Versión de HTML Básico
/(>
Stanley J. Grenz
Some ethicists argue that these various practices produce an adulterous
situation, in that the sperm of the husband is not combined with the egg of
the wife. Although there is a sense in which this suggestion poses an impor
tant ethical question, the charge of adultery as generally proposed offers an
oversimplified prognosis of the ethical problem involved. The technological
combining of sperm and egg, regardless of their source, does not entail adul
tery, simply because neither the intent to be unfaithful to one’s marital vows
nor the act of intercourse is present.
On another level, however, the charge of adultery does raise a difficulty
inherent in all technological processes that employ sperm or egg from some
one other than the marital partners. Each of these methods introduces a
third party not directly into the marriage bond itself (as in adultery), but into
the procreative process. Does this introduction of another person in the pro-
creative process constitute a violation of the marital covenant? An affirma
tive response to this question was succinctly articulated by the 1987 Vatican
statement: “The fidelity of the spouses in the unity of marriage involves
reciprocal respect of their right to become a father and a mother only
through each other.”
The perspective offered by Judeo-Christian history on this issue is not
totally unambiguous. The ancient Hebrews were characterized by a double
standard. They viewed marriage as giving to the husband exclusive rights to
his wife in this regard, but the exclusiveness was not reciprocated. Polygamy
was practiced in the Old Testament era, but not polyandry. The church,
however, has rejected this double standard. By appeal to various sources, not
the least of which is the creation story in Genesis 2, it has consistently cham
pioned the practice of monogamy. In Christian history, it became simply
assumed that the marriage covenant means that each of the spouses may
become father or mother only through the other.
Yet, the witness of history does not confirm the Vatican statement with
out further consideration, for there is a sense in which the contemporary sit
uation lacks historical precedence. Once the church came to adopt monog
amy, the only way in which a married person could become a parent apart
from one’s spouse was through adultery. This link to adultery, perhaps
more than any other consideration, led to the viewpoint reflected in
Donum
vitae.
Now, however, procreation can occur within the context of marriage
yet apart from the union of the sperm and egg from the marriage partners
without thereby introducing either the intent or the act of adultery. The
only way to find technological procreation to be adulterous is to define adul
tery not as the willful violation of the covenant of sexual faithfulness, but as
the violation of the assumed right of each spouse to become parent only
through the other.
Contrary to the language of the Vatican statement, however, the New
Testament does not emphasize rights. Instead, it speaks of the willingness to