Cardinal Bernadin and Artificial insemination

[TheAdvocate]

Hi, I read an article in St. Anthony’s Messenger in which it appears Cardinal Bernadin took a somewhat liberal position regarding artificial insemination (AI).

I was recently told by a doctor that artificial insemination (AI) is likely going to be the only way my wife and I will have a child. More tests are needed, so please pray. I don’t want to go the route of artificial insemination, but we’ve always wanted children. I am fully aware of what the Church’s teaching is on it, but apparently, Cardinal Bernadin suggested it was a question of conscience in the end. And I’ve always had a deep respect for the late Cardinal. I have posted the link to the article at the bottom of this post.

I also found out that the Orthodox Church, which is supposedly closest to us in doctrine than any other Christian body, is not opposed to the use of AI.

Bernadin was a cardinal, and a respected one at that.

Here’s what I think. The teaching on AI has not been infallibly proclaimed. You might argue that the ban on contraception is part of the universal ordinary magisterium, but the teaching on AI? Hardly. I am aware of the document *Donum Vitae *which deals with the issue. But Bernadin was commenting on that very document when he remarked about individual decision and conscience!

Another thought: The Church comes down against AI because it has to raise the moral bar high–understandable. Otherwise, if the Church that AI is permitted sometimes, it would result in a slippery slope leading to an acceptance of in vitro fertilization (which kills embryos), surrogate motherhood, and third party sperm donors. But c’mon…with AI, it’s the husband’s sperm and her egg. The medical procedure is just helping the two meet. The Church has to lay down rigid rules to set standards. But I believe sometimes in morality, it’s okay to color a little bit outside of the lines in certain moral situations.

Funny how when it comes to the death penalty, apparently you can be a Catholic in good standing if you disagree with the Church’s position (like apologist James Akin), but when you disagree with Her position on AI, you are a deviant dissenter. I guess traditional Catholics (aka “faithful”) just get really hung up on the sexual issues.

Any thoughts? If not, prayers please. God bless.

Here is the link to the article from St. Anthony’s Messenger:

americancatholic.org/Messenger/Apr1997/feature1.asp

 

[1ke]

Hi, I read an article in St. Anthony’s Messenger in which it appears Cardinal Bernadin took a somewhat liberal position regarding artificial insemination (AI).

I think this is wishful thinking on your part.

#1, what the Cardinal said is true but in no way supports AI. Every Catholic is indeed called to form their conscience and act upon it. One must **properly **form one’s conscience. And, Donum Vitae, the Catechism, and the newest writing Dignitas Personae must be used when forming your conscience.

#2 This is a partial quote, so I wouldn’t be so quik to jump on it without knowing its full text and context.

#3 When he made the remarks, the document had just come out and a variety of techniques were still ambiguous (as we know some assisted reproductive methods are allowed while other specific methods are not) morally.

#4 Since that time, not only has Donum Vitae been incorporated into the Magesterial teaching on the Sixth Commandment in the Catechism but the teaching was just reiterated in Dec 2008 in Dignitas Personae.

To try to use some out of context quotes of the Cardinal from 22 years ago, while ignoring Donum Vitae, the Catechism, AND Dignitas Personae, is self delusion not sound conscience formation.

I was recently told by a doctor that artificial insemination (AI) is likely going to be the only way my wife and I will have a child. More tests are needed, so please pray.

#1 Contact www.popepaulvi.com and see what they can do for you. All treatments are morally licit.

#2 Don’t let the devil tempt you by using your heart’s desire against you. He took Jesus up to the mountaintops and offered him everything… just one little catch. Don’t commit mortal sin to get what you desire. Turn your desire instead towards God.

I am fully aware of what the Church’s teaching is on it, but apparently, Cardinal Bernadin suggested it was a question of conscience in the end. .

Again, a 22 year old quote taken out of context cannot withstand scrutiny compared to the Church’s teaching in that 22 years.

I also found out that the Orthodox Church, which is supposedly closest to us in doctrine than any other Christian body, is not opposed to the use of AI.

The Orthodox hold more than one heretical position. Following them is not the way to form your conscience either.

Bernadin was a cardinal, and a respected one at that.

Not a substitute for the actual teaching of the Church.

I am aware of the document *Donum Vitae *which deals with the issue. But Bernadin was commenting on that very document when he remarked about individual decision and conscience!

Here’s what I think:

You want a child very badly and are willing to try to rationalize your way into doing what you want to do.

But, you cannot ignore the Magesterium, including Donum Vitae, the Catechism, and Dignitas Personae.

The teachign on artificial insemination states it is wrong for the same reason contraception is wrong. It separates the unitive and procreative elements of the sexual act. This is not an opinion that is going to change. It is an application of God’s universal and unchanging moral law to a new situation. It is not going to change.

Another thought: The Church comes down against AI because it has to raise the moral bar high–understandable.

Nope. That is NOT the reason the Church teache it is immoral.

But I believe sometimes in morality, it’s okay to color a little bit outside of the lines in certain moral situations.

That is exactly what the Devil wants you to think. He is very happy when you commit mortal sins.

Funny how when it comes to the death penalty, apparently you can be a Catholic in good standing if you disagree with the Church’s position (like apologist James Akin),

This is an inaccurate representation of the Church’s position on the death penalty and what position one can morally take.

but when you disagree with Her position on AI, you are a deviant dissenter. I guess traditional Catholics (aka “faithful”) just get really hung up on the sexual issues.

When you transgress the moral law you are a sinner. That’s the way it is. Calling onself a “dissenter” from a Church position is an attempt to rationalize it. Refusing to call oneself a sinner is self deception.

Your attempt to throw mud on faithful catholics by implying that they have sexual issues is a logical fallacy. It is beneath you to do so. Stick to the facts: the Church teaches it is grave matter-- a mortal sin-- to engage in this particular reproductive technology. Those who are “faithful” are merely telling you the truth. If you reject the Truth-- then that is ultimately on your conscience (as Bernardin said).

Any thoughts

Yes, please stop going down the path of self deception on this topic.

If it turns out that you are unable to conceive in a moral way, then embrace this cross that Christ has given you and turn your family energy towards service through adoption or in some other way.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Thanks for your reply. Let me get back to the death penalty for a second. It would seem that it’s off topic, but I want to make a point about the magisterium, dissent, etc.

I know Catholics who are pro-life all the way when it comes to abortion, contraception, etc., but when it comes to the death penalty, they believe it is permissible even if there are sufficient non-bloody means to protect society There are lots of Catholics like this that hold this view, and respectfully reject the Church’s teaching. (Alan Keyes, for instance)

I didn’t hear a single “faithful” Catholic raise an issue with Keyes when he ran for president even though the Church’s teaching on the death penalty is also in the Catechism and several other documents.

Yes, I know about informing one’s conscience. But when I’m dealing with a non-infallible teaching, and I’ve thought it through and prayed about it, I might arrive at a different conclusion, one that gives me peace.

 

[thistle]

Thanks for your reply. Let me get back to the death penalty for a second. It would seem that it’s off topic, but I want to make a point about the magisterium, dissent, etc.

I know Catholics who are pro-life all the way when it comes to abortion, contraception, etc., but when it comes to the death penalty, they believe it is permissible even if there are sufficient non-bloody means to protect society **There are lots of Catholics like this that hold this view, and respectfully reject the Church’s teaching. ** (Alan Keyes, for instance)

I didn’t hear a single “faithful” Catholic raise an issue with Keyes when he ran for president even though the Church’s teaching on the death penalty is also in the Catechism and several other documents.

Yes, I know about informing one’s conscience. But when I’m dealing with a non-infallible teaching, and I’ve thought it through and prayed about it, I might arrive at a different conclusion, one that gives me peace.

Anyone who rejects the Church’s teachings is a heretic and consequently in a state of mortal sin.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

See the Catechism on Conscience. Especially

[1791](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1791.htm’) This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

 

[livi]

I always thought artificial insemination was a sin…

 

[KingTheoden]

I have to disagree that it is okay to ‘color outside of the lines’ (i.e., disobey Church teaching). That attitude is the one of ‘I know better than God’s Church’ and is consistantly the root of sin.

With that in mind, I know it must be a serious burden and challenge to accept that you might not be able to have biological children. Of course, I think there should be a round of second opinions. And we have to remember that God does deliver to His faithful: I’m sure that had Elizabeth just listened to our contemporary ‘experts,’ they would have told her to give up!

But supposing you will not be able to have your own children, perhaps this is God’s call for adoption.

When I became Catholic I learned that a bit part of our faith is accepting suffering and using it to draw ourselve closer to Jesus Christ. Almost immediately after Confirmation, I had a mini-challenge which lasted only a month. But it was completely necessary and I know that there will be more in the future.

I would suggest starting with accounts of some of the Saints.

 

[puzzleannie]

I know Catholics who are pro-life all the way when it comes to abortion, contraception, etc., but when it comes to the death penalty, they believe it is permissible even if there are sufficient non-bloody means to protect society There are lots of Catholics like this that hold this view, and respectfully reject the Church’s teaching. (Alan Keyes, for instance)

I didn’t hear a single “faithful” Catholic raise an issue with Keyes when he ran for president even though the Church’s teaching on the death penalty is also in the Catechism and several other documents.

.

you are right it is off topic and also irrelevant. Because some people abide by the Church teaching that there is at least a theoretical possibility that the death penalty might be licit in some circumstances, that view is by no means held by all or even most outspoken pro-life anti-abortion activists.

The same people who organized the pro-life conference 2 weeks ago in our diocese in which the Shiedlers were the keynote speakers have also scheduled an anti-death penalty even next month (to be hosted at our parish, a stronghold for pro-life activity in the valley.)

 

[rep140]

In Matthew Jesus criticises the pharasies for setting the bar so high that none will be able to follow it. Sometimes the Church does the same.

 

[TheAdvocate]

you are right it is off topic and also irrelevant. Because some people abide by the Church teaching that there is at least a theoretical possibility that the death penalty might be licit in some circumstances, that view is by no means held by all or even most outspoken pro-life anti-abortion activists.

The same people who organized the pro-life conference 2 weeks ago in our diocese in which the Shiedlers were the keynote speakers have also scheduled an anti-death penalty even next month (to be hosted at our parish, a stronghold for pro-life activity in the valley.)

So what you’re saying is that you can be a Catholic in good standing and believe that the death penalty should be used even if bloodless means were possible? Many conservative Catholics are of this persuasion. What if such a politician were running for office? Anyone here want to condemn Alan Keyes for his stance? Read it for yourself.

ontheissues.org/Celeb/Alan_Keyes_Crime.htm

And no, it isn’t off topic much, because I want to highlight the hypocrisy. Some Catholics are so legalistic, much like the Pharisees were–and so cold.

In my original post, twice I asked for prayers, and yet not a single person offered to pray for me in my situation. Some of the replies were charitable, though. Still, I am disappointed at the tone many take. Many people on these boards have a serious chip on their shoulder, and love showing people how much they know, and to let them know how much error they have fallen in to. It’s like the “Mortal Sin Police.” How easily “Mortal sinner” and “heretic” fly from their lips!

 

[SarahR]

Prayers for you, your wife, and your fertility struggles.

Hopefully the popepaulvi.com/ institute can be of some assistance.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Prayers for you, your wife, and your fertility struggles.

Hopefully the popepaulvi.com/ institute can be of some assistance.

Thanks for your charitable response. This is often missing in our posts.

 

[YADA]

So what you’re saying is that you can be a Catholic in good standing and believe that the death penalty should be used even if bloodless means were possible? Many conservative Catholics are of this persuasion. What if such a politician were running for office? Anyone here want to condemn Alan Keyes for his stance? Read it for yourself.

ontheissues.org/Celeb/Alan_Keyes_Crime.htm

And no, it isn’t off topic much, because I want to highlight the hypocrisy. Some Catholics are so legalistic, much like the Pharisees were–and so cold.

In my original post, twice I asked for prayers, and yet not a single person offered to pray for me in my situation. Some of the replies were charitable, though. Still, I am disappointed at the tone many take. Many people on these boards have a serious chip on their shoulder, and love showing people how much they know, and to let them know how much error they have fallen in to. It’s like the “Mortal Sin Police.” How easily “Mortal sinner” and “heretic” fly from their lips!

You are throwing a red herring here … I do not see anything in the link that sets Mr. Keyes’ position on the death penalty in opposition to the teachings of the Church … the hypocracy is on your part … you want to make the Church’s position on the death penalty an absolute …

that the Death Penalty is [and always was and always will be - in all cases] an intrinsic moral evil as is Abortion … However that is not the position of the Church …

In this way you are trying to equate your position that is in opposition to a clearly stated and held church teaching with another person’s stance on an issue that in actuality may be in harmony with a teaching … :tsktsk: Mr Keyes [on your link] is shown to hold that the death penalty is an option, an option that it has the potential to be exercised and that the death penalty should only be exercised rarely … did you get that? He emphasized the rare use!

Now I have not seen any Church document or teaching that states that artificial insemination is moraly acceptable if only used in rare cases … and I do not believe that is what the cardinal was saying in the article you posted …

 

[Sure]

Before proclaiming the Church’s teaching on artificial insemination could we all go back and READ Donum Vitae.

Donum Vitae clearly indicates that homologous artificial insemination can be morally permissible as long as it seeks to assist the marital act and not replace it.

 

[Timbothefiveth]

It appears to me you’re trying to rationalise a way that this sin would be okay, but you know in your heart it’s wrong. I’ve done that so many times, and I still fall for it. The only solution is to run, not walk away from this.

 

[TheAdvocate]

You are throwing a red herring here … I do not see anything in the link that sets Mr. Keyes’ position on the death penalty in opposition to the teachings of the Church … the hypocracy is on your part … you want to make the Church’s position on the death penalty an absolute …

that the Death Penalty is [and always was and always will be - in all cases] an intrinsic moral evil as is Abortion … However that is not the position of the Church …

In this way you are trying to equate your position that is in opposition to a clearly stated and held church teaching with another person’s stance on an issue that in actuality may be in harmony with a teaching … :tsktsk: Mr Keyes [on your link] is shown to hold that the death penalty is an option, an option that it has the potential to be exercised and that the death penalty should only be exercised rarely … did you get that? He emphasized the rare use!

Now I have not seen any Church document or teaching that states that artificial insemination is moraly acceptable if only used in rare cases … and I do not believe that is what the cardinal was saying in the article you posted …

With regard to Dr. Keyes position from the website, no…I did NOT get that. He DID NOT emphasize rare use. In fact, the word “rare” doesn’t appear in his statement a single time. He said under “certain circumstances.” That is not the same thing as rare use, because “certain” circumstances can occur frequently. Read it AGAIN if you like.

Thanks for your reply.

 

[KingTheoden]

The Church does NOT just make up rules so life is that much harder. Some of the most intelligent and reflective men ever have been Church leaders and they do not come to snap judgements. When a teaching is promulgated, we are obliged to submit and obey, even if we don’t personally understand it.

It is my understanding that teachings on artificial insemination are very clear: No. Why might that be? If child-procreation turns into a sort of mechanical process perfectly apart from sexual intercourse, we are seriously straying from God’s design. A lot of very, very bad things can happen and are happening when we turn to a lab for making children.

Sex is integral to procreation and that is what we learned in RCIA.

 

[Runner1]

Please pray to Saint Philomena! She is most wonderful in every situation. Through her intercession, I conceived my son who will be 7 weeks tomorrow and I’m praying, if God wills it, for another child.

God bless you through Mary’s Immaculate Heart.

 

[m134e5]

Bernadin was a cardinal, and a respected one at that.

Yes he was a Cardinal, but a respected one? I suppose that depends on who you ask. He was the hero of many progressive Catholic groups that defied the Church’s teachings about various issues. He, of course, deserves the respect due to any clergyman- but from what I understand, he wasn’t in line with the Church’s teachings when it came to some issues of moral theology.

 

[Sure]

The Church does NOT just make up rules so life is that much harder. Some of the most intelligent and reflective men ever have been Church leaders and they do not come to snap judgements. When a teaching is promulgated, we are obliged to submit and obey, even if we don’t personally understand it.

It is my understanding that teachings on artificial insemination are very clear: No. Why might that be? If child-procreation turns into a sort of mechanical process perfectly apart from sexual intercourse, we are seriously straying from God’s design. A lot of very, very bad things can happen and are happening when we turn to a lab for making children.

Sex is integral to procreation and that is what we learned in RCIA.

Dear Posters:

This is kind of getting old…

PLEASE NOTE:

Homologous Artificial Insemination IS PERMITTED as long as it assists the marital act and does not replace it.

1. HOW IS HOMOLOGOUS ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION TO BE EVALUATED FROM THE MORAL POINT OF VIEW?

Homologous artificial insemination within marriage cannot be admitted **except for those cases in which the technical means is not a substitute for the conjugal act but serves to facilitate and to help so that the act attains its natural purpose. **

…[M]oral conscience “does not necessarily proscribe the use of certain artificial means destined solely either to the facilitating of the natural act or to ensuring that the natural act normally performed achieves its proper end”.(53) If the technical means facilitates the conjugal act or helps it to reach its natural objectives, it can be morally acceptable. If, on the other hand, the procedure were to replace the conjugal act, it is morally illicit. Artificial insemination as a substitute for the conjugal act is prohibited by reason of the voluntarily achieved dissociation of the two meanings of the conjugal act.

Donum Vitae

Artificial Insemination is not the same as In Vitro Fertilization (which is intrinsically evil).