Tuesday, 13th January 2009
Church 'not open to IVF'
The Church can never accept artificial fertilisation, even if it does not involve harming, destroying, freezing or experimenting on the human embryo - and even if it is used by married couples who do not require third-party donations.
"The union of the gamete should not take place in a lab or a test tube," the president of the Theological Commission, Fr Hector Scerri said yesterday.
He was clarifying a statement issued by the Commission last Thursday in which it described the instances where artificial fertilisation should not be allowed.
The statement was reported in an item entitled Church Leaves Door Slightly Open To IVF.
Fr Scerri said the Church was open to IVF legislation, not IVF.
The Commission's statement had said the embryo should not be used as a "piece of biological material" and should not be harmed, destroyed, frozen or experimented on, adding it should also not be used by unmarried couples or couples who require third-party donations.
Saint James Hospital director Josie Muscat had said his hospital did not freeze embryos because all the eggs that are fertilised are implanted into the woman, so the Church's guidelines could and are being followed. But the statement did not specify that even if these safeguards were made, the Church remained against IVF because this went contrary to the natural process.
Therefore, while the Church is willing to participate in social dialogue about how IVF legislation should be introduced for it to be regulated, this would only apply to those who choose to act outside the Catholic faith.
RSS
Comments
Its people like him who remind us how the Chruch has sought, and succeeded in brain washing people!!!!!
Thanks Joe
Dear Joe...you are talking to people who have not been brain washed from birth.
Could you please respect that?
In reality, the way you write just reminds most people of the bad, sad side of religion..so really,you're just putting people off!
Ps...The sacrament of marriage ....key word...Borgia...look it up
however, i still have qualms with the inquisition imagery which personally i find so unrealistic as regards today's Church. many speak of the Church as distant, yet i know of couples whom the bishop met in his residential home so as to hear their concerns regarding not being able to conceive and so on, one in particular asking his opinion on ivf, to which the bishop, per this couple, reiterated the church's position while simultaneously showing respect if they thought otherwise. my point is that respect for others' opinions is prevalent in the church, the reason why the church upholds certain "traditional" precepts to safe guard rather than condemn, the sense of awe at the significance of *any* human life, excluding it from matter that's tampered with, triggering this.
The church is adopting a similarly obstinate position today in a number of areas, among them divorce, gay marriage and IVF. While the inquisition has lost its teeth, its bark seems to be just as strong - and when that bark starts influencing the laws of the country, people are right to get worried.
Oh and in case you were wondering, no - that was not a verbatim transcript of the Galileo trial :)
this goes for all reports; upon reading, one has to keep in mind that not all that's written has been actually been pronounced by the party concerned -- not having seen a press release or anything of the sort, we cannot conclude that the verb "accept" was actually used. Knowing Fr Hector Scerri in person and vouching for his integrity, I cannot fathom him being so inconsiderate in this instance.
Church officials stood firm against recent moves to introduce the teaching that the earth orbits the sun, in direct contradiction of the long-held church tradition and dogma that the earth is at the centre of the universe. "Such heresies have no place among devoted Catholics", said a Curia representative.
"Eppur si muove" said an unidentified bearded man on condition of anonymity from his prison cell to reporters.
Moreover, since when has the Church had a veto as to what gets legislated in these islands, or otherwise? Of course, it has a certain bearing in that it represents many Maltese citizens, but, to my knowledge, up to now, there's no such thing as a Church-consenting body that does away with or upholds laws. in other words, grow up and stop using the Church as a scapegoat--if our politicians are wary of legislating in favour of or contrary to some issue, it's not because their village kappillan has told them so.
Would it not be better for the church to rid itself of all the known "holy" abusers (be they priests, nuns or members of the laity) and make their names public, rather than cover them in - and protect them by - a shroud of secrecy within its own confines?
if the church doesn't want to see more people distancing themselves from it, members from the church should sit down with those couples who are having problems when it comes to having children. it should first analyse the feelings of these people and see the stress it inflicts on the marriage.
while agreeing to its stand about needing donors and surrogates for procreating, i do not agree with its stand when it comes to ivf when the persons involved are the biological parents. i think that St James' practice (where no embryos are frozen) is a very moral and sensible one.