The Body-Informed Soul: Medicine and the Ensouled Person
Rev. Silas Hasselbrook, Marquette University
This paper seeks to answer the question, “What do we imagine of medicine not merely for the body but also for the good of ensouled persons?” Because Thomistic hylomorphism already takes for granted a link between the body and soul, I argue that medicine, because it treats the body, can also be used for the good of the soul and, thus, the holistic care of the entire ensouled person.
Thomistic hylomorphism defines human nature as a naturally inseparable soul-body composite in which the soul is the substantial form of the body. In other words, the soul informs the organic, structured matter of the body. But in what ways does the body inform the soul? Is this Thomistic understanding of human nature one-way? It is my contention that it is not and that the body, in fact, does affect and even inform the soul. The body does not do so as a substantial form of the soul, but it does affect the soul precisely for the reason that the body is the spatiotemporal instantiation and expression of the soul in history.
I propose to begin to explain this relationship in the following manner. First, using Jason Eberl’s explanation of Thomistic hylomorphism in The Nature of Human Persons, some of his insights regarding how the body affects the soul will be presented to introduce the conversation. Second, these insights will be expanded via Karl Rahner’s symbolic theology and his concept of remittance, in tandem with aspects gleaned from Pope John Paul II’s, Theology of the Body. Lastly, the principles and conclusions that have been arrived at thus far will be applied to specific examples within health care such as: clinical practice (namely, the doctor-patient relationship), suffering, disabilities, and end-of-life care. Further, the conclusions of this paper will attempt to provide principles and conclusions to help form a response to the question, “How can or should care of souls guide medical practice?” It will be argued that care of the entire person is best accomplished when medical professionals and clergy work together to care for the whole person.
Thomistic hylomorphism defines human nature as a naturally inseparable soul-body composite in which the soul is the substantial form of the body. In other words, the soul informs the organic, structured matter of the body. But in what ways does the body inform the soul? Is this Thomistic understanding of human nature one-way? It is my contention that it is not and that the body, in fact, does affect and even inform the soul. The body does not do so as a substantial form of the soul, but it does affect the soul precisely for the reason that the body is the spatiotemporal instantiation and expression of the soul in history.
I propose to begin to explain this relationship in the following manner. First, using Jason Eberl’s explanation of Thomistic hylomorphism in The Nature of Human Persons, some of his insights regarding how the body affects the soul will be presented to introduce the conversation. Second, these insights will be expanded via Karl Rahner’s symbolic theology and his concept of remittance, in tandem with aspects gleaned from Pope John Paul II’s, Theology of the Body. Lastly, the principles and conclusions that have been arrived at thus far will be applied to specific examples within health care such as: clinical practice (namely, the doctor-patient relationship), suffering, disabilities, and end-of-life care. Further, the conclusions of this paper will attempt to provide principles and conclusions to help form a response to the question, “How can or should care of souls guide medical practice?” It will be argued that care of the entire person is best accomplished when medical professionals and clergy work together to care for the whole person.