What Does the Church Teach about Suicide?

[[Hi Sister, what does the Church teach about suicide? I am writing because of the suicide last week of a young priest who [died] by suicide. I question why no one intervened and got this priest some help?]]

Oh, I'm very sorry for the priest and his parishioners because of his death! I am especially sorry for those fellow priests and other friends of this young cleric; they know well the degree of loneliness common to parish priests in today's Church. It is all especially difficult for them at this time. Perhaps you can send me his name? He is in my prayer.

The Church's position on suicide is very different than it was when I was growing up, for instance. (I was not raised a Catholic but had friends who were and I was aware of what the Church taught during these years.) The Church considered suicide a mortal or grievous sin and refused to bury the person's body in consecrated ground. Today, the Catechism of the Catholic Church stresses, as it has traditionally done, the responsibility of the person for the stewardship of his or her life, and at the same time, she now recognizes that in most cases of suicide, the person is in a psychological state that makes them less than entirely culpable for their act. With only the exception stated in Par 2282 (cf below), the Church commends the person to the mercy of God who, in ways known only to Godself, can bring the person home to themselves and to God. (This is the meaning of salutary repentance in Par 2283.) She also allows a Mass to be celebrated and burial in a Catholic cemetery. Here are the pertinent paragraphs quoted from the CCC.

•  “Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of” (#2280).

• 
   “Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God” (#2281).

•  “If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary cooperation in suicide is contrary to the moral law. Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide” (#2282).

• “We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for people who have taken their own lives” (#2283).

Is it actually known that no one tried to intervene and get help for this priest? We should not assume anything, whether negative or positive. I think it is important not only for the sake of the priest himself but also for those who truly knew and loved him. I am sure that everyone did what they could or knew could be helpful and what this priest allowed them to do.

Because of the reference to assumptions, it is important to point out the difference between an objectively evil action (an act against the moral law) and a sin (such an act committed with clear culpability). We know that suicide is an objective evil (pars 2280 and 2281, and committing suicide makes the person responsible for committing an objectively evil act. However, circumstances, including the inner sense that has led the person to this act, can diminish or even entirely take away culpability which means that we do not know whether this act was a sin or not. That is true of all acts that transgress the moral law. If we cannot say why the person committed such an act, neither can we say they have sinned. (For example, some people speak of not wanting to be the near occasion of sin for others, and this is a good sentiment, but in fact, all these persons can know is the fact that the actions they are describing others committing are objectively good or evil, not whether those who acted thusly, have subjectively sinned. In such a case it might be better to speak of not wanting to be the near occasion of temptation.) 

Again, please send me the young priest's first name and I will keep him in prayer.

On God's Permissive Will

 [[Dear Sister, could you explain what God's permissive will is? I keep hearing "God allows such and such" as though God agreed with the thing he allowed, but that idea of permissive will makes God responsible for the evil that people do to one another, and that can't be right, can it?]]

This is a terrific question and an important one. Thanks for asking!! First of all, you are correct, the idea of God's permissive will cannot be understood in a way that either implicitly or explicitly suggests that God is necessarily in agreement with the thing being done simply because God allowed or permitted it to happen. The key idea here is that we cannot speak of the permissive will of God if by that we mean to say God desired or agreed with this particular outcome.  If God desired or agreed with this particular event, then we simply call it the will of God. You might be aware that I have quoted Dietrich Bonhoeffer several times on this blog regarding events in our lives and the will of God. He says, [[Not everything that happens is the will of God, but inevitably, nothing that happens does so outside the will of God.]] 

Ordinarily, I hear Bonhoeffer saying that God does not will our suffering, nor does God will evil, and at the same time, he will eventually bring good out of even these realities. I think this is a way of speaking about the permissive will of God relative to God's sovereign will. The basic idea is that God's plan and sovereignty are greater than even the worst things we choose to do to ourselves, to others, or to God's creation. God is greater than all sin and evil. Paul affirmed this when he said [[Where sin abounded, grace abounded all the more!]] God made us capable of choosing, which means he also created a world where sin is possible and can even come to dominate in various ways. Neither this fraught world nor the sin that dominates it is the will of God. And yet, God does not stop it; God permits it. But this permission does not mean God approves of sin or evil.

I too have heard people speak of God's permissive will as though it indicates God's approval. Usually, it is meant to indicate God approves of something they have done because God didn't prevent it! For instance, in the name of "discernment," they will speak of something they are considering doing and feel unsure about. If God doesn't give them an out-and-out "sign" to not do the thing, they consider first that he is permitting it -- which God is!! They then argue it is okay and must have been God's will because God permitted it!! At this point, they refer to God's permissive will!! It's as though the phrase "God's permissive will" is a shorthand way of saying, "If God is permissive, then God must will whatever it is." There are many problems with this take on God's permissive will and the idea of "discernment" that propels it. Generally, it demonstrates an unformed and unsophisticated notion of discernment that depends on exterior signs from God. At the same time, it seems geared towards justifying an action one is uncomfortable about committing. In short, in adverting to God's permissive will in this way, one fails to listen to one's conscience (or to form it better) while calling upon God to give the person a sign! Meanwhile, one does all this while demeaning God in the process.

And of course, we know all too well that God permits terrible, even horrific things that one could never argue must therefore have been God's will. One of the most common in Christianity is the crucifixion of Jesus. People argue that this must have been the will of God, though they won't go so far as saying those who carried this out (or egged them on!) were doing the will of God! They also won't suggest that Judas was doing the will of God in betraying Jesus, and rightly so (though their take on God's permissive will should cause them to say Judas was doing or expediting the will of God). But Jesus' passion and death are critical instances of God's permissive will, and the truth of Bonhoeffer's quote: [[Not everything that happens is the will of God, . . .]] God did NOT will Jesus' passion and death!! He willed Jesus to act with integrity, compassion, and courage in the face of evil. And Jesus did that! It is Jesus' resurrection and Ascension that prove the second part of Bonhoeffer's maxim, [[but inevitably, nothing that happens does so outside the will of God.]] While human beings may do their worst, and while God does not prevent this, these are NOT the will of God. At the same time, God's plan and sovereignty are both larger than we can imagine and ultimately will bring justice, that is, ultimately God will set all things to rights.

You are correct that speaking as though God's permitting something means he agrees with it, makes God responsible for the evil that humankind does. God gives us the capacity to choose, as well as to learn and grow morally as well as intellectually, physically, emotionally, and spiritually. We have to trust in God's sovereignty if we are not to become completely discouraged with ourselves and the whole of humankind. This does not mean God is in total control, he is not. But it does mean that ultimately, the evil that we do is finite, and God's plan for a new heaven and new earth will encompass and transcend even the worst we do to ourselves and one another!