How does the church feel about IVF? This question worries many modern believers today, because at present the proportion of infertile marriages reaches 30%. In Russia, this figure is about two times lower, but still remains quite high. A promising method to save a couple from infertility is in vitro fertilization. Many gladly agree to this procedure, without thinking about the many ethical problems that cannot be considered compatible with the feelings of a true Christian. In this article, we will provide an overview of the views of theologians on this technology.
IVF method
The problem of attitudes towards the ECO church arose relatively recently. It was the 20th century that was marked by a large number of discoveries in various fields of science, including medicine. They radically changed our understanding of life and he alth. One of them was in vitro fertilization, which allows us to take a fresh look at the way humans reproduce offspring.
To understand the attitude of the church towards IVF,to figure out whether religion allows the intervention of medicine in such areas of human life, one should use the research of modern theological sciences. Since in the past similar problems simply did not exist. If you wish, you can discuss an exciting issue with a priest. However, everyone can have their own point of view. And it is important to find out the big picture.
The position of the church towards IVF was formulated in 2000 in the manual "Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church". Then this practice was only mastered. But a lot of time has passed since then. Now it is available to a huge number of people. And we have to admit that the attitude of the Orthodox Church towards IVF can be described as ambiguous.
On the one hand, any path to childbearing that is contrary to the intentions of the Creator is considered sinful. At the same time, it is noted that the use of not every method of assisted reproductive technologies is denied by the church. However, it is emphasized that the ROC has a negative attitude towards all types of IVF, which involve the destruction of the so-called "excessive" embryos.
As a result, it becomes necessary to study the ethical issues that fundamentally prevent the believer from using this method, as well as the existence of those that can be accepted by the Orthodox consciousness.
The opinion of the Church on IVF is formulated on the basis that modern methods of in vitro fertilization provide a large number of options.
Ethical Issues
This IVF topic includes the process of obtaining germ cells, an excess number of embryos, lack of communication with a spouse at conception, the use of germ cells from an outsider.
One of the main claims of the church to IVF is the actual killing of extra embryos. During in vitro fertilization, a woman takes a lot of eggs, which are involved in further fertilization. Literally, the doctor has human embryos in his hands, only one of which he transplants into a woman, and the rest freezes or destroys.
In Orthodox consciousness there is an understanding that a person's personality is born at the moment of his conception. Therefore, these manipulations with embryos, which actually lead to their death, are considered murder.
Similar in the concept of theologians to murder and freezing, since after it the probability of having a child decreases three times. As a result, the church treats IVF so negatively because the method exposes the embryos to death. Let it be indirect. Moreover, in the event of a multiple pregnancy, doctors strongly advise to reduce the "extra" embryos that are already in the uterus.
Obtaining germ cells
In relation to IVF, the church is confused by the very process of obtaining germ cells. After all, the simplest and most effective method for this is the extraction of the seed through masturbation. This is a sin that is unacceptable for an Orthodox person.
Note that this method of obtaining male germ cells is not the only one. There are medicalmethods, as a result of which it becomes possible to obtain a seed, and its collection is also possible during sexual intercourse between spouses.
Alien sex cells
It is believed that another fundamental point, because of which the church is against IVF, interference in the fertilization of outsiders. The Catholic Church especially insists on the inadmissibility of this.
One of the key ethical requirements is that childbearing should occur exclusively as a result of the union of spouses. At the same time, the church opposes IVF because third parties are involved in the process, at least a gynecologist and an embryologist.
This position is considered controversial, since in this case the doctor should not be allowed to treat infertility. After all, then he will also participate in conception as a third party. In this regard, the inadmissibility of IVF only on the basis of the invasion of third parties is considered unjustified by most theologians.
Considering this aspect of IVF, the Orthodox Church includes in this concept the donation of germ cells.
In this case, you should definitely indicate that these technologies are categorically unacceptable. The use of foreign male reproductive cells destroys the marriage union, allowing the possibility of intimate intercourse with a stranger at the cellular level. The church is also negative about surrogate motherhood.
History of the method
There is also an ethical problem in the history of method development. Church to ECOBecause of this, fertilization is still wary. For the first time, the assumption that embryos are able to develop outside the mother's body was made in 1934. After that, attempts to conceive "in vitro" began. First, animals were involved in the experiments, and then people. Experiments were carried out on embryos, which often ended in their death. For example, the birth of the first test-tube baby named Louise Brown occurred only after 102 failed attempts. By that time, experiments had been conducted for several decades, the total number of embryos sacrificed is difficult to imagine.
The church is against IVF, because it considers it impossible to receive benefits for one person if another suffers from it. The well-known Latin expression is dedicated to this: Non sunt facienda mala ut veniant bona (you cannot do evil from which good would come out).
True, some are discussing this issue as well. Arguing that this expression is related only to the proposed future action, for the sake of which one or another moral principle is to be violated. When the results are fact, it may be ethical to use the findings to improve people's lives.
This thesis finds numerous confirmations in history. For example, experiments on people who were carried out by the Nazis in concentration camps. When people are immersed in ice water, it was found that a person's chances of survival increase significantly if the back of the head is not immersed. This is how the life jacket was invented.collar. This development is used all over the world, but if you follow the above logic, it can also be considered unethical.
Vaccination example
Another striking analogy has to do with the possibility of using vaccines. In particular, vaccines against hepatitis A, rubella, chicken pox. In their manufacture, tissues of an aborted embryo are used. For example, the rubella virus is grown on embryonic cells that are obtained as a result of abortion. Such use of fabrics is considered unacceptable, which was confirmed by the relevant provisions in the "Fundamentals of the Social Concept".
Intolerance to this use of vaccines is increasing due to the fact that in some countries there are advanced developments in which vaccines are obtained from animal cells. For example, the vaccine against hepatitis A from monkey cells, and against rubella from a rabbit. These methods are widely used in Japan. However, these medicines are not registered in the Russian Federation, so they are not purchased. As a result, the Orthodox believer faces a difficult dilemma. On the one hand, children need to be vaccinated in order to get rid of possible serious diseases. On the other hand, the vaccines received were the result of the sin of a certain person committed several decades ago.
The Russian Orthodox Church has come to the conclusion that in the absence of an alternative, the use of such a vaccine can be regarded as the lesser of two evils. Otherwise, this may lead toinfections and epidemics that will no longer threaten an individual, but society as a whole.
Drawing appropriate analogies with in vitro fertilization, it can be argued that this technology was developed many years ago. After the method was perfected, experiments on embryos were banned in most countries. In addition, the technique uses only the results of previous experiments, not new ones.
From this, how the church relates to IVF fertilization is formed. Despite the ethical imperfection, the use of this technique can be considered acceptable, as it serves the benefit of all mankind. In this regard, the church allows IVF.
Additional problems
There are a few other issues that relate to the consequences of using this method. This is the impact on the he alth of children born as a result of in vitro fertilization, the impact on the he alth of the woman herself, as well as society as a whole. These questions are no longer only ethical, but also social and legal areas. Some tend to regard them as secondary, as they can be effectively eliminated in the future with proper control.
Based on the ethical issues discussed earlier, the Russian Orthodox Church considers the method of this assisted reproductive technology, which kills the so-called "extra" embryos, to be completely unacceptable. By this they mean their freezing, direct destruction. This is why the church is against IVF. At the same time, the ROC categorically opposes methods that destroy the bond between spouses at conception. This includes the use of foreign male germ cells and surrogate motherhood. Considering how the church treats IVF with a husband, it is worth noting that in this sense, most theologians admit the possibility of using this technique if there are no other options for conception.
The rest of the existing ethical issues, in particular, the intervention of a third party, are considered as medical assistance in the process of childbirth. The gynecologist in this case actually acts in the same role as the obstetrician during the usual delivery. Assistance with childbirth associated with the production of germ cells can be modified. For example, to receive them not as a result of masturbation, but by one of the other existing methods.
A number of controversial issues should be taken under strict public and state control. These include the medical factor with participation in the process of childbirth, state control of the use of this method by people who are not officially married. This is how the Orthodox Church views IVF.
Priests' opinions
In the Russian Orthodox Church, even though there is no specific position on this issue, there is no categorical ban on in vitro fertilization. Some priests approve this procedure subject to certain conditions, which have already been described above.
This is also confirmed by the fact that in 2013 at the meetingThe Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church actively discussed the topic of surrogate motherhood, as well as the admission of the baptism of children who were born as a result of this method of conception. The result of theological discussions was a document known as "On the baptism of babies born with the help of a surrogate mother." It emphasized that the Church officially recognizes medical assistance to childless spouses with the help of artificially fertilized male germ cells, if this is not accompanied by the destruction of fertilized eggs, and the basic principles of marriage are not violated. At the same time, surrogate motherhood was unambiguously condemned by the institution of the church.
Theologians' comments
On this basis, we can conclude that the Holy Synod condemned the very practice of in vitro fertilization only in the part that is associated with the destruction of "surplus" or "extra" embryos. It turns out that the rest of the church allows IVF.
In particular, these conclusions are confirmed by the words of Archpriest Maxim Kozlov, who is a member of the Biblical and Theological Commission. Commenting on the document adopted at the meeting of the Holy Synod, he notes that the Russian Orthodox Church does not prohibit IVF, except when it comes to the destruction of fertilized eggs.
Conclusions
Based on the foregoing, certain conclusions can be drawn. The Church admits that the method of extracorporealfertilization may be permissible and morally justified. The main thing is that the sacred connection of the spouses is not violated, the embryos are not killed.
It should be understood that this method fundamentally changes a person's idea of how to reproduce offspring, allowing you to choose children in accordance with the desired qualities. This actually opens the way to various abuses. For example, some may want to choose the color of the eyes or the sex of the child, and same-sex couples and single mothers are more likely to have offspring. All this is contrary to Christian ideas about virtue and morality. Therefore, these likely consequences, according to the church, should be brought under control by the state.
Due to the fact that not all consequences can be taken under state control, there is a danger of abuse in the widespread use of in vitro fertilization, its widespread promotion.
