The decision of British regulators to consider allowing the creation of hybrid embryos for use in medical experiments is “a monstrous act against human dignity,” said the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life.
Bishop Elio Sgreccia said this today in response to the Wednesday ruling of Britain’s Human Fertilization and Embryo Authority that it would in principle allow the creation of human-animal embryos.
“The British government has given in to the requests of a group of scientists absolutely against morality,” Bishop Sgreccia told the Italian daily Il Corriere della Sera. “It is necessary that the scientific community mobilizes itself as soon as possible.”
In a statement, the British agency announced that it will now consider two specific research proposals to create such embryos — which scientists call chimeras, after the mythical Greek creature with a lion’s head, a goat’s body and a serpent’s tail. The agency expects a decision for both cases in November.
The agency added, “This is not a total green light for … hybrid research, but recognition that this area of research can, with caution and careful scrutiny, be permitted.”
Bishop Sgreccia said that Britain’s decision marks a turning point: “That frontier, of the crossroads of distinct species, has been overstepped today with the go-ahead of the British government. Up until today this had been banned in the field of biotechnology, and not only by religious associations.”
Let’s see… potential hybrids?
[blockquote]
Centaur
Sphinx
Empusa
Dracaena
Agrius
Echidnades
Harpy
Choromandae
Cunocephali
Hippopodes
Machlyes (the solution to the LGBT problem)
Minotaur
Panes
Satyrs
Mermen and Mermaids
Sirens
[/blockquote]
All for Science’ sake, of course.
Dr Moraeu lives.
That would be Dr. Moreau lives!
Imagine, a new slave race…
Come, Lord Jesus.
Well, I warned you and nobody listens. You chatter about in-facing affairs, and the world is getting ready to eat you and all Christianity alive. LM
And where is the voice of the C of E on this? Shame on them for not speaking out!
[blockquote]Well, I warned you and nobody listens. You chatter about in-facing affairs, and the world is getting ready to eat you and all Christianity alive.[/blockquote]
I know it’s important to be vigilant, but you do know that we win in the end, don’t you? The Kingdom of God will triumph after all.
I agree that the C of E should have something to say about this, and that the proposed practice is immoral.
No, Adam, I do NOT know that we will win in the end, and that’s the heart of this problem from our side. There are a lot of people who believe what you believe, and there is no evidence for this believe whatsoever, and a lot of evidence that the secular/scientific world will be so successful in improving our genome that we will be no longer able to survive evolution’s tests. Consider some of the easy evidence: Bad eyesight is genetic, and these genes are spreading rapidly because those who carry them are free to spread them successfully. Narrow pelvic girdles are increasing also. This is genetic. But it means that fewer and fewer women will be able to bear a child without a caesarian section. Will research provide means for altering this genetic devolution? Maybe, but the price is that it will change us in ways that have not been tested in evolution’s forge.Can we circumvent evolution? You have heard that often I suspect. But evolution is like the air we breathe; it surrounds us on all sides and is always greater than life itself. We cannot supercede evolution. Is it God’s law, his intelligence at work? It surely is, but this does not mean that he will not allow man to extirpate himself for we appear to be free to do so. We say that He loves us, but in fact neither you nor I have any idea at all what that means. He loved His son too. Such is God’s love. We cannot grasp it at all for the thing contained cn never know the container.
I will say it again. The Anglican church will either face what changes science is making in the world and will accomodate these changes to an new elucidation of the gospel, or we will become extinct and we will deserve it. LM
We [i]will[/i] win in the end. I cheated. I skipped to the back of the Book. We win in the end, in the vanguard of our triumphant Christ. The Book says so, and I believe it.
Michael Crichton’s latest book, NEXT, is a quick read and an interesting introduction to this very topic.
Hybrid animals (including human hybrids) have been a staple for literature. C. S. Lewis’s fawns and J. K. Rowling’s Hippogriffs are two more recent examples. What is it about hybrid animals that fascinates us so?
I am in Britain now, and what has surprised me is how few ripples there have been in any circles as a response to this decision. For a number of years now I have been asserting that the real issue before us is the question what it means to be human. I am increasingly convinced that the whole sexuality situation is a sub-category of this more major and all-encompassing question.
I believe the template which is the foundation for an adequate understanding of the nature and dignity of humanity, male and female, is Genesis 1-2. As we move away from this fundamental understanding of the place of humankind within the wider creation, made in the image of God, then every kind of experimentation becomes allowable. A race that has declared itself autonomous of God (and, therefore, God’s revelation) has set itself free to explore every kind of behavior it is able to imagine, as well as to make all sort of contributions to what it considers to be humanity’s upward evolutionary journey. Crossing the species barrier is just one example of the possibilities now before us.
Those on the left within the church have in differing degrees allied themselves with this much more fluid understanding of what it means to be human, and we now watch and experience their working out of the consequences of this. Those on the ‘orthodox’ end of the spectrum have focused almost to the exclusion of everything else upon the issues of sexuality — which might be described more as a symptom of what is wrong than the core issue itself. Thus, we have been missing the underlying cause of the danger in which we now find ourselves, and put all our eggs in a secondary basket.
Playing across the species lines is clearly contrary to what Scripture teachers and inherently dangerous, but it is of the same ilk as the mentality that says I am free to be the person that I perceive myself to be, rather than to assert that I am the person that I have been made — in God’s image.
So, the key issue before us in our time, and which we as a church have to answer if we are to remain relevant to the fast-changing circumstances in which we find ourselves, is what does it mean to be human, male and female together made in the image of God.
[i]Playing across the species lines is clearly contrary to what Scripture teachers and inherently dangerous, but it is of the same ilk as the mentality that says I am free to be the person that I perceive myself to be, rather than to assert that I am the person that I have been made—in God’s image. [/i]
Excellent observation, Richard, and a pointed reminder for all of us. Thank-you.
The UK Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) conducted a consultation in which they asked people if they were opposed to hybrid embryos being used for research purposes, and whether they were opposed to the misuse of embryos for research purposes. People like myself who responded, appealing to the principle (well established in ethics) that human life should be treated as an end, not a means, were naturally opposed to both. These views were apparently discounted by the powers that be, who described the consultation exercise pseudoscientifically as “evidence-gathering” and showed no recognition that any moral consideration was relevant. The report is here. #12 should note that there have been plenty of ripples in Catholic circles, although of course the UK government will never heed merely moral (i.e. non-scientific) “evidence”.
From the report cited above by CPKS:
[blockquote] “Having looked at the principles behind this kind of research, an HFEA licence committee will now look at the details of the two specific research applications that were submitted earlier this year. We would hope to have a decision on both applications in November.” [/blockquote]
The monsters are at our very door.
Seriously, what boundaries are there? The scientific community seems completely unwilling to apply moral boundaries to anything they do.
And does anyone know what specifically these two experiments are going to involve?
Larry (sorry for the delay; I took a sabbatical from the computer this weekend):
[blockquote]There are a lot of people who believe what you believe, and there is no evidence for this believe whatsoever,[/blockquote]
OK, I’m no fundamentalist, but I must echo what Br_er Rabbit said in #10. Christ is victorious; that was settled nearly 2,000 years ago. How will this play out? I don’t know. And just because I have assurance that we do win out in the end doesn’t mean I’m complacent; I agree we should heed the call to action. But we will not become extinct.
As far as the genetic devolution that our knowledge allows us: who knows what the consequence will be? Maybe we can circumvent evolution; maybe we can’t. It’s always been that way. Humanity is nowhere near extinction, though we may always be on the cusp of catastrophe that would thin the herd quite a lot. I don’t have faith that we will not self-destruct; I do have faith that our fate is in God’s hands ultimately.