Jimmy Akin

A reader writes:

I wanted to pose a question given the Church’s teaching on embryonic stem cell research. I have a good friend that is suffering from a serious illness that will likely end her life earlier than average. This is an illness that, valid or not, numerous claims about stem cells being the source of a cure for this illness. For purposes of this question, let’s set aside the current practical understanding (ESCR hasn’t yielded any successful advances at this point, while adult stem cell research is more promising). Let’s assume that, at some point in the future (as ESCR is unfortunately likely to happen in private labs at the least), such research yields a complete cure for this illness. How does the current Church teaching extend to that scenario?

Currently, it is sinful for researchers to perform this and (correct me if I’m wrong) sinful to encourage or provide funding for it.

How does that apply to someone whose life would be extended if they receive that cure? If a cure is made available, does the Church teach that an individual will be committed a grave sin in receiving the cure?

Does it matter how the cure is developed (i.e., research yields a method that does not require killing off embryos – the initial research is sinful, what does that make the resulting method)? I’m not trying to look for a “loophole” here…I’m trying to grasp a better understanding of the application of the Church teaching so I can explain it better to my friend. Any help you could provide in explaining this better would be greatly appreciated.

This is an area of ongoing doctrinal development, so the best I can do is sketch the current shape of my own understanding of how to apply the relevant principles to this area. There may be medical facts I am unaware of, and the Church may later clarify things in a way that is different than what I sketch below.

Let’s start by being clear about what is intrinsically wrong here: killing embryonic human beings. That is the thing that is intrinsically wrong. Other things in this area are not intrinsically wrong–or have not been said by the Church to be instrinsically wrong–but may be extrinsically wrong based on how they relate to the killing of embryonic humans.

It is thus wrong to kill an embryonic human in order to develop a cell line out of his body, but it is not wrong–or has not been judged by the Church to be wrong–to extract stem cells from an adult (without killing him) in order to generate a cell line.

Once you’ve got the cell line, it is intrinsically possible to experiment on it and try to develop cures from it. The cell line is not a human being (unless you are culturing it in a way that results in the creation of zygotes, which may be the case in some instances) and so the cell line has no rights to be violated. Whether the cell line originated from an embryo who was killed or an adult who was not killed does not affect the moral character of experimenting on it as long as it does not give rise to new humans.

The source of concern at this point is whether conducting such experimentation–which is morally permitted in principle–is whether doing so will reward/encourage those who have killed embryos.

The Church is concerned to avoid the creation of widespread baby farming in order to get new cell lines for research. If allowing research on cells lines that came from murdered babies is something that will result in the murder of thousands or millions of more babies then–as a practical matter–refusing to allow the research may be the best way to protect human life (taking into account the lives that might not be saved because the research doesn’t get done). In this case doing/funding the research would be extrinsically wrong, meaning that it is not wrong in itself but is wrong because it promotes something that is wrong in itself.

Unfortunately, when things are extrinsically wrong it often is unclear what their moral status is. If something is wrong in and of itself then we can be more definite about its moral status than if we’re trying to figure out what kind of cooperation is involved in an action that is wrong. There is thus often a judgment call that has to be made when it comes to whether an immoral form of cooperation is present.

Thus far the Church has not issued a judgment that experimenting on cell lines from embryos is (a) intrinsically evil or (b) always extrinsically evil due to an inadmissable form of cooperation with embryo killing. In the absence of such a judgment, Catholic researchers would be allowed to hold the position that it is permissible for them to conduct research on embryonic stem cell lines as long as they are not creating zygotes or otherwise encouraging the destruction of embryos.

I strongly suspect, though, that if pressed the Vatican would also protect the right of Catholic researchers not to hold this opinion and to refuse to participate in the research.

Why do I say that?

Because there is also the question of how this impacts your friend: Supposing a cure were developed from such a cell line, could it be used?

Well, right now there are some treatments out there that, in one way or another, involve cells from aborted kids and the Holy See has defended the right of Catholics not to use these treatments even if they are required by local laws (e.g., as part of childhood vaccinations).

The current state of affairs is thus that the Church seems to permit Catholics to hold either position: that it is permissible to fund, research, or take treatments based on stem cell lines coming from embryos as long as one isn’t improperly cooperating in the deaths of new humans OR that one should refuse to fund, research, or take treatments based on such cell lines in order to avoid rewarding/encouraging those who would kill babies.

This is a tricky area, and I espect we will get more clarification from the Church in the future, but that is what seems to be the attitude it is taking for now.

Incidentally, this is not the only time that this kind of situation has come up. It also came up after World War II when it was discovered that the Nazis had done all kinds of medical experimentation on Jewish individuals and there was the question of what to do with the research they had amassed: use it or not?

We can adapt that situation a little bit to the case of stem cells in order to get at the central dilemma. What I’m about to say will be nightmarish, but we’re dealing with a nightmare scenario here, and it helps to remember that and to put a human face on it.

With embryonic stem cell research, what we’re talking about it killing children in order to get medical consumables from them that may then save lives.

Okay: So suppose that you are an Allied pilot who gets shot down over Nazi Germany and you are badly in need of a transfusion, without which you will die.

A Catholic doctor takes pity on you and offers you the transfusion, but he feels that you ought to know the source of the blood, and it turns out that the Nazis have been killing Jewish individuals specifically to get their blood for use in transfusions.

This morning the doctor received a shipment of blood of your type that was extracted from a little girl–Anne Frank–who was killed so that people like you could have her blood.

Do you take the transfusion or not?

It’s a nightmare scenario, but that’s the kind of thing we’re talking about.

Incidentally, one might note that Nazi Germany wasn’t a democracy and wouldn’t care about whether you refused the transfusion or not. On the other hand, we might note that while we are living in a democracy here in America, if widespread baby farming gets started then the drug companies and research labs won’t care about your individual refusal to take their treatments, either.

That’s the situation we’re left to wrestle with.

BUT HERE’S SOME GOOD NEWS.

A reader writes:

I’m a teenager that needs money for college, is it a sin to work on Sunday?  I will fulfill my Sunday oligation to go to Mass.   I’m involved in activities after school that might restrict the amont of hours I can work and will probably have to work on Sundays.  I would appreciate any light that you can shed on this. 

It is not a sin to work on Sunday if you are required to do so by your employer. If you need to make money and your employer requires you to work on Sunday then you work on Sunday. It is not a sin.

That said, one would want to try to find a job that doesn’t require one to work on Sunday. For most people–at least after their college years–this is achievable. But for many folks who are still in school or just starting out, it is not.

The Catechism states:

Family needs or important social service can legitimately excuse from the obligation of Sunday rest. the faithful should see to it that legitimate excuses do not lead to habits prejudicial to religion, family life, and health [CCC 2185].

It also says:

Traditional activities (sport, restaurants, etc.), and social necessities (public services, etc.), require some people to work on Sundays, but everyone should still take care to set aside sufficient time for leisure [CCC 2187].

Now, getting money for college is an important need and would clearly allow for Sunday work. Getting a college degree will open innumerable doors that would otherwise be closed to you in later life, so the gravity necessary for Sunday work is clearly present.

Assuming that there isn’t another possibility.

And here’s where we get to a judgment call: You mention that you are participating in activities after school that may be pushing you toward working on Sundays.

I don’t know what these activities are. They may be things that are themselves important to making your school record look good (so as to get into a better college) or they may be things that will look good on future job resumes (e.g., social service things) or they may just be personally psychologically important to you. So you may have reason to keep doing them on weekdays and then going to work on Sunday.

But I’d at least ask the question of whether the afterschool activities are of sufficient value that they should be done instead of Sunday work. If it were possible to get an afterschool job on weekdays and then rest and do leisure activities on Sunday, that would be preferable.

What the right thing to do in this situation is a judgment call, and I can’t make that for you. I’d therefore advise you to talk it over with your parents and see what they think.

Just make the best judgment call you can and act on it, entrusting the situation to the Lord.

Those three things–using our reason to make judgment calls, acting on them, and trusting God with the results–bring glory to the Lord for they show the attitude of faith coupled with the exercise of the gifts that God gave us to employ.

20