Jerome Bracken W
Associate Professor in Moral Theology, Immaculate Conception Seminary/School of Theology, Seton Hall University, South Orange, NJ., USA.
Linacre Q. 2013 Feb;80(1):63-73. doi: 10.1179/0024363912Z.0000000001.
This article asks how one should morally respond to the HHS contraceptive mandate which is now law and part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This article first presents the historical background of the Obama Administration altering the government's 'final rule' for providing health services and protecting conscience rights. The mandate compels individuals and religious groups to provide insurance coverage for contraceptive, abortifacient, and sterilization services even though they are contrary to their values, and it narrowly defines what constitutes a religious group so fewer of them can claim exemption. Hence, the question is: Can individuals and religious groups obey the law without acting against their moral values or denying their religious identity? Using Church documents, the article answers that one cannot formally cooperate in evil but under certain conditions one can materially cooperate. The article uses the Summa Theologiae of Aquinas to explain what constitutes formal cooperation and how obeying the law can be material but not formal cooperation. It then examines whether the present conditions warrant material cooperation. It concludes that they do not and that religious groups are called to act as martyrs and give witness to their religious identity and moral values by resisting the law.
本文探讨了人们在道德上应如何应对现已成为法律且是《患者保护与平价医疗法案》一部分的美国卫生与公众服务部（HHS）避孕强制令。本文首先介绍了奥巴马政府改变政府提供医疗服务和保护良知权利的“最终规则”的历史背景。该强制令迫使个人和宗教团体为避孕、堕胎和绝育服务提供保险，尽管这些服务违背他们的价值观，而且它对宗教团体的构成进行了狭义界定，以便更少的宗教团体能够申请豁免。因此，问题在于：个人和宗教团体能否在不违背其道德价值观或不否认其宗教身份的情况下遵守法律？通过引用教会文件，本文回答说，人们不能在恶行中进行形式上的合作，但在某些条件下可以进行实质上的合作。本文运用阿奎那的《神学大全》来解释什么构成形式上的合作，以及遵守法律如何可能是实质而非形式上的合作。然后，本文考察当前的条件是否允许进行实质上的合作。结论是不允许，宗教团体被召唤成为殉道者，通过抵制该法律来见证其宗教身份和道德价值观。
