The answers lies in even deeper reasons for this moral
teaching which reach down into the very core of what it means to be
husband and wife. The 1987 Instruction Donum Vitae (DV) by the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith contains the Church’s most
complete articulation to date of those reasons.
(1) First we
must begin with marriage, the exclusive and permanent one-flesh union of
a man and woman. Marital love, by its very nature, tends toward a
two-fold fruition: toward the ever deeper, loving union of the spouses,
and the unfolding of that love in the procreation of new human life.
The
moral significance of these two dimensions - the procreative and the
unitive dimensions of marital love - becomes most clearly manifest in
marital sexual intercourse. In this context, it becomes easier to
understand why the unitive and procreative dimensions of marital
intercourse may never be intentionally separated.
Such was the core teaching of Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae.
Human beings cause themselves and others grave harm when they sever the
"unbreakable connection" between the unitive and procreative dimensions
of marital sexual intercourse.
Consequently, as explained in DV,
it is morally wrong for married couples or anyone to attempt to
generate human life outside of, or apart from, the act of marital sexual
intercourse because to do so severs those dimensions: in IVF,
procreation takes place in a Petri dish, apart from the unitive
dimension of conjugal act.
(2) A second argument is based on
considerations of the dignity of the child conceived by these means. DV
argues that bringing a child into existence as a product of a technique
is to render that child an object. Children brought into the world
through IVF are arguably not generated, but manufactured. While the
couple provides the ‘materials’ (ovum and sperm) for the creation of the
child, it is a laboratory technician who brings about a new human life
in a laboratory dish. The Church further teaches, that in light of this
same human dignity, every human being possess a right to be “conceived
and born within marriage and from marriage.”
(3) A further argument against IVF has to do with the consequences of the procedure. There are well documented health risks
- which have on occasion been lethal - to women who undergo
super-ovulation for the retrieval of their eggs for IVF purposes. Add
to this, as reported in Scientific American
last February, mounting scientific evidence points to the troubling
fact of genetic abnormalities in children born through recourse to IVF.
At present, some three million IVF children have come into the world
since the procedure was first used in 1978. While most are healthy,
studies indicate that they are at risk for certain kinds of birth
defects and for the onset later in life of obesity, hypertension and
type 2 diabetes. Finally, even if these risks were nonexistent, IVF
still normally brings about the grave injustice of leaving an orphaned
population of unwanted embryos to the absurd fate of frozen storage and
eventual destruction.
The Church fully supports the endeavors of physicians such as Dr. Thomas Hilgers, director of the Pope Paul VI Institute
for the Study of Human Reproduction. His natural methods of overcoming
infertility, known as NaPro Technology, have helped hundreds of couples
to achieve a pregnancy without recourse to illicit means. While no
couple has a ‘right’ to a child, they should be afforded all the means
licit and available to help them achieve a pregnancy to the extent
possible.
Join the new media evangelization. Your tax-deductible gift allows Catholic.net to build a culture of life in our nation and throughout the world. Please help us promote the Church's new evangelization by donating to Catholic.net right now. God bless you for your generosity.
|
Write a comment on this article |
Catholic.net Poll
![]() Most Popular |
Comments
Post a Comment