Catholic Medical Quarterly Volume 74(3) Aug 2024
Paper
“Soul searching” - Catholic teaching on the human embryo, and its medical consequences
James Mc Tavish FMVD
In
this article we will undertake a brief overview of the Church’s
magisterial teaching on the dignity of the human embryo over the last
fifty years, analyse the discussion around the moment of the infusion of
the spiritual soul, and mention some of the many practical consequences of
this teaching in medical practice.
If asked, “Do you have a soul?” most Catholics today would probably reply in the affirmative. It is not too difficult to acknowledge that we are constituted with both body and soul. If we then asked “then when then did you get your soul?” we might respond “at conception”. Would we then be surprised to discover that there is no official declaration of the Church teaching that explicitly and categorically states that the spiritual soul is infused at the moment of conception? Once, when attempting to explain this reality to a lay formation group studying theology, I asked them what is the Magisterium’s teaching on the moment of animation (“anima” is Latin for soul, so the moment the embryo receives its soul is termed animation), and underlined that there is no categorical teaching that states definitively that the human embryo receives its soul immediately at the moment of conception. One lady reacted vehemently, “Nonsense! How is it possible? How can a living being like an embryo not have a soul?”
1. An important note
When I was a student at the Alphonsianum (a specialist institute in Rome, run by the Redemptorists, for the study of moral theology), I asked the late Prof. Brian Johnstone, CSsR, an eminent teacher of moral theology, about the moment of animation. He suggested, “Take a look at note 19 of the Church’s ‘Declaration on Procured Abortion?’” Let us look carefully at this fascinating note.
19. This declaration expressly leaves aside the question of the moment when the spiritual soul is infused. There is not a unanimous tradition on this point and authors are as yet in disagreement. For some it dates from the first instant; for others it could not at least precede nidation. It is not within the competence of science to decide between these views, because the existence of an immortal soul is not a question in its field. It is a philosophical problem from which our moral affirmation remains independent for two reasons: (1) supposing a belated animation, there is still nothing less than a human life, preparing for and calling for a soul in which the nature received from parents is completed, (2) on the other hand, it suffices that this presence of the soul be probable (and one can never prove the contrary) in order that the taking of life involve accepting the risk of killing a man, not only waiting for, but already in possession of his soul.
The “Declaration on Procured Abortion” came out in 1974, one year after the “Roe vs. Wade” case legalized abortion in the USA. This note (number 19) summarizes the Catholic tradition on animation up to that historical point, and mentions two schools of thought - immediate animation (infusion of the spiritual soul at the moment of conception) or belated (or delayed) animation not before implantation (or nidation as the note terms it) of the embryo in the uterus of the woman. How could the Church be open to the possibility of delayed or belated animation? There are large books written on the topic, so here at this moment in the essay, permit me to over-simplify somewhat the discussion. The core issue is the rational soul - with all its powers and capacities, just exactly what would it do inside an embryo of just a few cells? At that stage in the early embryo, there is clearly no brain, and it will take 3 or 4 weeks even for the initial brain structures to be laid down. So placing a powerful soul in those few cells could be likened to the “futility” of putting a jet engine inside a tiny mini car. There would appear to be a mismatch between matter (the few celled embryo, or the mini) and the form (the human soul, or the jet engine).
Of course, in the development of Church teaching over the centuries, the reflection would be deepened by the discovery of the microscope and the first visualization of the female ovum (1827), as well as later developments in the science of embryology. These would begin to show that even from the beginning of embryo development, highly complex processes are occurring within the human embryo such as cell division, cell organization, spatial orientation, programmed cell death and the like, thus supporting more immediate animation, in a way consistent with the Aristotelian-Thomistic concept of hylomorphic doctrine. The underlying presence of a rational soul could thus be understood as the driving force in this complex programming of the developing embryo, and the rational capacities of the soul can be held in potential. This potential could be likened to our potential capacity to learn say Mandarin. At the moment, my rational soul is not engaged in that endeavour but it has the potential and capacity to perhaps later do so. This could help us grasp that indeed the rational soul could be present from the moment of conception. The Declaration on Procured Abortion made further pronouncements.
In reality, respect for human life is called for from the time that the process of generation begins. From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor of the mother, it is rather the life of a new human being with his own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already. (Note 12)
Right from fertilization is begun the adventure of a human life, and each of its capacities requires time- a rather lengthy time- to find its place and to be in a position to act. The least that can be said is that present science, in its most evolved state, does not give any substantial support to those who defend abortion. Moreover, it is not up to biological sciences to make a definitive judgment on questions which are properly philosophical and moral such as the moment when a human person is constituted or the legitimacy of abortion. From a moral point of view this is certain: even if a doubt existed concerning whether the fruit of conception is already a human person, it is objectively a grave sin to dare to risk murder. (Note 13)
2. Further insights of the Magisterium
2.1 Donum Vitae
(1987)
The pressure for the Church to enunciate her teaching became more acute in 1978 with the birth of Louise Brown, the first baby born through the technique of in vitro fertilization. In the following years, the Church carefully analysed the technique of IVF (and other available Assisted Reproductive Techniques, ARTs) and duly published the document Donum Vitae in 1987.
Here we find,
Certainly no experimental datum can be in itself sufficient to bring us to the recognition of a spiritual soul; nevertheless, the conclusions of science regarding the human embryo provide a valuable indication for discerning by the use of reason a personal presence at the moment of this first appearance of a human life: how could a human individual not be a human person? The Magisterium has not expressly committed itself to an affirmation of a philosophical nature, but it constantly reaffirms the moral condemnation of any kind of procured abortion. This teaching has not been changed and is unchangeable. (I. RESPECT FOR HUMAN EMBRYOS, 1. What Respect Is Due To The Human Embryo, Taking Into Account His Nature And Identity?)
Donum Vitae also explicitly states an important Church teaching that,“The human being must be respected - as a person - from the very first instant of his existence.” (Ibid.). Here we are reminded not to solely focus on discussions of a strictly philosophical nature, such as the moment of the infusion of the spiritual soul. Such discussions should never overshadow or overtake the fact that the embryo deserves to be treated with the dignity and respect due every person.
2.2 Evangelium Vitae (1995)
Pope John Paul II wrote the Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae) and underlined that,
Furthermore, what is at stake is so important that, from the standpoint of moral obligation, the mere probability that a human person is involved would suffice to justify an absolutely clear prohibition of any intervention aimed at killing a human embryo. Precisely for this reason, over and above all scientific debates and those philosophical affirmations to which the Magisterium has not expressly committed itself, the Church has always taught and continues to teach that the result of human procreation, from the first moment of its existence, must be guaranteed that unconditional respect which is morally due to the human being in his or her totality and unity as body and spirit. (n. 60).
2.3 The Human Embryo in its Preimplantation phase (2006)
In 2006, the Vatican’s “Pontifical Academy for Life” held a specific congress with embryologists, philosophers, ethicists and juridical experts on the embryo titled, “The human embryo in the preimplantation phase: Scientific aspects and bioethical considerations”. The resulting document (of the same name) shows the clearest expression of support for the theory of immediate animation (that the human soul is infused at the moment of conception). Using technical language from the world of philosophy (and the sub-discipline of metaphysics), the document proposes that the soul is the form of the growing embryo (here form could be understood as the animating principle or driving force of the growing embryonic life). “Thanks to the presence of the intellective soul the body regulates itself, organises itself and differentiates itself ”(p. 27). The presence of the soul “guarantees the internal unity and continuity in time of a personal human being, right from the moment of his/her constitution as an organism” (Ibid.) Concluding this point, the document underlines, “In favour of such a position, it is to be observed that the theory of immediate animation, applied to every human being that comes into existence, reveals itself as being entirely consistent with his biological reality. Right from the first moment there exists in the human embryo a disposition of matter such as to be able to guide the appearance of differentiation gradually, according to the programme of the human species.” (Ibid.)
2.4 Dignitas Personae (2008)
This instruction on certain bioethical questions picks up the teaching from Donum Vitae, and also adds to it.
If Donum vitae, in order to avoid a statement of an explicitly philosophical nature, did not define the embryo as a person, it nonetheless did indicate that there is an intrinsic connection between the ontological dimension and the specific value of every human life. Although the presence of the spiritual soul cannot be observed experimentally, the conclusions of science regarding the human embryo give “a valuable indication for discerning by the use of reason a personal presence at the moment of the first appearance of a human life: how could a human individual not be a human person?”. [Donum vitae, I, 1] Indeed, the reality of the human being for the entire span of life, both before and after birth, does not allow us to posit either a change in nature or a gradation in moral value, since it possesses full anthropological and ethical status. The human embryo has, therefore, from the very beginning, the dignity proper to a person.
2.5 Pope Francis on the Human Embryo
This appeal to care for and respect the human embryo has been repeated various times by Pope Francis himself in most of his major encyclicals. His most explicit teaching on the need to respect the dignity of the human embryo is found in Evangelii Gaudium, his 2013 apostolic exhortation on the joy of sharing the Gospel. After discussing various categories of persons who are vulnerable, such as migrants, the homeless, those with addiction, and the elderly, he then moves on to discuss the human embryo.
Among the vulnerable for whom the Church wishes to care with particular love and concern are unborn children, the most defenceless and innocent among us. Nowadays efforts are made to deny them their human dignity and to do with them whatever one pleases, taking their lives and passing laws preventing anyone from standing in the way of this. Frequently, as a way of ridiculing the Church’s effort to defend their lives, attempts are made to present her position as ideological, obscurantist and conservative. Yet this defence of unborn life is closely linked to the defence of each and every other human right. It involves the conviction that a human being is always sacred and inviolable, in any situation and at every stage of development. Human beings are ends in themselves and never a means of resolving other problems. Once this conviction disappears, so do solid and lasting foundations for the defence of human rights, which would always be subject to the passing whims of the powers that be. Reason alone is sufficient to recognize the inviolable value of each single human life, but if we also look at the issue from the standpoint of faith, “every violation of the personal dignity of the human being cries out in vengeance to God and is an offence against the creator of the individual”. (n. 213)
In Laudato si’, his 2015 exhortation on the care of creation, he wrote, “How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties?” (n. 120) And in 2016, in Amoris Laetitia, on the pastoral care of families, he invites thus, “Let us pause to think of the great value of that embryo from the moment of conception. We need to see it with the eyes of God, who always looks beyond mere appearances.” (n. 168).
3. Choose Life!
In the Old Testament book of Deuteronomy (30:19-20), we find the important appeal for healthcare providers (and all persons of good will): “ This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him.” We are invited to concretely opt for life – to protect it, to speak out to defend it – and in these ways to “choose it”.
From the above discourse on the human embryo, we can be in agreement with the exhortation for the Pontifical Academy for Life, “Therefore, from a moral point of view, the mere fact of being in the presence of a human being necessitates that it be shown full respect of its integrity and dignity: every form of behaviour that may in some way constitute a threat to or offence of its fundamental rights, first and foremost the right to life, is to be considered gravely immoral.” (The Human Embryo in its Preimplantation phase, 2006, p. 29).
Thus, the Church and all its members need to be united in choosing life, giving a clear “yes” to the promotion of human life, and a clear “no” to all that threatens to harm and destroy it. This has many and wide-ranging implications in the world of medicine and healthcare. Here three specific examples will be given - relating to abortion, in vitro fertilization and embryo experimentation.
3.1 Abortion
Globally, there are approximately 75 million cases of induced abortion annually. This widely accepted “genocide” has become so “normal” to malformed consciences and hardened hearts, that it barely raises a concern. In fact, the main concern raised is to why someone would even seek to speak out in defence of human life. This paradox is hardly new. St Paul already noted it in his letter to the Church of Rome, “they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened”(Romans 1:21). In the face of such clear and consistent teaching of the Church regarding the immorality of procured abortion, some feel disturbed and seek to undermine it by appealing to the novelty of modernity, that things need to “progress” and “move on”. And to this, Pope Francis counters, replying,
Precisely because this involves the internal consistency of our message about the value of the human person, the Church cannot be expected to change her position on this question. I want to be completely honest in this regard. This is not something subject to alleged reforms or “modernizations”. It is not “progressive” to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life. On the other hand, it is also true that we have done little to adequately accompany women in very difficult situations, where abortion appears as a quick solution to their profound anguish, especially when the life developing within them is the result of rape or a situation of extreme poverty. Who can remain unmoved before such painful situations? (Evangelii Gaudium, n. 214)
3.2 In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)
Since the birth of Louise Brown, the world’s first “test-tube” baby in 1978, around eight million IVF babies have been born. The techniques surrounding IVF largely result in the widescale destruction of human embryonic life. After the embryo is created in the laboratory, those ones morphologically unsuitable are simply discarded. Excess embryos created are often stored in liquid nitrogen, posing an unsolvable ethical dilemma of what to do with them if later they are not used. For the embryo transfer to the womb of the gestational mother, at times extra embryos are transferred, already foreseeing the potential loss of some of them. If too many embryos actually implant and start to develop, some are then selectively aborted. All in all, without exaggeration, one could say it amounts to a massacre of human embryonic life. It is one thing to welcome an IVF baby into the world, but what about all of his or her “brothers and sisters” who had to die in the process? On reproductive technologies, Pope Francis has this to say, “The technological revolution in the field of human procreation has introduced the ability to manipulate the reproductive act, making it independent of the sexual relationship between a man and a woman. In this way, human life and parenthood have become modular and separable realities, subject mainly to the wishes of individuals or couples. It is one thing to be understanding of human weakness and the complexities of life, and another to accept ideologies that attempt to sunder what are inseparable aspects of reality.” (Laudato si’, n. 56). In these words, we see the wisdom and pastoral concern of our current Pope. His closing words sound as a potential warning too.“Let us not fall into the sin of trying to replace the Creator. We are creatures, and not omnipotent. Creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift. At the same time, we are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first place, accepting it and respecting it as it was created.” (Ibid.)
3.3 Embryo experimentation
Various countries are pushing the ethical boundaries on embryo experimentation, and in many cases have clearly transgressed them. Again, Pope Francis clearly denounces this.
There is a tendency to justify transgressing all boundaries when experimentation is carried out on living human embryos. We forget that the inalienable worth of a human being transcends his or her degree of development. In the same way, when technology disregards the great ethical principles, it ends up considering any practice whatsoever as licit. As we have seen in this chapter, a technology severed from ethics will not easily be able to limit its own power. (Laudato si’, n. 136)
Conclusion
How important to have a correct ethical vision regarding the identity and nature of the human embryo. How you “see” it will determine how you treat it. If viewed as merely “a bunch of cells” then one presumably can do whatever one wishes with it. Altogether different is to recognize that in this human being the adventure of life has begun, willed by God, with an eternal destiny. And as the Church emphatically underlines, the human embryo has, therefore, from the very beginning, the dignity proper to a person, stressing the underlying respect one must show towards the human embryo and human life overall.
There is a call for a renewed sensitivity in front of the smallest of our brothers and sisters (see Matthew 25:40). Not for nothing do the major bioethical documents of the Church (such as Donum vitae, Evangelium vitae and Dignitas Personae) all conclude by reminding us that our Lord himself identifies himself with the least of our brothers and sisters – and none are smaller than the human embryo. The massive destruction of human embryos has reached genocidal proportions. We need to embolden ourselves to choose life, and speak up on behalf of the human embryo who often remains defenseless and voiceless in the society of today. The status of the embryo thus becomes vital for many areas of medicine and healthcare research.