Much of the Western world is split by issues pertaining to politics, economics, race, gender, sexual orientation, and religion. No doubt, these issues need to be adequately assessed and dealt with in a morally prudent and logical manner. This is especially true in light of the upcoming presidential election between Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton. The decision is not a simple one, especially given their past and flip-flop attitudes. One cannot help but question their true motivations and whether they have the best interests of the people. Indeed, it is a sad time for American voters. This is not to say that here in Canada, we do not have our fair share of political, economic, and social problems; it is undeniable that we do. And of course, this is not endemic solely to North America but spread out across the world with varying degrees of severity.

The popular debates surrounding these broad issues concern human wellbeing, both individually and collectively, but demonstrate a deep neglect of the intrinsic worth of the human person. There is a profound, flawed misunderstanding and/or dismissal of metaphysics and meta-ethics. Unfortunately, particular ideologies have been elevated over the human person. The truth has been compromised. This has manifested itself in the debates revolving around abortion, assisted suicide, and transgender bathrooms. As polarising and misguided as these debates truly are, we sometimes need to take a pause from the cacophony of confused and competing voices. Regardless of ideological clashes, I would like to focus on a timeless issue. For a brief moment, let us focus our attention on a cause that will help create unity instead of disunity, even if just for a brief moment.

Whether one believes in the Judeo-Christian doctrine of the image-likeness of God (Genesis 1:27) or not, it provides one with an equalizer or guarantor in terms of why each human person has intrinsic value. Although Jewish, Christian, and Sufi Islamic philosophers and theologians have debated the meaning of being created in the image of God, it is an aspect of the human person that signifies a profound intrinsic worth that distinguishes human beings from the rest of the animal kingdom. I would argue that our capacity for self-consciousness (i.e., our ability to be aware of ourselves—the ability to recognize we are persons, the “I” moment) and what such a capacity entails, including the ability to deliberate, imagine, love, empathize, create, and imagine, are what encompass being created in the image of God. This doctrine is inclusive of all of humanity. All human persons share this image, whether one is a believer in the doctrine (Jew, Christian, Sufi-Muslim) or a non-believer (Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist, Agnostic, etc.).

It is worth pointing out that the origin and experience of self-consciousness are part of the subjective, phenomenological human experience. This is not to negate that animals have a certain level of self-awareness, but the extent to which it exists in humans seems to be something rather radical in comparison to the rest of the animal kingdom. Panpsychists who see consciousness as being ubiquitous throughout nature and particularly the animal kingdom will certainly disagree with such a statement. It is worth pointing out that a number of Christian intellectuals, such as Catholic paleontologist Daryl Domning, Catholic philosopher Peter van Inwagen, and theologians such as an Anglican bishop and eminent New Testament scholar N.T. Wright, through the implication of their embracing of Christian physicalism (which denies the existence of an immaterial self or soul), postulate that through further evolutionary development leading to high levels of complexity is what led to the origin of self-consciousness, i.e., the ability to reflect deeply on one’s own self. However, in Saint Pope John Paul II’s address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences: On Evolution in 1996, he states:

It is by virtue of his eternal soul that the whole person, including his body, possesses such great dignity. Pius XII underlined the essential point: if the origin of the human body comes through living matter which existed previously, the spiritual soul is created directly by God (“animas enim a Deo immediate creari catholica fides non retimere iubet”). (Humani Generis)

As a result, the theories of evolution which, because of the philosophies which inspire them, regard the spirit either as emerging from the forces of living matter, or as a simple epiphenomenon of that matter, are incompatible with the truth about man. They are therefore unable to serve as the basis for the dignity of the human person.

John Paul II rightfully emphasizes the great discontinuity between humanity’s soul and consciousness and the rest of the animal kingdom. This was a point of contention between the co-discoverers of evolution by natural selection, Alfred Wallace (1832–1913) and Charles Darwin (1809–1882). As G.K. Chesterton (1874–1966) observes, “The origin of self-consciousness is a radical event in the history of the universe.”

The matter here is one of history and not of philosophy so that it need only be noted that no philosopher denies that a mystery still attaches to the two great transitions: the origin of the universe itself and the origin of the principle of life itself. Most philosophers have the enlightenment to add that a third mystery attaches to the origin of man himself. In other words, a third bridge was built across a third abyss of the unthinkable when there came into the world what we call reason and what we call will. Man is not merely an evolution but rather a revolution. That he has a backbone or other parts upon a similar pattern to birds and fishes is an obvious fact, whatever be the meaning of the fact. But if we attempt to regard him, as it were, as a quadruped standing on his hind legs, we shall find what follows far more fantastic and subversive than if he were standing on his head.

It is our conscious experience of reality, which entails self-consciousness, that provides us with the capacity for love, which is what binds humans together. Inevitably, so does suffering, which occurs upon reflection of physical and/or emotional pain. Our ability to empathize with and identify with those who suffer unifies us with others through our ability to love. The Catholic philosopher and theologian Bernard Lonergan would refer to love for God and love for others as a mode of self-transcendence, which would be the fulfillment of our self-consciousness. Or as Lonergan would put it, “being in love with God is the basic fulfillment of our conscious intentionality.”

The greatest example of love throughout the history of humanity is embodied in the person of Jesus. Jesus asks us to love in a radical manner, i.e., to love those who are our enemies and who persecute us: “But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matthew 5:44–45). Jesus also asks us to love completely selflessly and in a radical form of perfect altruism, which will help us break free from the shackles of our selfishness and sinful desires in the form of sacrificing one’s self for our neighbour, but ultimately also save ourselves from our sinful and selfish nature: “My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends” (John 15:12–13). It is in this sense that we can freely partake in God’s love for others through being created in His image.

Catholic paleontologist Daryl Domning and the late theologian Monika Hellwig entertain an intriguing (but ultimately unorthodox, ed.) idea of perfect altruism in their book, Original Selfishness: Original Sin And Evil in the Light of Evolution.  This is something only exemplified through Christ in the created order. It helps break us free from our evolutionary roots of selfishness, which before the advent of moral consciousness were manifest in pre-humans through a propensity and innate predisposition to do everything in our capacity (or that of any particular organism) to survive. All organisms are selfish in a non-pejorative sense merely because of this propensity to survive. This inherent selfishness, which Domning calls “original selfishness,” is a substitute for what is typically referred to as “original sin.” All organisms share this original selfishness, from the origin of life to all present organisms, including humans. The difference with humans is that we have a moral consciousness and can choose evil through free will, whereby guilt can result.

Moral evil, although largely passed on through cultural transmission from sinful societies, is not the root. Domning and Hellwig reason that this is not the result of a pre-historical Fall, so eventually moral evil evolves out of physical evil. Yet, again, it is worth clarifying that this stands in contrast to Catholic doctrine, as enunciated in Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical Humani Generis:

When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which through generation is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own. (#37).

This involves the debate between polygenism and monogenism. Domning and Hellwig opt for polygenism. Over the years, there have been several attempts, although highly speculative, to try and reconcile a monogenist theological account of human origins with that of a polygenist. The success or failure of such notions would be beyond the scope of this essay. Nonetheless, what is certain between Domning and Hellwig’s view and Church doctrine is that perfect unselfishness cannot come from natural processes; we need supernatural grace transcending our original selfishness through Christ’s salvation. Thus, Domning and Hellwig see our emulation of Jesus’ perfect altruism as portrayed through his words and his ultimate act of love through his sacrifice on the Cross as how we may overcome “selfishness” and our mere ability to perform reciprocal altruism as is found through much of the animal kingdom. Similarly, in reference to Christian authenticity, Lonergan expresses how this is truly manifested:

Christian authenticity – which is a love of others that does not shrink from self-sacrifice and suffering – is the sovereign means for overcoming evil.  Christians bring about the kingdom of God in the world not only by doing good but also by overcoming evil with good (Rom. 12, 21).

God’s perfect image through Christ, is the highest example, who embodies the perfect moral consciousness, which is geared towards love for one another. This is demonstrated through God’s true love and purpose for His creation. Jesus, through the ultimate act of love and humility (his sacrificial atonement), is the one who demonstrates the true image of God. Following such an understanding of moral self-consciousness and authentic Christian living through God’s image is the inspirational story of the great Canadian hero Terry Fox. The story is well known. Fox, at the age of 18, was diagnosed with bone cancer and had to have his right leg amputated above the knee. Despite this huge setback in his life, he was determined to fight cancer by running from coast to coast in Canada. When many people would choose to turn inward and become bitter and succumb to their impending death, Fox chose life and decided to rage against that good night, as he states:

I don’t feel that this is unfair. That’s the thing about cancer. I’m not the only one, it happens all the time to people. I’m not special. This just intensifies what I did. It gives it more meaning. It’ll inspire more people. I just wish people would realize that anything’s possible if you try; dreams are made possible if you try.

This run, in 1979, came to be known as the Marathon of Hope. Unfortunately, he had to stop running outside of Thunder Bay, Ontario, since the cancer had spread to his lungs and made it extremely difficult for him to breathe. Only months after people from all over the world were able to realize Fox’s dream of raising one dollar per Canadian citizen for cancer research, $23.4 million was raised. Indeed, miracles of hope can occur. Who would’ve thought in a span of a few months such a feat was possible? Fittingly, Fox had stated, “I’m not a dreamer, and I’m not saying this will initiate any kind of definitive answer or cure to cancer, but I believe in miracles. I have to.”

This was 36 years ago. Since that moment, not just Canadians but millions of people around the world have participated in the National School Run Day, the Terry Fox Run, and the Terry Fox fundraising event. As of 2014, remarkably, 650 million dollars have been raised in Terry Fox’s name—an incredible milestone considering how it all began. Fox’s prophetic words have been realized: “Even if I don’t finish, we need others to continue. It’s got to keep going without me.”

Just the other day, a newsletter sent home to parents from my daughter’s Catholic elementary school describing the Terry Fox Run/Walk On inspired me to create a webpage for my daughter where sponsors could donate money online. This was an opportunity for friends and family to unite for a common cause despite their internal disagreements and discord. It is a beautiful thing to see the names of the sponsors, people who have different ideologies and religious outlooks but share a common propensity towards love and fighting a secondary cause of much of our human suffering: cancer. As an aside, I am proud to say this year she was able to run 17 more laps than the previous year (21 in total). She also helped raise close to $500, which was one third of the school’s goal! A special thank you to all the generous donors (you know who you are). As Fox recognized, cancer affects us all, whether indirectly or directly, and it also doesn’t discriminate with respect to our ideologies, age, race, gender, religion, etc., things that otherwise separate us. This realization of our common finitude and fragility is an appeal to our moral consciousness, where we can come together and be unified. It is this propensity towards love, even if sometimes buried deep down inside, that unites us to one another through our common suffering.

Although Fox was only 22 years old when he died, he realized his higher purpose. Terry Fox was a self-professed Christian. Unfortunately, many people spend a lifetime without truly embodying such a propensity towards love and helping others, as he states: “It took cancer to realize that being self-centered is not the way to live. The answer is to try and help others. It is through his very suffering that he is transformed and redeemed. A curse turns into a blessing. This seems to evince the notion that some evil is necessary for a greater good. In this light, evil has profound spiritual benefits for human development. Augustine in his Enchiridion argues that evil is not a thing in and of itself but merely an absence of the good, so if we are able to increase the good despite the circumstance we find ourselves in, as Fox did, we are able to diminish such an absence of good. We thus increase the light in this world to illuminate truth.

Fox promised himself that if he should live, he should prove to himself that he was deserving of life. Indeed, he did and serves as an extraordinary example for all of us to live by. We should all follow Fox’s example to love selflessly, mirroring Jesus’ radical altruism, albeit in a finite and imperfect way. Even if one does not believe in Christ, following such an example, will lead us from disunity to unity despite our many differences.

Keeping with this spirit of love, let us not forget the great many persons who have suffered from cancer and who continue to this very day, which could include close loved ones. Regardless of whether we are able to one day find a cure or not, let us always give our love to comfort them. In line with this, let us keep Christian apologist and Christian convert from Islam, Nabeel Qureshi (author of Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus), in our prayers, who has been recently stricken with stage IV stomach cancer. Let his work, faith, and courage be an example to all of us.