PRESS RELEASES
25.11.2003 Research on Human Embryos
4.4.2003
Abortion
16.9.2002 Medically Assisted Reproduction
17.8.2000 Euthanasia
14.12.2000 Cloning of Embryonic Cells
28.6.2000 Decoding of Human Genome
HELLENIC
REPUBLIC
THE HOLY SYNOD
OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE
BIOETHICS COMMITTEE
14 IOANNOU GENNADIOU - 115 21 ATHENS
GREECE
Press Release
25.11.2003
RESEARCH ON HUMAN EMBRYOS
On November 19, 2003, the European Parliament outvoted a report, which permits
the funding of embryo research that in turn implies their eventual destruction.
The Orthodox Church of Greece expresses Her explicit opposition to the adoption
of such a policy, which is contrary to fundamental ethical principles and offensive
towards the respect for man as the image of God. Moreover, it undermines the
validity of the ethical guidelines proposed by the European Commission in regards
to the funding of research on human embryonic stem-cells and violates the serious
ethical reservations invoked by a strong minority in the Parliament and expressed
by an even stronger majority within modern societies.
The haste with which the report was voted indicates a tendency to impose viewpoints
rather than initiate a dialogue. This is also confirmed by the inflexibility
and persistence with which the proposal to restrict experiments on human embryos
created prior to the crucial date of June 27, 2002 (the date on which the Sixth
EU Research Framework Programme was adopted) was dealt and ultimately rejected.
We, as Orthodox Christians, consider that human life begins "at the very
onset of conception"; in fact, the more weak and concealed human life is,
the more it needs our own care and legal protection. The embryo, whether a fertilised
egg, a zygote, or blastocyst, is a perfect human being as per its identity,
and is constantly being perfected as per its phenotypic expression and development.
In this sense, we are against every technique that implies the destruction of
embryos, no matter how promising it may be for the progress of health and medicine,
and we consider it as ethically unacceptable.
Instead of research on embryonic stem-cells that raises hopes, we could direct
our thought to other ethically acceptable therapeutic sources or methods, that
we can neither suspect nor correctly assess at present (i.e. adult stem-cells).
Usually our tendency to exaggerate things magnifies our possibilities and restricts
alternative solutions.
We wish to believe that the Council of Ministers, which has the final word,
will not adopt the proposal of the European Parliament and will not approve,
even at the last moment, the funding of embryonic stem-cell research by the
European Union. Such an act would not restrict research, but rather safeguard
due respect for the value of man.
HELLENIC
REPUBLIC
THE HOLY SYNOD
OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE
BIOETHICS COMMITTEE
14 IOANNOU GENNADIOU - 115 21 ATHENS
GREECE
Press Release
4.4.2003
ABORTION
On February 13, 2003, the European Parliament outvoted the report No. A5-0020/2003 by Europarliamentarian Ulla Margrethe Sandæk on aid for policies and actions on reproductive and sexual health and rights in developing countries.
The aforementioned report proposes, on one hand indirectly the legalisation of abortions, and on the other hand the provision of financial aid for the relevant policies and actions, including abortions.
As a result, the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece declares the following:
We
sympathise with the size of the problem and acknowledge the genuine concern
of political and social organisations in resolving all problems related to sexual
and reproductive health, and, particularly, the one of high mortality rate of
women undergoing unsafe abortions in developing countries.
It is obvious that the resolution presents many positive elements, such as the prevention of abortion as a method of family planning, the introduction of the amendment only to protect mother's life or health, the emphasis on the need for information and education and the assumption of individual responsibility, as well as the participation of families in implementing the resolution.
Nevertheless,
we believe that:
A) Abortion does not constitute an individual right, but an ethically unacceptable
act, and its legalisation, direct or indirect, an impermissible social deviation.
B)
No part of the resolution refers to the ethical dimension of the issue.
C)
While the need to protect the mother's health and individual rights is overstressed,
there is no reference to the rights of the embryo.
D)
The discrimination between dangerous and non-dangerous abortions leaves room
for one to conclude that non-dangerous abortions are permitted.
E)
Developmental policy surely plays a significant role in dealing with the problem.
However, the suggested policies and actions are limited to updating,
education and family planning and overlook the promotion of
ethical and spiritual values as well as personal responsibility towards the
family, society and mainly towards embryonic life.
F)
While the said adjustment does not suggest financial motives, it proposes financial
coverage of the entire programme, obviously including abortions as well.
We
wish to believe that:
A)
Given that European developmental cooperation is applied always within the
legislative context of the relevant country, these developing
countries, especially the ones that prohibit or set restrictions upon
abortions, will not be obliged directly or indirectly to adapt their
legislations.
Therefore,
we consider ethically imperative to include an explicit reference in the text
so that the legislation of the countries receiving European aid be safeguarded,
and if they judge so, to exclude abortions from financial aid. And
B)
No discrimination whatsoever shall be made against health and development organisations,
which do not include abortions in funding decisions proposed by the resolution.
HELLENIC
REPUBLIC
THE HOLY SYNOD
OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE
BIOETHICS COMMITTEE
14 IOANNOU GENNADIOU - 115 21 ATHENS
GREECE
Press Release
16.9.2002
MEDICALLY
ASSISTED RERPODUCTION
Recently,
a group of competent civil law attorneys presented a bill to the Ministry of
Justice, under the title "Medical Assistance in Human Reproduction".
The bill has already been submitted to the 3rd summer session of the Parliament
for discussion and voting.
The above legislative adjustment overturns in essence our family law and seriously
affects family ethics. Therefore, the following should be taken into consideration:
1. Before the bill is discussed in Parliament, the opinion of all carriers
involved, as well as of the Church, should be sought, as it was the case
in the past with other bills (i.e. the bill on transplantations).
2. Due to the special significance of the particular bill, the following is
required:
a. More time for thorough examination of its details
b. A wider coverage of viewpoints
c. Discussion of the subject at the plenary session of the Parliament
3. It is noteworthy that only a group of civil law attorneys was involved in
drafting the specific bill, without consulting representatives of other fields
(physicians, genetists, theologians, experts on constitutional law, psychologists,
etc.) and that it was hastily submitted in Parliament. These two facts trigger
the citizens' suspicion and justify the fear that the opinion of a minority
group is imposed upon the majority; that people who are not exactly experts
decide for those who are directly affected by the bill; and, finally, that the
sacred institution of the family is threatened by those who should, in fact,
protect it.
4. The writers of the bill claim that it is the most "progressive"
in Europe. Since we all support progress, we wonder what do they mean by
the word progressive? Do they consider "conservative" the fact that
our country has fewer divorces than other countries, or that it is distinguished
for the cohesion of its family ties, or that the majority of citizens prefers
religious weddings to civil ones?
5. Is it progressive to refer to the embryo as "genital material"
so we can do anything we like with it and, actually, be lawful? Perhaps it is
the first time that a group of progressive people dare to identify a human being
in its embryonic stage with the concept "material".
6. The bill proposes fertilisation with the sperm of a deceased spouse and
childbearing for unwed and overage women. Is it progressive to oblige human
beings to come into this world as orphans, or to ignore the natural laws that
determine the conditions of human development?
7. Do the enactment of sperm or embryo donation, the legalisation of surrogate
motherhood and relevant matters, which according to experts may lead to the
birth of children with five parents, prove the progressive character
of the law?
8. The law, as it is proposed, accepts the creation of "surplus embryos".
The Church refuses to accept that there are surplus people, whose fate is determined
by third parties. Every human being and, therefore, every embryo bears the uniqueness
of personhood, the sacredness of the image of God and the necessity of being
in communion with other people.
9. The freezing of embryos is combined with insurmountable problems.
For example, for how long is it legal to keep embryos in the freezer, or what
will happen in case parents neglect them due to divorce, death or some other
reason? Is it better to destroy them or donate them to other couples? Who is
competent to choose the best between two evils?
10. The new measures may lead to the weakening or questioning of the relationship
between parents and child; to the unequal relationship between each of the two
parents with the child-since one of them is the biological parent and the other
is a stepfather or a stepmother-; to the intervention of a surrogate mother
in the sacred relationship of the genetic parents with the child, or to the
creation of brothers or sisters unknown to each other. Each form of fertilisation
with donor basically degrades the principles of motherhood and fatherhood.
Furthermore, since the intervention of a third person is required in the sacred
process of human reproduction, the mystery of marriage is downgraded.
11. Surrogate motherhood may have a positive aspect for it assists child
bearing. However, since the developing relationship with the embryo during pregnancy
is an essential and integral part not only of motherhood, but also of the embryonic
development, the continuation of the relationship between the surrogate mother
and the child is unjust for the genetic parents; its interruption is unjust
for the surrogate mother; and, furthermore, both solutions are unjust for the
child, for they disrupt family cohesion.
12. The new law gives the possibility for unwed mother to bear children.
This, however, should be rejected because, on the one hand, it implies birth
of a child by unwed parents, and, on the other hand, it is unjust for the child
because it is destined to grow without a father. Moreover, it opens the way
for the legalization of relationships and childbearing contrary to nature with
destructive consequences upon the child and society.
13. The Greek Orthodox Church believes that at this moment it is imperative
to discuss once again the subject of abortions and the legal status of the embryo.
This is the only way to initiate a substantial dialogue and safeguard the sacredness
of the human person that has been recently defiled.
14. Contemporary technology does not only give solutions, but it also creates
persistent needs and insurmountable problems in our lives. Only if we determine
our limits, can we turn achievements into blessings and transform man from a
biological ephemeral entity to an image of God with eternal perspective.
HELLENIC
REPUBLIC
THE HOLY SYNOD
OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE
BIOETHICS COMMITTEE
14 IOANNOU GENNADIOU - 115 21 ATHENS
GREECE
Press Release
17.8.2000
EUTHANASIA
On November 28, 2000, the
Dutch Parliament approved by a vote of 104-40 the legalisation of euthanasia.
Since it is the first time in history that such an act has been legalised and
that rationalistic perception of modern society easily sacrifices the respect
for life and man in the altar of well-being and narrow self-interest, our Church
introduces to her flock the following:
1) Our life constitutes the supreme gift from God, the beginning and end of
which depends entirely on Him (Job 12:10). It is within biological life that
man's free will finds its full expression, encounters the grace of God and thus
his salvation is being realised.
2) The moments of our life which are connected to its beginning and end, such
as the moments of weakness, of pain and of our trials, have a unique sacredness
and constitute a mystery which requires special respect on the part of the relatives,
the doctors, the nurses and society as a whole. These moments facilitate humbleness,
open up the road of the quest for God and provoke miracles and the sign of God's
grace and presence.
3) These moments favour the bond between human beings, the development of love
and communion, the manifestation of sympathy and mercy. The request of certain
patients to end their lives may conceal a wish to test their relatives' love
and desire to be with them for as long as possible. During these moments one
can experience the grace of God and the love of human beings.
4) The presence of pain in human life, as well as any other trial, is "a
contributor to man's salvation" and sometimes "even superior to health
itself," according to saint Gregory Palamas. Nevertheless, the Church,
recognising the weakness of human nature, requests always with philanthropy
the deliverance from "all affliction, wrath, danger and need", and
often prays for the repose of people in pain (prayer for people in agony of
death). As human beings, our task is to pray, not to decide about life and death.
5) Society, being unable to treat pain with patience, prayer, human support
and divine encouragement, copes with suffering and pain solely by the use of
medicines. Recently, it introduced the practice of provoked death, which it
identifies as "good" (in Greek eu-thanasia means "good death");
yet, it accepts death only as a socio-biological event in the course of every
human being.
6) While euthanasia is justified in a secular sense as a "dignified death",
in reality, it constitutes an assisted suicide, namely a combination of murder
and suicide.
7) The so-called "right to death," which justifies the legalisation
of euthanasia, could develop into a threat for the life of patients who are
unable to respond to the financial demands of their therapy and hospitalisation.
8) Therefore, the Orthodox Church proclaiming
the immortality of the soul,
the resurrection of the body,
the eternal perspective and reality of man,
pain as "the marks of Lord Jesus" on our bodies (Gal. 6:17),
trials as causes and opportunities for salvation,
the prospect of growing loving communion and mutual support,
rejects every death resulting from human decisions and choices as being an insult
against God -no matter how "good" it may be called. Moreover, the
Church condemns as unethical and insulting for the medical profession every
medical act, which does not contribute to the prolongation of life, but, instead,
provokes the speeding up of the moment of death.
HELLENIC
REPUBLIC
THE HOLY SYNOD
OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE
BIOETHICS COMMITTEE
14 IOANNOU GENNADIOU - 115 21 ATHENS
GREECE
Press Release
14.12.2000
CLONING OF EMBRYONIC CELLS
The recent decision of the
British Government to allow experiments on human embryonic cells resulting from
cloning not only did it provoke intense political and medical controversies,
but it also offers the opportunity to stress that the ethical criterion is incomparably
superior to any form of scientific achievement.
Our Church, which daily experiences the drama of disease and the need for a
healthy life, embraces with love and understanding every single scientific endeavor
that promotes health and grants hope for life.
Nevertheless, She also expresses Her sensitivity towards the parallel need to
safeguard the eternal ethical and spiritual values. Man as a person has greater
value than biological life. We recognize that it is very difficult to resist
to the given applications of science that operate as accomplished facts of a
generalized practice. However, surrendering without fighting may be proven disastrous.
Therefore:
1. Our Church expresses Her categorical opposition to the conduct of experiments
on embryonic cells, since this implies the destruction not only of embryonic
cells but of human embryos as well.
2. The viewpoint that the human person begins to be formed on the 14th day after
conception gives an alibi to British scientists, but being the result of scholasticism
and not of a scientifically based finding, it constitutes a subjective faith
and an arbitrary belief. The Church and the Christian conscience believe that
man is a person with eternal and immortal perspective from the very moment of
his conception.
3. Discrimination between people gradually increases. Everything shows that
the course of our societies is clearly "eugenic" and racist. The effort,
however, to improve life cannot entail destruction of millions of human entities
in an embryonic stage.
4. Our knowledge in regards to the consequences of cloning is minimal and the
possibilities to pre-estimate our acts are even fewer. For this reason, every
decision concerning the implementation and experiments of cloning must be taken
with great prudence, common agreement and deep respect for the human values
and person. The danger of turning man into an object and using him as a piece
of material is already apparent.
5. In addition, it is possible that cloning may lead to a consideration of man
on financial grounds or to a consideration subject to uncontrollable interests
and planning. Moreover, it could hand over the fate, dignity and future of man
to governments or companies that have immoral and selfish purposes or intend
to make unwise and superficial use.
6. Who can reassure us that a society, which legalizes today what it prohibited
so far -this is already a fact-, will not legalize tomorrow what it prohibits
today? Who can protect us from the danger of therapeutic cloning becoming the
intermediate step towards reproductive human cloning?
7. Does the British government wish, by any chance, to legalize something that
has already been accomplished and has been familiar with some time ago?
8. "The benefits of humanity are such that surpass any ethical reservation,"
stated the chairman of the Health Committee, Liam Donaldson. "The ethical
inhibitions, however, are such that surpass any kind of "benefit"
for humanity," replies our Church.
HELLENIC
REPUBLIC
THE HOLY SYNOD
OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE
BIOETHICS COMMITTEE
14 IOANNOU GENNADIOU - 115 21 ATHENS
GREECE
Press Release
28.6.2000
DECODING OF HUMAN GENOME
The Holy
Synod of the Church of Greece warmly welcomes the greatest and probably the
most significant discovery of human science and technology: the decoding of
human genome.
She admires the achievement, supports the thirst for knew knowledge and is deeply
sympathizes with the anticipation of revolutionary progress in diagnostic, preventive
and therapeutic medicine. She glorifies the omniscient God for this gift, and
prays and hopes that a more profound knowledge of our biological and genetic
identity will facilitate the course towards spiritual self-knowledge as well
as the knowledge of God.
Nevertheless, the Church of Greece perceives, that along with the great promises,
genetic revolution includes dangers which are based on the fact that knowledge
is less than our ignorance; prudence is more scarce than our unreasonable desire;
and values are weaker than interests.
For all these reasons, She calls for our attention so that the human genome
be protected in every possible way from all kinds of interests and profits,
financial exploitation, eugenic orientation and arrogant dominance. The genome
by itself does not give value to man, neither does the achievement of its decoding;
rather, it is man who gives value to his genome.
Our responsibility towards future generations, towards the rights and dignity
of man, the value and freedom of the human person, the free progress and research
and the preservation of social stability makes us deny categorically every act
which reduces man to a genetic parameter or a deterministic unit, as well as
any form of racist discrimination based on eugenics. Simultaneously, it obliges
all of us to work for the prevalence of respect for man upon every form of research
objectives and achievements, for the confidentiality of genetic information
and for the protection of the genome from any kind of abuse.
Moreover, we consider necessary the formation of independent Committees of Bioethics
and Deontology and the commitment of all countries to promote education and
updating on Bioethics and relevant discussions, which must definitely be open
to the various religious trends. In addition, the "International Declaration
of Human Genome and Human Rights" should be adapted in accordance to the
above principles.
Finally, the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece has the pleasure to announce
the organization of an International Scientific Convention under the title "Orthodox
Christian faith before the challenge of the 21st century science and high technology,"
which will take place on October 4-8, 2000, in Athens. In the fifth session
of the said Convention, world wide known Greek Orthodox scientists, specialized
in Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, have been invited to analyze in depth
the problems related to the scientific and social dimension of the mapping of
the human genome.