in New Jersey, followed. Dr. Feldman, spoke about physician-assisted suicide. He contends that our duty is to do everything that is merciful, which includes pain medication that incidentally shortens life, but to do nothing that intentionally ends life. Only the Creator takes life. Our compassion for the patient should show us that we need to spare the patient the burden of choice. Once the choice to live or die is ours, so is the duty, so is the pressure to make the choice to die, and so is the guilt for not having done so. The mercy we might show to those who ask to die entails a lack of mercy for the far greater number whose psyches would be affected by the new burden of choice.

Miroslav Volf was the next presenter. He spoke on the topic, "Healing and the Expectation of the End." Dr. Volf teaches at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California. He sought to explore, theologically, the relationship between healing and beliefs about the nearness of "the promised end." He focused upon two notable features of Jesus' ministry in their interrelation--the proclamation of the nearness of the eschatological reign of God, and the practice of healing the sick. He also examined the eschatological dimension of Jesus' death and resurrection, and the relationship of these themes to healing.

The final speaker was Kevin O'Rourke, professor of health care ethics and Director of the Center for Health Care Ethics at Saint Louis University Health Sciences Center. Dr. O'Rourke spoke on the topic, "Using or Foregoing Life Support: The Catholic Tradition." Catholics believe that we are stewards of human life, not owners. Life is not the ultimate good. For medical treatment to be obligatory, it must be effective at prolonging life and not excessively burdensome. Dr. O'Rourke encourages people to define the ultimate goal of life support. For a treatment to be judged ineffective, it must leave the patient incapable of loving God, others, and himself. *

Cynthia A. Bilbrough, BA
Recent Graduate, University of Virginia
Severna Park, Maryland

[Go to index.] [Online Ethics Library]

All contents copyright © 1997 Loma Linda University. All rights reserved 

Revised July 28, 1997

Send comments and questions to webmaster@univ.llu.edu

URL: http://www.llu.edu