Suicide
This article will treat the subject under the following three
heads:
I. The notions and divisions of suicide;
II. The principles according to which its morality must be
judged;
III. Statistics and explanations of its frequency.
I. NOTION
Suicide is the act of one who causes his own death, either by
positively destroying his own life, as by inflicting on himself a
mortal wound or injury, or by omitting to do what is necessary to
escape death, as by refusing to leave a burning house. From a
moral standpoint we must treat therefore not only the prohibition
of positive suicide, but also the obligation incumbent on man to
preserve his life. Suicide is direct when a man has the intention
of causing his own death, whether as an end to be attained, or as
a means to another end, as when a man kills himself to escape
condemnation, disgrace, ruin etc. It is indirect, and not usually
called by this name when a man does not desire it, either as an
end or as a means, but when he nevertheless commits an act which
in effect involves death, as when he devotes himself to the care
of the plague-stricken knowing that he will succumb under the
task.
II. MORALITY
The teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the morality of
suicide may be summarized as follows:
Positive and Direct Suicide
Positive and direct suicide perpetrated without God's consent
always constitutes a grave injustice towards Him. To destroy a
thing is to dispose of it as an absolute master and to act as one
having full and independent dominion over it; but man does not
possess this full and independent dominion over his life, since to
be an owner one must be superior to his property. God has reserved
to himself direct dominion over life; He is the owner of its
substance and He has given man only the serviceable dominion, the
right of use, with the charge of protecting and preserving the
substance, that is, life itself. Consequently suicide is an
attempt against the dominion and right of ownership of the
Creator. To this injustice is added a serious offence against the
charity I which man owes to himself, since by his act he deprives
himself of the greatest good in his possession 1 and the
possibility of attaining his final end. Moreover, the sin may be
aggravated by circumstances, such as failure ih conjugal,
paternal, or filial piety, failure in justice or charity, if by
taking his life one I eludes existing obligations of justice or
acts of charity ;, which he could and should perform. That suicide
is unlawful is the teaching of Holy Scripture and of the Church,
which condemns the act as a most atrocious crime. (Until quite
recently, in hatred of the sin and to arouse the horror of its
children, the Church denied Christian burial to the suicide.)
Moreover, suicide is directly opposed to the most powerful and
invincible tendency of every creature and especially of man, the
preservation of life. Finally, for a sane man deliberately to take
his own life, he must, as a general rule, first have annihilated
in himself all that he possessed of spiritual life, since suicide
is in absolute contradiction to everything that the Christian
religion teaches us as to the end and object of life and, except
in cases of insanity, is usually the natural termination of a life
of disorder, weakness, and cowardice.
The reason we have advanced to prove the malice of a suicide,
namely, God's right and dominion, likewise justifies the
modification of the general principle: God being the master of our
life He may with His own consent remove from suicide whatever
constitutes its disorder. Thus do some authorities justify the
conduct of certain saints, who, impelled by the desire of
martyrdom and especially to protect their chastity did not wait
for their executioners to put them to death, but sought it in one
manner or other themselves; nevertheless, the Divine will should
be certain and clearly manifested in each particular case. The
question is asked: Can one who is condemned to death kill himself
if ordered to do so by the judge? Some authors answer this
question in the affirmative, basing their argument on the right
which society possesses to punish certain malefactors with death
and to commission any executioner, hence also the malefactor
himself, to carry out the sentence. We share the most widely
accepted opinion, that this practice, prevalent in certain
countries of the East, is not lawful. Vindictive justice -- and
for that matter all justice -- requires a distinction between the
subject of a right and that of a duty, hence in the present case
between the one who punishes and the one who is punished. Finally,
the same principle which forbids anyone to personally compass his
own death also forbids him to advise, direct, or command, with the
direct intention of suicide, that another should slay him.
Positive and Indirect Suicide
Positive but indirect suicide committed without Divine consent is
also unlawful unless, everything considered, there is sufficient
reason for doing what will cause death to follow. Thus, it is not
a sin, but an act of exalted virtue, to go into savage lands to
preach the Gospel, or to the bedside of the plague stricken, to
minister to them, although they who do so have before them the
prospect of inevitable and speedy death; nor is it a sin for
workmen in the discharge of duties to climb on roofs and
buildings, thus exposing themselves to danger of death, etc. All
this is lawful precisely because the act itself is good and
upright, for in theory the persons in question have not m view
either as end or means the evil result, that is, death, that will
follow, and, moreover, if there be an evil result it is largely
compensated for by the good and useful result which they seek. On
the other hand there is sin in exposing oneself to danger of death
to display courage, to win a wager, etc., because in all these
cases the end does not in any way compensate for the danger of
death that is run. To judge whether or not there is sufficient
reason for an act which will apparently be followed by death, all
the circumstances must be weighed, namely, the importance of the
good result, the greater or less certainty of its being attained,
the greater or less danger of death, etc., all questions which may
in a specific case be very difficult to solve.
Negative and Direct Suicide
Negative and direct suicide without the consent of God constitutes
the same sin as positive suicide. In fact man has over his life
only the right of use with corresponding obligations to preserve
the object of God's dominion, the substance of his life. Hence, it
follows obviously that he fails in this obligation of usufructuary
who neglects the necessary means for the preservation of life, and
this with the intention of destroying the latter, and consequently
violates the rights of God.
D. Negative and Indirect Suicide
Negative and indirect suicide without the consent of God is also
an attempt against the rights of the Creator and an injustice
towards Him whenever without sufficient cause a man neglects all
the means of preservation of which he should make use. If a man as
usufructuary is obliged in justice to preserve his life, it
follows that he is equally bound to make use of all the ordinary
means which are indicated in the usual course of things, namely:
* he should employ all the ordinary means which nature itself
provides, such as to eat, drink, sleep, and so on;
* moreover, he should avoid all dangers which he may easily avoid,
e.g. to flee from a burning house, to escape from an infuriated
animal when it may be done without difficulty.
In fact to neglect the ordinary means for preserving life is
equivalent to killing one's self, but the same is not true with
regard to extraordinary means. Thus theologians teach that one is
not bound in order to preserve life to employ remedies which,
considering one's condition, are regarded as extraordinary and
involving extraordinary expenditure; one is not obliged to undergo
a very painful surgical operation, nor a considerable amputation,
not to go into exile in order to seek a more beneficial climate,
etc. To use a comparison, the lessee of a house is bound to take
care of it as becomes a good father of a family, to make use of
the ordinary means for the preservation of the property, for
instance, to extinguish a fire which he may easily extinguish,
etc., but he is not bound to employ means considered
extraordinary, such as to procure the latest novelties invented by
science to prevent or extinguish fire.
The principles which have been outlined in the four propositions
or divisions above given should serve for the solution of
particular cases; however, the application may not always be
equally easy, and thus a person may by an objectively unlawful act
take his life and nevertheless consider it permissible and even an
act of exalted virtue. It may be asked whether by performing or
omitting a certain act a person may injure his health and shorten
his life. To apply the foregoing principles: it is first of all
clear (1st and 3rd propositions, A and C) that one may not have in
view this hastening of death, but, this hypothesis aside, it may
be said on the one hand that to expose oneself without sufficient
reason to a considerable shortening of life constitutes a serious
injury to the rights of the Creator; but on the other hand if the
danger of death be not imminent, although it is to be feared that
life may be shortened even by several years, it is not a grave but
only a venial sin. This is the case with the drunkard who by his
intemperance causes his premature death. Again it must be borne in
mind that with the addition of a reasonable motive the thing may
be entirely lawful and even an act of virtue; thus the workman
does not sin by devoting himself to rough labor, and the saints
performed a very meritorious and highly virtuous act when in order
to overcome their passions they lacerated and tortured their flesh
by penance and fasting and were thus the cause of their earlier
death.
III. FREQUENCY OF SUICIDE; CHIEF CAUSES
The plague of suicide belongs especially to the period of
decadence of the civilized peoples of antiquity, Greeks, Romans,
and Egyptians. The Christian Middle Ages were unacquainted with
this morbid tendency, but it has reappeared at a more recent
period, has developed constantly since the Renaissance, and at
present has reached such an intensity among all civilized nations
that it may be considered one of the special evils of our time.
This suicide rate obviously includes suicides attributable to
mental illness, but we cannot accept the opinion of a large number
of physicians, moralists, and jurists who, led into error by a
false philosophy, lay it down as a general rule that suicide is
always due to insanity, so great is the horror which this act
inspires in every man of sane mind. The Church rejects this theory
and, while admitting exceptions, considers that those unfortunates
who, impelled by despair or anger, attempt their life often act
through malice or culpable cowardice. In fact, despair and anger
are not as a general thing movements of the soul which it is
impossible to resist, especially if one does not neglect the helps
offered by religion, confidence in God, belief in the immortality
of the soul and in a future life of rewards and punishments.
Widely different reasons have been advanced to explain the high
frequency of suicide, but it is more correct to say that it does
not depend on any one particular cause, but rather on an
assemblage of factors, such as the social and economic situation,
the misery of a great number, a more feverish pursuit of what is
considered happiness, often ending in cruel deceptions, the ever
more refined search for pleasure, a more precocious and intense
stimulation of sexual life, intellectual overwork, the influence
of the media and the sensational news with which it daily provides
its readers, the influences of heredity, the ravages of
alcoholism, etc. But it is undeniable that the religious factor is
by far the most important, the increase in suicides keeping step
with the de-Christianization of a country. France presents a
painful example parallel to the systematic de-Christianization;
the number of suicides for each 100,000 of population increased
from 8.32 in 1852 to 29 in 1900. The reason is obvious. Religion
alone, and especially the Catholic religion, instructs us with
regard to the true destiny of life and the importance of death; it
alone furnishes a solution of the enigma of suffering, inasmuch as
it shows man living in a land of exile and suffering as a means of
acquiring the glory and happiness of a future life. By its
doctrines of the efficacy of repentance and the practice of
confession it relieves the moral suffering of man; it forbids and
prevents to a large extent the disorders of life; in a word it is
of a nature to prevent the causes which are calculated to impel a
man to the extreme act.
A. VANDER HEEREN
Transcribed by Tomas Hancil
From the Catholic Encyclopedia, copyright � 1913 by the
Encyclopedia Press, Inc. Electronic version copyright � 1996 by
New Advent, Inc., P.O. Box 281096, Denver, Colorado, USA, 80228.
(
[email protected]) Taken from the New Advent Web Page
(www.knight.org/advent).
This article is part of the Catholic Encyclopedia Project, an
effort aimed at placing the entire Catholic Encyclopedia 1913
edition on the World Wide Web. The coordinator is Kevin Knight,
editor of the New Advent Catholic Website. If you would like to
contribute to this worthwhile project, you can contact him by e-
mail at (knight.org/advent). For more information please download
the file cathen.txt/.zip.
-------------------------------------------------------
Provided courtesy of:
Eternal Word Television Network
PO Box 3610
Manassas, VA 22110
Voice: 703-791-2576
Fax: 703-791-4250
Data: 703-791-4336
Web:
http://www.ewtn.com
FTP: ewtn.com
Telnet: ewtn.com
Email address: sysop@ ewtn.com
EWTN provides a Catholic online
information and service system.
-------------------------------------------------------
