"Body, love, pleasure - does it make sense to separate nature and person?""In transhumanism we have to distinguish science fiction from what we will be able to see."On March 20, 2023 the U.S. Bishops' Conference of Bishops published a doctrinal note in which they talk about the manipulation of the body through technique and technology, and its moral limits.
In 14 pages, the bishops summarize the doctrine of the Catholic Church regarding the human body, the respect due to it and the gift of creation as something that men and women should embrace. Without disdaining all the good that scientific advances have done, which have facilitated the "ability to cure many human ills and promise to solve many more," they also warn of the danger of interventions "injurious to the authentic development of the person."
For all this, "it is necessary to carry out a moral discernment to determine which possibilities can be realized and which cannot, in order to promote the good of man". And to carry out this analysis we must use the criteria inscribed in human nature itself.
The natural order
In Genesis we read that God created the world and that this creation is good. From this, and as a fundamental part of the Christian faith, "the Church has always affirmed the essential goodness of the natural order, and calls us to respect it".
Thus, the Second Vatican Council left in writing in Gaudium et spes that "by the very nature of creation all things are endowed with their own consistency, truth and goodness and their own regulated order, which man must respect with the recognition of the particular methodology of each science or art". Shortly afterwards, Benedict XVI will say in Caritas in veritate that nature "carries within itself a "grammar" that indicates purpose and criteria for an intelligent, non-instrumental and arbitrary use".
The U.S. bishops affirm that "what is true of creation as a whole is also true of human nature in particular: there is an order in the nature of man that we must respect. Indeed, man, being the image and likeness of God, deserves even greater respect than the rest of creation. On this depends the happiness of the human being.
With forcefulness, the doctrinal note states that "we did not create human nature; it is a gift from our gracious Creator. Nor does this nature belong to us, as if it were something we could dispose of as we please. Therefore, genuine respect for the dignity of man requires that decisions about the use of technology be made with due respect for that created order."
Body and soul
The Episcopal Conference stresses as a crucial aspect of this order the unity of body and soul of the human being. In this regard, they cite the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which states in point 365: "The unity of soul and body is so profound that the soul must be considered as the 'form' of the body (cf. Council of Vienne, 1312, DS 902); that is, thanks to the spiritual soul, the matter that makes up the body is a human and living body; in man, spirit and matter are not two united natures, but their union constitutes a single nature".
This implies, the episcopate points out, that "the soul does not come into existence on its own and somehow find itself inside a body, as if it could have been introduced into any body. A soul cannot be in any other body, much less be in the wrong body."
The question of sex
Human corporeality is indissolubly linked to sexuality. Thus, through the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and the WorldThe doctrinal note stresses "the importance and meaning of the difference between the sexes as a reality that is deeply inscribed in the man and woman. "Sexuality characterizes both men and women. woman not only on the physical level, but also on the psychological and spiritual level with its consequent imprint in all its manifestations" (cf. Congregation for Catholic Education, Educational guidelines on human love. Sex education guidelines (Nov. 1, 1983), 4: Ench. Vat. 9, 423)".
Therefore, sex is not just a biological trait. Sex is part of the personality and influences the way we communicate and even the way we love.
Faced with the challenges posed by statements such as these, the U.S. bishops turn directly to Pope Francis, who in turn refers to the document Relatio Finalis in his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitiaand says: "It should not be ignored that 'biological sex (sex) and the sociocultural role of sex (gender), they can be distinguished but not separated" [...] It is one thing to understand human frailty or the complexity of life, and another thing to accept ideologies that seek to split in two the inseparable aspects of reality. Let us not fall into the sin of pretending to substitute ourselves for the Creator. We are creatures, we are not omnipotent. What is created precedes us and must be received as a gift. At the same time, we are called to guard our humanity, and this means first of all to accept and respect it as it has been created".
Interventions
With regard to advances in science, the doctrinal note stresses that "neither patients, nor physicians, nor researchers, nor any other person has unlimited rights over the body; they must respect the order and purpose" inscribed in human nature.
To clarify the Church's teaching, the bishops point out that there are two cases in which the Church recognizes that intervention on the human body may be morally justified:
- when such interventions are intended to repair a defect of the body,
- when the sacrifice of a part of the body is necessary for the good of the whole.
However, there are other interventions that are not performed for these purposes, but are aimed at "altering the natural order of the body. Such interventions do not respect the order and purpose inscribed in the person".
Repairing defects
According to the doctrine, every person, including Christians, has the duty to use the ordinary means available to preserve his or her health. However, this obligation disappears "when the benefits of the intervention are not proportionate to the burdens involved".
For this reason, the bishops indicate that in order to know whether an intervention is morally licit or not, one must consider "not only the object of the action and its intention, but also the consequences of the act, which include an evaluation of the probability of discernible benefits and a comparison of the benefits expected to be obtained versus the burdens expected to be suffered".
Something similar happens with those interventions that are not aimed at correcting a defect, but at modifying appearance. In this regard, the Episcopal Conference quotes Pope Pius XII, who in a speech on October 4, 1958, said that physical beauty "is a good thing in itself, but subordinate to others which are much better and, consequently, precious and desirable." Therefore, beauty, "as something good and a gift of God, is to be esteemed and cared for, without thereby claiming a duty to resort to extraordinary means" to obtain or preserve it.
Taking into account the assessment explained above, interventions may be justified in cases of seeking a normal appearance or even greater perfection in features. However, the intentions and circumstances must be taken into account.
The sacrifice of the part for the whole
With regard to the mutilation of body parts to preserve health, the bishops turn again to the teachings of Pius XII. They mention the three conditions that this Pope pointed out in order to consider mutilations as morally permissible:
- Maintaining or allowing a particular organ of the organism as a whole to continue to function causes significant harm to the organism or constitutes a threat.
- That this damage cannot be avoided, or reduced so as to be appreciated, other than by the mutilation in question, and that the effectiveness of such mutilation is well assured.
- That the negative effects of mutilation can reasonably be expected to be outweighed by the positive effects.
Alterations in the natural order
The bishops' doctrinal note immediately goes on to evaluate the interventions made by science in some cells. To explain what the Church indicates, they turn to the document prepared by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dignitas Personaewhich indicates in its number 26 that "the interventions on somatic cells for strictly therapeutic purposes are, in principle, morally licit. Such interventions aim to restore the normal genetic configuration of the subject, or to counteract the damage deriving from the presence of genetic anomalies or other correlated pathologies".
However, "it is necessary to ensure beforehand that the treated subject is not exposed to risks to his health or physical integrity that are excessive or disproportionate to the seriousness of the pathology to be cured. It is also required that the patient, previously informed, gives his consent, or a legitimate representative does so".
In the face of this, the debate on genetic mutilation is immediately opened. The same Congregation explains that because "the risks linked to each genetic manipulation are significant and still not easily controllable, in the present state of research, it is not morally admissible to act in such a way that the potential damage resulting from it could spread to the offspring. In the hypothesis of the application of gene therapy to the embryo, it must also be added that it must be carried out in a technical context of in vitro fertilization, and is therefore subject to all the ethical objections related to such procedures. For these reasons it must be affirmed that, in the present state of the question, germ line gene therapy is morally illicit in all its forms".
Sex change
Body modifications and interventions related to sex change are not morally licit. The bishops explain that these interventions "do not repair bodily defects." Moreover, mutilation of the body does not seek to preserve health, but in this case "the removal or reconfiguration is itself the desired result."
Consequently, "these are attempts to alter the natural order and purpose of the body and replace it with something else. Within the natural order established by God are the body and its sexed identity, therefore "Catholic medical services must not practice these interventions, whether surgical or chemical, which attempt to modify the sexual characteristics of the human body" and neither can they take part in such interventions.
This does not detract from the obligation to use "all appropriate means to mitigate the suffering of those with gender incongruities, but the resources must respect the natural order of the human body." For only through morally licit means can health care providers "show all due respect for the dignity of each person."
Conclusion
The bishops understand that progress in science seeks, on most occasions, the good of man and the solution to his problems. But we cannot forget that "an approach that does not respect the natural order will never be able to solve the problem in question; in the end, it will only create more problems".
Therefore, "the search for solutions to the problems of human suffering must continue, but it must be directed towards solutions that truly promote the development of the person, whether he or she, in his or her bodily integrity".
The Bishops' Conference encourages all Catholics involved in healthcare to make every effort, using appropriate means, to offer the best medical service and the compassion of Christ, without distinction of persons. Of course, the mission of Catholic health care "is none other than to offer the healing ministry of Jesus and to provide health at all levels, physical, mental and spiritual."
