The Hippocratic Oath

Like many non-physicians I was vaguely aware of the oath purportedly taken by the medical profession and the oft-stated principle at the heart of the oath commonly  expressed as ‘Do no harm.’

I have wondered about that for a long time in light of the continuing abomination of abortions (nearly 58 million estimated in the nearly 50 years since Roe v. Wade) performed by the ‘profession,’ and the looming potential involvement of the ‘profession’ in euthanasia of the elderly.

Here is the Hippocratic Oath edited slightly by me only by removing, by insertion of ellipsis, irrelevant material and maintaining by exact quotation the rest and substance of the ‘profession’:

            “I swear . . . that, according to my ability and judgment, I will keep this oath and stipulation . . . . 

            I will follow that method of treatment which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous.  I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel.  Furthermore, I will not give to a woman an instrument to produce an abortion. 

            With Purity and with Holiness I will pass my life and practice my art. / Into  whatever houses I enter I will go into them for the benefit of the sick and will abstain from every voluntary act of mischief and corruption; and further from the seduction of females or males, bond or free.           

            Whatever, in connection with my professional practice, or not in connection with it, I may see or hear in the lives of men which ought not to be spoken abroad, I will not divulge, as reckoning that all such should be kept secret.

            While I continue to keep this oath unviolated, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and the practice of the art, respected by all men, at all times, but should I trespass and violate this oath, may the reverse be my lot.”

The original oath, penned about 2,500 years ago, as quoted above, I have learned is not sworn to, nor ever was, by the vast majority of the medical profession. Neither is it even approximated by many physicians; it has long been superannuated and doctors are not bound by it. 

There are, however, politically correct and legally careful—yet probably  non-binding—ceremonial oaths taken in this country by graduates of most medical schools.

I’m sure most physicians would still like to be “respected by all men, at all times,” but what about the larger issue, respect for LIFE, which I always assumed was the medical profession’s obligation to protect, promote, and preserve which many religious people, such as me, consider to be the highest value?

Ask your physician about it—but, of course, you will probably be ‘billed’ for his/her answer.  

"BUT DO YOU LOVE ME?"

Fiddler on the Roof was a highly successful 1964 Broadway production and in 1971 came out as a very popular award-winning musical-comedy drama film.  I thought it was a great film.  My title comes from a song in the play sung by Tevye, the Jewish milkman husband of Golde and the father of five girls who lived in a poor farming village of Ukraine at the beginning of the last century. 

Tevye sings this song as he considers his 25 year marriage to his arranged-marriage wife, and asks her the question, “Do you love me?”  As Jewish cultural traditions are being challenged and turned upside-down by events in society, his three oldest daughters are influenced and wish to marry for love, not having their marriages arranged by a matchmaker.  So too does the staunch traditionalist Tevye also begin to think about love as a legitimate reason for and component of marriage.

I have read and reread an excellent book by C. S. Lewis titled The Four Loves.  In it he treats affection (storge), friendship (philia), eros (the natural love of a man for a woman and vice versa), and Charity (divine love).  They are all of a piece and they all have a progression.  It has greatly helped me to understand the nature of love—how the three “natural loves,” affection, friendship, and eros or what we call ‘being in love’ can and ultimately must be subsumed and magnified if done right into the human version of Charity or Divine Love.  Our three “need loves,” as Lewis calls them, can be transformed into “gift love,” the kind of love God has for us; there is a higher love.

To develop it, there is an art to love.  There is also a law of love.  That is to say, there are attitudes, appreciations, expectations, and expressions or behaviors that show this most powerful of all human emotions in its finest light and which can ultimately refine a person to his or her highest potential.   But know, also, that love, or a deprivation of it, can bring any person to the greatest extremes of joy or down to the depths of despair.

How is it done?  As Jesus says, “As I have loved you, love one another.” It is done by looking outward and upward, not inward.  As we better understand the nature, requirements, cautions, duties, and rewards and conditions of love we can better live a life blessed by giving and receiving love—which, I submit, is more important to a rich and happy life than anything I can imagine.  But there is an order to it: a mature love gives first, and then finds, happily, that he receives.

Yes, Tevye’s marriage relationship with Golde has been functional and utilitarian—she has cared for him by cooking his meals, washing his clothes, keeping his house, and raising his children.  And he has faithfully provided for her and their children the necessities of life as well as protection and security.  But it has become prosaic. And he knows inside himself that he wishes and senses it could be more—her for him and him for her. Like all people, Tevye needs the reassurance and comfort that a happy acknowledgement brings. ‘Need love’ in humans never goes away—at least not until it is transformed.  In the meantime, it needs to be fed.

We know there is a geniality to love—a mutual gratification and happiness at being in each other’s presence that the sharing of common values provides. But it comes not by “seeking our own;” it comes by giving—“as I have loved you.” Love is the provision for the other the knowledge that they matter and that they are the provider (at least as far as another person can provide) for you as well.  Love goes both ways.

The question is not to our earthly love, “Do you love me?”, but “Do I love you?”—meaning, do I love God first--the way He loves?, and then, if I do, I will love you even more, and you will know of my love.

  

Indeed, we shall find, if we continue in faith and in hope that love for one another is our "work and our glory"—not just God’s.  And it will be enough, for Charity—Divine Love, "never faileth" to do its mighty work and to satisfy.