FAITH AND SCIENCE

The best thing about this particular post by Magister is the excerpt from La Civilta Cattolica. What a beautiful scientific parsing of Genesis 1! Everything falls into place naturally - nothing has to be 'forced' to draw analogies!


Give Darwin his due
but Creation is God's work


A major conference sponsored by the Vatican has assembled scientists, philosophers, and theologians
of various tendencies.
All of them agree about evolution. But the intelligent structure of creation also has its defenders.





ROMA, March 9, 2009 – Two hundred years after the birth of Charles Darwin, and one hundred fifty years since his most famous work, the Pontifical Council for Culture headed by Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi sponsored a monumental international conference, entitled "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories. A critical appraisal 150 years after The origin of species."

The conference was held from March 3-7 in Rome, at the Pontifical Gregorian University. It was organized by this university together with the American University of Notre Dame.

The speakers were leading worldwide specialists in various disciplines, from biology to paleontology, from anthropology to philosophy to theology. A wide variety of positions were discussed. There were Catholic scholars, Protestants, Jews, agnostics, atheists.

Since Darwin, few scientific theories have been debated as bitterly as evolution, or have determined such a paradigm shift in the common interpretation of all of reality, including man.

In both the field of science and the view of the Catholic Church, creation and evolution are not necessarily incompatible. But on both sides, there are tendencies to erect theoretical constructs that are mutually exclusive.

In officially presenting the conference at the Vatican, Jesuit Fr. Marc Leclerc, professor of natural philosophy at the Gregorian, summed up the two opposing ideological tendencies as follows:

"The novelty of this paradigm prompted a number of Darwin's followers to go beyond the limits of science in order to set up some elements of his theory, or of the modern synthesis created during the twentieth century, as a 'Philosophia universalis', in the fitting words of then-cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, as the universal key for interpreting a reality in perpetual change.

"But too often, the adversaries of Darwinism have also followed this same path, confusing the scientific theory of evolution with the all-inclusive ideology that deformed it, in order to reject it entirely as being completely incompatible with a religious view of reality.

"This situation could explain the contemporary return of 'creationist' conceptions, or that which sometimes presents itself as an alternative theory, so-called 'intelligent design'. At this level, we are far from scientific discussions."

In effect, none of the speakers at the conference defended any of these ideological constructions. All of them were discussed and evaluated critically. The common intention was to employ the individual disciplines – scientific, philosophical, theological – with the specificity and richness of each one, for the benefit of all.

After five extremely intense days, with thirty-five presentations each given by a different specialist, it can be said that the objective seems to have been reached. Peace between creation and evolution now appears more solid.

A shining example of how the two views of the world can coexist and interact can be found in the following essay, published on the eve of the conference by La Civiltà Cattolica, the journal of the Rome Jesuits published following review by the secretariat of the Vatican secretariat of state.

The author teaches at the Pontifical Gregorian University, which hosted the conference on Darwin. In his essay, he demonstrates how the biblical account of creation not only is not incompatible with modern rationality, but marks "an emancipation of scientific knowledge," by entrusting creation to the responsibility of man.

The following is an extract of the essay, published in issue number 3807 of La Civiltà Cattolica, February 7, 2009:


'The origin of species', Genesis 1
and man's scientific vocation
by Jean-Pierre Sonnet



When speaking about origins, the challenge for Christians in our time is that of living a dual citizenship: an intelligent fidelity to the teaching of Genesis 1, and an attentive openness to the proposals of scientific research. [...]

Today, in any case, they must refine this twofold loyalty, at a time in which some enjoy pitting the notions of creation and evolution against each other, under the form of ideologies – creationism and evolutionism – that are mutually exclusive.

For the supporters of evolutionism, referring to the opening poem of Genesis means regressing into a form of obscurantism that is incompatible with the rationality of the modern age.

In this essay, we will seek to demonstrate that referring to the first chapters of Genesis does not at all imply a surrender of the intelligence. [...] A brilliant rationality permeates these texts, which are capable of speaking to every reasonable man, and in particular to the contemporary man of science. [...]

Genesis 1 could be subtitled "Process and Reality": the act of creation is divided into successive moments, in the sequence of a week. [...]

Far from being an explosion of blind power, creation – according to the narrative poem of Genesis 1 – is an action that takes place progressively, in an ordered sequence that reveals a plan.

The progression – as Paul Beauchamp has demonstrated in his essay "Création et séparation" - is above all that of successive separations, expressed at first with the verbal root "badal": "And God separated the light from the darkness" (1:4; cf. 1:6, 7, 14, 18).

Beginning with the third day, once the macro-elements of the cosmos have been put in place, the verb of separation does not appear any more (except in 1:14, 18, regarding the "great lights"). It is replaced with another expression: "according to its kind."

This formula, which is repeated ten times, is applied first to the plant species (1:11-12), and then to the animal species (1:21, 24-25). From the beginning, God drives away formlessness and indeterminateness, gradually constituting a differentiated world.

In their sequence, the days of creation amplify the succession already connected to speech. From the first day the divine acts, as immediate as they are, are manifested in a discursive manner. [...]

Succession is without a doubt a law of language, and of narrative discourse in particular, which can only say things one after another. In a reflection of theological "realism," the account of Genesis 1 takes care to refer this succession back to the divine freedom itself. [...]

Following the divine initiatives step by step, the narrator takes pains to accentuate what is fixed and finalized about the divine plan. The act of creation, in its sequence, is not a random process or an extravagant dispersion of energy.

The divine act – the narrator asserts – unfolds between "beginning" (1:1) and "completion" (see the verb "finished" in 2:1), and in a series ("first day," "second day," etc.) which appears gradually in its completeness, that of six days plus one.

Finally, at the end of the account we discover that God brings to fulfillment precisely that which he had begun to create at the beginning, "the heavens and the earth" (2:1; cf. 1:1). In other words, the process is part of an intelligent plan, which governs each of its phases.

The divine dominion in Genesis 1 paradoxically has its most beautiful demonstration in the pauses that mark the sequence of creation. In fact, God adds to his creative initiatives a moment of pause and admiration: "God saw that the light was good" (1:4). [...]

In each of these pauses, God reveals that he is not in any way the slave of his own power; instead, this is ultimately the expression of his freedom, as is shown on the seventh day, when God "rested . . . from all the work that he had done" ("wayysbot," from the root "sabat") and consecrated an entire day to this rest (2:2).

Instead of occupying the seventh day of the series with "exhausting" his creative power and filling the entire world, the biblical God puts a limit on his act of creation, "dominating his dominion," to echo the words of Solomon: "But though you are master of might, you judge with clemency" (Wisdom 12:18).

In this rest, God establishes his refraining from filling everything, and, at the same time, his desire to to make room for autonomy in the universe, in particular for humanity. [...]

Finally, this process, in its arrangement, reveals the finality underlying it: the progressively constituted elements trace out a curve that goes from "good" in verse 4 to "very good" in verse 31.

The axis of speech is that which best reveals this curve of created space. If from the beginning of the creation of light God speaks, and if he speaks of all the elements he creates – "Let there be light . . . Let the waters be gathered . . . Let there be lights in the firmament . . ." – he speaks in the second person only to the living, beginning on the fifth day: "Be fertile, multiply, and fill the water of the seas . . ." (v. 22).

Until then, the creatures had not been addressed, but at the most had received orders in the third person. From this moment, God speaks of living creatures, capable of understanding him.

But it is on the sixth day, with the creation of man, that the missing grammatical person – the first person – makes its appearance on the lips of God.

First, in the plural: "Let us make man" (v. 26) and then in the singular: "I give you every seed-bearing plant all over the earth and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit on it to be your food" (v. 29).

And it is with the appearance of the human couple that the divine word is addressed to an explicit interlocutor: "God said to them" (v. 28). God addresses himself – and in the first person – to the being who will also be a being of language, "the being in his image," destined for gentle mastery of the word.

The sequence was therefore, in every one of its parts, ordered to its end. And the narrative form, in particular in its way of representing the variations in the divine word, was the effective vehicle for this purpose.

Genesis 1 could also be subtitled "The origin of species," because of the close connection between the divine plan and the diversity of species. Of course, this is not a matter of the evolution of species.

If Genesis 1 evokes a process, this is to be sought in the sequence of days, during which God creates the plant species, the animal species of the water, the air, and the dry land. The various life forms are respected (water, firmament, earth), but the divine intervention is not addressed to "classes" of animals, but instead goes directly to particular species: the plants and animals appear all "according to their kinds" (vv. 11-12, 21, 24-25).

And these species appear "as they are," meaning as man sees them beginning in verse 28. The flora and fauna consecrated by God in their goodness are the ones that accompany the human family in its destiny. [...]

If the species are brought into existence individually by the immediate intervention of God, they are also created in autonomy. The plant species sprout according to their principle of reproduction: "Let the earth bring forth vegetation: every kind of plant that bears seed and every kind of fruit tree on earth that bears fruit with its seed in it" (1:11).

As for the representatives of the animal species, these are told to "be fruitful and multiply" (1:22). If heteronomy is present at every moment of the narrative poem of Genesis 1 – because the creatures have their secret in this Other who brings them into being – the autonomy of the species over the passing of time is also demonstrated: God creates living beings and entrusts them to their reproductive autonomy, to that which will make them "the same" from age to age.

There is another text in the Pentateuch, chapter 11 of Leviticus, in which the topic of the "discourse on species" in Genesis 1 becomes fully evident. [...]

The treatise on clean and unclean animals in Leviticus 11 constitutes, in fact, a sophisticated implementation of the elements and distinctions introduced in Genesis 1. New light was brought to Leviticus 11 with the work of Mary Douglas, an English anthropologist, who in 1966 published Purity and Danger.

Already in 1962, Claude Lévi-Strauss, in La Pensée sauvage, had [...] demonstrated through the analysis of various myths and their structure that the primitive thought called "savage" was instead guided by a rigorous logic of classification.

In Purity and Danger, Douglas demonstrates that Leviticus 11 perfectly illustrates this logic. [...] God has declared the goodness of all creatures, including the sea monsters, consecrating their division according to species (Genesis 1:21-25).

Why, then, does Leviticus 11 introduce supplementary distinctions between clean and unclean animals? The differences introduced in Leviticus 11 apply only to the people that has been "distinguished": these are practical in nature, and refer to the dietary regime of the Israelites and to their sacrificial practice; they concern a people called to enter into the sanctity of God – and therefore into his "difference" – by entering into a world more rich in distinctions.

One passage from Leviticus sums up this singular vocation: "I, the Lord, your God, have set you apart from the other nations. You, too, must set apart, then, the clean animals from the unclean, and the clean birds from the unclean, so that you may not be contaminated with the uncleanness of any beast or bird or of any swarming creature in the land that I have set apart for you. To me, therefore, you shall be sacred; for I, the Lord, am sacred, I, who have set you apart from the other nations to be my own" (20:24-26). [...]

Together with the other distinctions introduced by Leviticus, the distinction of clean and unclean animals is among those that put the children of Israel on the side of [...] a more attentive respect, in others and in themselves, for the first gift from God, which is this life. Once again, the biblical vision does not at all support an irrational religiosity, but reveals itself as connected to an intelligent articulation of the world, respectful of the distinctions within reality and of the finality indicated by these.

Genesis 1 could, finally, have the subtitle that Karl Popper gave to his last work: "Questions concerning the understanding of nature." Adam extends the creative work of the separation of species. In doing this, he exercises, in the image of God, the "gentle mastery" of the world that is entrusted to him (1:28).

A text in the book of Kings also asserts that in this he exercises a royal, and, so to speak, a "scientific" function. The praise of Solomon's wisdom ends with these verses: "Solomon surpassed all the Cedemites and all the Egyptians in wisdom. [...]

Solomon also uttered three thousand proverbs, and his songs numbered a thousand and five. He discussed plants, from the cedar on Lebanon to the hyssop growing out of the wall, and he spoke about beasts, birds, reptiles, and fishes" (1 Kings 5:10-13).

In the garden-state that is Judah and Israel (cf. 1 Kings 5:5), Solomon, full of the wisdom that he has received, extends the work of Adam, who "gave names to all the cattle, all the birds of the air, and all the wild animals" (Genesis 2:20), and also initiates the governance of the world with language.

Following Herder and Heidegger, there has been no lack of interpretations that have seen in the naming of the animals by Adam man's poetic vocation, that of "inhabiting this earth poetically" (Hölderlin).

To tell the truth, the cultural background of the twofold scene (in Genesis 2 and in 1 Kings 5) invites looking at Adam and Solomon as representatives of both poets and men of science. Solomon's encyclopedic wisdom in the passage cited from 1 Kings 5:12-13 is close, in fact, to the classification and "science of lists" among the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, from which the inventories of the book of Proverbs and the biblical legal codices are also derived.

René Labat writes about this "science of lists" developed between the Tigris and the Euphrates: "Although it was not intended for universal use, in practice it was extended to all areas of knowledge: to the natural sciences in the lists of minerals, plants, and animals; to the technical sciences in the lists of tools, garments, buildings, foods, and drinks; to the science of the universe in the lists of gods, stars, countries or districts, rivers, and mountains; and finally, to the human sciences in the lists of physical features, parts of the body, occupations, and social classes."

This classification of natural phenomena is especially organized on the basis of their names. In the Bible, there is an echo of the creative activity of God who creates things by giving them names.

"Solomon's zoological and botanical circle of knowledge is another garden of Adam," writes Paul Beauchamp. Adam and Solomon both attest – one at the beginning and the other in historical "modernity" – to man's vocation of inhabiting "scientifically" the earth that God has entrusted to him.

In his nomenclature, Labat mentions the elaboration of the "lists of the gods." But this is not a task for biblical man, whose one God has revealed himself as irreducible to the phenomena of the world.

In fact, it must be stressed how biblical monotheism transformed the relationship of man's "knowledge" with the world around him: in the biblical world, the "science of lists" has a new meaning. The polytheistic religions of the ancient Near East – Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Canaanite – [...] were strictly connected to cosmic elements: the sky, the rain, the constellations, the air, the wind, the rivers.

This is no longer thinkable in the biblical context: if God penetrates with his attention and care the world he has created, even in its most inaccessible parts (cf. Job 38-39), he is nonetheless "separate" in his absolute transcendence (cf. Isaiah 40:25; 46:5; 66:1-2).

The religious societies of the ancient Near East are further characterized by a dark undercurrent ruled by demons and malevolent forces. Biblical thought noticeably altered this situation. [...]

Liberated from divine and demonic immanences, the earth is given over entirely to biblical man: "The heavens belong to the Lord, but the earth he has given to the sons of men" (Psalm 115:16). It is given to him in its full extension, sky, sea, and land, as Psalm 8 says, with the duty of inquiry that stems from this: "The glory of kings is to search things out" (Proverbs 25:2).

This royal task of biblical man receives its most "modern," almost secularized form in the research of Solomon, as presented in the book of Ecclesiastes: "I applied my mind to search and investigate in wisdom all things that are done under the sun" (1:13).

This undertaking is certainly far from the modern sciences: in order to become operational, these would have to pass across other thresholds of rationality, beginning with that of Greek philosophy. It is nonetheless true that the biblical idea of the handing over of creation to the knowledge and power of man constitutes one of the conditions of the emancipation of scientific knowledge.

Genesis 1 is, therefore, in its own way, a manifesto on the intelligibility of the world. [...] This chapter and the ones that follow in Genesis do not at all assert a form of competition between divine science and that of man.

Man's access to the knowledge of language is not a prerogative taken away from the divinity, like a Promethean fire, in spite of the false promises of the serpent in Genesis 3:1-5.

Man's "scientific" vocation is, instead, enunciated in the moments of God's presence to man, whether it is a discourse addressed to Adam by God in Genesis 1, or God's closeness to man in the garden in Genesis 2, or the mystical experience in 1 Kings 3, where Solomon asks God for wisdom, which in particular would take the form of his governance of the world through speech.

This knowledge is not immune from deviations, but it proceeds above all from "being in the image," like the royal task that God entrusted to Adam.

Psalm 8 puts things in the proper perspective when it celebrates the mastery of God by celebrating that of man: "You have made him little less than a god, crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him rule over the works of your hands, put all things under his feet."

___________


The journal in which the essay was published:
> La Civiltà Cattolica
i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii232/TERESA7_album/FORUM-3%20052208/FORUM-5%20LOGOSBANNERS/CIVILTA-CATTO...


The website of the conference, in Italian and English:
> Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories
www.evolution-rome2009.net/

Benedict XVI dedicated to "creation and evolution" the closed-door seminar that he held with his former students in Castel Gandolfo in September of 2006. On that occasion, www.chiesa published the following article:
> Creation or Evolution? Here Is the View of the Church of Rome (11.8.2006)
chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1336781

The article reprints the famous article that Cardinal Christoph Schönborn dedicated to the topic in "The New York Times" on July 7, 2005, a commentary by Professor Fiorenzo Facchini (one of the speakers at the recent conference on Darwin) and a topical selection of magisterial Church documents on evolution.

Benedict XVI has revisited the topic since then, in particular in the annual speech to the Roman curia on December 22, 2008, in a passage highlighted in this other article from www.chiesa:
> Faith By Numbers. When Ratzinger Puts on Galileo's Robes (9.1.2009)
chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1337138

Moreover, a book has been published containing the proceedings from the seminar in Castel Gandolfo in September of 2006, with essays by Christoph Schönborn, Peter Schuster, Robert Spaemann, Paul Erlich, and Sigfried Wiedenhofer. The book, entitled Creazione ed evoluzione, was published in Italy by Edizioni Dehoniane in Bologna, and in Germany by Sankt Ulrich Verlag, in Augsburg.

HIV/AIDS in Africa:
What does the science really show?
by Deirdre Fleming
www.catholicportal.co.za/AIDS/flemingHIVscience.htm



“Blind faith trumping common sense[1],” “Vatican insiders declare the Pope a disaster[2],” “Outrageous,” “Irresponsible” …

If anything is embarrassing, it is the sensationalism of such statements in the Western media when giving the party line of anti-Catholic sentiment. The trouble is that when one looks at the science of AIDS research today, one finds a completely different story from the one being promoted by the popular media.

The problem for the layman is that certain organizations which sound authoritative make claims which are regarded as “expert opinions.”

For example, the International Aids Society has denounced Pope Benedict XVI's comments as "contrary to scientific evidence and global consensus" and has suggested that his comments might even exacerbate HIV infection in Africa[3].

In the same vein, the president of the World Health Assembly, Leslie Ramsammy, has claimed, “The statement by the Pope is inconsistent with science, it's inconsistent with our experiences and it is not in sync with what Catholics have experienced and believe[4],” while Kevin Osborne of the International Planned Parenthood Federation says, "All the evidence is that preaching sexual abstinence and fidelity will not solve the problems …The Pope's message will alienate everybody. It is scary. It spreads stigma and creates a fertile breeding ground for the spread of HIV.[5]"

On the other hand, authorities in the field who disagree with these sorts of statements get scant media attention. Here I am not talking about renegade scientists, but professionals in HIV/AIDS research who provide technical reports to the World Health Organisation (WHO) and The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS).

Take, for example, Edward Green, director of Harvard University’s Aids Prevention Research Project (APRP): in an interview with CNA, Green stated with reference to Africa, “Theoretically, condoms ought to work, and theoretically, some condom use ought to be better than no condom use, but that’s theoretically … We just cannot find an association between more condom use and lower HIV reduction rates.[6]”

This view is echoed by Helen Epstein, specialist in public health in developing countries and consultant to Human Rights Watch. In a 2008 letter to UNAIDS she bemoans the disconnect between on-the-ground research about condoms and UN reports: “I seem to recall UNAIDS documents attributing the decline in HIV infections in US gay men to the rise of ‘the condom culture’.

In fact, modeling studies by Martina Morris and behavioural surveys carried out across the US show that partner reduction was dramatic during the 1980s, when HIV decline among gays was the steepest. The “condom culture” emerged only later. I can provide many references on this, on request.”

She goes on to say, “Condom use alone may have protected many individuals, but has not – in the absence of partner reduction – shown a strong epidemiological effect, anywhere. One may not like this fact, but it is true.”[7]

Condoms, though seemingly an effective technological fix, have had their greatest influence in AIDS prevention when targeted towards such areas as the sex industry in Thailand. But even then, the UNAIDS best practice reports fail to mention that there was a 60% decline in visits to brothels during Thailand’s condom campaign and that this undoubtedly contributed to the decline in HIV.[8]


Why are condoms so ineffective?

The trouble with condoms is that they have the effect of giving users a false sense of security which results in disinhibition, that is, users indulge in greater risk taking which eventually negates any protective effects of the condom.

According to Potts et al., “When most transmission occurs within more regular and, typically, concurrent partnerships, consistent condom use is exceedingly difficult to maintain.” [9]

James Shelton of the Bureau for Global Health, USAID, in Washington DC puts it this way: “Many people dislike using them (especially in regular relationships), protection is imperfect, use is often irregular, and condoms seem to foster disinhibition, in which people engage in risky sex either with condoms or with the intention of using condoms.”[10]

“Condom use with prostitutes and in one-night stands is increasingly the norm all over the world, but they are rarely used in longer-term, less businesslike affairs,” observes Helen Epstein.[11]


Know your epidemic

It is becoming increasingly clear to AIDS researchers that some of the assumptions that underlie HIV prevention strategies are unsupported by the evidence.

Some of the confusion is created by a failure to differentiate adequately between different types of epidemics.

Outside of Africa (in Europe, the Americas, Middle East, Asia and Australasia) HIV tends to occur among high risk groups: Men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, sex workers and their partners. These are known as concentrated epidemics.

Africa, particularly Southern and Eastern Africa, on the other hand, is an example of a generalized epidemic, with infection predominantly heterosexual and generalized among the population.

Then there are epidemics such as those in the Caribbean, Pacific region, the horn of Africa and West Africa which may include characteristics of both concentrated and generalized epidemics.[12]

According to James Shelton there are a number of myths that impede the success of AIDS prevention in Africa.

These misconceptions include beliefs such as that poverty and conflict increase vulnerability to HIV and that transmission occurs through sex workers and promiscuous men or adolescents; whereas current research seems to indicate that most transmission occurs because of the prevalence of multiple and simultaneous or concurrent partnerships among adults in African society.[10]



Helen Epstein describes it this way in her article, The Fidelity Fix: “This ‘concurrency’ links sexually active people up in a giant network, not only to one another but also to the partners of their partners’ partners – and to the partners of those partners, and so on – via a web of sexual relationships that can extend across huge regions. If one member contracts HIV, then everyone else in the web may, too.” [11]

Helen Epstein and Daniel Halperin of Harvard’s Centre for Population and Development Studies explain it this way:

---

In Africa, many longer term relationships that do not involve prostitution nevertheless tend to have a powerful ‘transactional’ element. People with more disposable income might thus be able to maintain multiple, concurrent relationships.

Although very few are ‘rich’ by Western standards, they are nevertheless at the leading edge of the massive social and economic transition occurring in Africa today, from an agrarian past to a semi-industrialised present, characterized by rapid urbanization, high unemployment, and lack of social security.

As with all such transitions, this creates upheavals in basic norms, customs and values, which might facilitate the spread of HIV.”[13]

---

In an opinion piece published in The Lancet, James Shelton states, “Our priority must be on the key driver of generalized epidemics - concurrent partnerships … But partner limitation (fidelity) has also been neglected because of the culture wars between advocates of condoms and advocates of abstinence, because it smacks of moralising, because mass behavioural change is alien to most medical professionals, and because of the competing priorities of HIV programmes. [10]

David Wilson of World Bank and Daniel Halperin of the Harvard School of Public Health agree. “For too long, the global HIV-prevention community has pursued generalized responses in concentrated epidemics, concentrated approaches in generalized epidemics, or hedged their bets and done a bit of everything,” they said in the Lancet, August 2008.

“For example, after three decades, the global community is only beginning to accept that there is no simple direct association between income, education, gender inequality, and HIV. Population-based surveys show that the wealthier African countries have the highest, not the lowest, infection levels in Africa, and more educated, upper-income people are generally more likely to be infected with HIV.”

They say that it is “striking that a comparison of gender equality and HIV prevalence across African countries shows a strong positive, not negative, association.” That is, wherever women and men are most equal, HIV is most prevalent.

Contrast Botswana, the second wealthiest country in Africa, with rare male circumcision, high levels of multiple concurrent partnerships and an HIV prevalence of 25%, with Niger, the lowest ranking country in the Human Development Index, predominantly Muslim with strict sexual constraints and universal male circumcision, but an HIV prevalence of 0.7%.

“Turning to generalized epidemics” continue Wilson and Halperin,
we face three overarching challenges:" First, our most trusted prevention interventions – testing and counseling, condom promotion, school and youth programmes, and treatment of other sexually transmitted infections … are at best unproven, and at worst disproven, for reducing HIV incidence.

Second, the most solidly proven preventive intervention to date, male circumcision, is barely advancing … In countries such as Zambia, with 15% adult HIV prevalence and nearly US$1billion in aid annually for AIDS, much less than 1% of this funding goes for male circumcision services …

Third, the major contributor to reduced HIV transmission in generalized epidemics has been reduction in multiple sexual partnerships (increased fidelity). Compelling evidence of this association has emerged in a growing number of African countries, such as Kenya, Zimbabwe and Ethiopia.

Additionally, partner reduction seems to have contributed to HIV declines in Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Yet, except for Uganda in the late 1980s, and more recently in Swaziland, reductions in multiple partnerships seem to have mainly occurred despite, not because of, formal programmes.”12


What happened in Uganda

In 1993, Helen Epstein was working as a molecular biologist in Uganda, at that time the country with the highest HIV-infection rate in the world. She explains how HIV incidence plummeted from 21% in 1991 to 6% in 2002.

“At the time, few international health experts were working on AIDS in Uganda, but the Ugandan government developed a simple and effective program on its own.

In 1986, the Uganda Ministry of Health started a vigorous HIV-prevention campaign in which the slogans ‘Love Carefully,’ ‘Love Faithfully” and ‘Zero Grazing’ – Ugandan slang for ‘Don’t have sexual partners outside the home’ – were posted on public buildings, broadcast on radio and bellowed in speeches by government officials, teachers and AIDS-prevention workers across the country.

Religious leaders scoured the Bible and the Koran for quotations about infidelity. Newspapers, theatres, singing groups and ordinary people spread the same message. Their words fell on fertile ground … A realistic fear of AIDS was reinforced by a compassionate response to the suffering the disease created.

Ordinary Ugandans have always been much more open about AIDS than people from other African countries, and they were also far more likely to admit that they knew someone who had died of the disease or was infected with HIV.

Community- and church-based groups sprang up to help families affected by AIDS. Uganda’s women’s movement, one of the oldest and most dynamic in Africa, galvanized around issues of domestic abuse, rape and HIV.

The anger of the activists, and the eloquent sorrow of women throughout the country who nursed the sick and helped neighbours cope, was a harsh reproach to promiscuous men. So was their gossip, a highly efficient method of spreading any public-health message.”11

An article by Potts et al. in Science explains it as follows: “In Uganda, HIV prevalence declined dramatically following the extensive “Zero Grazing” campaign of the late 1980s.

WHO surveys conducted in 1989 and 1995 found a greater than 50% reduction in the number of people reporting multiple and casual partners. In Kenya, partner reduction and fidelity also appear to have been the main behavioural change associated with the recent HIV decline.

Similar behaviour change has been reported in DHS surveys in Zimbabwe, where HIV has also fallen, along with Ethiopia, Cote d’Ivoire, and urban Malawi. In Swaziland, the number of people reporting two or more partners in the past month was halved after an aggressive 2006 campaign focusing on the danger of having a ‘secret lover’.” 9


Reassessing the funding

Potts and his team plead for a reassessment of funding for interventions that have the greatest potential impact. In a letter responding to comments by the Department of Evidence, Monitoring and Policy at UNAIDS, they say,

---

We note that the requested funding for [hyper-endemic and generalized] epidemics would comprise only a little over 20% of the global total, even though such epidemics account for over two-thirds of all HIV infections worldwide.

Also, although 5% of this funding would be dedicated to circumcision programs, the large majority of resources would continue to be allocated to other interventions, for which the evidence of prevention impact in generalized epidemics is much weaker …

Recent CDC data from Uganda suggest that most married people who recently acquired HIV were infected by an extramarital partner or by their spouse who had recently acquired HIV from an extramarital partner.

---

Many of the latter were probably in the brief “acute infection” period, when HIV infectivity is much higher yet undetectable by a standard HIV test. It is crucial to address the multiple and concurrent partnerships that mainly drive these generalized epidemics.” [14]

A growing number of AIDS experts who are prepared to look at the facts are questioning why the Ugandan approach has not been emphasized in Southern Africa and elsewhere.

Edward Green in his book Rethinking AIDS Prevention says, “There is also a troubling suspicion among a growing number of scientists who support the ABC model that certain opponents may simply be AIDS profiteers, more interested in protecting their incomes than battling the disease.”[15]

His book, Aids and Ideology, due for release later this year highlights the AIDS funding industry which is “drawing billions of dollars a year promoting condoms, testing, drugs and treatment of AIDS.”6

Claiming that AIDS has been spread because of the lack of human rights for “vulnerable populations”, such as homosexual men and sex workers, the UN, in the document International Guidelines on HIVAIDS and Human Rights, have suggested that AIDS cannot be defeated unless all international laws restricting human sexuality are amended: “Criminal law prohibiting sexual acts (including adultery, sodomy, fornication and commercial sexual encounters) between consenting adults in private should be reviewed, with the aim of repeal.”

The Guidelines also promote abortion on demand, legalization of homosexual marriage, and laws “providing penalties for vilification of people who engage in same-sex relationships.”

One could argue that to the UN, AIDS funding is more about promoting the ideologies of the sexual revolution than about using the research to promote public health.[16]

“To treat one AIDS patient with life-prolonging anti-retroviral drugs costs more than $1,000 a year. Our successful ABC campaign cost just 29 cents per person each year," explains Sam Ruteikara, co-chair of Uganda’s AIDS Prevention Committee.[17]

David Kalema, Ugandan AIDS activist, puts it poignantly in the film “The Change is On”[18], which documents the Catholic Church’s approach to behaviour modification in South Africa and Uganda:

---

Maybe they tried [abstinence] and it failed, and since it failed with them, they think it will fail with everyone.

I'm a testimony myself. I finished my primary [school] without having sex. I went for my secondary education, I didn't have sex, I went to University, I was not having sex. I never fell sick because of not having sex.

Can this world tell me that it only worked with me? The way it worked with me it can work with everyone else. My friends who used to laugh at me thinking that abstinence is abnormal, most of them are dead by now.”

---

References

[1] Cockburn, L. Blind faith trumping common sense. 18 March 2009. Edmonton Sun. www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/2009/03/18/8787936-sun.html (accessed 22 March 2009).

[2] Squires, N. Vatican insiders declare the Pope a ‘disaster’. 19 March 2009. Telegraph. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/5018013/Vatican-insiders-declare-the-Pope-a-disas... (accessed 21 March 2009).

[3] Pope's condom comments could fuel HIV/AIDS, AFP, 21 March 2009, www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hoINS_JuqDuL85UVqlbi... , (accessed on 21 March 2009).

[4] World Health Assembly: Pope Benedict ‘Wrong’, AFP, 22 March 2009. www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hsk4RI5cPLSsvXTY9ZEy... (accessed 22 March 2009)

[5] Clayton, J. and Redhill, R. Pope Benedict XVI's AIDS comments under fire. The Australian, 19 March 2009, www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25206355-32682... (accessed 21 March 2009)

[6] Harvard researcher agrees with Pope on condoms in Africa, Catholic News Agency, 21 March 2009, catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15445 (accessed on 21 March 2009).

[7] Epstein, H., email to UNAIDS, 18 January 2008.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Potts, M., Halperin, D. et al. Reassessing HIV Prevention, Science, AAAS, Vol.320, p.750. 9 May 2008. www.hvtn.org/media/ReassessingPrevention.pdf

[10] Shelton, J. Ten myths and one truth about generalized HIV epidemics, The Lancet Vol 370, 1 December 2007. www.botsblog.org/pdf/10MythsLancet07.pdf

[11] Epstein, H. The Fidelity Fix, New York Times Magazine, 13 June 2004.

[12] Wilson, D. and Halperin, D. “Know your epidemic, know your response”: a useful approach if we get it right. The Lancet, Vol. 372. 9 August 2008. www.comminit.com/en/node/276049/347

[13] Epstein, H. and Halperin, D. Letter in response to Wellings et al. Sexual behaviour in context: a global perspective. The Lancet, Vol. 369 17 February 2007.

[14] Halperin, D., Potts, M. et al. Letters: Tailoring AIDS Prevention – Response. Science, Vol. 321, 19 September 2008.

[15] Green, E. Rethinking Aids Prevention: Learning from Successes in Developing Countries. 2003. Praeger.

[16] Sylva, D. Aids and the ideological barrier: the threat to “sexual liberation”. Ethics and Medics. Vol. 33, No. 12. December 2008.

[17] Ruteikara, Sam. Let my people go: AIDS profiteers. Washington Post. 30 June 2008.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/29/AR2008062901... (accessed 23 March 2009).

[18] The Change is On. Metanoia Media. Directed by Norman Servais, South Africa, 2008.
www.metanoia.co.za/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=METTCIO

Pros and cons of genetic modification: Not your typical food fight

By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service
May 1, 2009

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- It's not your typical food fight.

The battle being waged is between multinational corporations that market genetically modified crops and environmentalists who warn that gene-altered foodstuffs are not safe.

In an effort to find out whether genetically modified organisms harm human health or not, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences will be holding a study week in mid-May to hear what the scientific community has to say.

"There is a lot of propaganda being used by the two sides," Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, the academy's chancellor, told Catholic News Service April 29. "And for exactly that reason some scientific clarity is needed" to determine how safe these organisms are.

The arguments put forth by corporations in favor of genetic modification are not trustworthy, he said, "for the fact that they (corporations) are looking to make money."

And, he said, some of the activists who have been sounding the alarm against so-called "Frankenfoods" often do not cite sound scientific studies to back up their claims.

Bishop Sanchez said organizers sought to gather an objective group of experts who have been working with genetically modified organisms for years.

The majority of the 41 speakers listed on the academy's Web site support the use of modified crops for boosting food production and the creation of new sources of energy from nonfood crops. The bishop said that's because there are very few scientists who oppose the use of genetically modified organisms.

Even though it looks like most participants already agree that genetic modification should play a key role in fighting world hunger, Bishop Sanchez believes there will be a lively debate and some disagreement.

For one thing, the academy has invited Bishop George Nkuo of Kumbo, Cameroon, to talk about a recent warning by African bishops against claims that genetically modified crops would solve Africa's food crises.

A working document for this fall's Synod of Bishops for Africa says using modified crops risks "ruining small landholders, abolishing traditional methods of seeding and making farmers dependent on the production companies" selling their genetically modified seeds.

The document said no one should overlook the real agricultural problems on the continent, which include a lack of arable land, water, energy, credit, local markets and infrastructure for transporting products.

It's not the first time the academy has discussed whether genetic modification should play a role in promoting food security. It co-hosted a conference on modified foods with the U.S. Embassy to the Vatican in 2004; some criticized that conference as being too biased in favor of genetic technology.

The academy showed its support for the potential of modified foods when it released a statement -- based on the conference discussions -- that praised the important contributions such foods could make in fighting hunger.

But academy members want to take another look at the safety of genetic modification, Bishop Sanchez said.

"We have new members who are very interested in this issue," he said, and new concerns have cropped up over the safety of pest- and herbicide-resistant crops.

An herbicide-resistant crop of genetically altered corn or soybeans, for example, allows farmers to douse their fields with herbicide without damaging the genetically modified plants. Farmers may prefer this system because they no longer have to till the land before planting to get rid of weeds; but what of the impact on human health and the environment?

A number of participants have invented genetically modified foodstuffs or work for companies that sell modified seeds.

There also are at least four speakers who have ties to the U.S. agribusiness giant Monsanto, which created a synthetic bovine growth hormone to boost cow milk production as well as insect- and herbicide-resistant seeds.

Bishop Sanchez said those in charge of organizing and finding speakers for the genetic modification study week were two Swiss pontifical academy members: Werner Arber, a 1978 Nobel Prize winner in medicine, and Ingo Potrykus, who invented a genetic strain of rice that is rich in beta carotene and can fortify diets lacking in vitamin A.

Oddly, the academy is asking journalists not to attend the meeting or interview participants because the issue is so sensitive and controversial.

The academy chancellor said he has been dismayed at how often journalists will take the one opinion or view of a participant attending a Vatican conference and bill it as the Vatican's official position.

In an effort to avoid that kind of misinformation, he asked that journalists base their coverage of the study week only on the academy's final statement.

Bishop Sanchez emphasized that what comes out of this gathering "will not be part of the church's magisterium." The church, in fact, has never taken an official position on genetically modified foods.

The Vatican's somewhat neutral position has meant that genetically modified food supporters and detractors have been "pushing and shoving to recruit the Vatican onto their side," said a front-page article in the May 1 edition of the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano.

The church is keenly aware of the urgent food crises across the globe, it said, but how the problems of poverty, hunger and malnutrition should be solved "remains an open question."

No one possesses a magic wand and there is still a lack of scientific evidence and consensus concerning the safety, environmental impact and true productivity yields of modified crops, said the newspaper.

For this reason, it said, the issue of genetically modified organisms should be "faced without dogmatism and with common sense and responsibility, not with a barrage of mutual excommunications or, worse, lobbying disguised as a religious war."

Vatican visit to CERN opens new channel of dialogue for science, faith

By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service
June 10, 2009

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- A recent visit by a Vatican delegation to CERN -- one of the world's largest centers for scientific research -- has opened up an important channel of communication between science and faith, said the Vatican representative to U.N. agencies in Geneva.

Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, the representative, was part of the delegation led by Cardinal Giovanni Lajolo, president of the commission governing Vatican City. The head of the Vatican Observatory, Jesuit Father Jose Funes, and a Vatican astronomer, U.S. Jesuit Brother Guy Consolmagno, were also part of delegation visiting the world's largest particle physics laboratory in Geneva June 3.

The director-general of CERN, Rolf-Dieter Heuer, was interested in having the Vatican come to the world famous facility "because he wanted this visit to be a way to establish a link to the Holy See," Archbishop Tomasi told Catholic News Service by phone June 9.

The idea of having the Vatican visit CERN came from Ugo Amaldi, the president of TERA Foundation, which collaborates closely with CERN in finding ways to apply atomic research in treating cancer, especially in children, said the archbishop.

In an e-mail response to questions by CNS, Cardinal Lajolo said he "gladly accepted the invitation to visit CERN because of my own interest regarding the farthest limits that astrophysical science is striving to reach with proton acceleration."

He said the discovery of new sub-atomic particles may help confirm Princeton University professor Edward Witten's Superstring Theory, which seeks to unify Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity and quantum physics.

Archbishop Tomasi said, "The issue that emerged from the visit was how to maintain contact" because scientists studying the universe ask many of the same questions theologians ponder such as what is the meaning of life.

However, the methods scientists and theologians use for answering those questions are radically different and put them in "two completely different worlds," he said.

"There is no hostility between the two, but there is a need to talk across this border and see how human knowledge can be advanced," he said.

Heuer has been invited to visit the Vatican, the archbishop said, but no date has been set.

In an opening statement during a roundtable discussion on science and faith in dialogue June 3, Cardinal Lajolo said scientific truths and theological truths can never contradict each other because all truths "are derived from the same source, which is God."

He quoted St. Robert Bellarmine, the doctor of the church who had been involved in the Vatican's investigation of Galileo Galilei. Then-Cardinal Bellarmine said if a scientific statement turns out to be evidently true and appears to not be in complete conformity with sacred Scripture, then "one needs to research how sacred Scripture can be interpreted correctly so as not to contradict scientific truth."

Cardinal Lajolo said this statement "still remains a valid principle in dealing with scientific statements" today.

The Catholic Church is a defender of reason and truth, which "is why the church later recognized the scientific position held by Galileo and the error committed in condemning him," said the cardinal.

Archbishop Tomasi said, "There were very good feelings, a good atmosphere during the visit and some frank exchange" between Vatican representatives and the CERN scientists.

"A good channel of communication has been established" with CERN and its scientists, even with those who don't believe in any religion, he said.

The Vatican delegation was given an official welcome to the CERN facilities and had a chance to learn more about the laboratory's activities, he said.

They were given a tour of CERN's underground Large Hadron Collider, which is the world's largest high-energy particle accelerator used in experiments for trying to better understand the universe and what happened immediately after the Big Bang.

The accelerator is expected to be up and running again in September after it suffered damage during early experiments last fall.

This is a clever idea.


Archdiocese of Sydney announces fourth adult stem cell research grant

Sydney, Australia, Jul 9, 2009 / 02:20 am (CNA).- The Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney has invited Australia-based researchers to apply for a $100,000 grant to support and foster research on the therapeutic potential of adult stem cells.

The research grant is the fourth announced by Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney. It is intended to advance science and to circumvent human embryonic stem cell research, which requires the creation and destruction of human embryos.

Announcing the grant, Cardinal Pell said that the Church “promotes and encourages medical research, and we strongly support stem cell research and other forms of biotechnology that respect the dignity of every human life, including that of the unborn.”

"Every human life should be accorded the full protection of the law without regard to race, ethnicity, sex, religion, age, condition of dependency or stage of development. And this includes the smallest members of the human family.”

“Advances in adult stem cell research have been extremely impressive. Achievements in this area have surpassed anything that has been achieved in the field of embryonic cell research,” he added.

The grant will be awarded based on the recommendation of an independent assessment panel, whose members include experts in science and ethics.

The Archdiocese of Sydney’s grants have funded three previous efforts in stem cell research.

A 2003 grant of $50,000 funded an investigation into the therapeutic potential of adult stem cells derived from the nose to be used in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. A 2005 grant in the amount of $100,000 helped investigate therapies using skin-derived stem cells to regenerate skin for catastrophic burn victims.

Another $100,000 grant, announced in 2007, helped research the capacity of stem cells derived from human dental pulp to transform into neuron cells, which may be useful in treating stroke victims.

Adult stem cells may be harvested from a patient’s own body and have been used in the treatment of heart and liver disease, strokes and spinal cord conditions. Though such therapies are still in early stages of development, adult stem cells avoid many of the technical and ethical problems surrounding the use of human embryonic stem cells.

This sensational news from the purely scientific point of view, but its ethical implications are frightening - because it seems it will greatly facilitate cloning. Are the governments of the world prepared to legislate now - before this goes any further - to ban human cloning in any way, shape or form by any past, present or future technology that may be available?



Researchers produce cells they say
are identical to embryonic stem cells
by Thomas H. Maugh II

July 23, 2009


Two groups of Chinese researchers have performed an unprecedented feat, it was announced today, by inducing cells from connective tissue in mice to revert back to their embryonic state and producing living mice from them.

By demonstrating that cells from adults can be converted into cells that, like embryonic stem cells from fetuses, have the ability to produce any type of tissue, the researchers have made a major advance toward eliminating the need for fetal cells in research and clinical applications.


Researchers first produced this new type of cell, called induced pluripotent stem, or iPS, cells, two years ago, but there have been lingering doubts about whether the cells are truly identical to embryonic cells or instead are capable of producing only some types of body cells.

The new results, published online today by the journals Nature and Cell Stem Cell, appear to erase those doubts.

The results also open the door to a variety of applications beyond producing stem cells for medicinal purposes, including the production of endangered species and the reproduction of prized farm and other animals.

The reports "show that iPS cells are identical to embryonic stem cells," said biologist Kathrin Plath of UCLA's Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research, who was not involved in the research. "It hadn't worked before, so it wasn't clear that it would ever work."

The approach the teams used was "the gold standard because it is the only assay [test] that proves the cells are pluripotent."

The results are "comforting, because there has been a lingering concern that iPS cells had failed in this particular assay," added biologist Robert Blelloch of UC San Francisco's Broad Center for Regeneration Medicine and Stem Cell Research, who was not involved in the research.

But he cautioned that the teams were ultimately successful in only a few out of many attempts. "What's missing, which will really be key, is whether there is anything about the cells that did pass the test that is different from those that didn't."

Dr. Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer at Advanced Cell Technology Inc. in Worcester, Mass., who was also not involved in the studies, cautioned that the results "revive many of the same ethical issues as reproductive cloning."

Although generating fetuses with iPS techniques is technically different from cloning, the bottom line is the same -- the generation of an organism that is genetically identical to the source of the donor cells.

"We have gone from science fiction to reality." Because the process works in mice, it should also work in humans, he added. "We now have the technology to create iPS cells from skin or hair follicles. Combine that with showing that they can actually create a living organism, and that's pretty scary. All the pieces are here for serious abuse."

Adds Plath: "That's an experiment that shouldn't be done" in humans.

The technique that the two teams of Chinese researchers used is called tetraploid complementation. When researchers first started studying iPS cells, they would assess their properties by injecting them into a blastocyst, a very early embryo.

What they found in those studies was that the iPS cells and the host embryo's cells would contribute to the resulting animal, producing a chimera - a mosaic of genetically different cells.

More recently, researchers have fused the cells of the host blastocyst so that each cell contains double the number of chromosomes, making them tetraploid. When that is done, the host cells can form only the placental tissues; all the animal's tissues must come from the injected iPS cells. But researchers have never been able to produce living animals by this technique, creating doubts that the iPS cells were truly pluripotent.

In the new studies, "the method of producing iPS cells didn't change," Blelloch said. "They used the same methods and materials everybody else is using."

He characterized their efforts as a "brute force effort" in which they simply looked at a large enough number of attempts to finally find one that succeeded.

The more successful of the studies, by researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing and the Shanghai Jiao Tong University, created 37 iPS cell lines that could be grown in the laboratory. Three of these lines produced 27 live offspring by tetraploid complementation, Fanyi Zeng of the Shanghai University told a telephone news conference. Some of the mice have successfully mated and have produced second and third generations.

But Zeng cautioned that some of the first-generation living mice had abnormalities, although she did not say how many and what those abnormalities were. That, she said, will be the subject of a future paper.

The second team, from the National Institute of Biological Sciences in Beijing, achieved only four births, with only one mouse making it to adulthood.

Both teams emphasized the large number of failures required to achieve the few successes and argued that it would be unethical to attempt the technique with human cells.


One can only pray that other scientists will have the same ethical conscience!

The Pope and the Astronauts

By Hal G.P. Colebatch
American Spectator
7.24.09 @ 6:08AM

Pope Paul's Vl Pontificate has faded from popular memory, completely overshadowed by that of John Paul II.

However it is worth remembering at this time that in 1969 he unequivocally blessed and hailed the Apollo Moon-landing, upholding the Vatican's tradition of support for science, astronomy and the application of human reason.

"Honor, greetings and blessings to you, conquerors of the moon, pale lamp of our nights and our dreams!" was his resounding message to the Apollo 11 astronauts. "Today," he said, "We celebrate a sublime victory!"

Pope Paul spent the night of July 20/21, 1969, watching the moon through the telescope of the Vatican Observatory at his summer residence at Castel Gandolfo. Like countless millions of others he then watched the landing and the first moon-walk on television.

Following his message and a congratulatory telegram to President Nixon, the Pope wrote at length about the event. To mark the 40th anniversary of the landing Vatican Radio is publishing its collection of his reflections on the event, talks he gave, and the text of his speech to the Apollo 11 Astronauts who he met at the Vatican on October 16, 1969. These make it plain that the Pope was an enthusiast for space exploration.

The Pope said Armstrong's words about "one giant leap for mankind" were right on the mark.

"Man has a natural urge to explore the unknown, to know the unknown, yet man also has a fear of the unknowns," the Pope told the astronauts. "Your bravery has transcended this fear and through your intrepid adventure man has taken another step towards knowing more of the universe."

He said the talent, energy, and teamwork behind the moon-shot "pay tribute to the capacity of modern man to reach beyond himself, to attain perfection of achievement made possible by God-given talent." He said he prayed that the knowledge of the Creation would continue to grow and would enable God's power, infinity and perfection to be seen more clearly.

In a number of audiences and addresses earlier in the same year he had emphasized that the Catholic Church applauded the accomplishments of science, technology, and human ingenuity. He also made the point that science must also be applied to solving problems on Earth.

The Pope was carrying on a tradition of the church which existed from very early times, when the Church played a primary role in lifting astronomy out of astrology. (At the tail-end of the Roman Empire Saint Augustine of Hippo refuted astrology by referring to babies born under identical stars who nevertheless led completely different lives. Even when astrology still infected science and thought in general, the Church said such influence could be overcome by Free Will).

J. L. Heilbron of the University of California has said: "The Roman Catholic Church gave more financial aid and social support to the study of astronomy over six centuries, from the recovery of ancient learning during the late Middle Ages into the Enlightenment, than any other, and, probably, all other, institutions."

Modern astronomy may be said to have begun with Copernicus, a Catholic priest, who dedicated his 1543 work, On the Orbits of Heavenly Bodies, to the Pope of the day. Galileo might have avoided trouble as easily as Copernicus did if he had shown a little more diplomatic skill and common sense, for example if he had refrained from mocking a Pope who had befriended and honored him.

The contribution of the Catholic Church to astronomy was massive and unequalled. Without it astronomy might very well never have grown out of astrology at all. The cathedrals in Bologna, Florence, Paris, Rome and elsewhere, for example, were designed in the 17th and 18th centuries to function as solar observatories. Each cathedral contained holes through which measured rays of sunlight could enter and meridian lines on the floor.

Kepler was helped by a number of Jesuit astronomers, including Father Paul Guldin and Father Zucchi, and by Giovanni Cassini, who studied under Jesuits. Cassini and Jesuit colleagues were eventually able to confirm Kepler's theory on the Earth having an elliptical orbit.

Pope Gregory VIII, who founded the Vatican Observatory in 1578, employed the calculations of Copernicus in 1582 to correct the calendar and bring it into accord with the true movement of the Earth, a task of enormous importance and responsibility.

The Papacy remained intensely interested in geography and astronomy for scientific and political as well as theological reasons, and when as a result of Magellan's first circumnavigation of the world (1519-1522), it was discovered that when traveling around the world one gains or loses a day, it was considered so important that a special delegation was sent to the Pope to explain this.

A Catholic priest, Father Nicholas Zucchi, invented the reflecting telescope. Among the many great Catholic clerical astronomers Giuseppe Piazzi discovered the first asteroid, Ceres, in 1801, and established the observatory at Palermo. Piazzi also obtained modern equipment and instruments for it, and converted Palermo from a backwater in poverty-stricken and ignorant Sicily to a great center for astronomy, a position it has maintained ever since, later being involved with the first imaging X-ray astrophysics. Despite being a Catholic priest and indeed a Professor of Dogmatic Theology in Rome, in 1788 Piazzi traveled to England to work with the astronomer Nevil Maskelyne, a Protestant minister, and the famous instrument-maker Ramsden. A little before this a Jesuit mathematician, R. G. Boscovich, had played a key role in charting the way to modern nuclear physics. In the 20th century a Catholic priest and scientist, Fr. Georges Lemaître, discovered the Big Bang. (He was concerned that it not be used as an argument to prove the existence of God, which he held should be a matter of faith.)

It is also said that Father George Coyne, a previous director of the Vatican Observatory, applied for astronaut training in the 1960s. His provincial is said to have muttered, "If I let you become an astronaut, George, every priest will want to."

Hal G.P. Colebatch, a lawyer and author, has lectured in International Law and International Relations at Notre Dame University and Edith Cowan University in Western Australia and worked on the staff of two Australian Federal Ministers.

I really didn't know what thread to put this story on. It is really bizarre I think. Sorry. I mean I do consider Padre Pio to be a shining light but a source of solar power...????


Italy to build solar-energy-producing statue of saint

Italy is planning to build a 200 ft high, solar energy-producing statue of one of its most cherished saints.

By Nick Squires in Rome
Telegraph.co.uk
Published: 6:10PM BST 05 Aug 2009

The statue of Padre Pio, who was canonised in 2002 by Pope John Paul II and has a huge worldwide following, will be built on a hill in southern Italy, close to the town where he is commemorated.

It will cost several million pounds, with the money to be raised from his followers around the world.

The statue will be coated in a special photovoltaic paint which will enable it to trap the sun's heat and produce solar energy, making it an "ecological" religious icon, according to the Ansa news agency.

The planning and construction of the project, near the town of San Giovanni Rotondo in the southern province of Puglia, will be put out to international tender in the next few weeks.

Padre Pio, whose real name was Francesco Forgione, was born into a poverty-stricken family in 1887 and died in 1968. He entered the Church as a teenager and became a Capuchin monk.

His followers believe that he performed many miracles during his lifetime and that his body bore stigmata – marks corresponding to Christ's Crucifixion wounds.

A survey by a Catholic magazine once found that more Italians pray to Padre Pio than to Jesus or the Virgin Mary.

U.S. BISHOPS TO URGE ETHICAL INFERTILITY TREATMENTS

Seek to Offer Hope and Encouragement to Couples

WASHINGTON, D.C., OCT. 30, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The U.S. bishops will debate a document next month that encourages couples struggling with infertility to embrace "legitimate" treatments to fulfill their desire to be parents.

During the bishops' fall meeting -- Nov. 16-19 -- the prelates will debate and discuss a document titled "Life-Giving Love in an Age of Technology," drafted by the conference's Committee on Pro-Life Activities.

The text affirms the necessary link between the sexual act and procreation, and explains the Church's moral opposition to artificial reproductive technologies such as in vitro fertilization, embryo donation and adoption, egg and sperm donation, cloning, and surrogacy.

"The Church has compassion for couples suffering from infertility and wants to be of real help to them," explains the draft document. "At the same time, some 'reproductive technologies' are not legitimate ways to solve those problems. We bishops of the United States offer this reflection to explain why.

"We also offer it to provide hope -- real hope that couples can fulfill their procreative potential and build a family while fully respecting God's design for their marriage and for the gift of children."

The text will include a section of questions and answers, testimonies from couples, and encouragement.

Valid treatments for infertility, the text explains, include hormonal treatment and other medications, surgery to repair damaged fallopian tubes, natural family planning, and means for alleviating male infertility factors.

The document explains that these methods are acceptable because they "do not substitute for the married couple’s act of loving union; rather, they assist this act in reaching its potential for giving rise to a new human life."

The text requires the approval of two-thirds of the bishops.

This document is a companion to the 2007 educational resource "Married Love and the Gift of Life," which explains the Church's teaching on contraception.

NEW SITE FOR ADULT STEM CELL RESOURCES

KANSAS CITY, Kansas, NOV. 17, 2009 (Zenit.org).- A new Web site is detailing success stories in adult stem cell research.

www.stemcellresearchfacts.org is part of a campaign to educate and spread awareness about the potentials and successes of adult stem cell therapies.

It was created by the Family Research Council and SaintMax Worldwide. The site is just the first phase of the project, a statement from the Catholic Medical Association reported.

It includes three videos that present the stories of people who have been saved or helped by adult stem cells.

Amy Daniels tells how she has survived systemic scleroderma. The parents of Joseph Davis tell how their second child was able to save Joseph from sickle cell anemia. And Laura Dominguez affirms that thanks to adult stem cells, she is going to walk again after a car accident that left her paralyzed.

The new site was launched Saturday in Kansas City.

Vatican funds adult stem-cell research

Ontario commits $114.6 M for genome projects

CBC News
Friday, April 23, 2010

The Vatican will fund research into the potential use of adult stem cells to treat disease, a field where Canadian researchers are hard at work.

Cardinal Renato Martino said Friday the Vatican fully supports the project because it does not involve embryonic stem cells, which the church opposes because it involves destruction of embryos. In 2007, Pope Benedict XVI said adult stem-cell research respects human life.

Canadian researchers are also sidestepping the thorny issue of using clones or embryos, instead exploring the potential of reprogramming adult stem cells to trigger the body to heal itself.

At McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont., Mick Bhatia and other scientists are trying to identify new chemicals they can modify into drugs that would turn on the regenerative potential of adult human stem cells to repair damaged tissue.

Using state-of-the-art screening technology, they are testing hundreds of chemicals to see which ones wake up stem cells and kick start them into repair mode.

"The idea is that instead of necessarily transplanting new cells to get that repair, can we activate the cells that are already there through a novel approach of using chemicals — chemicals turning into drugs," Bhatia said.

The goal is to use the stem cell-based therapies as a tool kit to repair damage caused by cancer and other serious diseases with catastrophic effects on the quality of life such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, he added.

On Thursday, the Ontario government announced it will contribute $11.5 million to support Bhatia's project, the Ontario Consortium for Regeneration Inducing Therapeutics. The collaborative effort also includes research institutions and universities in Waterloo, Ottawa and Toronto.

The Global Leadership Round in Genomics & Life Sciences or GL2 fund also commits $114.6 million to support the work of more than 230 researchers at eight research institutes across the province.

Vatican calls synthetic cell creation 'interesting'

By the CNN Wire Staff
May 22, 2010

Rome, Italy (CNN) -- The Vatican had praise Saturday for this week's announcement that scientists had created the world's first synthetic cell, calling it an "interesting result" that could help cure disease.

In an article Saturday, the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano called it "important research" and "the work of high-quality genetic engineering." But it said the scientists who created the cell had not created life, just "replaced one of its motors."

The response may appear to mark a turn for the Vatican, but in fact the church does not officially oppose genetic engineering as long as the science avoids embryonic stem cells, cloning or anything else that fiddles too much with the re-creation of human life.

"Genetic engineering can do good: It is enough to think that it could heal chromosome-related diseases," the article said.

However, scientists must "join courage with caution," it said.

"They touch a very fragile territory where the environment and manipulation play a role that cannot be underestimated," the article said.

Genetics pioneer J. Craig Venter, who runs an eponymous U.S. institute for genomic research, announced Thursday that he and his team had created artificial life for the first time.

Using sequences of genetic code created on a computer, the team assembled a complete DNA of a bacterium and inserted it into a cell of bacteria. The new cell was self-replicating, controlled only by the synthetic genome.

"The weight of the DNA is great, and great are the expectations of genetic science," L'Osservatore Romano said. "Nevertheless, the DNA, even though it is an excellent engine, is not life."

Venter said his team had not created life.

"We created a new cell. It's alive. But we didn't create life from scratch," he said.

Venter said the discovery would help give science new tools for a range of applications, from converting carbon dioxide into fuel and creating new food substances to creating new vaccines to treat diseases.

The breakthrough will stimulate discussion about the possibilities, Venter told CNN. He said his next step would be to "see if we can create some of these cures for the planet."

JOINT INITIATIVE: COUNCIL FOR CULTURE AND NEOSTEM INC.

VATICAN CITY, 25 MAY 2010 (VIS) - The international biopharmaceutical company NeoStem Inc. and the Pontifical Council for Culture have announced a joint initiative between their charitable organisations to expand research and raise awareness of adult stem cell therapies, according to a communique made public today.

NeoStem's Stem for Life Foundation, formed to create awareness about the promise of adult stem cells to treat disease, and the pontifical council's STOQ Foundation (Science Theology and the Ontological Quest), will work to advance research on adult stem cells, to explore their clinical applicability in the field of regenerative medicine, and the cultural relevance of such research especially with its impact on theological and ethical issues.

"As part of the collaboration, NeoStem and the pontifical council will make efforts to develop educational programs, publications and academic courses with an interdisciplinary approach for theological and philosophical faculties, including those of bioethics, around the world. One of the initiatives will be a three-day international conference at the Vatican on adult stem cell research, including VSEL technology (which uses very small embryonic-like stem cells) that will focus on medical research presentations and theological and philosophical considerations and implications of scientific achievements", the communique says.

Researchers find that adult stem cells can rebuild heart tissue

Washington D.C., Aug 18, 2010 / 06:05 pm (CNA).- Researchers at the Mayo Clinic, working together with Belgium experts, have demonstrated in lab tests that adult stem cells from bone marrow can repair and rebuild damaged heart tissue. The discovery was published yesterday in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

Stem cells that have been isolated from patients generally have a limited capacity to repair heart tissue, explained the Mayo Clinic in a press release. However, the technology used in this particular study yielded significant results by programming these cells to acquire a profile similar to cardiac cells.

In order to carry out the tests, researchers obtained bone marrow-derived stem cells from patients with heart disease during coronary bypass surgery.

The Mayo Clinic reported that stem cells from two of the 11 individuals demonstrated an unusual capacity to repair heart tissue. The researchers then used techniques to introduce the same molecular signature into the stem cells of the other patients in order to “program” their capacity to repair heart tissue.

These kinds of cells, called Mesenchymal stem cells, were injected into rats with heart disease and resulted in significant recovery of heart function, as well as an improved survival rate after one year, in contrast with rats infused with stem cells not guided by researchers.

According to Andre Terzic of the Mayo Clinic, the main author of the study, “These findings provide proof-of-principle that "smart" adult stem cells have added benefit in repairing the heart.”

Pro-life groups laud decision to block embryonic stem cell research

Washington D.C., Aug 23, 2010 / 06:19 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Pro-life groups lauded the decision of a federal court ruling on Monday which prevents the Obama administration from carrying out its embryonic stem cell research policy. One legal fund reacted by saying, the “American people should not be forced to pay for experiments – prohibited by federal law – that destroy human life.”

The ruling comes after the National Institutes of Health (NIH) issued new guidelines last year that permitted federal funding for research on stem cell lines that had already been created.

On August 23, however, a federal judge concluded that the policy likely violates a federal law known as the “Dickey/Wicker Amendment.” The amendment has been part of the annual appropriations bill for the Department of Health and Human Services every year since 1996.

The amendment bars federal funding for the creation of a human embryo for research purposes as well as for research in which a human embryo or embryos are “destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death.”

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth temporarily blocked the Obama administration on Monday from using federal dollars to fund expanded human embryonic stem cell research while a lawsuit against the NIH policy – filed last year by the Christian Medical Association (CMA) and Nightlight Christian Adoptions – proceeds.

Pro-life groups praised the ruling on Monday.

The Alliance Defense Fund, which helped represent CMA and Nightlight, saying that the “American people should not be forced to pay for experiments – prohibited by federal law – that destroy human life.”

“The court is simply enforcing an existing law passed by Congress that prevents Americans from paying another penny for needless research on human embryos,” continued ADF Senior Legal Counsel Steven H. Aden. “No one should be allowed to decide that an innocent life is worthless.”

“Experimentation on embryonic stem cells isn’t even necessary because adult stem cell research has been enormously successful,” Aden said. “In economic times like we are in now, it doesn’t make sense for the federal government to use precious taxpayer dollars for this illegal and unethical purpose.”

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins also weighed in on the ruling Monday, saying that the judge's decision was “a stinging rebuke to the Obama Administration and its attempt to circumvent sound science and federal law, which clearly prohibits federal funding for research that involves the destruction of human embryos.”

“Rather than fund additional embryo-destructive research, the government should focus its resources on adult stem cells that are already improving health and saving the lives of patients with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, spinal cord injury and many other conditions,” he added. “There is great potential in this country for stem cell research and treatments for many diseases, while maintaining ethical standards.”

Astronomers meeting in Rome share discoveries, dreams of finding life

By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service
Sept. 22, 2010

ROME (CNS) -- Normally filled with theology students, the creaking classroom seats of the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas were crammed with planetary scientists and astronomers from all over the world.

Overhead screens flashed slideshows of planned space missions and colorful graphs as dozens of speakers and nearly 600 participants shared their latest discoveries and dreams of finding extraterrestrial life in the universe.

"Mars is still a very intriguing object with a high probability of life being somewhere under the surface or some traces of life remaining," Jesuit Father Pavel Gabor told Catholic News Service Sept. 21.

The Czech priest works at the Vatican Observatory in Tucson, Ariz., and was one of a number of Vatican astronomers who took part in the European Planetary Science Congress Sept. 19-24 at the university.

Scientists have known for some time that liquid water, which is needed for life, was once present on the surface of Mars during its early evolution, he said.

There are other clues, too, pointing to possible organic activity on the Red Planet, such as the mysterious presence of methane in its atmosphere.

Manish Patel, a researcher at the Open University in the United Kingdom, said something may be producing the methane "because it really shouldn't exist in the atmosphere for long at all and if it does exist it should break down (and disappear) very quickly."

It could be coming from some geological process or release, he said, or, like on Earth, the methane could be coming from biological activity or living organisms.

To find out, Patel is helping build an instrument to detect traces or signs of life that will be part of a NASA-European Space Agency mission to Mars' atmosphere in 2016.

Larry Esposito teaches astrophysical and planetary sciences at the University of Colorado in Boulder. His specialty, he said, is Saturn's rings, which are made of little bits of dust and "almost pure ice, the sort of stuff you could use to cool a drink."

The university built one of the experiments currently being conducted on the Cassini-Huygens spacecraft as it orbits Saturn.

He said the data coming in over the past six years has suggested that some of Saturn's rings were formed when the planet formed 4.5 billion years ago and that other rings are "newer," being just 100 million years old.

Esposito said he suspects the rings, which are "thinner than a pancake," formed after a surrounding icy moon shattered to pieces.

"Saturn is recycling its icy material," he said. "The moons that are in orbit around Saturn get broken into pieces, the pieces come back together to form new moons and then they're broken again."

One session at the congress focused on future missions, especially to Venus, that would use metallic balloon probes to study atmospheres and use missile-shaped "micro-penetrators" to crash deep into planetary or moon surfaces and drill for samples.

Father Gabor, who designs instruments that gather data about the atmosphere of planets outside the solar system, said the congress "is a melting pot of people who come to talk about their research" and to network.

The sensor he designs may be able to detect life by picking up the color, that is, the composition, of an extremely distant planet's atmosphere, he said.

"If you have a planet that harbors life it is very likely that this life has already changed the composition of the atmosphere," he said, just like life on Earth has created an anomalously high concentration of oxygen.

"If you were an extraterrestrial looking at the Earth, you would know there was something strange happening here," he said.

While scientists don't expect to find little green men, life may exist or may have existed in the form of microorganisms.

Learning more about the cosmos is important for "feeling at home in the universe," which is a feeling that is closely linked to faith, said the Jesuit priest.

"I think our faith leads us to seeing the world around us as a gift from a very munificent God, a God who gives very freely and generously," he said.

"And if we find any life outside this planet, it will mesh in very nicely with that idea of God, who is such a generous giver," said Father Gabor.

Jesuit astrophysicist: Hawking’s theory on origin of universe is unscientific

Valencia, Spain, Nov 24, 2010 / 01:54 pm (CNA).- Renowned astrophysicist and Jesuit, Father Manuel Carreira spoke out Nov. 23, noting that British scientist Stephen Hawking's theory that the universe created itself from nothing lacks “scientific rigor and validity.”

Fr. Carreira said Hawking’s theory is “unscientific” because it contradicts the laws of physics and provides no proof for its claims, according to AVAN news agency. The priest's comments came during a conference in Valencia, Spain titled, “Dialogue with Stephen Hawking on Creation.”

Fr. Carreira said Hawking’s theory “does not contribute to knowledge in any way.” While he praised the British scientist for his determination in battling his physical limitations, he said Hawking’s new book is “a highly revealing description of what 20th century science has accomplished and what remains to be done.” But, he added, the book “does not offer anything new.”

The book is only “original” in its illogical denial of human freedom in chapter one and its claims in the final chapter that “through the force of gravity, a universe created itself from nothing.” “Nothingness does not have any force or properties,” Fr. Carreira noted. It is “purely the absence of all reality.” What is evident, he continued, is that “gravity is the result of mass,” such that “since nothingness has no mass, it cannot have gravity either. It would be like saying from zero you could get a bank account.”

Fr. Carreira also noted the “compatibility” of science, philosophy and theology in discovering truth. “They are all partial ways of understanding a reality that is very rich and that cannot be known by just one methodology.” All three can “complement each other in bringing about the development of human knowledge,” he added.

Science “only speaks of how matter acts,” but it “cannot give a reason” for why that matter exists. The question of the meaning of the universe or of life “is outside the bounds of science and one must seek an answer in another order of reasoning,” the priest said.

Thus science is “a way of knowing what is observable and subject to experimentation, but it cannot be asked to speak of what it cannot prove,” such as “the desire to know, freedom, finality, ethics, art, family or social relations,” he stated. For this reason, “reducing human reality to the four forces of matter is a totally unscientific claim that goes against our experience,” Fr. Carreira explained.

Fr. Carreira is a doctor in physics and professor of philosophy at the Comillas University in Spain. He is also a member of the Vatican Observatory.

Vatican to update bioethics guidelines for Catholic health care workers

By Alan Holdren, Rome Correspondent

Vatican City, Feb 4, 2011 / 12:37 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- The Vatican department in charge supporting Catholic health care workers has announced that it will soon release updated guidelines on bioethics issues.

The guidelines offered in the "Charter for Health Care Workers" provide a point of reference on Church teaching for medical professionals. It is being updated to provide current teaching on complex topics in the health care field like stem-cell research, reproductive issues, euthanasia and abortion.

Representatives from the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Health Workers spoke to journalists about the theme on Feb. 3 after presenting the Pope's message for the 19th World Day for the Sick.

Bishop Jose L. Redrado, secretary of the council, said Catholic facilities are battling a "culture of death."

In Phoenix, Ariz., one such clash involved doctors at a Catholic hospital choosing to abort the child of a mother with severe pulmonary hypertension. Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix reacted to the news of the abortion by ordering an investigation and, after attempting to reconcile differences with the hospital staff, stripped the facility of its Catholic identity.

These types of cases demonstrate that there is a need to translate Church teaching into terms that are understandable in "modern society," Redrado said.

"The language should be clear," he added, "explaining what the church says, where the frontiers are, where there is a risk of crossing the line."

Under-secretary of the council, Msgr. Jean-Marie Mpendawatu, suggested that the revised document could serve to reduce the "mystification" attached to bioethical themes and offer health workers the truth of Catholic Church teaching in the area.

The monsignor lamented the way that "invasive ideologies" often bury authentic Catholic Church teaching on issues of bioethics. He referred specifically to reproductive issues and the use of adult stem-cell research and treatment.

"Many say that the Church on stem cells is behind the times, it doesn't want to do anything, it's not interested." But the Church has centers for developing and promoting ethical treatments using non-embryonic stem cells, "centers also of research and treatment using (adult) stem cells." he said.

The council, led by Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski, is in contact with Catholic institutions to pair their knowledge with Vatican-approved doctrine. Bioethics centers and bishops' conferences throughout the world are contributing.

Msgr. Mpendawatu said that it could be "very important" for the formation of health care workers who are often not trained specifically in bioethics.

During the press conference, the council also announced a May 2011 conference in which participants will examine HIV/AIDS prevention issues. International experts and Vatican officials will be taking part.

Condom use will be discussed, but the conference will take a broader approach to AIDS-related themes, said Msgr. Mpendawatu.

The conference is especially interesting following Pope Benedict XVI's comments on condom use in the 2010 book-interview "Light of the World." He said that condoms were not the solution to AIDS prevention, but that they could show a first sign of moral responsibility if used with the intention of reducing the risk of transmitting disease.

The words were widely seen as a change in Church teaching against condom use, but as the Vatican's doctrine department clarified on Dec. 21, they represented no such change.

The council announced that it will release guidelines to Church teaching on AIDS care and prevention which will provide a Vatican-approved point of reference for Catholic professionals in the field.

As a "pastoral" document, it will approach the many difficult issues such as care for elderly left without children and protection of children whose parents have died from AIDS.

New essay explains Church teaching on 'brain death,' organ donation

Denver, Colo., May 3, 2011 / 06:17 pm (CNA).- Confusion about Catholic moral teaching on “brain death” may be leading some doctors and ethicists to forbid organ donations in cases where the Church would allow it.

Dr. John Haas, head of the National Catholic Bioethics Center says the confusion stems from new doubts about the medical criteria for determining “brain death.”

The issue is critical in cases where a patient’s organs are to be donated for transplant. In order to be effective, organs must be “harvested” as close to the time of death as possible.

Currently, the Church permits doctors to use “brain death” or “neurological criteria for determining death” in making end-of-life and organ donation decisions.

But recently some have suggested that these criteria are no longer acceptable. A recent book by a Catholic doctor even claims that doctors who use “brain death” criteria are committing murder.

Haas is worried that this thinking — which runs counter to Church teaching — is gaining influence and causing confusion.

In a new essay published exclusively on the website of the Catholic News Agency, Haas argues that patients and doctors can follow the Church’s teaching with a “clear conscience.”

“It is understandable that pro-life Catholics are going to be very sensitive to any possible violation of the human person’s fundamental right to life. However, on occasion some misunderstand Catholic teaching in their pro-life zeal and deny that certain actions are morally permissible,” he writes.

The issue of “brain death” remains hotly debated in some Catholic medical circles.

“The idea that neurological criteria are not a licit means of determining death prior to organ harvesting seems to be gaining ground in certain Catholic circles,” Haas told CNA.

Some Catholic theologians and medical ethicists now believe that new brain research has raised questions about previous Catholic moral conclusions. They say this new research suggests that brain death criteria don’t provide doctors with the certainty that a person is truly dead.

Haas pointed to a recent article by E. Christian Brugger, a moral theologian at Denver’s St. John Vianney Theological Seminary and a senior ethicist at the Washington-based Culture of Life Foundation.

Brugger said that research has shown that some patients who have been “rightly diagnosed” as brain dead sill show “integrative bodily unity to a fairly high degree.” He said the research “raises a reasonable doubt that excludes ‘moral certitude’ that ventilator-sustained brain dead bodies are corpses.”

Brugger’s views have been widely circulated on the internet since being published earlier this year by the Catholic news agency, Zenit.

Haas says that despite the good intentions of Bruggers and others, their arguments run “contrary to the moral guidance the Church has provided the faithful on a critical life and death issue.”

Haas expressed concern that given Brugger’s status as an archdiocesean seminary professor, his arguments “could well unsettle consciences.”

“I fear that some Catholics, after reading Brugger’s piece, would think they would be morally compelled to refuse an organ transplant if the donor were judged to be dead using neurological criteria,” Haas said.

He acknowledged that questions remain about the moment of death and the proper safeguards needed before organs can be removed for transplant.

But he said: “The Church has provided guidance to the faithful that they can confidently follow with clear consciences.”

In his essay, Haas critiques the arguments by Brugger and others. He also explains the authoritative teaching of Blessed Pope John Paul II, as well as the Pontifical Academy for Life, and other Catholic institutions.

He concludes: “Moral certitude of death can be achieved using either cardio-pulmonary or neurological criteria, according to the magisterium of the Church. Catholics may in good conscience offer the gift of life through the donation of their organs after death based on neurological or cardio-pulmonary criteria according to current Church teaching. This does not mean that the teaching is irreformable. It may be modified on the basis of future scientific discoveries. However, it does mean that, at this point in time, the teaching can be followed with a clear conscience.”

Haas’ essay can be found here: www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=1568

Birth defects a third more common in IVF babies

Reuters
4/20/2012 9:05:11 AM ET

Babies conceived through certain fertility treatment techniques are about one-third more likely to have a birth defect than babies conceived without any extra help from technology, according to a review of several dozen studies.

However, the researchers - whose findings were published in the journal Fertility and Sterility - did not determine why fertility treatments are tied to a higher risk of birth defects or whether the technology is even responsible.

In vitro fertilization (IVF) - in which the mother's egg is fertilized outside of her body and then transferred to her womb - has been available to would-be mothers for more than three decades, and numerous studies have looked at the potential hazards of these techniques.

Zhibin Hu at Nanjing Medical University and colleagues collected the results of 46 studies that compared the number of birth defects among children conceived using an IVF technique to children conceived normally.

For more than 124,000 children born through IVF or using ICSI, in which a single sperm is injected directly into the egg, the risk of having a birth defect was 37 percent higher than that of the other children, they found.

"Children conceived by IVF and/or ICSI are at significantly increased risk for birth defects, and there is no risk difference between children conceived by IVF and/or ICSI," the team wrote.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, major birth defects, such as malformation of a limb or organ, occur in about three out of every 100 babies born in the United States.

A 37 percent increase would bump that rate to four out of every 100 babies.

"(The report) confirms what most people accepted anyway, that, yes, there is an increased risk in congenital abnormality associated with assisted reproductive technology," said William Buckett, a professor at McGill University, who was not involved with the review.

The increase in birth defect risk was apparent across a range of functions and body systems, including the genitals, skeleton, digestive system and the nervous system, the authors reported.

The question of why most studies find birth defects to be more common among IVF-conceived babies, though, remains to be answered.

It's possible that the same reasons people have trouble conceiving and seek out fertility treatment could influence their increased risk of having a baby with a birth defect.

It's also possible that the IVF techniques themselves, the jostling and handling of the embryos, or the drugs that go along with fertility treatment, could be involved.

A third theory is that birth defects only appear to be more common in babies conceived through fertility treatments because they're monitored more closely than other babies, Buckett said.

"Couples who have had babies born as a result of IVF are followed up more closely, and therefore subtle abnormalities may be detected that otherwise might not have been detected."

As far as trying to reduce the risk of birth defects for parents using IVF, Hu said in an email that "it is really too early to find out ways to reduce the risk, because the reasons accounting for the risk are largely unknown."