Philip McCosker

Navigating Impasses in Bioethics: Rethinking Ill/Health

The papers gathered together in this issue are the fruit of a one-day conference held at theVonHügel Institute (VHI) of St Edmund’sCollege, Cambridge inDecember 2015. The conference brought together several scholars and practitioners from very diverse fields to consider what definitions of health and ill-health are assumed and operative in their respective arenas, how these have changed, what their deficiencies or blindspots might be, and what new perspectives might contribute. Ethical discussions are often conducted at themicro-level, zoomed in, as it were, on this or that particular dilemma or problem from the perspective of one discipline. Such approaches can be hugely helpful. But it was instructive and refreshing to stand back, zoomout, and consider what understandings of health (and its opposites) are driving different discourses, often unnoticed and not commented on, and how they might be improved. The articles in this issue frequently highlight reductionist understandings of health which have considerable consequences for how one understands health’s opposite, ill-health, in particular. I was delighted that the VHI was able to host the workshop which was very sparky and suggestive: much momentum for future work. Thana de Campos looks at the various understandings of health as well-being at work in contemporary human rights discourses. She argues that these views unhelpfully conflate various distinctions which are important: that between basic and nonbasic health needs, as well as the distinction between individual and universal freedom. These are vital when weighing up priorities and legislating in connection with scarce health resources: the individual must be integrated into the wider, collective picture, and the common good. Societal, political, and cultural forces are considered by Gianmarco Contino, who investigates the recent phenomenon of the medicalization of health. Key here is the changing role of the state in health and welfare provision. Individuals increasingly find themselves as buffers between the various interests of the state, companies, insurers, and healthcare professionals. In that space of multiple interests and agents, the lines between disease, predisposing conditions, and broader health are blurred and negotiated, especially in the light of recent genetic and information distribution advances. The freedom and privacy of individuals may be at risk. The humanities discourses of theology and philosophy are not frequently resorted to in public discussions of health. David Elliot insightfully argues that they have much to offer, again by way of keeping our understandings of health and well-being sufficiently variegated and non-reductive. Drawing on the Aristotelian tradition of virtue ethics and eudaimonism, especially in the forms found in Thomas Aquinas, the new bioethics, Vol. 22 No. 1, 2016, 2–3

From the Joy of the Gospel to the Joy of Christ: Situating and Expanding the Christology of Evangelii Gaudium

Many have perceived and reacted to the fresh presentation of the Christian gospel in the pontificate of Francis. It is tempting to read this as a switch in emphasis from content to form, or from ideas to action, and play Benedict XVI off against Francis I : the introverted scholarly theologian followed by the charismatic preacher. Ultimately undermining such a dichotomising approach, this article describes, analyses, situates, and draws out Francis’ christology. Exploring resonances between Francis’ thought and some ressourcement thinkers (Romano Guardini, Josef Jungmann, Yves Congar), it uncovers the christology underlying Evangelii Gaudium . Attention to the role of christology in Francis’ thought, as well as the inspiration he continues to draw from ressourcement thinkers, especially Guardini, uncovers surprisingly significant links between Bergoglio and Ratzinger.