Defending human life

I believe the Catholic Church in Malta – through the recent bishops’ pastoral letter – has given a very valid contribution to the current debate on the introduction of IVF legislation. It is a credit to our bishops that they fulfilled their duty to enlighten the faithful about such a crucial issue.

The bishops fulfilled their duty to enlighten the faithful about such a crucial issue- Fr Edward Xeureb

It seems that criticism of the bishops’ teachings – which after all are nothing else but a reflection of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church – is being levelled on the basis of the methodology employed, by labelling it militant, pastorally insensible and reminiscent of some bygone age.

It is important, however, to respect everybody’s intelligence by not deflecting the attention from the real contents of the letter, namely the three essential moral principles expounded by the bishops on which the Church’s position – not just in Malta but everywhere – is firmly and logically undergirded: the integrity of human life, the unity of marriage and the personal dignity of the exercise of human sexuality.

Furthermore, when the Church talks about moral issues concerning human nature, it addresses not only its members, but the public at large. Obviously, the civil legislator has to cater for all citizens, in the spirit of the common good, not just for any particular faction or factions.

What are the principles upon which this common good is founded? They are those principles that are moral in character and derive from human nature and human reason.

That is why the Church’s position on IVF is to be taken very seriously. And for this very reason, its position is valid for society at large, not just for its own loyal members.

To argue that the faithful should not impose their beliefs on others in the sense that the legislator is free to discard the requisites of natural law in the interest of the wider society, is to fall prey to our typical post-modern fallacy of separating morality from positive civil law, with all its disastrous past and present effects.

Unfortunately, opinions contrary to the Church’s teachings are more vociferous and less reserved than those who are unassumingly doing a lot of good and are sincerely seeking the truth by following the steps of their master Jesus. In this scenario, various voices that dominate the means of communication seem to want to make us believe – and maybe they are right to a certain extent – that the situation is so desperate that we cannot but accept it and all we can do is to propose a legislation that is the least possibly harmful.

Yet, even in this situation, the Church should not succumb to such pressures and refrain from clearly stating its position, resting upon sound and ever valid moral principles.

It is indeed a matter of regret that a certain section of the media is playing upon the emotions of its audience to justify IVF’s substitutive type of human procreation in those humanly painful cases of sterility.

In a way, it is understandable that they have recourse to such argumentation because it is a logical consequence of holding a view of ethics determined by the situation and not drawn from objective principles.

To return to that ‘emotional’ argument, the discourse will not be complete by just playing upon the heartfelt sentiments and legitimate aspirations of certain people by somehow assuming that they possess a right to have a baby, which actually is not a right but always a gratuitous gift from God.

Keeping the discussion on the same emotional plane, we should also logically consider with equal empathy and compassion the fate of those vulnerable fertilised eggs, that are indeed human beings, that are discarded, and thus ‘killed’, during the process of substitutive human procreation. Isn’t this horrible?

“The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign,” said Blessed Mother Theresa (‘Notable and Quotable’, Wall Street Journal, February 25,1994).

At least, when voicing its position amid a seemingly widespread secularist mentality, the Church shows that it believes in itself: in the inner energy its founder continually gives it to adhere to the truth and defend it, thus render a sterling service to society at large.

It was indeed a prophetic action, in the biblical sense of witnessing the truth in interpreting the signs of the times amid a hostile audience.

By illustrating the moral impermissibility of IVF, the bishops expected to be criticised, given today’s secularism and the fallacy that pastoral charity does not necessarily go hand in hand with the real truth about man.

The Church, however, asks for a dialogue with professional people who practise IVF, such as scientists, researchers, medics and surgeons, a significant section of whom, at least in our country, are members of the Church.

The Church incessantly encourages science to advance in its research with an eye to a better service to man as a whole, but regrettably, this invitation is not always accepted, most likely due to economic interests. The Church’s attention, with a view to addressing their respective spiritual needs, also extends to parents who already used IVF and particularly to our dear brothers and sisters who are the result of this reproductive technology.