From: http://green.yahoo.com/news/nm/20080310/hl_nm/pope_sins_dc.html
The Vatican published a list this past weekend of new sins and “modern evils.” Many focused on the environment, such as not polluting, but the Archbishop Gianfranco Girotti told a Vatican newspaper that he sees bioethics as the most potentially dangerous area for sin. “[Within bioethics] there are areas where we absolutely must denounce some violations of the fundamental rights of human nature through experiments and genetic manipulation whose outcome is difficult to predict and control,” said the Archbishop. The Vatican does not support stem cell research “that involves destruction of embryos and has warned against the prospect of human cloning.” I find it very interesting that it is possible to call areas of bioethics sins, because essentially that is claiming that God deems areas within bioethics as unholy and causing separation from God. By not condoning the destruction of embryos and cloning, the Vatican is saying that God is against these acts. Calling those acts sins makes it hard to argue against for them. Especially if you are Catholic, how can you support these areas in bioethics? And what makes them so wrong that even God is against them? I understand the religious perspective that the destruction of any life is wrong, but I still feel that it is perhaps too strong for the Archbishop to label such acts sins.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This is what I intended to post about, but it appears that I got beaten to it. So, I'll give my thoughts on this.
In general, when the church becomes involved in science, the results can be very interesting. I remember seeing a video about several biology majors attending a strongly religious college. After some controversy (which I do not recall), the professors were given very strict limits as to what they were allowed to say, particularly about evolution. I remember one scene in which a group of seniors was discussing evolution in a seminar setting, and they eventually came to conclude something that disagreed with the school's conclusion. Rather than reiterate the official perspective, the professor simply sat in silence, with a strained look on his face. It was obvious that he wanted to say something, but was bound by the college's rules.
This situation is analogous to this new proclamation from the church. In order to be accepted by the academic community in their field, the students had to find a way to accept things that their religion disagreed with. With regards to evolution, one of the students concluded that God must have planned events in order to allow evolution to take place as it did. In this case the student was able to resolve his religion and his academic passion. What worries me about these new sins is that they allow no room for interpretation. For religious scientists on the cutting edge of biological research, there may be no way for them to continue their work and their religion. I think this may rob the world of many important discoveries that could save lives. In particular, the field of stem cell research has shown huge promise to heal a great many diseases.
For the church to condemn certain scientific practices is a very dangerous thing, for both the church and science. I hope that Archbishop Girotti rethinks the implications of his proclamation.
Post a Comment