Foundations of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church
XII. Bioethical Issues
XII.1. The rapid development of biomedical technologies, which actively engage with human life from birth to death, and the inability to address the emerging moral problems within the framework of traditional medical ethics, have raised serious concerns in society. Humanity’s attempts to place itself in the role of God, arbitrarily altering and “improving” His creation, could bring new difficulties and suffering. The development of biomedical technologies has significantly outpaced the understanding of the potential spiritual, moral, and social consequences of their uncontrolled application, causing deep pastoral concern within the Church. In forming its stance on bioethical issues widely debated in contemporary society, particularly those bioethical realities that directly affect humanity, the Church draws from the understanding of life based on Divine Revelation. This includes the view of life as a precious gift from God and the irreplaceable nature of human freedom and God-like dignity, which calls each person to strive toward the goal—”the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:14), toward the perfection characteristic of the Heavenly Father (Matthew 5:48), and toward godliness, which allows people to become partakers of the Divine nature (2 Peter 1:4).
XII.2. Since ancient times, the Church has regarded intentional termination of pregnancy (abortion) as a grave sin. Canonical rules equate abortion with murder. This assessment is based on the conviction that the emergence of human life is a gift from God, making any act against the life of a human person from the moment of conception a crime.
The Psalmist describes the development of the fetus in the womb as a creative act of God: “For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb… My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me, when as yet there were none of them” (Psalm 139:13,15-16). The words of Job testify to this when he speaks to God: “Your hands have made me and fashioned me, an intricate unity; yet You would destroy me. Remember, I pray, that You have made me like clay. And will You turn me into dust again? Did You not pour me out like milk, and curdle me like cheese, clothe me with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and sinews? You have granted me life and favor, and Your care has preserved my spirit… Why then have You brought me out of the womb? Oh, that I had perished and no eye had seen me!” (Job 10:8-12,18). The Lord said to the Holy Prophet Jeremiah: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you” (Jeremiah 1:5-6).
In the “Didache” (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles), one of the oldest monuments of Christian literature, among the most important commandments of God is this: “You shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born.” Athenagoras, a 2nd-century apologist, writes: “A woman who causes an abortion is guilty of murder and will answer to God. For… the embryo in the womb is a living being, cared for by God.” “He who will be a man is already one,” asserted Tertullian at the end of the 2nd and the beginning of the 3rd century. “A woman who deliberately kills her fetus is answerable for murder… They who give potions to cause abortion are murderers, as are they who take poisons to kill the fetus”—states the 2nd and 8th canons of St. Basil the Great, included in the “Book of Rules of the Orthodox Church” and confirmed by the 91st rule of the 6th Ecumenical Council. St. Basil clarifies that the severity of the guilt does not depend on the stage of pregnancy: “We do not make a distinction whether the fetus has received form or is without form.” St. John Chrysostom called women who performed abortions “even worse than murderers.”
The widespread acceptance and justification of abortion in modern society are seen by the Church as a threat to the future of humanity and as a clear sign of moral degradation. Faithfulness to the biblical and patristic teachings on the sanctity and inestimable value of human life from its very conception is incompatible with the recognition of a “woman’s right to choose” in deciding the fate of the fetus. Moreover, abortion poses a serious threat to the physical and mental health of the mother. The Church has always considered it its duty to protect the most vulnerable and dependent human beings, namely unborn children. The Orthodox Church cannot, under any circumstances, give its blessing for abortion. However, the Church does not reject women who have had abortions but calls them to repentance and to overcome the destructive consequences of their sin through prayer and the assignment of penance, followed by participation in the salvific Holy Mysteries.
When there is an imminent threat to the mother’s life due to the continuation of pregnancy, especially if she already has children, pastoral practice advises leniency. A woman who has terminated a pregnancy under such circumstances is not excluded from Eucharistic communion with the Church, but this is conditioned upon fulfilling her personal penitential prayer rule, as determined by the priest who receives her confession. The fight against abortion, a decision sometimes made by women due to extreme poverty and a sense of helplessness, requires the Church and society to implement effective measures for the protection of motherhood and to create conditions for the adoption of children whom their mothers, for various reasons, cannot raise themselves.
The responsibility for the sin of killing an unborn child lies not only with the mother but also with the father if he agrees to the decision to have an abortion. If the abortion is performed without the husband’s consent, it may be grounds for divorce. The guilt also falls upon the doctor who performs the abortion. The Church calls upon the state to recognize the right of medical workers to refuse to perform abortions on grounds of conscience. It is often argued that the legal responsibility of the doctor for the mother’s death during childbirth is incomparably greater than the responsibility for the destruction of the fetus. Such a position cannot be accepted as relevant, particularly because it encourages medical workers and, through them, patients, to perform abortions. The doctor must exercise the utmost responsibility when making a diagnosis that could prompt a woman to terminate her pregnancy; the believing medical worker must carefully compare the medical findings with the commandments of the Christian conscience.
XII.3. The issue of contraception also requires a spiritual and moral assessment. Some contraceptive methods effectively have an abortifacient effect, artificially terminating the life of the embryo in its earliest stages. Therefore, the principles that apply to abortion apply to their use as well. Other methods that do not terminate an already initiated life cannot, in any case, be equated with abortion. In determining their attitude toward contraceptive methods, Christian spouses should keep in mind that the continuation of the human race is one of the fundamental purposes of the God-ordained marital union. Deliberate refusal to bear children for selfish reasons devalues marriage and is undoubtedly a sin. At the same time, spouses are responsible before God for raising their children in a quality and responsible manner. One way to exercise a responsible attitude toward childbirth is through temporary abstinence from sexual relations. However, it is necessary to recall the words of St. Paul addressed to Christian spouses: “Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control” (1 Corinthians 7:5). Clearly, spouses should make decisions in this area with mutual agreement and in consultation with their spiritual father. The spiritual father should, with pastoral care, consider the specific living conditions of the couple, their age, health, level of spiritual maturity, and many other circumstances, and distinguish between those who can “accept” high standards of abstinence and those to whom it “has not been given” (Matthew 19:11), with the primary concern being the preservation and strengthening of the family.
The Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, in its decision of December 28, 1998, instructed priests engaged in pastoral ministry that it is “impermissible to force or persuade their spiritual children, against their will, to… abstain from conjugal life within marriage.” The Synod also reminded pastors of the necessity of “exercising particular chastity and pastoral caution when discussing with their spiritual children any aspect of their family life.”
XII.4. The application of new biomedical methods often allows for the overcoming of infertility. However, technological intervention in the process of human conception increasingly threatens the spiritual integrity and physical health of the individual. Also endangered are the relationships among people, which have traditionally been the foundation of society. The development of these technologies is accompanied by the spread of an ideology of so-called reproductive rights, which is now being promoted both nationally and internationally. This system of views prioritizes sexual and social fulfillment over concern for the future of the child, the spiritual and physical health of society, and its moral stability. The human life is increasingly treated as a product that can be selected according to our preferences and managed like material goods.
In the prayers of the marriage ceremony, the Orthodox Church expresses its belief that the birth of children is the desired fruit of lawful marriage, but it is not its only purpose. The Church prays not only for the “fruit of the womb for profit” of the spouses but also for the gifts of eternal love, chastity, and “unity of mind and body.” Therefore, the Church cannot consider as morally justified those methods of childbearing that are not in harmony with the Creator’s design for life. If a husband or wife is unable to conceive children and therapeutic and surgical treatments do not help, they must humbly accept their childlessness as a special calling. Pastoral recommendations in these cases should include the possibility of adopting a child, with the mutual consent of the spouses. Permissible means of medical assistance include artificial insemination using the husband’s sperm, as this does not violate the integrity of the marital union, does not differ significantly from natural conception, and is performed within the context of marital relations.
Manipulations involving the “donation” of germ cells violate the integrity of the person and the uniqueness of marital relations by allowing third parties to intrude. Furthermore, such practices encourage irresponsible fatherhood or motherhood, as they publicly absolve anonymous donors of any responsibilities toward those who are “flesh of their flesh.” The use of donor material disrupts fundamental family ties by implying that the child has “biological” parents in addition to “social” ones.
“Surrogacy,” that is, the carrying of a fertilized egg to full term by a woman who then surrenders the child to the “ordering” parents, is unnatural and morally unacceptable, even when carried out without financial compensation. This method destroys the deep emotional and spiritual bond established between mother and child during pregnancy. Surrogacy causes trauma both to the woman carrying the child to term, whose maternal feelings are thus violated, and to the child, who may later experience a crisis of identity. From the Orthodox perspective, all forms of extracorporeal (in vitro) fertilization are morally unacceptable, as they involve the preparation, storage, and intentional destruction of “excess” embryos. The Church’s condemnation of abortion is based precisely on the recognition of the human dignity of the embryo.
Insemination of unmarried women using donor sperm or the exercise of “reproductive rights” by an unmarried man or by individuals with so-called non-traditional sexual orientations deprives the future child of the right to have both a mother and a father. The use of reproductive methods outside the context of a God-blessed family becomes a form of rebellion against God, conducted under the guise of protecting human autonomy, but in reality, it is based on a distorted understanding of personal freedom.
Excerpt from: Foundations of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church..
