Monster Media 1993 #3/MONSTER.ISO/textfile/sci.bio

Text File | 1993-11-02 | 95KB | 1,882 lines

Newsgroups: alt.soc.ethics,bit.listserv.catholic,soc.rights.human,sci.bio,sci.bio.technology,sci.engr.biomed,sci.med
Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!olivea!pagesat!news.cerf.net!kaiwan.com!dzkriz
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Kriz)
Subject: EMBRYO CLONING - ethics - 1987 Vatican Instr. on such techs (4/6)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279,714-539-0829,830-606[1 to 4] guest)
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1993 09:06:55 GMT
Lines: 677
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu alt.soc.ethics:344 bit.listserv.catholic:18150 soc.rights.human:15724 sci.bio:15154 sci.bio.technology:1270 sci.engr.biomed:1293 sci.med:71649



Note: If one has a question regarding the contents of the file
presented here, one can inquire about purchasing an official print
copy of the document (usually for a nominal fee) by contacting the
OFFICE OF PUBLISHING SERVICES, UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE,
3211 Fourth Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.  20017-1194.  Tel:
[phone].

The following is a portion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its
Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation - Replies to Certain
Questions of the Day."  The document is organized in the following
manner.

     Forward.
     Introduction.
     I. Respect for Human Embryos.
-->  II. Interventions Upon Human Procreation.
     III. Moral and Civil Law.
     Conclusion.

Note: (-->) Corresponds to the section of the document presented
herein.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
The CDF's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin
and on the Dignity of Procreation" -- Part II.


                               II.
              INTERVENTIONS UPON HUMAN PROCREATION


  By "artificial procreation" or "artificial fertilization" are
understood here the different technical procedures directed towards
obtaining a human conception in a manner other than the sexual
union of man and woman.  This Instruction deals with fertilization
of an ovum in a text-tube (*in vitro* fertilization) and artificial
insemination through transfer into a woman's genital tracts of
previously collected sperm.

  A preliminary point for the moral evaluation of such technical
procedures is constituted by the consideration of the circumstances
and consequences which those procedures involve in relation to the
respect due the human embryo.  Development of the practice of *in
vitro* fertilization has required innumerable fertilizations and
destructions of human embryos.  Even today, the usual practice
presupposes a hyperovulation on the part of the woman: a number of
ova are withdrawn, fertilized and then cultivated *in vitro* for
some days.  Usually not all are transferred into the genital tracts
of the woman; some embryos, generally called "spare," are destroyed
or frozen.  On occasion, some of the implanted embryos are
sacrificed for various eugenic, economic and psychological reasons.
Such deliberate destruction of human beings or their utilization
for different purposes to the detriment of the integrity and life
is contrary to the doctrine on procured abortion already recalled.

  The connection between *in vitro* fertilization and the voluntary
destruction of human embryos occurs too often.  This is
significant: through these procedures, with apparently contrary
purposes, life and death are subjected to the decision of man, who
thus sets himself up as the giver of life and death by decree.
This dynamic of violence and domination may remain unnoticed by
those very individuals who, in wishing to utilize this procedure,
become subject to it themselves.  The facts recorded and the cold
logic which links them must be taken into consideration for a moral
judgement on IVF and ET (*in vitro* fertilization and embryo
transfer): the abortion mentality which has made this procedure
possible thus leads, whether one wants it or not, to man's
domination over the life and death of his fellow human beings and
can lead to a system of radical eugenics.

  Nevertheless, such abuses do not exempt one from a further and
thorough ethical study of the techniques of artificial procreation
considered in themselves, abstracting as far as possible from the
destruction of embryos produced *in vitro*.

  The present Instruction will therefore take into consideration in
the first place the problems posed by heterologous artificial
fertilization (II,1-3) and subsequently those linked with
homologous artificial fertilization (II,4-6).

  [By the term HETEROLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL FERTILIZATION or
PROCREATION, the Instruction means techniques used to obtain a
human conception artificially by the use of gametes coming from at
least one donor other than the spouses who are joined in marriage.
Such techniques can be of two types:

  a) HETEROLOGOUS IVF and ET: the technique used to obtain a human
conception through the meeting *in vitro* of gametes taken from at
least one donor other than the two spouses joined in marriage.

  b) HETEROLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION: the technique used to
obtain a human conception through the transfer into the genital
tracts of a woman of the sperm previously collected from a donor
other than the husband.

  By ARTIFICIAL HOMOLOGOUS FERTILIZATION or PROCREATION, the
Instruction means the technique used to obtain a human conception
using the gametes of the two spouses joined in marriage.
Homologous artificial fertilization can be carried out by two
different methods:

  a) HOMOLOGOUS IVF and ET: the technique used to obtain a human
conception through the meeting *in vitro* of the gametes of the
spouses joined in marriage.

  b) HOMOLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION: the technique used to
obtain a human conception through the transfer into the genital
tracts of a married woman of the sperm previously collected from
her husband.]

  Before formulating an ethical judgement on each of these
procedures, the principles and values which determine the moral
evaluation of each of them will be considered.


                                A
              HETEROLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION


1. Why must human procreation take place in marriage?

  EVERY HUMAN BEING IS ALWAYS TO BE ACCEPTED AS A GIFT AND BLESSING
OF GOD.  HOWEVER, FROM THE MORAL POINT OF VIEW A TRULY RESPONSIBLE
PROCREATION VIS-A-VIS THE UNBORN CHILD MUST BE THE FRUIT OF
MARRIAGE.

  For human procreation has specific characteristics by virtue of
the personal dignity of the parents and of the children: the
procreation of a new person, whereby the man and the woman
collaborate with the power of the Creator, must be the fruit and
sign of the mutual self-giving of the spouses, of their love and of
their fidelity [34].  THE FIDELITY OF THE SPOUSES IN THE UNITY OF
MARRIAGE INVOLVES RECIPROCAL RESPECT OF THEIR RIGHT TO BECOME A
FATHER AND A MOTHER ONLY THROUGH EACH OTHER.

  The child has the right to be conceived, carried in the womb,
brought into the world and brought up within marriage: it is
through the secure and recognized relationship to his own parents
that the child can discover his own identity and achieve his own
proper human development.

  The parents find in their child a confirmation and completion of
their reciprocal self-giving: the child is the living image of
their love, the permanent sign of their conjugal union, the living
and indissoluble concrete expression of their paternity and
maternity [35].

  By reason of the vocation and social responsibilities of the
person, the good of the children and of the parents contributes to
the good of civil society; the vitality and stability of society
require that children come into the world within a family and that
the family be firmly based on marriage.

  The tradition of the Church and anthropological reflection
recognize in marriage and in its indissoluble unity the only
setting worthy of truly responsible procreation.


2. Does heterologous artificial fertilization conform to the
dignity of the couple and to the truth of marriage?

  Through IVF and ET and heterologous artificial insemination,
human conception is achieved through the fusion of gametes of at
least one donor other than the spouses who are united in marriage.
HETEROLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL FERTILIZATION IS CONTRARY TO THE UNITY OF
MARRIAGE, TO THE DIGNITY OF THE SPOUSES, TO THE VOCATION PROPER TO
PARENTS, AND TO THE CHILD'S RIGHT TO BE CONCEIVED AND BROUGHT INTO
THE WORLD IN MARRIAGE AND FROM MARRIAGE.

  Respect for the unity of marriage and for conjugal fidelity
demands that the child be conceived in marriage; the bond existing
between husband and wife accords the spouses, in an objective and
inalienable manner, the exclusive right to become father and mother
solely through each other [37].  Recourse to the gametes of a third
person, in order to have sperm and ovum available, constitutes a
violation of the reciprocal commitment of the spouses and a grave
lack in regard to that essential property of marriage which is its
unity.

  Heterologous artificial fertilization violates the rights of the
child; it deprives him of his filial relationship with his parental
origins and can hinder the maturing of his personal identity.
Furthermore, it offends the common vocation of the spouses who are
called to fatherhood and motherhood: it objectively deprives
conjugal fruitfulness of its unity and integrity; it brings about
and manifests a rupture between genetic parenthood, gestational
parenthood and responsibility for upbringing.  Such damage to the
personal relationships within the family has repercussions on civil
society: what threatens the unity and stability of the family is a
source of dissension, disorder and injustice in the whole of social
life.

  THESE REASONS LEAD TO A NEGATIVE MORAL JUDGEMENT CONCERNING
HETEROLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL FERTILIZATION: CONSEQUENTLY FERTILIZATION
OF A MARRIED WOMAN WITH THE SPERM OF A DONOR DIFFERENT FROM HER
HUSBAND AND FERTILIZATION WITH THE HUSBAND'S SPERM OF AN OVUM NOT
COMING FROM HIS WIFE ARE MORALLY ILLICIT.  FURTHERMORE, THE
ARTIFICIAL FERTILIZATION OF A WOMAN WHO IS UNMARRIED OR A WIDOW,
WHOEVER THE DONOR MAY BE, CANNOT BE MORALLY JUSTIFIED.

  The desire to have a child and the love between spouses who long
to obviate a sterility which cannot be overcome in any other way
constitute understandable motivations; but subjectively good
intentions do not render heterologous artificial fertilization
conformable to the objective and inalienable properties of marriage
or respectful of the rights of the child and of the spouses.


3. Is "surrogate" motherhood morally licit?

  [By "surrogate mother" the Instruction means:

  a) the woman who carries in pregnancy an embryo implanted in her
uterus and who is genetically a stranger to the embryo because it
has been obtained through the union of the gametes of "donors".
She carries the pregnancy with a pledge to surrender the baby once
it is born to a party who commissioned or made the agreement for
the pregnancy.

  b) the woman who carries in pregnancy an embryo to whose
procreation she has contributed the donation of her own ovum,
fertilized through insemination with the sperm of a man other than
her husband.  She carries the pregnancy with a pledge to surrender
the child once it is born to the party who commissioned or made the
agreement for the pregnancy.]

  NO, FOR THE SAME REASONS WHICH LEAD ONE TO REJECT HETEROLOGOUS
ARTIFICIAL FERTILIZATION: FOR IT IS CONTRARY TO THE UNITY OF
MARRIAGE AND TO THE DIGNITY OF THE PROCREATION OF THE HUMAN PERSON.

  Surrogate motherhood represents an objective failure to meet the
obligations of maternal love, of conjugal fidelity and of
responsible motherhood; it offends the dignity and the right of the
child to be conceived, carried in the womb, brought into the world
and brought up by his own parents; it sets up, to the detriment of
families, a division between the physical, psychological and moral
elements which constitute those families.


                                B
               HOMOLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL FERTILIZATION

  Since heterologous artificial fertilization has been declared
unacceptable, the question arises of how to evaluate morally the
process of homologous artificial fertilization: IVF and ET and
artificial insemination between husband and wife.  First a question
of principle must be clarified.


4. What connection is required from the moral point of view between
procreation and the conjugal act?

  a) The Church's teaching on marriage and human procreation
affirms the "inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be
broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of
the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning.
Indeed, by its intimate structure, the conjugal act, while most
closely uniting husband and wife, capacitates them for the
generation of new lives, according to laws inscribed in the very
being of man and of woman" [38].  This principle, which is based
upon the nature of marriage and the intimate connection of the
goods of marriage, has well-known consequences on the level of
responsible fatherhood and motherhood.  "By safeguarding both these
essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal
act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its
ordination towards man's exalted vocation to parenthood" [39].

  The same doctrine concerning the link between the meanings of the
conjugal act and the goods of marriage throws light on the moral
problem of homologous artificial fertilization, since "it is never
permitted to separate these different aspects to such a degree as
positively to exclude either the procreative intention or the
conjugal relation" [40].

  Contraception deliberately deprives the conjugal act of its
openness to procreation and in this way brings about a voluntary
dissociation of the ends of marriage.  Homologous artificial
fertilization, in seeking a procreation which is not the fruit of
a specific act of conjugal union, objectively effects an analogous
separation between the goods and meanings of marriage.

  Thus, FERTILIZATION IS LICITLY SOUGHT WHEN IT IS THE RESULT OF A
"CONJUGAL ACT WHICH IS PER SE SUITABLE FOR THE GENERATION OF
CHILDREN TO WHICH MARRIAGE IS ORDERED BY ITS NATURE AND BY WHICH
THE SPOUSES BECOME ONE FLESH" [41].  BUT FROM THE MORAL POINT OF
VIEW PROCREATION IS DEPRIVED OF ITS PROPER PERFECTION WHEN IT IS
NOT DESIRED AS THE FRUIT OF THE CONJUGAL ACT, THAT IS TO SAY OF THE
SPECIFIC ACT OF THE SPOUSES' UNION.

  b) The moral value of the intimate link between the goods of
marriage and between the meanings of the conjugal act is based upon
the unity of the human being, a unity involving body and spiritual
soul [42].  Spouses mutually express their personal love in the
"language of the body", which clearly involves both "sponsal
meanings" and parental ones [43].  The conjugal act by which the
couple mutually express their self-gift at the same time expresses
openness to the gift of life.  it is an act that is inseparably
corporal and spiritual.  It is in their bodies and through their
bodies that the spouses consummate their marriage and are able to
become father and mother.  In order to respect the language of
their bodies and their natural generosity, the conjugal union must
take place with respect for its openness to procreation; and the
procreation of a person must be the fruit and the result of married
love.  The origin of the human being thus follows from a
procreation that is "linked to the union, not only biological but
also spiritual, of the parents, made one by the bond of marriage"
[44].  Fertilization achieved outside the bodies of the couple
remains by this very fact deprived of the meanings and the values
which are expressed in the language of the body and in the union of
human persons.

  c) Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal
act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible
procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person.  In his
unique and irrepeatable origin, the child must be respected and
recognized as equal in person dignity to those who give him life.
The human person must be accepted in his parents' act of union and
love; the generation of a child must therefore be the fruit of that
mutual giving [45] which is realized in the conjugal act wherein
the spouses cooperate as servants and not as masters in the work of
the Creator who is Love [46].

  In reality, the origin of the human person is the result of an
act of giving.  The one conceived must be the fruit of his parents'
love.  He cannot be desired or conceived as a product of an
intervention of medical or biological techniques; that would be
equivalent to reducing him to an object of scientific technology.
No one may subject the coming of a child into the world to
conditions of technical efficiency which are to be evaluated to
standards of control and domination.

  THE MORAL RELEVANCE TO THE LINK BETWEEN THE MEANINGS OF THE
CONJUGAL ACT AND BETWEEN THE GOODS OF MARRIAGE, AS WELL AS THE
UNITY OF THE HUMAN BEING AND THE DIGNITY OF HIS ORIGIN, DEMAND THAT
THE PROCREATION OF A HUMAN PERSON BE BROUGHT ABOUT AS THE FRUIT OF
THE CONJUGAL ACT SPECIFIC TO THE LOVE BETWEEN SPOUSES.  The link
between procreation and the conjugal act is thus shown to be of
great importance on the anthropological and moral planes, and it
throws light on the positions of the Magisterium with regards to
artificial fertilization.


5. Is homologous 'in vitro' fertilization morally licit?

  The answer to this question is strictly dependent on the
principles just mentioned.  Certainly one cannot ignore the
legitimate aspirations of sterile couples.  For some, recourse to
homologous IVF and ET appears to be the only way of fulfilling
their sincere desire for a child.  The question is asked whether
the totality of conjugal life in such situations is not sufficient
to ensure the dignity proper to human procreation.  It is
acknowledged that IVF and ET certainly cannot supply for the
absence of sexual relations [47] and cannot be preferred to the
specific acts of conjugal union, given the risks involved for the
child and the difficulties of the procedure.  But it is asked
whether, when there is no other way of overcoming the sterility
which is a source of suffering, homologous *in vitro* fertilization
may not constitute an aid, if not a form of therapy, whereby its
moral licitness could be admitted.

  The desire for a chile -- or at the very least an openness to the
transmission of life -- is a necessary prerequisite from the moral
point of view for responsible human procreation.  But this good
intention is not sufficient for making a positive moral evaluation
of *in vitro* fertilization between spouses.  The process of IVF
and ET must be judged in itself and cannot borrow its definitive
moral quality from the totality of conjugal life of which it
becomes part nor from the conjugal acts which may precede or follow
it [48].

  It has already been recalled that, in the circumstances in which
it is regularly practiced, IVF and ET involves the destruction of
human beings, which is something contrary to the doctrine on the
illicitness of abortion previously mentioned [49].  But even in a
situation in which every precaution were taken to avoid the death
of human embryos, homologous IVF and ET dissociates from the
conjugal act the actions which are directed to human fertilization.
For this reason the very nature of homologous IVF and ET also must
be taken into account, even abstracting from the link with procured
abortion.

  Homologous IVF and ET is brought about outside the bodies of the
couple through actions of third parties whose competence and
technical activity determine the success of the procedure.  Such
fertilization entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the
power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of
technology over the origin and destiny of the human person.  Such
a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity
and equality that must be common to parents and children.

  Conception *in vitro* is the result of the technical action which
presides over fertilization.  SUCH FERTILIZATION IS NEITHER IN FACT
ACHIEVED NOR POSITIVELY WILLED AS THE EXPRESSION AND FRUIT OF A
SPECIFIC ACT OF THE CONJUGAL UNION.  IN HOMOLOGOUS IVF AND ET,
THEREFORE, EVEN IF IT IS CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF 'DE FACTO'
EXISTING SEXUAL RELATIONS, THE GENERATION OF THE HUMAN PERSON IS
OBJECTIVELY DEPRIVED OF ITS PROPER PERFECTION: NAMELY, THAT OF
BEING THE RESULT AND FRUIT OF A CONJUGAL ACT in which the spouses
can become "cooperators with God for giving life to a new person"
[50].

  These reasons enable us to understand why the act of conjugal
love is considered in the teaching of the Church as the only
setting worthy of human procreation.  For the same reasons the so-
called "simple case", i.e. a homologous IVF and ET procedure that
is free of any compromise with the abortive practice of destroying
embryos and with masturbation, remains a technique which is morally
illicit because it deprives human procreation of the dignity which
is proper and connatural to it.

  Certainly, homologous IVF and ET fertilization is not marked by
all that ethical negativity found in extra-conjugal procreation;
the family and marriage continue to constitute the setting for the
birth and bringing up of children.  Nevertheless, in conformity
with the traditional doctrine relating to the goods of marriage and
the dignity of the person, THE CHURCH REMAINS OPPOSED FROM A MORAL
POINT OF VIEW TO HOMOLOGOUS 'IN VITRO' FERTILIZATION.  SUCH
FERTILIZATION IS IN ITSELF ILLICIT AND IN OPPOSITION TO THE DIGNITY
OF PROCREATION AND OF THE CONJUGAL UNION, EVEN WHEN EVERYTHING IS
DONE TO AVOID THE DEATH OF THE HUMAN EMBRYO.

  Although the manner in which human conception is achieved with
IVF and ET cannot be approved, every child which comes into the
world must in any case be accepted as a living gift of the divine
Goodness and must be brought up with love.


6. How is homologous artificial insemination to be evaluated from
a moral point of view?

  HOMOLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION WITHIN MARRIAGE CANNOT BE
ADMITTED EXCEPT FOR THOSE CASES IN WHICH THE TECHNICAL MEANS IS NOT
A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE CONJUGAL ACT BUT SERVES TO FACILITATE AND TO
HELP SO THAT THE ACT ATTAINS ITS NATURAL PURPOSE.

  The teaching of the Magisterium on this point has already been
stated [51].  This teaching is not just an expression of particular
historical circumstances but is based on the Church's doctrine
concerning the connection between the conjugal union and
procreation and on a consideration of the personal nature of the
conjugal act and of human procreation.  "In its natural structure,
the conjugal act is a personal action, a simultaneous and immediate
cooperation on the part of the husband and wife, which by the very
nature of the agents and the proper nature of the act is the
expression of the mutual gift which, according to the words of
Scripture, brings about union 'in one flesh'" [52].  Thus moral
conscience "does not necessarily proscribe the use of certain
artificial means destined solely either to the facilitating of the
natural act or to ensuring that the natural act normally performed
achieves its proper end" [53].  If the technical means facilitates
the conjugal act or helps it to reach its natural objectives, it
can be morally acceptable.  If, on the other hand, the procedure
were to replace the conjugal act, it is morally illicit.

  Artificial insemination as a substituted for the conjugal act is
prohibited by reason of the voluntary achieved dissociation of the
two meanings of the conjugal act.  masturbation, through which the
sperm is normally obtained, is anther sign of this dissociation:
even when it is done for the purpose of procreation, the act
remains deprived of its unitive meaning: "It lacks the sexual
relationship called for by the moral order, namely the relationship
which realizes 'the full sense of mutual self-giving and human
procreation in the context of true love'" [54].


7. What moral criterion can be proposed with regard to medical
intervention in human procreation?

  The medical act must be evaluated not only with reference to its
technical dimension but also and above all in relation to its goal
which is the good of persons and their bodily and psychological
health.  The moral criteria for medical intervention in procreation
are deduced from the dignity of human persons, of their sexuality
and of their origin.

  MEDICINE WHICH SEEKS TO BE ORDERED TO THE INTEGRAL GOOD OF THE
PERSON MUST RESPECT THE SPECIFICALLY HUMAN VALUES OF SEXUALITY
[55].  THE DOCTOR IS AT THE SERVICE OF THE PERSONS AND OF HUMAN
PROCREATION.  HE DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DISPOSE OF THEM OR
TO DECIDE THEIR FATE.  A medical intervention respects the dignity
of persons when it seeks to assist the conjugal act either in order
to facilitate its performance or in order to enable it to achieve
its objective once it has been normally performed" [56].

  On the other hand, it sometimes happens that a medical procedure
technologically replaces the conjugal act in order to obtain a
procreation which is neither its result nor its fruit.  In this
case the medial act is not, as it should be, at the service of
conjugal union but rather appropriates to itself the procreative
function and thus contradicts the dignity and inalienable rights of
the spouses and of the child to be born.

  The humanization of medicine, which is insisted upon today by
everyone, requires respect for the integral dignity of the human
person first of all in the act and at the moment in which the
spouses transmit life to a new person.  It is only logical
therefore to address an urgent appeal to Catholic doctors and
scientists that they bear exemplary witness to the respect due to
the human embryo and to the dignity of procreation.  The medical
and nursing staff of Catholic hospitals and clinics are in a
special way urged to do justice to the moral obligations which they
have assumed, frequently also, as part of their contract.  Those
who are in charge of Catholic hospitals and clinics and who are
often Religious will take special care to safeguard and promote a
diligent observance of the moral norms recalled in the present
Instruction.


8. The suffering caused by infertility in marriage.

  THE SUFFERING OF SPOUSES WHO CANNOT HAVE CHILDREN OR WHO ARE
AFRAID OF BRINGING A HANDICAPPED CHILD INTO THE WORLD IS A
SUFFERING THAT EVERYONE MUST UNDERSTAND AND PROPERLY EVALUATE.

  On the part of the spouses, the desire for a child is natural: it
expresses the vocation to fatherhood and motherhood inscribed in
conjugal love.  This desire can be even stronger if the couple is
affected by sterility which appears incurable.  Nevertheless,
marriage does not confer upon the spouses the right to have a
child, but only the right to perform those natural acts which are
*per se* ordered to procreation [57].

  A TRUE AND PROPER RIGHT TO A CHILD WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE
CHILD'S DIGNITY AND NATURE.  THE CHILD IS NOT AN OBJECT TO WHICH
ONE HAS A RIGHT, NOR CAN HE BE CONSIDERED AN OBJECT OF OWNERSHIP:
RATHER, A CHILD IS A GIFT, "THE SUPREME GIFT" [58] AND THE MOST
GRATUITOUS GIFT OF MARRIAGE, AND IS A LIVING TESTIMONY OF THE
MUTUAL GIVING OF HIS PARENTS.  FOR THIS REASON, THE CHILD HAS THE
RIGHT, AS ALREADY MENTIONED, TO BE THE FRUIT OF THE SPECIFIC ACT OF
THE CONJUGAL LOVE OF HIS PARENTS; AND HE ALSO HAS THE RIGHT TO BE
RESPECTED AS A PERSON FROM THE MOMENT OF HIS CONCEPTION.

  Nevertheless, whatever its cause or prognosis, sterility is
certainly a difficult trial.  The community of believers is called
to shed light upon and support the suffering of those who are
unable to fulfill their legitimate aspiration to motherhood and
fatherhood. Spouses who find themselves in this sad situation are
called to find in it an opportunity for sharing in a particular way
in the Lord's Cross, the source of spiritual fruitfulness.  Sterile
couples must not forget that "even when procreation is not
possible, conjugal life does not for this reason lose its value.
Physical sterility in fact can be for spouses the occasion for
other important services to the life of the human person, for
example, adoption, various forms of educational work, and
assistance to other families and to poor or handicapped children"
[59].

  Many researchers are engaged in the fight against sterility.
While fully safeguarding the dignity of human procreation, some
have achieved results which previously seemed unattainable.
Scientists therefore are to be encouraged to continue their
research with the aim of preventing the causes of sterility and of
being able to remedy them so that sterile couples will be able to
procreate in full respect for their own personal dignity and that
of the child to be born.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:

[34] Cf. Pastoral Constitution, GAUDIUM ET SPES, 50.

[35] Cf. Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation FAMILIARIS
CONSORTIO, 14: AAS 74 (1982) 96.

[36] Cf. Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 4TH
INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF CATHOLIC DOCTORS, 29 September 1949: AAS
41 (1949) 559.  According to the plan of the Creator, "A man leaves
his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become
one flesh" (Gen. 2:24).  The unity of marriage, bound to the order
of creation, is a truth accessible to natural reason.  The Church's
Tradition and Magisterium frequently make reference to the Book of
Genesis, both directly and through passages of the New Testament
that refer to it: Mt. 19:4-6; Mk. 10:5-8; Eph. 5:31.  Cf.
Athenogoras, LEGATIO PRO CHRISTIANIS, 33: PG 6, 965-967.  St.
Chrysostom, IN MATTHAEUM HOMILIAE, LXII, 19, 1: PG 58, 597; St. Leo
the Great, EPIST. AD RUSTICUM, 4: PL 54, 1204; Innocent III, Epist.
GUADEMUS IN DOMINO: DS 778; Council of Lyons II, IV Session: DS
860; Council of Trent, XXIV Session: DS 1798, 1802; Pope Leo XIII,
Encyclical ARCANUM DIVINAE SAPIENTIAE: ASS 12 (1979/80) 388-391;
Pope Pius XI, Encyclical CASTO CONNUBII: AAS 22 (1930) 546-547;
Second Vatican Council, GAUDIUM ET SPES, 48; Pope John Paul II,
Apostolic Exhortation FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO, 19: AAS 74 (1982) 101-
102; CODE OF CANON LAW, Can. 1056.

[37] Cf. Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 4TH
INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF CATHOLIC DOCTORS,  29 September 1949: AAS
41 (1949) 560; DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE CONGRESS OF
THE ITALIAN CATHOLIC UNION OF MIDWIVES,  29 October 1951: AAS 43
(1951) 850; Code of Canon Law, Can. 1134.

[38] Pope Paul VI, Encyclical Letter HUMANAE VITAE, 12: AAS 60
(1968) 488-489.

[39] Loc. cit., ibid, 489.

[40] Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE SECOND
NAPLES WORLD CONGRESS ON FERTILITY AND HUMAN STERILITY,  19 May
1956: AAS 48 (1956) 470.

[41] CODE OF CANON LAW, Can. 1061.  According to this Canon, the
conjugal act is that by which the marriage is consummated if the
couple "have performed (it) between themselves in a human manner."

[42] Cf. Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 14.

[43] Cf. Pope John Paul II, GENERAL AUDIENCE ON 16 JANUARY 1980:
INSEGNAMENTI DI GIOVANNI PAOLO II, III, 1 (1980) 148-152.

[44] Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 35TH
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 29 October 1983:
AAS 76 (1984) 393.

[45] Cf. Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 51.

[46] Cf. Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 50.

[47] Cf. Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 4TH
INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF CATHOLIC DOCTORS, 29 September 1949: AAS
41 (1949) 560: "It would be erroneous ... to think that the
possibility of resorting to this means (artificial fertilization)
might render valid a marriage between persons unable to contract it
because of the impedimentum impotentiae."

[48] A similar question was dealt with by Pope Paul VI, Encyclical
HUMANAE VITAE, 14: AAS 60 (1968) 490-491.

[49] Cf. supra: I, 1ff.

[50] Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO,
14: AAS 74 (1982) 96.

[51] Cf. RESPONSE OF THE HOLY OFFICE, 17 March 1987: DS 3323: Pope
Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 4TH INTERNATIONAL
CONGRESS OF CATHOLIC DOCTORS,  29 September 1949: AAS 41 (1949)
560; DISCOURSE TO THE ITALIAN CATHOLIC UNION OF MIDWIVES, 29,
October 1951: AAS 43 (1951) 850; DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN
THE SECOND NAPLES WORLD CONGRESS ON FERTILITY AND HUMAN STERILITY,
19 May 1956: AAS 48 (1956) 471-473; DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART
IN THE 7TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF
HAEMATOLOGY,  12 September 1958: AAS 50 (1958) 733; Pope John
XXIII, Encyclical MATER ET MAGISTRA, III: AAS 53 (1961) 447.

[52] Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THE ITALIAN CATHOLIC UNION OF
MIDWIVES, 29 October 1951: AAS 43 (1951) 850.

[53] Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 4TH
INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF CATHOLIC DOCTORS, 29 September 1949: AAS
41 (1949) 560.

[54] Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, DECLARATION
ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS CONCERNING SEXUAL ETHICS, 9: AAS 68 (1976) 86,
which quotes the Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 51.  Cf.
DECREE OF THE HOLY OFFICE, 2 August 1929: AAS 21 (1929) 490; Pope
Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 26TH CONGRESS OF
THE ITALIAN SOCIETY OF UROLOGY, 8 October 1953: AAS 45 (1953) 678.

[55] Cf. Pope John XXIII, Encyclical MATER ET MAGISTRA, III: AAS 53
(1961) 447.

[56] Cf. Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 4TH
INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF CATHOLIC DOCTORS, 29 September 1949: AAS
41 (1949), 560.

[57] Cf. Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THE TAKING PART IN THE SECOND
NAPLES WORLD CONGRESS ON FERTILITY AND HUMAN STERILITY,  19 May
1956: AAS 48 (1956) 471-473.

[58] Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 50.

[59] Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO,
14: AAS 74 (1982) 97.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.soc.ethics,bit.listserv.catholic,soc.rights.human,sci.bio,sci.bio.technology,sci.engr.biomed,sci.med
Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!olivea!pagesat!news.cerf.net!kaiwan.com!dzkriz
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Kriz)
Subject: EMBRYO CLONING - ethics - 1987 Vatican Instr. on such techs (3/6)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279,714-539-0829,830-606[1 to 4] guest)
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1993 09:04:01 GMT
Lines: 415
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu alt.soc.ethics:345 bit.listserv.catholic:18151 soc.rights.human:15725 sci.bio:15155 sci.bio.technology:1271 sci.engr.biomed:1294 sci.med:71650



Note: If one has a question regarding the contents of the file
presented here, one can inquire about purchasing an official print
copy of the document (usually for a nominal fee) by contacting the
OFFICE OF PUBLISHING SERVICES, UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE,
3211 Fourth Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.  20017-1194.  Tel:
[phone].

The following is a portion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its
Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation - Replies to Certain
Questions of the Day."  The document is organized in the following
manner.

     Forward.
     Introduction.
-->  I. Respect for Human Embryos.
     II. Interventions Upon Human Procreation.
     III. Moral and Civil Law.
     Conclusion.

Note: (-->) Corresponds to the section of the document presented
herein.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
The CDF's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin
and on the Dignity of Procreation" -- Part I.


                               I.
                    RESPECT FOR HUMAN EMBRYOS


  Careful reflection on this teaching of the Magisterium and on the
evidence of reason, as mentioned above, enables us to respond to
the numerous moral problems posed by technical interventions upon
the human being in the first phases of his life and upon the
processes of his conception.


1. What respect is due to the human embryo, taking into account his
nature and identity?

  THE HUMAN BEING MUST BE RESPECTED -- AS A PERSON -- FROM THE VERY
FIRST INSTANT OF ITS EXISTENCE.

  The implementation of procedures of artificial fertilization has
made possible various interventions upon embryos and human
foetuses.  The aims pursued are of various kinds: diagnostic and
therapeutic, scientific and commercial.  From all of this, serious
problems arise.  Can one speak of a right to experimentation upon
human embryos for the purpose of scientific research?  What norms
or laws should be worked out with regard to this matter?  The
response to these problems presupposes a detailed reflection on the
nature and specific identity -- the word "status" is used -- of the
human embryo itself.

  At the Second Vatican Council, the Church for her part presented
once again to modern man her constant and certain doctrine
according to which: "Life once conceived, must be protected with
the utmost care; abortion and infanticide are abonimable crimes"
[23].  More recently, the CHARTER OF THE RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY,
published by the Holy See, confirmed that "Human life must be
absolutely respected and protected from the moment of conception"
[24].

  This Congregation is aware of the current debates concerning the
beginning of human life, concerning the individuality of the human
being and concerning the identity of the human person.  The
Congregation recalls the teachings found in the DECLARATION ON
PROCURED ABORTION: "From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a
new life is begun which is neither that of the father nor of the
mother; it is rather the life of a new human being with its own
growth.  It would never be made human if it were not human already.
To this perpetual evidence ... modern genetic science brings
valuable confirmation.  It has demonstrated that, from the first
instant, the programme is fixed as to what this living being will
be, a man, this individual-man with his characteristic aspects
already well determined.  Right from fertilization is begun the
adventure of a human life, and each of its great capacities
requires time ... to find its place and to be a position to act"
[25].  This teaching remains valid and is further confirmed, if
confirmation were needed, by recent findings of the human
biological science which recognize that the zygote (the zygote is
the cell produced when the nuclei of the two gametes have fused)
resulting from fertilization the biological identity of a new human
individual is already constituted.

  Certainly no experimental datum can be in itself sufficient to
bring us to the recognition of a spiritual soul; nevertheless, the
conclusions of science regarding the human embryo provide a
valuable indication for discerning by the use of reason a personal
presence at the moment of this first appearance of a human life:
how could a human individual not be a human person?  The
Magisterium has not expressly committed itself to an affirmation of
a philosophical nature, but it constantly reaffirms the moral
condemnation of any kind of procured abortion.  This teaching has
not changed and is unchangeable [26].

  Thus the fruit of human generation, from the first moment of its
existence, that is to say from the moment the zygote has formed,
demands the unconditional respect that is morally due to the human
being in his bodily and spiritual totality.  The human being is to
be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception;
and therefore from the same moment his rights as a person must be
recognized, among which in the first place is the inviolable right
of every innocent human being to life.

  This doctrinal reminder provides the fundamental criterion for
the solution of the various problems posed by the development of
the biomedical sciences in this field: since the embryo must be
treated as a person, it must also be defended in its integrity,
tended and cared for, to the extent possible, in the same way as
any other human being as far as medical assistance is concerned.


2. Is prenatal diagnosis morally licit?

  IF PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS RESPECTS THE LIFE AND INTEGRITY OF THE
EMBRYO AND THE HUMAN FOETUS AND IS DIRECTED TOWARDS ITS
SAFEGUARDING OR HEALING AS AN INDIVIDUAL, THEN THE ANSWER IS
AFFIRMATIVE.

  For prenatal diagnosis makes it possible to know the condition of
the embryo and of the foetus when still in the mother's womb.  It
permits, or makes possible to anticipate earlier and more
effectively certain therapeutic, medical or surgical procedures.

  Such diagnosis is permissible, with the consent of the parents
after they have been adequately informed, if the methods employed
safeguard the life and integrity of the embryo and the mother,
without subjecting them to disproportionate risks [27].  But this
diagnosis is gravely opposed to the moral law when it is done with
the thought of possibly inducing an abortion depending upon the
results: a diagnosis which shows the existence of a malformation or
a hereditary illness must not be the equivalent of a death-
sentence.  Thus a woman would be committing a gravely illicit act
if she were to request such a diagnosis with the deliberate
intention of having an abortion should the results confirm the
existence of a malformation or abnormality.  The spouse or
relatives or anyone else would similarly be acting in a manner
contrary to the moral law if they were to counsel or impose such a
diagnostic procedure on the expectant mother with the same
intention of possibly proceeding to an abortion.  So too the
specialist would be guilty of illicit collaboration if, in
conducting the diagnosis and in communicating its results, he were
deliberately to contribute to establishing or favouring  a link
between prenatal diagnosis and abortion.

  In conclusion, any directive or programme of the civil and health
authorities or of scientific organizations which in any way were to
favour a link between prenatal diagnosis and abortion, or which
were to go as far as directly to induce expectant mothers to submit
to prenatal diagnosis planned for the purpose of eliminating
foetuses which are affected by malformations or which are carriers
of hereditary illness, is to be condemned as a violation of the
unborn child's right to life and as an abuse of the prior rights
and duties of the spouses.


3. Are therapeutic procedures carried out on the human embryo
licit?

  As with all medical interventions on patients, ONE MUST UPHOLD AS
LICIT PROCEDURES CARRIED OUT ON THE HUMAN EMBRYO WHICH RESPECT THE
LIFE AND INTEGRITY OF THE EMBRYO AND DO NOT INVOLVE
DISPROPORTIONATE RISKS FOR IT BUT ARE DIRECTED TOWARD ITS HEALING,
THE IMPROVEMENT OF ITS CONDITION OF HEALTH, OR ITS INDIVIDUAL
SURVIVAL.

  Whatever the type of medical, surgical or other therapy, the free
and informed consent of the parents is required, according to the
deontological rules followed int eh case of children.  The
application of this moral principle may call for delicate and
particular precautions in the case of embryonic or foetal life.

  The legitimacy and criteria of such procedures have been clearly
stated by Pope John Paul II: "A strictly therapeutic intervention
whose explicit objective is the healing of various maladies such as
those stemming from chromosomal defects will, in principle, be
considered desirable, provided it is directed to the true promotion
of the personal well-being of the individual without doing harm to
his integrity or worsening his condition of life.  Such an
intervention would indeed fall within the logic of the Christian
moral tradition" [28].


4. How is one to evaluate morally research and experimentation on
human embryos and foetuses?

  Since the terms "research" and "experimentation are often used
equivalently and ambiguously, it is deemed necessary to specify the
exact meaning given them in this document/

  1) By RESEARCH is meant any inductive-deductive process which
aims at promoting the systematic observation of a given phenomenon
in the human field or at verifying a hypothesis arising from
previous observations.

  2) By EXPERIMENTATION is meant any research in which the human
being (in the various stages of his existence: embryo, foetus,
child or adult) represents the object through which or upon which
one intends to verify the effect, at present unknown or not
sufficiently known, of a given treatment (e.g. pharmacological,
teratogenic, surgical, etc.).

  MEDICAL RESEARCH MUST REFRAIN FROM OPERATIONS ON LIVE EMBRYOS,
UNLESS THERE IS A MORAL CERTAINTY OF NOT CAUSING HARM TO THE LIFE
OR INTEGRITY OF THE UNBORN CHILD AND THE MOTHER, AND ON CONDITION
THAT THE PARENTS HAVE GIVEN THEIR FREE AND INFORMED CONSENT TO THE
PROCEDURE.  It follows that all research, even when limited to the
simple observation of the embryo, would become illicit were it to
involve risk to the embryo's physical integrity or life by reason
of the methods used or the effects induced.

  As regards experimentation, and presupposing the general
distinction between experimentation for purposes which are not
directly therapeutic and experimentation which is clearly
therapeutic for the subject himself, in the case in point one must
also distinguish between experimentation carried out on embryos
which are still alive and experimentation carried out on embryos
which are dead.  IF THE EMBRYOS ARE LIVING, WHETHER VIABLE OR NOT,
THEY MUST BE RESPECTED JUST LIKE ANY OTHER HUMAN PERSON;
EXPERIMENTATION ON EMBRYOS WHICH IS NOT DIRECTLY THERAPEUTIC IS
ILLICIT [29].

  No objective, even though noble in itself, such as a foreseeable
advantage to science, to other human beings or to society, can in
any way justify experimentation on living human embryos or
foetuses, whether viable or not, either inside or outside the
mother's womb.  The informed consent ordinarily required for
clinical experimentation on adults cannot be granted by parents,
who may not freely dispose of the physical integrity or life of the
unborn child.  Moreover, experimentation on embryos and foetuses
always involves risk, and indeed in most cases it involves the
certain expectation of harm to their physical integrity or even
their death.

  To use human embryos or foetuses as the object or instrument of
experimentation constitutes a crime against their dignity as human
beings having a right to the same respect that is due to the child
already born and to every human person.

  The CHARTER OR THE RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY published by the Holy See
affirms: "Respect for the dignity of the human being excludes all
experimental manipulation or exploitation of the human embryo"
[30].  The practice of keeping alive human embryos *in vivo* and
*in vitro* for experimental or commercial purposes is totally
opposed to human dignity.

  In the case of experimentation that is clearly therapeutic,
namely when it is a matter of experimental forms of therapy used
for the benefit of the embryo itself in a final attempt to save its
life, and in the absence of other reliable forms of therapy,
recourse to drugs or procedures not yet fully tested can be licit
[31].

  THE CORPSES OF HUMAN EMBRYOS AND FOETUSES, WHETHER THEY HAVE BEEN
DELIBERATELY ABORTED OR NOT, MUST BE RESPECTED JUST AS THE REMAINS
OF OTHER HUMAN BEINGS.  In particular, they cannot be subjected to
mutilation or to autopsies if their death has not yet been verified
and without consent of the parents or of the mother.  Furthermore,
the moral requirements must be safeguarded that there be no
complicity in deliberate abortion and that the risk of scandal be
avoided.  Also, in the case of dead foetuses, as for the corpses of
adult persons, all commercial trafficking must be considered
illicit and should be prohibited.


5. How is one to evaluate morally the use for research purposes of
embryos obtained by fertilization 'in vitro'?

  Human embryos obtained *in vitro* are human beings and subjects
with rights: their dignity and right to life must be respected from
the first moment of their existence.  IT IS IMMORAL TO PRODUCE
HUMAN EMBRYOS DESTINED TO BE EXPLOITED AS DISPOSABLE "BIOLOGICAL
MATERIAL."

  In the usual practice of *in vitro* fertilization, not all of the
embryos are transferred to the woman's body; some are destroyed.
Just as the Church condemns induced abortion, so she also forbids
acts against the life of these human beings.  IT IS A DUTY TO
CONDEMN THE PARTICULAR GRAVITY OF THE VOLUNTARY DESTRUCTION OF
HUMAN EMBRYOS OBTAINED 'IN VITRO' FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF RESEARCH,
EITHER BY MEANS OF ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION OR BY MEANS OF "TWIN
FISSION."  By acting in this way the researcher usurps the place of
God; and, even though he may be unaware of this, he sets himself up
as the master of the destiny of others inasmuch as he arbitrarily
chooses whom he will allow to live and whom he will send to death
and kills defenseless human beings.

  Methods of observation or experimentation which damage or impose
grave and disproportionate risks upon embryos obtained *in vitro*
are morally illicit for the same reasons.  Every human being is to
be respected for himself, and cannot be reduced in worth to a pure
and simple instrument for the advantage of others.  IT IS THEREFORE
NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE MORAL LAW DELIBERATELY TO EXPOSE TO
DEATH HUMAN EMBRYOS OBTAINED 'IN VITRO.'  In consequence of the
fact that they have been produced *in vitro*, these embryos which
are not transferred into the body of the mother and are called
"spare" are exposed to an absurd fate, with no possibility of their
being offered safe means of survival which can be licitly pursued.


6. What judgement should be made on other procedures of
manipulating embryos connected with the "techniques of human
reproduction"?

  Techniques of fertilization *in vitro* can open the way to other
forms of biological and genetic manipulation of human embryos, such
as attempts or plans for fertilization between human and animal
gametes and the gestation of human embryos in the uterus of
animals, or the hypotheses or project of constructing artificial
uteruses for the human embryo.  THESE PROCEDURES ARE CONTRARY TO
THE HUMAN DIGNITY PROPER TO THE EMBRYO, AND AT THE SAME TIME THEY
ARE CONTRARY TO THE RIGHT OF EVERY PERSON TO BE CONCEIVED AND TO BE
BORN WITHIN MARRIAGE AND ROM MARRIAGE [32].  ALSO, ATTEMPTS OR
HYPOTHESES FOR OBTAINING A HUMAN BEING WITHOUT ANY CONNECTION WITH
SEXUALITY THROUGH "TWIN FISSION", CLONING OR PARTHENOGENESIS ARE TO
BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE MORAL LAW, SINCE THEY ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE DIGNITY BOTH OF HUMAN PROCREATION AND OF THE
CONJUGAL UNION.

  THE FREEZING OF EMBRYOS, even when carried out in order to
preserve the life of an embryo -- cryopreservation -- CONSTITUTES
AN OFFENCE AGAINST THE RESPECT DUE TO HUMAN BEINGS by exposing them
to grave risks of death or harm to their physical integrity and
depriving them, at least temporarily, of maternal shelter and
gestation, thus placing them in a situation in which further
offenses and manipulation are possible.

  CERTAIN ATTEMPTS TO INFLUENCE CHROMOSOMIC OR GENETIC INHERITANCE
ARE NOT THERAPEUTIC BUT ARE AIMED AT PRODUCING HUMAN BEINGS
SELECTED ACCORDING TO SEX OR OTHER PREDETERMINED QUALITIES.  THESE
MANIPULATIONS ARE CONTRARY TO THE PERSONAL DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN
BEING AND HIS OR HER INTEGRITY AND IDENTITY.  Therefore in no way
can they be justified on the grounds of possible beneficial
consequences for future humanity [33].  Every person must be
respected for himself: in this consists the dignity and right of
every human being from his or her beginning.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:

[23] Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 51.

[24] Holy See, CHARTER OF THE RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY, 4:
L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, 25 November 1983.

[25] Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, DECLARATION
ON PROCURED ABORTION, 12-13: AAS 66 (1974) 738.

[26] Cf. Pope Paul VI, DISCOURSE TO PARTICIPANTS IN THE TWENTY-
THIRD NATIONAL CONGRESS OF ITALIAN CATHOLIC JURISTS, 9 December
1972: AAS 64 (1972) 777.

[27] The obligation to avoid disproportionate risks involves an
authentic respect for human beings and the uprightness of
therapeutic intentions.  It implies that the doctor "above all ...
must carefully evaluate the possible negative consequences which
the necessary use of a particular exploratory technique may have
upon the unborn child and avoid recourse to diagnostic procedures
which do not offer sufficient guarantees of their honest purpose
and substantial harmlessness.  And if, as often happens in human
choices, a degree of risk must be undertaken, he will take care to
assure that it is justified  by a truly urgent need for the
diagnosis and by the importance of the results that can be achieved
by it for the benefit of the unborn child himself" (Pope John Paul
II, DISCOURSE TO PARTICIPANTS IN THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT CONGRESS, 3
December 1982: INSEGNAMENTI DI GIOVANNI PAOLO II, V, 3 [1982]
1512).  This clarification concerning "proportionate risk" is also
to be kept in mind in the following sections of the present
Instruction, whenever this term appears.

[28] Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE 35TH
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 29 October 1983:
AAS 76 (1984) 392.

[29] Cf. Pope John Paul II, ADDRESS TO A MEETING OF THE PONTIFICAL
ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 23 October 1982: AAS 75 (1983) 37: "I condemn,
in the most explicit and formal way, experimental manipulations of
the human embryo, since the human being, from conception to death,
cannot be exploited for any purpose whatsoever."

[30] Holy See, CHARTER OF THE RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY, 4b:
L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, 25 November 1983.

[31] Cf. Pope John Paul II, ADDRESS TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE
CONVENTION OF THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT, 3 December 1982: INSEGNAMENTI
DI GIOVANNI PAOLO II, V, 3 (1982) 1511: "Any form of
experimentation on the foetus that may damage its integrity or
worsen its condition is unacceptable, except in the case of a final
effort to save it from death."  Sacred Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, DECLARATION ON EUTHANASIA, 4: AAS 72 (1980)
550: "In the absence of other sufficient remedies, it is permitted,
with the patient's consent, to have recourse to the means provided
by the most advanced medical techniques, even if these means are
still at the experimental stage and are not without a certain
risk."

[32] No one, before coming into existence, can claim a subjective
right to begin to exist; nevertheless, it is legitimate to affirm
the right of the child to have a fully human origin through
conception in conformity with the personal nature of the human
being.  Life is a gift that must be bestowed in a manner worthy
both of the subject receiving it and of the subjects transmitting
it.  This statement is to be borne in mind also for what will be
explained concerning artificial human procreation.

[33] Cf. Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE
35TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 29 October
1983: AAS 76 (1984) 391.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.soc.ethics,bit.listserv.catholic,soc.rights.human,sci.bio,sci.bio.technology,sci.engr.biomed,sci.med
Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!olivea!pagesat!news.cerf.net!kaiwan.com!dzkriz
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Kriz)
Subject: EMBRYO CLONING - ethics - 1987 Vatican Instr. on such techs (5/6)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279,714-539-0829,830-606[1 to 4] guest)
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1993 09:10:04 GMT
Lines: 168
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu alt.soc.ethics:346 bit.listserv.catholic:18152 soc.rights.human:15726 sci.bio:15156 sci.bio.technology:1272 sci.engr.biomed:1295 sci.med:71651



Note: If one has a question regarding the contents of the file
presented here, one can inquire about purchasing an official print
copy of the document (usually for a nominal fee) by contacting the
OFFICE OF PUBLISHING SERVICES, UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE,
3211 Fourth Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.  20017-1194.  Tel:
[phone].

The following is a portion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its
Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation - Replies to Certain
Questions of the Day."  The document is organized in the following
manner.

     Forward.
     Introduction.
     I. Respect for Human Embryos.
     II. Interventions Upon Human Procreation.
-->  III. Moral and Civil Law.
     Conclusion.

Note: (-->) Corresponds to the section of the document presented
herein.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
The CDF's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin
and on the Dignity of Procreation" -- Part III.


                               III
                       MORAL AND CIVIL LAW

                THE VALUES AND MORAL OBLIGATIONS
                     THAT CIVIL LEGISLATION
            MUST RESPECT AND SANCTION IN THIS MATTER


  The inviolable right to life of every innocent human individual
and the rights of the family and of the institution of marriage
constitute fundamental moral values, because they concern the
natural condition and integral vocation of the human person; at the
same time they are constitutive elements of civil society and its
order.

  For this reason the new technological possibilities which have
opened up in the field of biomedicine require the intervention of
the political authorities and of the legislator, since an
uncontrolled application of such techniques could lead to
unforeseeable and damaging consequences for civil society.
Recourse to the conscience of each individual and to the self-
regulation of researchers cannot be sufficient for ensuring the
respect for personal rights and public order.  If the legislator
responsible for the common good were not watchful, he could be
deprived of his prerogatives by researchers claiming to govern
humanity in the name of the biological discoveries and the alleged
"improvement" processes which they would draw from those
discoveries.  "Eugenism" and forms of discrimination between human
beings could come to be legitimized: this would constitute an act
of violence and a serious offense to the equality, dignity and
fundamental rights of the human person.

  The intervention of the public authority must be inspired by the
rational principles which regulate the relationships between civil
law and moral law.  The task of the civil law is to ensure the
common good of people through the recognition of and the defence of
fundamental rights and through eh promotion of peace and of public
morality [60].  In no sphere of life can the civil law take the
place of conscience or dictate norms concerning things which are
outside its competence.  It must sometimes tolerate, for the sake
of the public order, things which it cannot forbid without a
greater evil resulting.  However, the inalienable rights of the
person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the
political authority.  These rights depend neither on single
individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made
by society and the State: they pertain to human nature and are
inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the
person took his or her origin.

  Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard:
A) every human being's right to life and physical integrity from
the moment of conception until death; b) the rights of the family
and of marriage as an institution and, in this area, the child's
right to be conceived, brought into the world and brought up by his
parents.  To each of these two themes it is necessary here to give
some further consideration.

  In various States certain laws have authorized the direct
suppression of innocents: the moment a positive law deprives a
category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation
must accord them, the State is denying the equality of all before
the law.  When the State does not place its power at the service of
the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more
vulnerable, the very foundations of a State based on law are
undermined.  The political authority consequently cannot give
approval to the calling of human beings into existence through
procedures which would expose them to those very grave risks noted
previously.  The possible recognition by positive paw and the
political authorities of techniques of artificial transmission of
life and the experimentation connected with it would widen the
breach already opened by the legalization of abortion.

  As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be
ensured for the unborn child from the moment of his conception, the
law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate
violation of the child's rights.  The law cannot tolerate -- indeed
it must expressly forbid -- that human beings, even at the
embryonic state should be treated as objects of experimentation, be
mutilated or destroyed with the excuse that they are superfluous or
incapable of developing normally.

  The political authority is bound to guarantee to the institution
of the family, upon which society is based, the juridical
protection to which it has a right.  From the very fact that it is
at the service of people, the political authority must also be at
the service of the procreation which, for the benefit of third
parties (doctors, biologists, economic or government powers), take
away what is a right inherent in the relationship between spouses;
and therefore civil law cannot legalize the donation of gametes
between persons whoa re not legitimately united in marriage.

  Legislation must also prohibit, by virtue of the support which is
due to the family, embryo banks, *post mortem* insemination and
"surrogate motherhood."

  IT IS PART OF THE DUTY OF THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY TO ENSURE THAT THE
CIVIL LAW IS REGULATED ACCORDING TO THE FUNDAMENTAL NORMS OF THE
MORAL LAW IN MATTERS CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN LIFE AND THE
INSTITUTION OF THE FAMILY.  POLITICIANS MUST COMMIT THEMSELVES,
THROUGH THEIR INTERVENTIONS UPON PUBLIC OPINION, TO SECURING IN
SOCIETY THE WIDEST POSSIBLE CONSENSUS ON SUCH ESSENTIAL POINTS AND
TO CONSOLIDATING THIS CONSENSUS WHEREVER IT RISKS BEING WEAKENED OR
IS IN DANGER OF COLLAPSE.

  In many countries, the legalization of abortion and juridical
tolerance of unmarried couples makes i more difficult to secure
respect for the fundamental rights recalled in this Instruction.
It is to be hoped that States will not become responsible for
aggravating these socially damaging situations of injustice.  It is
rather to be hoped that nations and States will realize all the
cultural, ideological and political implications connected with
techniques of artificial procreation and will find the wisdom and
courage necessary for issuing laws which are more just and more
respectful of human life and the institution of the family.

  THE CIVIL LEGISLATION OF MANY STATES CONFERS AN UNDUE
LEGITIMATION UPON CERTAIN PRACTICES IN THE EYES OF MANY TODAY; IT
IS SEEN TO BE INCAPABLE OF GUARANTEEING THAT MORALITY WHICH IS IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE NATURAL EXIGENCIES OF THE HUMAN PERSON AND WITH
THE "UNWRITTEN LAWS" ETCHED BY THE CREATOR UPON THE HUMAN HEART.
ALL MEN OF GOOD WILL MUST COMMIT THEMSELVES, PARTICULARLY WITHIN
THEIR PROFESSIONAL FIELD AND IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS,
TO ENSURING THE REFORM OF MORALLY UNACCEPTABLE CIVIL LAWS AND THE
CORRECTION OF ILLICIT PRACTICES.  In ADDITION, "CONSCIENTIOUS
OBJECTION" VIS-A-VIS SUCH LAWS MUST BE SUPPORTED AND RECOGNIZED.
A MOVEMENT OF PASSIVE RESISTANCE TO THE LEGITIMATION OF PRACTICES
CONTRARY TO HUMAN LIFE AND DIGNITY IS BEGINNING TO MAKE AN EVER
SHARPER IMPRESSION UPON THE MORAL CONSCIENCE OF MANY, ESPECIALLY
AMONG SPECIALISTS IN THE BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnote:

[60] Cf. Declaration DIGNITATIS HUMANAE, 7.

------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: alt.soc.ethics,bit.listserv.catholic,soc.rights.human,sci.bio,sci.bio.technology,sci.engr.biomed,sci.med
Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!olivea!pagesat!news.cerf.net!kaiwan.com!dzkriz
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Kriz)
Subject: EMBRYO CLONING - ethics - 1987 Vatican Instr. on such techs (2/6)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279,714-539-0829,830-606[1 to 4] guest)
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1993 08:58:21 GMT
Lines: 351
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu alt.soc.ethics:347 bit.listserv.catholic:18153 soc.rights.human:15727 sci.bio:15157 sci.bio.technology:1273 sci.engr.biomed:1296 sci.med:71652



Note: If one has a question regarding the contents of the file
presented here, one can inquire about purchasing an official print
copy of the document (usually for a nominal fee) by contacting the
OFFICE OF PUBLISHING SERVICES, UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE,
3211 Fourth Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.  20017-1194.  Tel:
[phone].

The following is a portion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its
Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation - Replies to Certain
Questions of the Day."  The document is organized in the following
manner:

     Forward.
-->  Introduction -- Fundamental Principles.
     I. Respect for Human Embryos.
     II. Interventions Upon Human Procreation.
     III. Moral and Civil Law.
     Conclusion.

Note: (-->) Corresponds to the section of the document presented
herein.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
The CDF's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin
and on the Dignity of Procreation" -- Introduction.


                          INTRODUCTION
                          ------------

                               1.
       BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH AND THE TEACHING OF THE CHURCH

  The gift of life which God the Creator and Father has entrusted
to man calls him to appreciate the inestimable value of what he has
been given and to take responsibility for it: this fundamental
principle must be placed at the centre of one's reflection in order
to clarity and solve the moral problems raised by artificial
interventions on life as it originates and on the processes of
procreation.

  Thanks to the progress of biological and medical sciences, man
has at his disposal ever more effective therapeutic resources; but
he can also acquire new powers, with unforeseeable consequences,
over human life at its very beginning and in its first stages.
Various procedures now make it possible to intervene not only in
order to assist but also to dominate the processes of procreation.
These techniques can enable man to "take in hand his own destiny",
but they also expose him "to the temptation to go beyond the limits
of reasonable dominion over nature" [1].  They might constitute
progress in the service of man, but they also involve serious
risks.  Many people are therefore expressing an urgent appeal that
in interventions on procreation the values and rights of the human
person be safeguarded.  Requests for clarification and guidance are
coming not only from the faithful but also from those who recognize
the Church as "an expert in humanity" [2] with a mission to serve
the "civilization of love" [3] and of life.

  The Church's Magisterium does not intervene on the basis of a
particular competence in the area of experimental sciences; but
having taken account of the data of research and technology, it
intends to put forward, by virtue of its evangelical mission and
apostolic duty, the moral teaching corresponding to the dignity of
the person and to his or her integral vocation.  It intends to do
so by expounding the criteria of moral judgement as regards the
applications of scientific beginnings.  These criteria are the
respect, defence and promotion of man, his "primary and fundamental
right" to life [4], his dignity as a person who is endowed with a
spiritual soul and with moral responsibility [5] and who is called
to beatific communion with God.

  The Church's intervention in this field is inspired also by the
love which she owes man, helping him from the fount of Christ's
love: as she contemplates the mystery of the Incarnate Word, the
Church also comes to understand the "mystery of man" [6]; by
proclaiming the Gospel of salvation, she reveals to man his dignity
and invites him to discover fully the truth of his own being.  Thus
the Church once more puts forward the divine law in order to
accomplish the work of truth and liberation.

  For it is out of goodness -- in order to indicate the path of
life -- that God gives human beings his commandments and the grace
to observe them: and it is likewise out of goodness -- in order to
help them persevere along the same path -- that Cod always offers
to everyone his forgiveness.  Christ has compassion on our
weaknesses: he is our Creator and Redeemer.  may his spirit open
men's hearts to the gift of God's peace and to an understanding of
his precepts.


                               2.
                     SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
               AT THE SERVICE OF THE HUMAN PERSON

  God created man in his own image and likeness: "male and female
he created them" (Gen 1:27), entrusting them to the task of "having
dominion over the earth" (Gen 1:28).  Basic scientific research and
applied research constitute a significant expression of this
dominion of man over creation.  Science and technology are valuable
resources for man when placed at his service and when they promote
his integral development for the benefit of all; but they cannot of
themselves show the meaning of existence and of human progress.
Being ordered to man, who initiates and develops them, they draw
from the person and his moral values the indication of their
purpose and the awareness of their limits.

  It would on one hand be illusory to claim that scientific
research and its applications are morally neutral; on the other
hand one cannot derive criteria for guidance from mere technical
efficiency, from research's possible usefulness to some at the
expense of others, or, worse still, from prevailing ideologies.
Thus science and technology require, for their own intrinsic
meaning, an unconditional respect for the fundamental criteria of
the moral law: that is to say, they must be at the service of the
human person, of his inalienable rights and his true and integral
good according to the design and will of God [7].

  The rapid development of technological discoveries gives greater
urgency to this need to respect the criteria just mentioned:
science without conscience can only lead to man's ruin.  "Our era
needs such wisdom more than bygone ages if the discoveries made by
man are to be further humanized.  For the future of the world
stands in peril unless wiser people are forthcoming" [8].


                               3.
       ANTHROPOLOGY AND PROCEDURES IN THE BIOMEDICAL FIELD

  Which moral criteria must be applied in order to clarify the
problems posed today in the field of biomedicine?  The answer to
this question presupposes a proper idea of the nature of the human
person in his bodily dimension.

  For it is only in keeping with his true nature that the human
person can achieve self-realization as a "unified totality" [9]:
and this nature is at the same time corporal and spiritual.  By
virtue of its substantial union with a spiritual soul, the human
body cannot be considered as a mere complex of tissues, organs and
functions, nor can it be evaluated in the same way as the body of
animals; rather it is a constitutive part of the person who
manifests and expresses himself through it.

  The natural moral law expresses and lays down the purposes,
rights and duties which are based upon the bodily and spiritual
nature of the human person.  Therefore this law cannot be thought
of as simply a set of norms on the biological level; rather it must
be defined as the rational order whereby man is called by the
Creator to direct and regulate his life and actions and in
particular to make use of his own body [10].

  A first consequence can be deduced from these principles: an
intervention on the human body affects not only the tissues, the
organs and their functions but also involves the human person
himself on different levels.  It involves, therefore, perhaps in an
implicit but nonetheless real way, a moral significance and
responsibility.  Pope John Paul II forcefully reaffirmed this to
the World Medical Association when he said: "Each human person, in
his absolutely unique singularity, is constituted not only by his
spirit, but by his body as well.  Thus, in the body and through the
body, one touches the person himself in his concrete reality.  To
respect the dignity of man consequently amounts to safeguarding
this identity of man 'corpore et anima unus', as the Second Vatican
Council says (GAUDIUM ET SPES, 14, par. 1).  IT is on the basis of
this anthropological vision that one is to find the fundamental
criteria for decision-making in the case of procedures which are
not strictly therapeutic, as, for example, those aimed at the
improvement of the human biological condition" [11].

  Applied biology and medicine work together for the integral good
of human life when they come to the aid of a person stricken by
illness and infirmity and when they respect his or her dignity as
a creature of God.  No biologist or doctor can reasonably claim, by
virtue of his scientific competence, to be able to decide on
people's origin and destiny.  This norm must be applied in a
particular way in the field of sexuality and procreation, in which
man and woman actualize the fundamental values of love and life.

  God, who is love and life, has inscribed in man and woman the
vocation to share in a special way in his mystery of personal
communion and in his work as Creator and Father [12].  For this
reason marriage possesses specific goods and values in its union
and in procreation which cannot be likened to those existing in
lower forms of life.  Such values and meanings are of the personal
order and determine from the moral point of view the meaning and
limits of artificial interventions on procreation and on the origin
of human life.  These interventions are not to be rejected on the
grounds that they are artificial.  As such, they bear witness to
the possibilities of the art of medicine.  But they must be given
a moral evaluation in reference to the dignity of the human person,
who is called to realize his vocation from God to the gift of love
and the gift of life.


                               4.
            FUNDAMENTAL CRITERIA FOR A MORAL JUDGMENT

  The fundamental values connected with the techniques of
artificial human procreation are two: the life of the human being
called into existence and the special nature of the transmission of
human life in marriage.  The moral judgement on such methods of
artificial procreation must therefore be formulated in reference to
these values.

  Physical life, with which the course of human life in the world
begins, certainly does not itself contain the whole of a person's
value, nor does it represent the supreme good of man who is called
to eternal life.  However it does constitute in a certain way the
"fundamental" value of life, precisely because upon this physical
life all other values of the person are based and developed [13].
The inviolability of the innocent human being's right to life "from
the moment of conception until death" [14] is a sign and
requirement of the very inviolability of the person to whom the
Creator has given the gift of life.

  By comparison with the transmission of other forms of life in the
universe, the transmission of human life has a special character of
its own, which derives from the special nature of the human person.
"The transmission of human life is entrusted by nature to a
personal and conscious act and as such is subject to the all-holy
laws of God: immutable and inviolable laws which must be recognized
and observed.  For this reason one cannot use means and follow
methods which could be licit in the transmission of the life of
plants and animals" [15].

  Advances in technology have now made it possible to procreate
apart from sexual relations through the meeting *in vitro* of the
germ-cells previously taken from the man and woman.  But what is
technically possible is not for that very reason morally
admissible.  Rational reflection on fundamental values of life and
of human procreation is therefore indispensable for formulating a
moral evaluation of such technological interventions on a human
being from the first stages of his development.


                               5.
                  TEACHINGS OF THE MAGISTERIUM

  On its part, the Magisterium of the Church offers to human reason
in this field too the light of Revelation: the doctrine concerning
man taught by the Magisterium contains many elements which throw
light on the problems being faced here.

  From the moment of conception, the life of every human being is
to be respected in an absolute way because man is the only creature
on earth the God has "wished for himself" [16] and the spiritual
soul of each man is "immediately created" by God [17]; his whole
being bears the image of the Creator.  Human life is sacred because
from its beginning it involves the "creative action of God" [18]
and it remains forever in a special relationship with the Creator,
who is its sole end [19].  God alone is the Lord of life from its
beginning until its end; no one can, in any circumstance, claim for
himself the right to destroy directly an innocent human being [20].

  Human procreation requires on the part of the spouses responsible
collaboration with the fruitful love of God [21]; the gift of human
life must be actualized in marriage through the specific and
exclusive acts of husband and wife, in accordance with the laws
inscribed in their persons and in their union [22].

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:

[1] Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 81ST
CONGRESS OF THE ITALIAN SOCIETY OF INTERNAL MEDICINE AND THE 82ND
CONGRESS OF THE ITALIAN SOCIETY OF GENERAL SURGERY, 27 October
1980: AAS 72 (1980) 1126.

[2] Pope Paul VI, DISCOURSE TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE UNITED
NATIONS ORGANIZATION, 4 October 1965: AAS 57 (1965) 878; Encyclical
POPULORUM PROGRESSIO, 13: AAS 59 (1967) 263.

[3] Pope Paul VI, HOMILY DURING THE MASS CLOSING THE HOLY YEAR,  25
December 1975: AAS 68 (1976) 145; Pope John Paul II, Encyclical
DIVES IN MISERICORDIA, 30: aas 72 (1980) 1224.

[4] Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 35TH
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 29 October 1983:
AAS 76 (1984) 390.

[5] Cf. Declaration DIGNITATIS HUMANAE, 2.

[6] Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 22; Pope John Paul II,
Encyclical REDEMPTOR HOMINIS, 8: AAS 71 (1979) 270-272.

[7] Cf. Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 35.

[8] Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 15; cf. also Pope Paul
VI, Encyclical POPULORUM PROGRESSIO, 20: AAS 59 (1967) 267; Pope
John Paul II, Encyclical REDEMPTOR HOMINIS, 15: AAS 71 (1979) 286-
289; Apostolic Exhortation FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO, 8: AAS 74 (1982)
89.

[9] Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO,
11: AAS 74 (1982) 92.

[10] Cf. Pope Paul VI, Encyclical HUMANAE VITAE, 10: AAS 60 (1968)
487-488.

[11] Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE 35TH
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 29 October 1983:
AAS 76 (1984) 393.

[12] Cf. Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation FAMILIARIS
CONSORTIO, 11: AAS 74 (1982) 91-92;  cf. also Pastoral Constitution
GAUDIUM ET SPES, 50.

[13] Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, DECLARATION
ON PROCURED ABORTION, 9: AAS 66 (1974) 736-737.

[14] Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO THOSE TAKING PART IN THE 24TH
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 29 October 1983:
AAS 76 (1984) 390.

[15] Pope John XXIII, Encyclical MATER ET MAGISTRA, III: AAS 53
(1961) 447.

[16] Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 24.

[17] Cf. Pope Pius XII, Encyclical HUMANI GENERIS: AAS 42 (1950)
575; Pope Paul VI, PROFESSIO FIDEI: AAS 60 (1968) 436.

[18] Pope John XXIII, Encyclical MATER ET MAGISTRA, III: AAS 53
(1961) 447; cf. Pope John Paul II, DISCOURSE TO PRIESTS
PARTICIPATING IN A SEMINAR ON "RESPONSIBLE PROCREATION", 17
September 1983, INSEGNAMENTI DI GIOVANNI PAOLO II, VI, 2 (1983)
562: "At the origin of each human person there is a creative act of
God: no man comes into existence by chance; he is always the result
of the creative love of God."

[19] Cf. Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 24.

[20] Cf. Pope Pius XII, DISCOURSE TO THE SAINT LUKE MEDICAL-
BIOLOGICAL UNION, 12 November, 1944: DISCORSI E RADIOMESSAGGI VI
(1944-1945) 191-192.

[21] Cf. Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 50.

[22] Cf. Pastoral Constitution GAUDIUM ET SPES, 51: "When it is a
question of harmonizing married love with the responsible
transmission of life, the moral character of one's behavior does
not depend only on the good intention and the evaluation of
motives: the objective criteria must be used, criteria drawn from
the nature of the human person and human acts, criteria which
respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human
procreation in the context of true love."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.soc.ethics,bit.listserv.catholic,soc.rights.human,sci.bio,sci.bio.technology,sci.engr.biomed,sci.med
Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uunet!olivea!pagesat!news.cerf.net!kaiwan.com!dzkriz
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Kriz)
Subject: EMBRYO CLONING - ethics - 1987 Vatican Instr. on such techs (1/6)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279,714-539-0829,830-606[1 to 4] guest)
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1993 08:55:30 GMT
Lines: 108
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu alt.soc.ethics:348 bit.listserv.catholic:18154 soc.rights.human:15728 sci.bio:15158 sci.bio.technology:1274 sci.engr.biomed:1297 sci.med:71653


One of the major stories of the past week has been the report that
doctors have been able to successfully clone human embryoes in
the laboratory.  With this report also came a widely publicized
appeal supposedly from the biomedical community to ethicists
asking them for help in analyzing the moral/ethic dimensions
of the various doors and possibilities this discovery can
open up.  It is entirely possible that there really is no such
interest in the impact of this technology on human rights and
dignity ... that such "30-something angst" just seemed the
"right thing to say" in face of the dawning of yet another demonic
technology which will result once more in the classification of
yet another category of human beings as being "not really human"
(ie "clones" being "grown" simply for their organs to be "given"
later to another).

In any case, the Vatican did issue a document in 1987 regarding
such technological possibilities.  It might behoove a read at
this point ...

dennis
[e-mail]



Note: If one has a question regarding the contents of the file
presented here, one can inquire about purchasing an official print
copy of the document (usually for a nominal fee) by contacting the
OFFICE OF PUBLISHING SERVICES, UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE,
3211 Fourth Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.  20017-1194.  Tel:
[phone].

The following is a portion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its
Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation - Replies to Certain
Questions of the Day."  The document is organized in the following
manner.

-->  Forward.
     Introduction.
     I. Respect for Human Embryos.
     II. Interventions Upon Human Procreation.
     III. Moral and Civil Law.
     Conclusion.

Note: (-->) Corresponds to the section of the document presented
herein.

dennis
[e-mail]

-------------------------------------------------------------------
The CDF's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin
and on the Dignity of Procreation" -- Forward.


           CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

                           INSTRUCTION
                               ON
              RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE IN ITS ORIGIN
                AND ON THE DIGNITY OF PROCREATION

             Replies to Certain Questions of the Day


                             FORWARD


  The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has been
approached by various Episcopal Conferences or individual Bishops,
by theologians, doctors and scientists, concerning biomedical
techniques which make it possible to intervene in the initial phase
of the life of a human being and in the very processes of
procreation and their conformity with the principles of Catholic
morality.  The present Instruction, which is the result of wide
consultation and in particular of a careful evaluation of the
declarations made by Episcopates, does not intend to repeat all the
Church's teaching on the dignity of human life as it originates and
on procreation, but to offer, in the light of the previous teaching
of the Magisterium, some specific replies to the main questions
being asked in this regard.

  The exposition is arranged as follows: an INTRODUCTION will
recall the fundamental principles, of an anthropological and moral
character, which are necessary for a proper evaluation of the
problems and for working out replies to the questions; the FIRST
PART will have as its subject respect for the human being from the
first moment of his or her existence; the SECOND PART will deal
with the moral questions raised by technical interventions on human
procreation; the THIRD PART will offer some orientations on the
relationships between moral law and civil law in terms of the
respect due to human embryos and foetuses (*) and as regards the
legitimacy of techniques of artificial procreation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


(*) The terms "zygote", "pre-embryo" and "foetus" can indicate in
the vocabulary of biological successive stages of the development
of a human being.  The present Instruction makes free use of these
terms, attributing to them an identical ethical relevance, in order
to designate the result (whether visible or not) of human
generation, from the first moment of its existence until birth.
The reason for this usage is clarified by the text (cf. I, 1).

-------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: alt.soc.ethics,bit.listserv.catholic,soc.rights.human,sci.bio,sci.bio.technology,sci.engr.biomed,sci.med
Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!usc!news.cerf.net!kaiwan.com!dzkriz
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Kriz)
Subject: EMBRYO CLONING - ethics - 1987 Vatican Instr. on such techs (6/6)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279,714-539-0829,830-606[1 to 4] guest)
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1993 09:12:48 GMT
Lines: 97
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu alt.soc.ethics:350 bit.listserv.catholic:18158 soc.rights.human:15732 sci.bio:15160 sci.bio.technology:1275 sci.engr.biomed:1298 sci.med:71655



Note: If one has a question regarding the contents of the file
presented here, one can inquire about purchasing an official print
copy of the document (usually for a nominal fee) by contacting the
OFFICE OF PUBLISHING SERVICES, UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE,
3211 Fourth Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.  20017-1194.  Tel:
[phone].

The following is a portion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its
Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation - Replies to Certain
Questions of the Day."  The document is organized in the following
manner.

     Forward.
     Introduction.
     I. Respect for Human Embryos.
     II. Interventions Upon Human Procreation.
     III. Moral and Civil Law.
-->  Conclusion.

Note: (-->) Corresponds to the section of the document presented
herein.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
The CDF's 1987 "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin
and on the Dignity of Procreation" -- Conclusion.


                           CONCLUSION


  The spread of technologies of intervention in the processes of
human procreation raises very serious moral problems in relation to
the respect due to the human being from the moment of conception,
to the dignity of the person, of his or her sexuality, and of the
transmission of life.

  With this Instruction the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, in fulfilling its responsibility to promote and defend the
Church's teaching in so serious a matter, addresses a new and
heartfelt invitation to all those who, by reason of their role and
their commitment, can exercise a positive influence and ensure
that, in the family and in society, due respect is accorded to life
and love.  It addresses this invitation to those responsible for
the formation of consciences and of public opinion, to scientists
and medical professionals, to jurists and politicians.  It hopes
that all will understand the incompatibility between recognition of
the dignity of the human person and contempt for life and love,
between faith in the living God and the claim to decide arbitrarily
the origin and fate of a human being.

  In particular, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
addresses an invitation with confidence and encouragement to
theologians, and above all to moralists, that they study more
deeply and make ever more accessible to the faithful the contents
of the teaching of the Church's Magisterium in light of a valid
anthropology in the matter of sexuality and marriage and in the
context of the necessary interdisciplinary approach.  Thus they
will make it possible to understand ever more clearly the reasons
for and the validity of this teaching.  By defending man against
the excesses of his own power, the Church of God reminds him of the
reasons for his true nobility; only in this way can the possibility
of living and loving with that dignity and liberty which derive
from respect for the truth be ensured for men and women of
tomorrow.  The precise indications which are offered in the present
Instruction are not meant to halt the effort of reflection but
rather to give it a renewed impulse in unrenounceable fidelity to
the teaching of the Church.

  In the light of the truth about the gift of human life and in the
light of the moral principles which flow from that truth, everyone
is invited to act in the area of responsibility proper to each and,
like the good Samaritan, to recognize as a neighbor even the
littlest among the children of men (cf. Lk. 10:29-37).  Here
Christ's words find a new and particular echo: "What you do to one
of the least of my brethren, you do unto me" (Mt. 25:40).

  DURING AN AUDIENCE GRANTED TO THE UNDERSIGNED PREFECT AFTER THE
PLENARY SESSION OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH,
THE SUPREME PONTIFF, JOHN PAUL II, APPROVED THIS INSTRUCTION AND
ORDERED IT TO BE PUBLISHED.

  Given at Rome, from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, February 22, 1987, the Feast of the Chair of St. Peter, the
Apostle.

     Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
     Prefect

               + Alberto Bovone
               Titular Archbishop of Caesarea in Numidia
               Secretary

-------------------------------------------------------------------