The Catholic Church is Not against the Use of Biotechnology
in Agriculture But Simply Advocates Prudence and Regulation
15 Jun 2001
By C.S. Prakash
AgBioView
Please see below the complete text of the statement on genetic engineering
in agriculture from Cardinal Sin, the powerful Archbishop of Manila in
Philippines. A recent news item from the Philippine Daily Inquirer (see
below) has selectively quoted as saying that Cardinal Sin,
is against the use of biotechnology in agriculture. Cardinal Sin is among
the most influential of Roman Catholic Cardinals as he also chairs the
most Vatican Committees, and were it not for his failing health, he was
considered by many to become the first Asian Pope.
The statement below from Cardinal Sin shows that while he advocates caution
in the use of biotechnology in agriculture, he readily acknowledges that
science "is a significant expression of man's dominion over creation",
and "A concrete case that needs examination is genetic engineering
applied to agricultural products. Along with the noble desire to combat
hunger, poverty and disease in developing and applying such technology,
scientists have the task of protecting the rest of creation from all possible
harms that ensue".
Statement from the Pope on November 11, 2000: "This is a principle
to be remembered in agricultural production itself, whenever there is
a question of its advance through the application of biotechnologies,
which cannot be evaluated solely on the basis of immediate economic interests.
They must be submitted beforehand to rigorous scientific and ethical examination,
to prevent them from becoming disastrous for human health and the future
of the earth." (See the
complete text of Holy Father's speech below and an earlier statement from
the Pontifical Academy).
It must be recognized here that biotechnologically-enhanced foods are
the most tested food ever, and have been subjected to more scientific
scrutiny than any food in the history. The regulatory process that oversees
the safety of biotech products on a case-by-case basis, high consensus
of the scientific community on the biosafety issues, and the history of
the safe use of the biotechnology products overwhelming addresses the
concerns expressed above.
I had detailed discussion with Bishop Jesse Varela and Rev. Father Noli
Alparce of Sorsogon, Philippines (who provided me the pastoral statement
that appears below); and both concur that biotechnology can help advance
the food security in developing countries and also help in poverty alleviation.
While both expressed some reservation against the dominant use of this
technology by the private sector and also advocate prudence on biosafety
issues, they advised me that the Catholic Church is not opposed to the
use of biotechnology in agriculture and it clearly recognizes its potential
benefits in impacting the humanity. Father Alparce, a highly recognized
social activist in Philippines (an ex-journalist and political aide) addressed
a gathering of agricultural experts on June 13 in Manila where he advocated
the continued development of agricultural biotechnology to address the
problems of poor farmers, and assured that therer was no incongruence
in the use of this technology with the Church's beliefs.
One can thus see that overall the Church has a cautious but supportive
position on agricultural biotechnology (despite the misquotes and 'out
of context' quotes by the media reports and activists), and is the position
what most agricultural scientists and policy makers embrace - move forward
with the technology but with adequate safeguards.
I thank Mr. Miguel R. Unson of the Senate of the Philippines for his
help in the transcription of the Cardinal Sin text. As the Pope's speech
in November 2000 is also being selectively misquoted in the press, I reproduce
below that speech along with an earlier Piero Morandini's analysis of
the comments of the Holy Father (from Agbioview on Dec 2, 2000).
- C. S. Prakash
---------
Cardinal Sin's Statement
PASTORAL STATEMENT ON GENETIC ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila 121 Arzobispo Street, Intramuros,
P.O. Box 132, Manila, Philippines
In the beginning God gave mankind the gift of intelligence to be used,
among other things, to collaborate with him in caring for creation. Today
this collaboration with the creator is also evident in the advances of
science and technology. The Church has always valued such progress, but
has likewise made the necessary precautions so as not to lose sight of
the true context in which it is situated.
Thus, after noting that ?basic scientific research, as well as applied
research, is a significant expression of man?s dominion over creation?,
the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that ?science and technology
are precious resources when placed at the service of man and promote his
integral development for the benefit of all. Science and technology are
ordered to man, from whom they take their origin and development; hence
they find in the person and in his moral values both evidence of their
purpose and awareness of their limits? (no. 2293).
The quest for knowledge and dominion always brings with it certain ethical
questions. For indeed, while technology merely asks, ?can it be done??,
ethics on the other hand brings us one step further and asks, ?if it can
be done, should it be done?? The answer to the latter can only be in the
affirmative if what is being contemplated is truly for the good of the
human person. A concrete case that needs examination is genetic engineering
applied to agricultural products. Along with the noble desire to combat
hunger, poverty and disease in developing and applying such technology,
scientists have the task of protecting the rest of creation from all possible
harms that ensue. In fact, concerns have already been raised that certain
experiments and marketing strategies may have detrimental effects on different
areas of human existence, such as health and safety, environment and biodiversity,
culture, consumers rights, and proper distribution of food and earnings.
Genetic engineering is acceptable only if all risks are minimized. Otherwise,
one may easily succumb to temptations of productivity and profit at the
expense of the people and the environment. And as long as foreseeable
dangers are not fully identified, studied and avoided, safe alternative
procedures should be used, or if none, testing and development of the
technology should be delayed altogether.
May the Lord of the harvest bless us with an abundant yield, and may
our Creator continue to guide our intelligence. May the advancement of
science and technology be always a true collaboration with God?s work
of providence.
Villa San Miguel, 8th day of May 2001. Original Signed +JAIME L. CARDINAL
SIN, Archbishop of Manila
==========
Following is the news item by Philippine Daily Inquirer based on the
above speech (thanks to Agnet):
PHILIPPINES - CHURCH LEADER URGES USE OF SAFE ALTERNATIVES TO GMO
Philippine Daily Inquirer
June 12, 2001
Manila Archbishop Jaime Cardinal Sin has, according to this story, urged
the use of safe alternatives to genetically modified organism (GMO) in
the country in a pastoral statement issued amid claims of agrochemical
firms the technology has church backing, stating, "Genetic engineering
is acceptable only if all risks are minimized. Otherwise, one may easily
succumb to temptations of productivity and profit at the expense of the
people and the environment."
The story says that the archbishop's statement echoed Vatican's latest
position on this biotechnological issue that sharply divides scientists
and researchers all over the world.
Speaking before an estimated 50,000 farmers from Italy and elsewhere
at a special outdoor mass for farmers, Pope John Paul II was cited as
saying on November last year that using GMO to increase farm production
was contrary to God's will.
The influential archbishop of Manila was quoted as saying, "As long
as foreseeable dangers are not fully identified, studied and avoided,
safe alternative procedures should be used. (I)f none, testing and development
of the technology should be delayed altogether."
The story says that in a bid to win over support of the predominantly
Catholic populace of the country, the proponents of GMO use in public
fora and promotional materials the old Vatican statement endorsing genetic
engineering to improve living conditions of farmers.
Sin was further quoted as saying, "certain experiments and marketing
strategies may have detrimental effects on different areas of human existence,
such as health and safety, environment and biodiversity, culture, consumers
rights and proper distribution of food and earnings."
The story adds that there is still no consensus among scientists worldwide
over the issue of the technology's safety, and failures in many GMO farms
cast doubts on the efficacy of it.
======
Statement by the Pope
JUBILEE OF THE AGRICULTURAL WORLD ADDRESS OF JOHN PAUL II
Saturday, 11 November 2000
Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Brothers and Sisters,
1. I am pleased to be able to meet you on the occasion of the Jubilee
of the Agricultural World, for this moment of celebration and reflection
on the present state of this important sector of life and the economy,
as well as on the ethical and social perspectives that concern it.
I thank Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Secretary of State, for his kind words
expressing the sentiments and expectations of all those present. I respectfully
greet the dignitaries, including those of different religious backgrounds
who are representing various organizations and are present this evening
to offer us the contribution of their testimony.
2. The Jubilee of farmers coincides with the traditional "Thanksgiving
Day" promoted in Italy by the praiseworthy Confederation of Farmers,
to whom I extend my most cordial greetings. This "Day" makes
a strong appeal to the perennial values cherished by the agricultural
world, particularly to its marked religious sense. To give thanks is to
glorify God who created the land and its produce, to God who saw that
it was "good" (Gn 1: 12) and entrusted it to man for wise and
industrious safekeeping.
Dear men and women of the agricultural world, you are entrusted with
the task of making the earth fruitful. A most important task, whose urgent
need today is becoming ever more apparent. The area where you work is
usually called the "primary sector" by economic science. On
the world economic scene, your sector varies considerably, in comparison
to others, according to continent and nation. But whatever the cost in
economic terms, plain good sense is enough to highlight its real "primacy"
with respect to vital human needs. When this sector is underappreciated
or mistreated, the consequences for life, health and ecological balance
are always serious and usually difficult to remedy, at least in the short
term.
3. The Church has always had special regard for this area of work, which
has also been expressed in important magisterial documents. How could
we forget, in this respect, Bl. John XXIII's Mater et Magistra? At the
time he put his "finger on the wound", so to speak, denouncing
the problems that were unfortunately making agriculture a "depressed
sector" in those years, regarding both "labour productivity"
and "the standard of living of farm populations" (cf. ibid.,
nn. 123-124). In the time between Mater et Magistra and our day, it certainly
cannot be said that these problems have been solved. Rather it should
be noted that there are others in addition, in the framework of new problems
stemming from the globalization of the economy and the worsening of the
"ecological question".
4. The Church obviously has no "technical" solutions to offer.
Her contribution is at the level of Gospel witness and is expressed in
proposing the spiritual values that give meaning to life and guidance
for practical decisions, including at the level of work and the economy.
Without doubt, the most important value at stake when we look at the
earth and at those who work is the principle that brings the earth back
to her Creator: the earth belongs to God! It must therefore be treated
according to his law. If, with regard to natural resources, especially
under the pressure of industrialization, an irresponsible culture of "dominion"
has been reinforced with devastating ecological consequences, this certainly
does not correspond to God's plan. "Fill the earth and subdue it;
and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air"
(Gn 1: 28). These famous words of Genesis entrust the earth to man's use,
not abuse. They do not make man the absolute arbiter of the earth's governance,
but the Creator's "co-worker": a stupendous mission, but one
which is also marked by precise boundaries that can never be transgressed
with impunity.
This is a principle to be remembered in agricultural production itself,
whenever there is a question of its advance through the application of
biotechnologies, which cannot be evaluated solely on the basis of immediate
economic interests. They must be submitted beforehand to rigorous scientific
and ethical examination, to prevent them from becoming disastrous for
human health and the future of the earth.
5. The fact that the earth belongs constitutively to God is also the
basis of the principle, so dear to the Church's social teaching, of the
universal destination of the earth's goods (cf. Centesimus annus, n. 6).
What God has given man, he has given with the heart of a father who cares
for his children, no one excluded. God's earth is therefore also man's
earth and that of all mankind! This certainly does not imply the illegitimacy
of the right to property, but demands a conception of it and its consequent
regulation which will safeguard and further its intrinsic "social
function" (cf. Mater et Magistra, n. 111; Populorum progressio, n.
23).
Every person, every people, has the right to live off the fruits of the
earth. At the beginning of the new millennium, it is an intolerable scandal
that so many people are still reduced to hunger and live in conditions
unworthy of man. We can no longer limit ourselves to academic reflections:
we must rid humanity of this disgrace through appropriate political and
economic decisions with a global scope. As I wrote in my Message to the
Director-General of the FAO on the occasion of World Food Day, it is necessary
"to uproot the causes of hunger and malnutrition" (cf. L'Osservatore
Romano English edition, 1 November 2000, p. 3). As is widely known, this
situation has a variety of causes. Among the most absurd are the frequent
conflicts within States, which are often true wars of the poor. And there
remains the burdensome legacy of an often unjust distribution of wealth
in individual nations and at the world level.
6. This is an aspect which the celebration of the Jubilee brings precisely
to our special attention. For the original institution of the Jubilee,
as it is formulated in the Bible, was aimed at re-establishing equality
among the children of Israel also by restoring property, so that the poorest
people could pick themselves up again and everyone could experience, including
at the level of a dignified life, the joy of belonging to the one people
of God.
Our Jubilee, 2,000 years after Christ's birth, must also bear this sign
of universal brotherhood. It represents a message that is addressed not
only to believers, but to all people of good will, so that they will be
resolved, in their economic decisions, to abandon the logic of sheer advantage
and combine legitimate "profit" with the value and practice
of solidarity. As I have said on other occasions, we need a globalization
of solidarity, which in turn presupposes a "culture of solidarity"
that must flourish in every heart.
7. Thus, while we never cease to urge the public authorities, the great
economic powers and the most influential institutions to move in this
direction, we must be convinced that there is a "conversion"
that involves us all personally. We must start with ourselves. For this
reason, in the Encyclical Centesimus annus, along with the discussions
of the ecological question, I pointed to the urgent need for a "human
ecology". This concept is meant to recall that "not only has
God given the earth to man, who must use it with respect for the original
good purpose for which it was given to him, but man too is God's gift
to man. He must therefore respect the natural and moral structure with
which he has been endowed" (Centesimus annus, n. 38). If man loses
his sense of life and the security of moral standards, wandering aimlessly
in the fog of indifferentism, no policy will be effective for safeguarding
both the concerns of nature and those of society. Indeed, it is man who
can build or destroy, respect or despise, share or reject. The great problems
posed by the agricultural sector, in which you are directly involved,
should be faced not only as "technical" or "political"
problems, but at their root as "moral problems".
8. It is therefore the inescapable responsibility of those who work with
the name of Christians to give a credible witness in this area. Unfortunately,
in the countries of the so-called "developed" world an irrational
consumerism is spreading, a sort of "culture of waste", which
is becoming a widespread lifestyle. This tendency must be opposed. To
teach a use of goods which never forgets either the limits of available
resources or the poverty of so many human beings, and which consequently
tempers one's lifestyle with the duty of fraternal sharing, is a true
pedagogical challenge and a very far-sighted decision. In this task, the
world of those who work the land with its tradition of moderation and
heritage of wisdom accumulated amid much suffering, can make an incomparable
contribution.
9. I am therefore very grateful for this "Jubilee" witness,
which holds up the great values of the agricultural world to the attention
of the whole Christian community and all society. Follow in the footsteps
of your best tradition, opening yourselves to all the developments of
the technological era, but jealously safeguarding the perennial values
that characterize you. This is also the way to give a hope-filled future
to the world of agriculture. A hope that is based on God's work, of which
the Psalmist sings: "You visit the earth and water it, you greatly
enrich it (Ps 65: 10).
As I implore this visit from God, source of prosperity and peace for
the countless families who work in the rural world, I would like to impart
an Apostolic Blessing to everyone at the end of this meeting.
Before leaving the Pope said to those present:
I would like to thank you for this lovely evening, for the invitation
and for the beautiful link between the rural, agricultural world and modern
music. Thanks to everyone for the participation of representatives from
all the countries; this is the way that the whole universal Church lives
and celebrates the Jubilee.
I wish you a good rest. Tomorrow another great celebration awaits you.
Let us hope for good weather.
====
Posting of Piero Morandini to Agbioview on Dec 2, 2000
Subj: Re: AGBIOVIEW: Pope & Biotech
From: piero.morandini@unimi.it (Piero Morandini)
Alex Avery already made some points clear on the BNA report about recent
Pope's speeches. What I want to stress is that it is a huge mistake to
believe to newspapers & journalists when it comes to matter such as
"what the Pope means".
One can remove bits and pieces from the Pope's speeches in order to support
his own views. For instance: (address from 11-11-00) "Follow in the
footsteps of your best tradition, opening yourselves to all the developments
of the technological era, but jealously safeguarding the perennial values
that characterize you." Especially if you cut the second part of
the sentence, this could be interpreted as a critical praise of biotechnology.
IMHO, the Pope made statements that neither condemned nor blessed biotechnology,
statements that are balanced. Much more stress was put on the need to
oppose the culture of waste.
I cite again from 11-11-00 address: "It is therefore the inescapable
responsibility of those who work with the name of Christians to give a
credible witness in this area. Unfortunately, in the countries of the
so-called "developed" world an irrational consumerism is spreading,
a sort of "culture of waste", which is becoming a widespread
lifestyle. This tendency must be opposed. To teach a use of goods which
never forgets either the limits of available resources or the poverty
of so many human beings, and which consequently tempers one's lifestyle
with the duty of fraternal sharing, is a true pedagogical challenge and
a very far-sighted decision. In this task, the world of those who work
the land with its tradition of moderation and heritage of wisdom accumulated
amid much suffering, can make an incomparable contribution."
Of course such statements (which are clear-cut and do not need much interpretation)
did not reach the headlines: it is counterproductive (for the newspaper)
to tell people they should restrain from bad attitudes such as feeding
yourself beyond need and wasting it. Look at the speeches from the official
site and do not be fooled: http://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/jubilevents/events_jubilagric_en.htm
Best regards to everybody Piero Morandini, Dept. of Biology, Univ. of
Milan (Italy)
=========
Vatican Calls for Honesty on Biotechnology: "Don't Fear Scientific
Progress"
Pontifical Academy For Life
October 12, 1999
Two New Books Clarify Questions on Genetic Modification
Vatican City, Oct 12 (Zenit).- Transgenic foods, genetic maps and sex
selection are just the tip of the iceberg that has sparked the debate
on the ethical repercussions of the use of biotechnology. Both scientists
and ethicians alike are trying to agree on the limits and use of this
new emerging field. At present, there is a clash between those who have
denounced the encouragement of alarmist views, devoid of scientific basis
and, those who stress the enormous advantages that can be gleaned from
a proper use of biotechnology.
To date, the Church has not pronounced itself explicitly on this matter.
Believers and non-believers ask a very serious question: what is the Catholic
moral position regarding genetic manipulation?
To answer this question, the Pontifical Academy for Life, an institution
created by John Paul II himself in 1994, has published two volumes, one
on the human genome and another on biotechnology - both presented this
morning to the international press.
Scientific Progress
According to one of the most prestigious European geneticists, Jesuit
Angelo Serra, Professor Emeritus of the Faculty of Medicine of the Sacred
Heart University in Rome, "research on the human genome began in
1989 and after ten years we only know about 6% of this map that contains
3 billion letters. 1,462 genes are known, on which genetic diseases depend,
and 4,500 monogenetic illnesses have been identified, to which must be
added all the rest, such as tumors, which are poligenetic illnesses."
Serra said that "the progress of scientific knowledge is exceptional,
although its application is deficient. The 600 experiments of genetic
engineering that are currently underway on illnesses such as AIDS, cancer,
monogenetic and enzymatic sicknesses, to date have not given definitive
results, as they have not succeeded in curing the dysfunction of some
genes that cause the sicknesses."
New Medical Responsibility
Serra denounced that "instead of making the medical and health personnel
more aware of their own responsibilities, this knowledge is heading "toward
moral shipwreck." By way of example he mentioned pre-natal diagnoses,
which "tend to eliminate the subject that could develop the sickness,
instead of curing it." He added that "there are real cases of
eugenics that are triumphing in the field of medicine."
Professor Serra was certain that "the progress in knowledge will
bring great benefits to mankind; consequently, science must not be incriminated."
Yet, he acknowledged that science "requires greater responsibility
and attention on the part of the medical corps and institutions, by respecting
the ethical limits that many would like to ignore."
Catastrophic Sensationalism
Giuseppe Bertoni, professor at the Institute of Zootechnology of the
Sacred Heart University in Piacenza, criticized "the catastrophic
sensationalism with which the press reports on biotechnology," specifically,
he rejected the "idea of conceiving scientific progress as something
that should be feared."
"It's true that ethical limits must be respected, but above all
the reality of biotechnology must be known. Because of this I say: 'If
you know biotechnology, you don't fear it.' "
"To reject biotechnology because its patent is in the hands of multinational
corporations, is an ideological argument - not a scientific one. Perhaps
what Rifkin says is true, that corporations have 40% of the knowledge
in this field, but it is also true that the public structures and the
smallest European enterprises are committed to this research and offer
guarantees that must not be ignored," Bertoni said.
Regarding animal cloning, Bertoni said that "it could help to resolve
in a final way the problem of species in the process of extinction. It
is being tried with the panda, and it could be applied to other species."
The Church's Position
Bishop Elio Sgreccia, vice-president of the Pontifical Academy for Life
and director of the Institute of Bioethics of the Sacred Heart University
of Rome, explained that "there are no specific indications from the
Magisterium of the Church on biotechnology.
Because of this, I have stopped all those who demand the condemnation
of these products." "The book, 'Animal and Vegetable Biotechnology:
New Frontiers and New Responsibilities,' is a contribution toward clarifying
this question. We give the ideological lines: research in the biotechnological
field could resolve enormous problems as, for example, the adaptation
of agriculture to arid land, thus conquering hunger. The biotechnological
products must contribute to man's wellbeing, giving guarantees in face
of possible risks. Therefore, what is needed is honesty. Once the proper
health characteristics of the product are guaranteed, it is right that
the consumer should know if it has been genetically modified."
Finally, Bishop Sgreccia confirmed that "the Pontifical Academy
for Life says no to the cloning of man in all its forms."
========
Alex Avery already made some points clear on the BNA report about recent
Pope's speeches. What I want to stress is that it is a huge mistake to
believe to newspapers & journalists when it comes to matter such as
"what the Pope means".
One can remove bits and pieces from the Pope's speeches in order to support
his own views. For instance: (address from 11-11-00) "Follow in the
footsteps of your best tradition, opening yourselves to all the developments
of the technological era, but jealously safeguarding the perennial values
that characterize you." Especially if you cut the second part of
the sentence, this could be interpreted as a critical praise of biotechnology.
IMHO, the Pope made statements that neither condemned nor blessed biotechnology,
statements that are balanced. Much more stress was put on the need to
oppose the culture of waste.
I cite again from 11-11-00 address: "It is therefore the inescapable
responsibility of those who work with the name of Christians to give a
credible witness in this area. Unfortunately, in the countries of the
so-called "developed" world an irrational consumerism is spreading,
a sort of "culture of waste", which is becoming a widespread
lifestyle. This tendency must be opposed. To teach a use of goods which
never forgets either the limits of available resources or the poverty
of so many human beings, and which consequently tempers one's lifestyle
with the duty of fraternal sharing, is a true pedagogical challenge and
a very far-sighted decision. In this task, the world of those who work
the land with its tradition of moderation and heritage of wisdom accumulated
amid much suffering, can make an incomparable contribution."
Of course such statements (which are clear-cut and do not need much interpretation)
did not reach the headlines: it is counterproductive (for the newspaper)
to tell people they should restrain from bad attitudes such as feeding
yourself beyond need and wasting it. Look at the speeches from the official
site and do not be fooled: http://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/jubilevents/events_jubilagric_en.htm
Best regards to everybody
Piero Morandini,
Dept. of Biology,
Univ. of Milan (Italy)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: "Kershen, Drew L" <dkershen@ou.edu>
Subject: Vatican website-Recent speeches by John Paul II-biotechnology
In light of the posts by Alex Avery, I thought I would let people read
the words of John Paul II directly. You may read what the Pope said during
the Jubilee Year events on World Agricultural Days (November 11-12, 2000)
by doing the following:
1. Go to the official Vatican website http://www.vatican.va
;
2. Click on the word "Jubilee";
3. At the screen for Jubilee Events, click on the words "Agricultural
world (Nov)".
You should now be looking at a screen with five documents:
* a press conference hosted by Vatican staffers -- in Italian
* a schedule of events for World Agricultural Days in the Jubilee Year
-- in Italian;
* John Paul II's address on Saturday, Nov. 11, 2000 to a gathering in
St. Peter's Square -- in English;
* John Paul II's sermon on Sunday Nov. 12, 2000 at a Jubilee Mass in St.
Peter's Basilica -- in English;
* John Paul II's prayer at noon (the Angelus) on Sunday Nov. 12, 2000
-- in English. For those who do not have the time to go to the Vatican
website, I quote the relevant portions of these documents:
********************************
ADDRESS OF JOHN PAUL II,
Saturday, 11 November 2000
Paragraph 4: "The Church obviously has no "technical"
solutions to offer. Her contribution is at the level of Gospel witness
and is expressed in proposing the spiritual values that give meaning to
life ... "Without doubt, the most important value at stake ... the
earth belongs to God! ... These famous words of Genesis entrust the earth
to man's use, not abuse. They do not make man the absolute arbiter of
the earth's governance, but the Creator's "co-worker": a stupendous
mission, but one which is also marked by precise boundaries that can never
be transgress with impunity. "This is a principle to be remembered
in agricultural production itself, whenever there is a question of its
advance through the application of biotechnologies, which cannot be evaluated
solely on the basis of immediate economic interests. They must be submitted
beforehand to rigorous scientific and ethical examination, to prevent
them from becoming disastrous for human health and the future of the earth.
Paragraphs 5 - 8 ".... Paragraph 9: "I am therefore very grateful
for this "Jubilee" witness, which holds up the great values
of the agricultural world to the attention of the whole Christian community
and all society. Follow in the footsteps of your best tradition, opening
yourselves to all the developments of the technological era, but jealously
safeguarding the perennial values that characterize you. This is also
the way to give a hope-filled future to the world of agriculture."
*******************
HOMILY OF JOHN PAUL II,
Sunday, 12 November 2000
Paragraph 3: "... Agricultural activity in our era has to reckon
with the consequences of industrialization and the sometimes disorderly
development of urban areas, with the phenomenon of air pollution and ecological
disruption, with the dumping of toxic waste and deforestation. Christians,
while always trusting in the help of Providence, must make responsible
efforts to ensure that the value of the earth is respected and promoted.
"Agricultural work should be better and better organized and supported
by social measures that fully reward the toil it involves and the truly
great usefulness that characterizes it. If the world of the most refined
technology is not reconciled with the simple language of nature in a healthy
balance, human life will face ever greater risks, of which we are already
seeing the first disturbing signs."
*******************
ANGELUS OF JOHN PAUL II,
Sunday, 12 November 2000
"... I extend a particular greeting to Mr. Jacques Diouf, Director-General
of the FAO, and to Mr. Paolo Bedoni, representing the farmers. "In
their addresses they wanted to highlight the challenges but also the enormous
potential that agriculture holds today. It is called to play an active
and responsible role especially in facing the great problems connected
with food and hunger in the world. The balanced use of natural resources
and the equitable distribution of available goods will make it possible
to offer the world population the food security that everyone desires."
Moreover, the Vatican's only formal statement on biotechnology (issued
in late 1999) was favorable. I have set forth below two news stories that
accurately summarize the formal statement. I cannot find the formal statement
itself in my files, although I am certain that I have it in my files somewhere.
*************
BUSINESS WORLD
Jan. 13, 2000
Despite controversy surrounding the ill effects of biotechnology, top
Catholic Church officials are convinced that this latest progeny of science
is a gain rather than a loss to humanity. Biotechnology, or the use of
biological techniques to improve agricultural products and medicine, has
been in hot water since news broke that some of its practical applications
in the market such as Genetically Modified Products (GMPs) could cause
cancer, gene mutation and other health hazards.
"I have stopped all those who demand condemnation of these (genetically
modified) products," said Bishop Elio Sgreccia, Vatican director
of Bioethics and vice-president of the Pontifical Academy of Life (PAL).
He emphasized that biotechnological research could resolve global problems
such as hunger since it enables agricultural productivity even in arid
lands. "We (PAL members) are increasingly encouraged that the advantages
of genetic engineering of plants and animals are greater than the risks,"
explained Bishop Sgreccia. "The risks should be carefully followed
through openness, analysis and control, but without a sense of alarm."
Another PAL fellow, Giuseppe Bertoni, criticized the "catastrophic
sensationalism" of press reports that substantially contribute to
biotechnology's current infamous image. "It's true that ethical limits
must be respected but, above all, the reality of biotechnology must be
known," said Bertoni. "If you know biotechnology, you don't
fear it." He further pointed out that the "idea of conceiving
scientific progress is something to be feared" should be rejected.
PAL, being an authority on science's moral and ethical issues, presented
two volumes of documents two months ago regarding biotechnology. Though
clearly not in favor of human cloning, PAL scholars gave a "prudent
yes" to plant and animal engineering since it is a potential mechanism
to alleviate certain human problems such as world hunger, incurable diseases
and the like. Though not part of PAL, theologian Daniel McGee shared PAL's
view that "God is a presence who continues in the marvelous creative
process" and mankind partakes in all of these divine efforts.
************************
THE OBSERVER
Nov. 28, 1999
THE Pope has given his blessing to genetically modified food in a move
which will re-ignite the controversy over the ethics of genetic engineering.
After more than two years of discussion, the Vatican's Pontifical Academy
for Life has decided that, while it is wrong to modify the human genetic
code, modifying the genes of plants and animals is theologically acceptable.
Bishop Elio Sgreccia, vice- president of the pontifical academy, said:
'We are increasingly encouraged that the advantages of genetic engineering
of plants and animals are greater than the risks. The risks should be
carefully followed through openness, analysis and controls, but without
a sense of alarm.' Referring to genetically modified products such as
corn and soya, Sgreccia added: 'We give it a prudent 'yes' We cannot agree
with the position of some groups that say it is against the will of God
to meddle with the genetic make -up of plants and animals.' But he warned
that consumers must be informed on genetically modified products by proper
labelling. He added that potential environmental risks from genetically
modified plants must 'be carefully studied and monitored on a case -by-case
basis'.
Last month's Vatican decision comes as a battle has erupted within the
Church of England over its attitude towards GM food. On Wednesday, the
Church of England's ethical investment working group will meet to decide
whether to allow the Government to use church land for GM crop trials.
There is concern that undue pressure is being put on the Church Commissioners
to allow the Ministry of Agriculture to proceed with the trials. A decision
on the issue will have far-reaching implications for the Government's
policy on GM food. The Prime Minister, a practising Christian, would be
highly embarrassed if the Church of England declared GM trials 'unethical'.
This Wednesday's meeting of the Church's ethical group will also have
a significant impact on the Church's financial investment, as the commissioners
hold thousands of shares in companies involved in genetic science.
Tim Cooper, chairman of the Christian Ecology Link, said: 'The Church
Commissioners should disinvest from companies such as Astra-Zeneca and
Novartis forthwith. Widespread public opposition to GM food means that
investing heavily in their shares involves undue risk. The commissioners
should instead be exploring opportunities for increased investment in
companies associated with organic food, which benefits the environment
and is increasingly in demand.' He warned that, if the Church Commissioners
allowed the trials to proceed, 'ordinary churchgoers will find it hard
to understand why the Church disregards the known environmental threats
and dismisses widespread public concern.'
The Christian Ecology Link, Christian Aid and Friends of the Earth are
also concerned at the role played by Stuart Bell MP, the Government's
representative on the board of the Church Commissioners. Bell earns thousands
of pounds a year from Bell Pottinger the public relations firm which advises
Monsanto. They are also worried about the influential role played by Professor
Derek Burke, a key member of the Church's scientific and medicines advisory
committee. Burke is a passionate supporter of GM food and recently published
a 10-point rebuttal of the Prince of Wales's criticism of GM food.
Although the Vatican did restate church objections to human cloning and
test -tube fertilisation, it gave its cautious approval to other forms
of biotechnology that it believes seek to improve the human condition.
Sgreccia said: 'Bioengineering is a good if it seeks to cure, but an evil
if it violates the personality of man to the point of eugenicism and the
construction of human beings to use them as an organ factory.'
------------------------------
I add that the Vatican Pontifical Academy on Life published two books
on biotechnology after the two years of discussion, including several
conferences by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. Both books are favorable
to biotechnology. The OU Law School Library has both books. The book on
pharmaceutical-medical biotechnology and human biotechnology is in English.
The book on agricultural and environmental biotechnology is in Italian.
In light of what I have quoted, I think it accurate to say that the BNA
article (quoted by Alex Avery in his post) is, at best, incorrect and
misleading probably because the BNA reporter relied upon press releases
from organizations -- like the Green Party of Italy -- that deliberated
misinterpreted and distorted the words of John Paul II in order to promote
their ideological agenda.
Drew Drew L. Kershen;
Earl Sneed Centennial Professor of Law
University of Oklahoma College of Law
|
