My reaction: This story brings up an interesting discussion concerning the “principle of legitimate cooperation in evil.” One of the most basic principles of all of morality is to “do good, avoid evil.” It's black and white. Here we seem to have a moral gray area. Can we still buy our caramel macchiatoes while Starbucks takes such a corporate stance? Can a Catholic go to Starbucks and still sleep at night?
In societal evils, there are various levels of cooperation. The evil is committed by the principal agents, but we all know that with societal sin there are many who enable the sin to be committed. At what point is participation in the evil OK?
There is formal cooperation, which amounts to willing the evil that is done. For example, in an abortion, the doctor is one who is formally cooperating in the evil done. In the case of Starbucks, it is the corporate decision-makers who are formally cooperating in the evil of endorsing gay marriage.
Then there is material cooperation, which amounts to indirectly willing the evil, with a great of difference in degree herein. There is immediate cooperation, which is very close to the evil done and morally tantamount to formal cooperation. Then there is mediate cooperation, which has proximate and remote levels of cooperation. These are all possibilities within material cooperation.
To discuss material cooperation, we also have to discuss culpability. Culpability comes from the Latin word culpa. Yes, it’s the same as what we say at Mass: Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa... Through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault... Culpability basically means the extent to which something is our fault, the extent to which a soul has guilt over an evil committed. In immediate cooperation, the culpability is basically the same as with formal cooperation. With remote cooperation, the cooperation that is farthest from the evil done, culpability is greatly reduced to the point of nullification.
Let’s get back to Starbucks—the topic, that is. This much is clear: Customers usually can put enough of a financial hurt upon a corporation so as to cause its decision-makers to pull back on immoral actions. This has often been demonstrated throughout the history of boycott. Furthermore, it is because Starbucks has become the corporate powerhouse of coffee sales in the U.S. that its voice has such boom. Starbucks officials have calculated a certain level of risk-taking and are putting their money on Americans' coffee habits against the possibility of a substantial boycott.
So at the level of remote cooperation in evil, should customers of good will be content to continue purchasing Americanos while the company takes such a radical stand in support of gay marriage, which legalized does grave harm to the common good and to the rights of children and families? Again, that principle stands: “Do good, avoid evil”—then, act in good conscience. Some companies must be avoided if one’s conscience is to remain clean. Pepsi is one (see this story). Pepsi, I might add, is easily avoided—just drink Coke. (I would say that because of the gravity of the evil being done, there’s no more room for legitimate cooperation in evil when it comes to consuming PepsiCo. products than there is for an in-good-conscience outing at Hooters. It just is not possible.)
But let’s face some facts concerning our American coffee habits—we’re druggies. I myself am quite dependent upon the power of the bean. Thus, are we not subject to the wills of our corporate overlords?
Certainly not! There are plenty of options. If in California, there is likely a Peet’s Coffee (which is superior quality to Starbucks anyway) or a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf nearby. (I do not know of any radical stances taken by these companies.) Many grocery stores get high quality coffee beans. If addiction or attachment is too strong and you can’t stop sending your dollars to Starbucks, then write to them and express your displeasure. We cannot sit idly sipping lattés as though nothing is amiss, as though families in Washington state are not in jeopardy over this, as though children's lives there are not going to be affected by this. Continuing to purchase at Starbucks, even though we did not make the decision they made, is to continue to cooperate in the evil they are doing, yet we must “avoid evil” when possible. I have had my last cup of Starbucks for the foreseeable future.
A wise former roommate of mine often said that he votes with his dollar. Let’s express our solidarity with the good people of Washington state and vote Starbucks down on this one. Let’s stuff our ears with beeswax and sail on past Starbucks, keeping our consciences sailing through safe waters. Families in the Pacific Northwest are worth the fight. Plus, I am sure God makes better coffee in heaven anyway.
Starbucks Customer Relations
PO Box 3717
Seattle, WA 98124-3717
Toll free: 1-800-235-2883
Toll free: 1-800-782-7282 (Customer Service)
http://www.starbucks.com/customer-service/contact/company-information-form
... And more reax to anti-Catholic HHS mandate, this time from Fr. Barron:
0 comments:
Post a Comment