3. THE DIFFERENT CONCEPTS OF HUMAN DIGNITY, ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES, AND THE
3.4. HUMAN DIGNITY AS A CONCEPT IN THE AFRICAN DEBATE
3.5.5. HUMAN DIGNITY AS NATURAL LAW
the most vulnerable group of people that may require to be given priority. For instance, Gabr asked:
“Who are the sick people? Are they those who are the most socially deprived or is it a certain group of people such as children with challenges? Are they those who exhibit congenital disabilities or those who are deaf whose inherent vulnerability renders them powerless?”670
There is a serious problem with how to gauge equity especially in the context of other existing socio-economic and cultural challenges. This brings about other complications regarding the determination of health care services and the beneficiaries.
On another level, the concept of human dignity as equity may create another problem, i.e.
the various forms of biases that might result in social divisions and hatred. The concept may leave us with another dilemma, how do we consider the needs of the most vulnerable people in society without overlooking the other basic needs of the community at large, in view of the limited resources available? The present research acknowledged the positive progress of the different concepts and, at the same time, realised the limitations associated with each concept so far studied.
Supreme Being, who is God.676 Natural law seeks to understand morality in terms of relationships between the agent, prescriptions of nature and the objective obligations related to it.677
The human person in this context, realises the finiteness of her or his nature and looks forward to a higher authority to achieve order and a sound relationship with other beings and the environment. The move in this direction by default pushes him or her to realise the demands of other beings like children with disabilities. The human person in this case, also makes an appeal to the conscience, which is the inner powerhouse that helps someone to make decisions and choices.678 Aquinas said,
“By using our capacity to reason and reflect on our human nature, we discover the specific ends towards which we naturally tend to incline, such as to live, to reproduce, to acquire knowledge, to have a role in an ordered society. and the general end for which God created us, to achieve good and avoid evil, pain, and suffering.”679
The very nature of natural law compels us to certain directives which are binding to all humanity and create a certain kind of relationship i.e. the creator of us all and ourselves; the relationships amongst ourselves; the relationship with the environment where we exist. 680 Regarding the above discussion, this reality objectively compels us to have a unique view, where we as human beings may be able to acknowledge our place as being lower than the creator. Our natural inclinations may give us an orientation on how to conduct ourselves before the creator, between and amongst ourselves and with the environment. To this effect, we may have an insight into how we could best treat children with disabilities based on the notion and ascriptions of natural law. Each person, through the faculty of reasoning, may constitute the capacity to possess natural law and how to use it for our own good and at the same time, for the good of children with disabilities. The Church has always taken up a protective attitude, maintaining that there is a true natural law and moral duties derived from the nature of mankind which are knowable by human reason, at least in their fundamental
676 Haakonssen, K., (2001), Natural Law in Becker, L.C., and Becker, C.B., (Eds), Encyclopedia of Ethics, Second Edition, Vol. II, New York: Routledge Publishers, 1206.
677 Ibid.
678 Rwiza, R.N., (2001), Formation of Christian Conscience in Modern Africa, Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa, 46-48. In this quotation, St. Thomas Aquinas defined conscience as the subjective norm of morality.
679 Hughes, G.J., (1986), Natural Law, in Childress, J.F., and Macquarrie, J., (Eds), A New Dictionary of Christian Ethics, London: SCM Press Ltd, 413.
680 Magee, J.M., (2013), St. Thomas Aquinas on the Natural Law, in http://www.aquinasonline.com/topics/natlaw.html, Thomistic Philosophy Page, Posted on February 05,10:52 GMT.
structures.681 The Church further affirmed this claim because the primary theological justification of natural law rests on the doctrine of creation, which states that God created human nature and human reason, so that human reason can discover how best human beings should act by reflecting on their own nature.682 What we discover is that natural law is linked directly to natural norms and precepts, which may give guidance and direction authoritatively to morality. As human beings, we find moral and ethical values naturally instituted in our intellectual faculty, which prompt us to act in a way that we achieve the objective good.683 Natural law therefore may act as the basis of our actions. While we attempt to achieve the subjective good, we acknowledge the needs of other beings i.e. children with disabilities. In the context of the formation of our morality towards others (children with disabilities), natural principles of doing good and avoiding pain may compel us to consider even further, the needs of children with disabilities who are less privileged than we are.684 In this case, natural law informs us to take care of children with disabilities. In this regard, violence against children with disabilities may bring about certain ethical questions related to human dignity in the domain of morality. Violence vented on children with disabilities may question our moral capacity to reason, which is one of the major faculties of natural law.685 The concept of human dignity as natural law goes far beyond the reality of creation as it has its origin in the creator who made us in his image and likeness.686 Human identity and dignity rests on the creator, who revealed himself through his own creation.687 We therefore realise that each person, viewed from the perspective of natural law, is endowed with a unique and inalienable dignity. The variations in terms of physical and mental status are simply accidentals that cannot take away the identity and dignity of someone as a person.
In consideration to the current discourse, human dignity is therefore a non-negotiable reality as it claims its origin from the creator. In this perspective, dignity is about responsibility and about rights and that our very dignity as human beings call forth and demands a response on
681 Grundel, J., (1975), Natural Law in Rahner, K., (Ed), Encyclopedia of Theology: A Concise Sacramentum Mundi, London: Burns and Oates, 1022.
682 Curran, C.E., (1997), Natural Law, in Clarck, P.B. and Linzey, A., (Eds), Dictionary of Ethics, Theology and Society, London: Routledge Publishers, 595.
683 Ibid.
684 Ibid.
685 Ibid.
686 The Catechism of the Catholic Church, (1994), Human Dignity as Natural Law, Nairobi: Pauline Publications Africa, Art. No. 1978.
687 Ibid.
our part, to ensure that our relationships with others and with nature itself are right, responsible, and just.688
3.5.5.1. HOW BEST CAN IT AFFIRM OR BETRAY HUMAN LIFE
The concept of human dignity as natural law is basically a unique way of looking at reality based on the perspectives some of our religious beliefs, with special emphasis on the natural theory.689 It brings about a unique morality, centred on the person, which is called a morality of love.690 What is more affirming in such a morality is the passion for the promotion of one’s dignity which may, in the process, lead to the humanisation of the society.691 One of the setbacks of the concept of human dignity as natural law is not, or does not, lie in the concept as such, rather in the source or agent who promotes it, in this case, the Church. The Church seems to hold on to certain belief systems that she claims authority over issues of faith and morality692. What we observe is that there is some sort of internal and external reservation against Church-centred morality. People tend to opt out of the burden laid upon them by Church rules on morality that are grounded in natural law. What we often notice is the disillusionment of the people, in general, that is enhanced by the rigidity of the faith- based traditions on moral issues.
The concept itself seems to be good, but the audience seem to be opposed to the concept, because of the agent that advocates it and imposes it on the people. Unfortunately, when the Church addresses such issues, it does not only focus on its members, but rather on the idea that, as a mother Church, it claims to have the authority to teach everybody on all matters of faith and morals.693 People of other faiths and other Christian churches may not accept this reality claimed by the main-line Church tradition, since it makes the realization of the concept more complex and unrealistic. We are living in a world that does not favour authoritative rules and norms on issues of morality, but the human community is more
688 Healy, S., Reynolds, B., and Jordan, T., (Eds), (2005), Human Dignity and Spirituality in a Globalized World: Encountering and Promoting Human Dignity, Dublin: Dominican Publications, The Leinster Leader, Naas, Co., 51.
689 Mac Namara, V., (2001), Theological Ethics and the Contemporary Culture, in Theological Journal:
Doctrine and Life, Vol. 51, May/June Issue No. 5, Dublin: Leinster Leader Ltd, 268.
690 Ibid.
691 Ibid.
692 Flannery, A., (Ed), (2010), Mysterium Ecclesiae, Declaration in Defence of the Catholic Doctrine on the Church Against some Present-Day Errors, in Vatican Council II, Conciliar Documents, Volume 2, 453-357.
On the infallibility of the Church’s Magisterium, the Conciliar document i.e. ‘Mysterium Ecclesiae’ starts by saying that Jesus Christ from whom derives the task proper to the pastors of teaching in the Gospel to all his people and the entire human family, wished to endow the pastors’ Magisterium with a fitting charism of infallibility in matters regarding faith and morals.
693 Ibid.
inclined to move towards plurality, a contextual approach to life and the assimilation of the various methods of doing things. Natural law theories on moral issues may not be binding in the current world settings, as perceived by faith-based traditions. To this effect, the concept of human dignity as natural law has limited chances of making an impact on society in the contemporary world. It could therefore tend not to be so helpful regarding children with disabilities as it might even ignite certain sentiments associated with certain faith-based traditions.