When a genuinely contested question arises in moral theology, initial analyses inevitably settle around particular lines of argument and counter-argument that rely on relevant moral claims which are presumed stable and settled. Mutual criticism, discussion, and further reflection bring more nuance and texture to these lines of argument as they also illumine those claims and teachings taken to be reliable moral markers or building blocks. What takes shape is a “debate” with more or less clearly demarcated “sides,” and subsequent scholarly entries into the contested question must traverse the debate’s terrain. Eventually, however, new routes into the question are called for and charted, as newcomers to and veterans of the debate alike begin to challenge the terms on which the conversation has settled.
In the case of embryo adoption, analyses have settled around the question whether it is morally permissible to transfer a genetically unrelated embryo into the uterus of a married woman, and answers to this question are crafted by appealing to relatively stable and settled Catholic teaching on marriage, or more specifically to the marriage “act” (i.e., heterosexual intercourse) or to the marital/nuptial significance of the human body. This essay argues that many of the heretofore available Catholic arguments about embryo adoption are methodologically flawed, problematically gendered, and theologically deficient. After developing these charges, the essay explores embryo adoption in light of theological reflection on Christ’s body and ours, adoption, and the common good. While I judge that embryo adoption is at least sometimes morally permissible, my aim here is not so much to argue for the moral permissibility of the practice, but (like Eric Gregory does admirably in his contribution to this volume) to call for and inaugurate more robustly moral theological consideration of the practice. More specifically, I consider embryo adoption in light of the affirmation that we are made God’s adopted children by being incorporated into Christ’s body.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bartholet, E. (1993). Family Bonds: Adoption, Infertility, and the New World of Child Production. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Berkman, J.R. (2002). ‘The morality of adopting frozen embryos in light of Donum Vitae,’ Studia Moralia, 40, 115–141.
Berkman, J.R. (2003a). ‘Gestating the embryos of others,’ National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, 3, 309–329.
Berkman, J.R. (2003b). ‘Reply to Tonti-Filippini on “Gestating the embryos of others”,’ National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, 4, 12–13.
Berkman, J.R. (2006). ‘Virtuous parenting and orphaned embryos,’ in T. Berg & E. Furton (Eds.), Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life (pp. 13–36). Philadelphia, PA; Thornwood, NY: The National Catholic Bioethics Center and the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person.
Brugger, E.C. (2006). ‘A defense by analogy of heterologous embryo transfer,’ in T. Berg & E. Furton (Eds.), Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life. Washington, DC: The Westchester Institute.
Cahill, L.S. (1996). Sex, Gender, and Christian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cahill, L.S. (2005). ‘Adoption: A Roman Catholic perspective,’ in Timothy P. Jackson (Ed.), The Morality of Adoption: Social-Psychological, Theological, and Legal Perspectives. Grand Rapids, MI and Cambridge: Eerdmans.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1987). Donum Vitae (Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation: Replies to Certain Questions of the Day) [Online]. Available: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/ rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html.
Gaudium et Spes: The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (1965), in A. Flannery (Ed.) (1992). Vatican Council II, the Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents. North Port, NY: Costello.
Geach, M. (1999). ‘Are there any circumstances in which it would be morally admirable for a woman to seek to have an orphan embryo implanted in her womb?’ in L. Gormally (Ed.), Issues for a Catholic Bioethic (pp. 341–346). London: The Linacre Centre.
Geach, M. (2006). ‘The female act of allowing an intromission of an impregnating kind,’ in T. Berg & E. Furton (Eds.), Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life (pp. 251–271). Philadelphia, PA; Thornwood, NY: The National Catholic Bioethics Center and the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person.
Griffiths, P.J. (2005). ‘Christians and the Church,’ in G. Meilaender & W. Werpehoski (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Theological Ethics (pp. 398–412). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grisez, G. (1997). ‘Should a woman try to bear her dead sister’s embryo?’ in The Way of the Lord Jesus, Vol. 3, Difficult Moral Questions (pp. 239–244). Quincy, IL: Franciscan Press.
John, XXIII (1961). Mater et Magistra (On Christianity and Social Progress) [Online]. Available: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_ 15051961_mater_en.html.
John Paul, II (1981). Familiaris Consortio (The Christian Family in the Modern World). [Online]. Available: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_ exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio_en.html.
Kerr, F. (2007). Twentieth Century Catholic Theologians: From Neoscholasticism to Nuptial Mysticism. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Long, S.A. (2006). ‘An argument for the embryonic intactness of marriage,’ The Thomist, 70, 267–88.
May, W.E. (2006). ‘The object of the acting woman in embryo rescue,’ in T.V. Berg & E.J Furton (Eds.), Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life (pp. 135–163). Philadelphia, PA, Thornwood, NY: The National Catholic Bioethics Center and The Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person.
Oleson, C. (2006). ‘The nuptial womb: On the moral significance of being “with child”,’ in T.V. Berg & E.J. Furton (Eds.), Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life (pp. 165–195). Philadelphia, PA, Thornwood, NY: The National Catholic Bioethics Center and The Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person.
Ryan, M.A. (2001). Ethics and Economics of Assisted Reproduction: The Cost of Longing. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Tonti-Filippini, N. (2006). ‘The embryo rescue debate: Impregnating women, ectogenesis, and restoration from suspended animation,’ in T. Berg & E. Furton (Eds.), Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life (pp. 69–114). Philadelphia, PA; Thornwood, NY: The National Catholic Bioethics Center and The Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person.
Weaver, D.F. (2005). ‘Death,’ in G. Meilaender & W. Werpehoski (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Theological Ethics (pp. 254–270). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Weaver, D.F. (forthcoming). ‘Embryo adoption: Expanding the terms of the debate,’ in L. Hogan (Ed.), Catholic Theological Ethics in the World Church. New York: Orbis.
Wheeler, S. (2005). ‘Christians and family,’ in G. Meilaender & W. Werpehoski (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Theological Ethics (pp. 343–359). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer Science + Business Media B.V
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Weaver, D.F. (2007). Embryo Adoption Theologically Considered: Bodies, Adoption, and the Common Good. In: Brakman, SV., Weaver, D.F. (eds) The Ethics of Embryo Adoption and the Catholic Tradition. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 95. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6211-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6211-7_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-6210-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-6211-7
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)