Darlene Fozard Weaver

Taking Sin Seriously

Contemporary Roman Catholic ethics endeavors to take sin seriously by offering theologies of sin that emphasize it as a force and as a basic, personal orientation. Such efforts rightly counter the Catholic traditions earlier reduction of sin to sins, and sins to external acts and moral culpability. But perhaps they go too far in this regard. By engaging Charles Curran, this study argues that inattention to sins undermines the theological referent of sin as a discourse that concerns more than moral culpability, obscures God as the source of freedom and value, and neglects the way in which acts express and sustain sin and fashion a personal orientation. Drawing on the work of Jean Porter, the essay shows that attention to sins highlights the historicity, particularity, and provisionality of human acts because of the theological referent and analogical character of sin and sins.

Embryo Adoption Theologically Considered: Bodies, Adoption, and the Common Good

When a genuinely contested question arises in moral theology, initial analyses inevitably settle around particular lines of argument and counter-argument that rely on relevant moral claims which are presumed stable and settled. Mutual criticism, discussion, and further reflection bring more nuance and texture to these lines of argument as they also illumine those claims and teachings taken to be reliable moral markers or building blocks. What takes shape is a “debate” with more or less clearly demarcated “sides,” and subsequent scholarly entries into the contested question must traverse the debate’s terrain. Eventually, however, new routes into the question are called for and charted, as newcomers to and veterans of the debate alike begin to challenge the terms on which the conversation has settled. In the case of embryo adoption, analyses have settled around the question whether it is morally permissible to transfer a genetically unrelated embryo into the uterus of a married woman, and answers to this question are crafted by appealing to relatively stable and settled Catholic teaching on marriage, or more specifically to the marriage “act” (i.e., heterosexual intercourse) or to the marital/nuptial significance of the human body. This essay argues that many of the heretofore available Catholic arguments about embryo adoption are methodologically flawed, problematically gendered, and theologically deficient. After developing these charges, the essay explores embryo adoption in light of theological reflection on Christ’s body and ours, adoption, and the common good. While I judge that embryo adoption is at least sometimes morally permissible, my aim here is not so much to argue for the moral permissibility of the practice, but (like Eric Gregory does admirably in his contribution to this volume) to call for and inaugurate more robustly moral theological consideration of the practice. More specifically, I consider embryo adoption in light of the affirmation that we are made God’s adopted children by being incorporated into Christ’s body.

Introduction: The Ethics of Embryo Adoption and the Catholic Tradition

In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET or more commonly IVF), first successfully accomplished in humans in 1978 (Steptoe & Edwards, 1978), has become the treatment of choice for infertile couples in the developed world. IVF, along with other forms of assisted reproductive technology (ART) are considered morally impermissible according to official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1987). In IVF procedures, highly skilled technicians facilitate the creation of embryos in a Petri dish after obtaining ovum and sperm. Prior to fertilization, the ova are assessed and those deemed of highest quality are mixed with the highest quality of sperm. Two to five days after fertilization, a number of embryos are implanted via a catheter into the woman’s uterus, which has been prepared through hormonal therapy so that uterine conditions are suitable for embryo implantation (De los Santos et al., 2003). Success rates for live births using fresh eggs obtained from the woman undergoing embryo transfer hover between 20% and 30%, with even the most successful clinics reporting rates less than 51% according to reports by the Center for Disease Control (2006) and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (2005).

How Sin Works: A Review Essay

Reviewing works by James Alison, Alistair McFadyen, Andrew Sung Park, Ted Peters, and Solomon Schimmel, the author suggests that the status and (dys)function of the discourse/doctrine of sin highlight tensions between theology and ethics in ways that suggest the character, limits, and promise of religious ethics. This literature commends attention to sin-talk because it helps religious ethicists to render more adequately the dynamics of human agency, sociality, and culture and because it raises questions about the nature and task of theology, faith, and morality. Yet these volumes also indicate that religious ethics should pay more attention to particular sins.

Apologies and Their Import for the Moral Identity of Offenders

Apologies are morally significant with regard to their form, function, and freight. Nevertheless, little work in Christian ethics considers apologies. Philosophical and social scientific literature on apologies focuses on the conditions for making valid apologies and the efficacy of apologies in moral repair but ignores the import of apologies for the offender. This literature is ill equipped to specify the relation between persons and their moral failures, minimizes the difficulty of understanding our own moral failure, does not adequately treat the relationship between explanation and apology, and neglects the way that apology making may comprise a process of moral repair for the offender. Relevant resources in Christian moral tradition can inform and enrich ethical consideration of apologies.