Mirror of Justice

A blog dedicated to the development of Catholic legal theory.
Affiliated with the Program on Church, State & Society at Notre Dame Law School.

Thursday, May 30, 2013

Camosy's "response to critics"

Over at the Catholic Moral Theology blog (which is excellent), Fordham theologian Charlie Camosy has a post up called "Is Disagreement Between Peter Singer and Catholic Teaching on Abortion 'Narrow'? -- a Response to Critics."  The post is a response to concerns expressed by a number of reviewers of his recent book, Peter Singer and Christian Ethics:  Beyond Polarization.  We've talked about Charlie's thesis -- i.e., that there are some important similarities between Singer's ethical commitments and Christian teachings (for example, that we are obligated to take seriously and to try to reduce others' suffering) -- here at MOJ often.  Here's a bit from the post:

While I admit that I could have been more clear about what I meant by “narrow”, it could hardly be said that I meant the difference between the two was “unimportant” or “insignificant.”  I clearly explain how the narrow disagreement, when run through to its logical conclusion, leads to a serious disagreement in terms of practical conclusions about abortion and infanticide.  Furthermore, I spend many, many pages trying to make the complex case that Singer is wrong on the narrow point of the disagreement. Further evidence that I consider it to be serious and important.

By calling the disagreement “narrow”, I’m saying that the disagreement is not “wide.”  One might think that two points of view, one which argues for infanticide and the other which wants to protect even the early fetus, must have wide-ranging disagreement in the abortion debate.  But this is not the case between Peter Singer and Catholic teaching.  The disagreement is deep, but it is deep on only one narrow point–especially relative to all the possible issues about which Singer and the Church could disagree.


Garnett, Rick | Permalink


                                                        Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.