Might be a smoke signal sent by Good Cardinal Lopez Trujillo. But where there's smoke there are flames. Perhaps a consensus by our esteemed shepherds that the barn door was blown open on abortion in GoGo60s and Disco70s and that stem cell research must be watched more closely. Typical response from Il Professori. Translated- I'm smarter than the average bishop and I'll clone horses or humans if I bloody well feel like it. Thus the split between science and theology in 25 words or less. Will make for interesting kerfuffles in upcoming years. Nice to know the Vatican won't let this abomination slip past it.
Gerard E. | 06.30.06 - 2:06 pm | #

Lopez Trujillo is not the Vatican. His dycastery is concerned with family and sexuality issues. His greatest need at present is to study carefully the RHETORICAL skills of Joseph Ratzinger in defending Catholic teaching. Trujillo may have balls, but he lacks an ability to package Catholic teaching on marriage and family in a fashion that engages the opposition. Ben 16 gets the opposition talking about the issues; Trujillo generates predictable reactions from the usual subjects and unpredictable ones from others (like the Opus Dei senator!). His dycastery has no competence on canonical questions; his opinion is an opinion, not an official act. This would be reserved to the dycastery on interpreting legislative texts. And while they're at it, they could examine whether women on the pill are excommunicated (because some believe that it's an abortofacient). One thing is for certain. Canon law, in its automatic excommunications, does not neglect the subjective aspect of these questions. There are several canons dealing with this, not often cited by those primarily interested in politics rather than canon law.
Tom Haessler | 06.30.06 - 2:17 pm | #

I think the "women" he was referring to were egg donors. That was my take on it at least.
Marc | 06.30.06 - 3:10 pm | #

Regardless of how finely tuned Trujillo's statements are to Canon law, this article does one thing effectively. It gets across the point that embryonic stem-cell research is morally illicit. I thank God for Trujillo's statements as it gave me an opportunity to forward a similar article to a recent acquaintance who declared herself Catholic and in support of embryonic stem cell research. Her response was "I had no idea the Church took such a strong stance." It has made her think. Thanks be to God.
skeptical catholic | 06.30.06 - 3:23 pm | #

Isn't this the same story discussed by Dr. Edward Peters in the analysis linked below? I have to say that he seemed spot-on to me (i.e., this is Lopez Trujillo's opinion, but the cardinal is really just connecting the dots between already-in-force canons & decisions).

I do agree, though, that Cardinal Lopez Trujillo has a way of stating things which, while I may find it refreshing, does not really do much to convince the other side in these debates.....
Petellius | 06.30.06 - 5:40 pm | #

Archbishop Bertone, the new Secretary of State, was talking to the press about embryonic stem cell research and cloning and the Church's teaching. After a calm, carefully reasoned explanation of Catholic teaching about these matters, he said that he favored one exception to the rule against cloning - Sophia Loren should be cloned! Everyone laughed. And some, for the first time, must have thought to themselves, "hey, this dude's human just like me. Pretty smart too! I'll have to spend more time thinking and reading about this."

This story about Bertone was told to me by the Jesuit president of Marquette High who is in Rome now. It's just one illustration of HOW we come off when we defend Catholic truth is important.
Tom Haessler | 07.01.06 - 2:09 am | #

My take on the article was that women who knew that they were donating eggs for use in embryonic stem cell research were going to incur automatic excommunication. The language of the article could have implied all women who get abortions would also because the wording was vague and mentions abortion right near that point.

I WISH the Vatican was so bold that it would do that for all abortive women.
bookstopper | Homepage | 07.02.06 - 1:52 am | #

bookstopper, abortion already incurs automatic excommunication. It has for a while.

I don't see why it is a big deal that killing embryos would incur automatic excommunication. I thought that was implied by the whole abortion incurs automatic excommunication thing, since killing an embryo or fetus inside or outside of a woman's body is morally equivalent (maybe even worse, since you cannot argue you are protecting the woman's body once it is on the outside).
Mariana | 07.02.06 - 5:18 am | #