Welcome to the Abbey Library!

Definition

We cannot reach a good goal ("ends") by doing evil to get it (the "means" to the goal).

Explanation

We've all heard someone justifying doing something evil by saying, "but I meant well," or, "I did what I had to do." Euthanasia is often justified by claiming it is done to relieve suffering. Movie writers delight in presenting impossibly difficult situations in which it seems obvious that killing a person is putting them out of their misery.

The beautiful truth is that God wants us to acheive good goals in good ways so that we possess as much goodness as possible. He wrote this truth deep in the human heart and made it part of human nature.

For an act to be truly good, all parts of it must be good. Good goals must be met by doing good things.

Sometimes it is very difficult to separate good from evil in a single act or situation. In such cases, the principle of double effect guides us to make sure that we are not choosing evil goals or evil means to those goals.

Application

• Contraception: in situations in which avoiding pregnancy is morally justified, the way that you avoid pregnancy still matters. Contraception is intrnsically evil. It may not be used even to acheive a good goal. Natural family planning (timing intercourse according to a woman's natural cycle of fertility and infertility) is a morally good means to avoid or to acheive pregnancy.
  
  
• Euthanasia: you may not directly cause death in order to alleviate suffering. Even though the end of alleviating suffering is good, directly causing death is always evil.
  
  
• Abortion: killing a baby cannot be justified for the sake of saving the mother's life. The goal of medicine should be to try to save the lives of both the baby and the mother. Efforts to save one may be made even if it risks the life of the other only if the principle of double effect is applied.