Cooperation with Evil

Formal cooperation occurs when a person shares the evil intention of the principal wrongdoer. It is always sinful. An action that directly chooses the same immoral object cannot be made good by describing oneself as a secondary participant or by appealing to a beneficial further purpose.

Material cooperation assists an evil act without sharing its intention. Its moral character depends on what the cooperator actually chooses, how causally close and necessary the assistance is, the gravity of the evil, the duties created by the person's role, the danger of scandal, available alternatives, and whether a proportionate reason exists. Some material cooperation is illicit; sufficiently remote material cooperation can sometimes be tolerated. Labels cannot replace judgment about the concrete act.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that moral judgment considers the object chosen, the acting person's intention, and the circumstances together. A good goal does not justify an intrinsically evil means, and pressure from an employer, institution, or civil law does not turn formal cooperation into a good act. Fear or coercion can lessen personal culpability without changing the objective moral character of the chosen action.^[1]

Cooperation can also occur through omission when a person has a real duty and ability to disclose, impede, or correct wrongdoing. Authority increases responsibility: ordering, advising, approving, protecting, or deliberately facilitating another's sin can make a person answerable for it even without performing the principal act personally.^[2]

A Catholic must refuse formal cooperation and any material cooperation that the moral law excludes, even at personal cost. Conscientious objection should be truthful and peaceful, and it must not become indifference to people who need lawful care, protection, or accompaniment.^[3]

Declining to endorse an evil does not require refusing every act connected with a corrupt law or institution. For example, a legislator who clearly opposes an unjust law may sometimes support a measure that limits its harmful effects when complete repeal is presently impossible. That judgment concerns a genuinely limited act and proportionate good; it does not permit intending the evil or presenting it as acceptable.