subscribe: Posts | Comments | Email

Prayer Vigil for unborn life in the Vatican

Comments Off on Prayer Vigil for unborn life in the Vatican

The Human Embryo in the Pre-Implantation Phase

Comments Off on The Human Embryo in the Pre-Implantation Phase

Address of Pope Benedict XVI to the 12th General Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life and the congress on “The Human Embryo in the Pre-Implantation Phase”.

Vatican, Clementine Hall

Monday, 27 February 2006

Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate and in the Priesthood,
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,

I address a respectful and cordial greeting to everyone on the occasion of the General Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life and the International Congress on: “The human embryo in the pre-implantation phase”, which has just begun.

I greet in particular Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragàn, President of the Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care, as well as Bishop Elio Sgreccia, President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, whom I thank for the kind words with which he has presented clearly the special interest of the themes treated on this occasion, and I greet Cardinal-elect Carlo Caffarra, a long-standing friend.

Indeed, the study topic chosen for your Assembly, “The human embryo in the pre-implantation phase”, that is, in the very first days subsequent to conception, is an extremely important issue today, both because of the obvious repercussions on philosophical-anthropological and ethical thought, and also because of the prospects applicable in the context of the biomedical and juridical sciences.

It is certainly a fascinating topic, however difficult and demanding it may be, given the delicate nature of the subject under examination and the complexity of the epistemological problems that concern the relationship between the revelation of facts at the level of the experimental sciences and the consequent, necessary anthropological reflection on values.

As it is easy to see, neither Sacred Scripture nor the oldest Christian Tradition can contain any explicit treatment of your theme. St Luke, nevertheless, testifies to the active, though hidden, presence of the two infants.

He recounts the meeting of the Mother of Jesus, who had conceived him in her virginal womb only a few days earlier, with the mother of John the Baptist, who was already in the sixth month of her pregnancy: “When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leapt in her womb” (Lk 1: 41).

St Ambrose comments: Elizabeth “perceived the arrival of Mary, he (John) perceived the arrival of the Lord the woman, the arrival of the Woman, the child, the arrival of the Child” (Comm. in Luc. 2: 19, 22-26).

Even in the absence of explicit teaching on the very first days of life of the unborn child, it is possible to find valuable information in Sacred Scripture that elicits sentiments of admiration and respect for the newly conceived human being, especially in those who, like you, are proposing to study the mystery of human procreation.

The sacred books, in fact, set out to show God’s love for every human being even before he has been formed in his mother’s womb.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you” (Jer 1: 5), God said to the Prophet Jeremiah. And the Psalmist recognizes with gratitude: “You did form my inward parts, you did knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for you are fearful and wonderful. Wonderful are your works! You know me right well” (Ps 139[138]: 13-14).
These words acquire their full, rich meaning when one thinks that God intervenes directly in the creation of the soul of every new human being.

God’s love does not differentiate between the newly conceived infant still in his or her mother’s womb and the child or young person, or the adult and the elderly person. God does not distinguish between them because he sees an impression of his own image and likeness (Gn 1: 26) in each one.
He makes no distinctions because he perceives in all of them a reflection of the face of his Only-begotten Son, whom “he chose… before the foundation of the world…. He destined us in love to be his sons… according to the purpose of his will” (Eph 1: 4-6).

This boundless and almost incomprehensible love of God for the human being reveals the degree to which the human person deserves to be loved in himself, independently of any other consideration – intelligence, beauty, health, youth, integrity, and so forth. In short, human life is always a good, for it “is a manifestation of God in the world, a sign of his presence, a trace of his glory” (Evangelium Vitae, n. 34).

Indeed, the human person has been endowed with a very exalted dignity, which is rooted in the intimate bond that unites him with his Creator: a reflection of God’s own reality shines out in the human person, in every person, whatever the stage or condition of his life.

Therefore, the Magisterium of the Church has constantly proclaimed the sacred and inviolable character of every human life from its conception until its natural end (cf. ibid., n. 57). This moral judgment also applies to the origins of the life of an embryo even before it is implanted in the mother’s womb, which will protect and nourish it for nine months until the moment of birth: “Human life is sacred and inviolable at every moment of existence, including the initial phase which precedes birth” (ibid., n. 61).

I know well, dear scholars, with what sentiments of wonder and profound respect for the human being you carry out your demanding and fruitful work of research precisely on the origin of human life itself it is a mystery on whose significance science will be increasingly able to shed light, even if it will be difficult to decipher it completely.

Indeed, as soon as reason succeeds in overcoming a limit deemed insurmountable, it will be challenged by other limits as yet unknown. Man will always remain a deep and impenetrable enigma.

In the fourth century, St Cyril of Jerusalem already offered the following reflection to the catechumens who were preparing to receive Baptism: “Who prepared the cavity of the womb for the procreation of children? Who breathed life into the inanimate fetus within it? Who knit us together with bones and sinews and clothed us with skin and flesh (cf. Jb 10: 11), and as soon as the child is born, causes the breast to produce an abundance of milk? How is it that the child, in growing, becomes an adolescent, and from an adolescent is transformed into a young man, then an adult and finally an old man, without anyone being able to identify the precise day on which the change occurred?”.

And he concluded: “O Man, you are seeing the Craftsman you are seeing the wise Creator” (Catechesi Battesimale, 9, 15-16).

At the beginning of the third millennium these considerations still apply. They are addressed not so much to the physical or physiological phenomenon as rather to its anthropological and metaphysical significance. We have made enormous headway in our knowledge and have defined more clearly the limits of our ignorance but it always seems too arduous for human intelligence to realize that in looking at creation, we encounter the impression of the Creator.

In fact, those who love the truth, like you, dear scholars, should perceive that research on such profound topics places us in the condition of seeing and, as it were, touching the hand of God. Beyond the limits of experimental methods, beyond the boundaries of the sphere which some call meta-analysis, wherever the perception of the senses no longer suffices or where neither the perception of the senses alone nor scientific verification is possible, begins the adventure of transcendence, the commitment to “go beyond” them.

Dear researchers and experts, I hope you will be more and more successful, not only in examining the reality that is the subject of your endeavour, but also in contemplating it in such a way that, together with your discoveries, questions will arise that lead to discovering in the beauty of creatures a reflection of the Creator.

In this context, I am eager to express my appreciation and gratitude to the Pontifical Academy for Life for its valuable work of “study, formation and information” which benefits the Dicasteries of the Holy See, the local Churches and scholars attentive to what the Church proposes on their terrain of scientific research and on human life in its relations with ethics and law.

Because of the urgency and importance of these problems, I consider the foundation of this Institution by my venerable Predecessor, John Paul II, providential. I therefore desire to express with sincere cordiality to all of you, the personnel and the members of the Pontifical Academy for Life, my closeness and support.

With these sentiments, as I entrust your work to Mary’s protection, I impart the Apostolic Blessing to you all.

© Copyright 2006 – Libreria Editrice Vaticana


Against the Cloning of Human Beings

Comments Off on Against the Cloning of Human Beings

Intervention by the Holy See at the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly of the United Nations on the International Convention against the Cloning of Human Beings.

Address of Msgr. Celestino Migliore

Tuesday, 21 October 2003

Mr. Chairman,

After only a short time since my delegation’s intervention last September 29th, I am taking the floor again, with pleasure, in this current debate on human cloning.

It is indeed encouraging to note that this debate in the Sixth Committee is attracting increased attention and gaining factual contributions from delegations and from various sectors of the civil society represented at the United Nations.

My delegation has presented its views in a position paper, circulated by the Working Group on the occasion of the first session of this debate, a couple weeks ago. During that meeting, my delegation reaffirmed the conviction that only a comprehensive convention on human cloning can address all the related issues and respond to the challenges of the twenty-first century on this topic. Situations that pose grave dangers to human dignity can only be effectively addressed by international agreements that are comprehensive, not partial. While a partial convention might address temporarily some issues related to human cloning, it could generate subsequently greater problems, even more difficult to solve. The most durable solution should therefore be an all-inclusive legal instrument. Moreover, an all-inclusive convention can provide a binding legal instrument that could guide and enable States to formulate appropriate domestic legislation on human cloning.

My delegation has noticed with satisfaction that the time of reflection and meeting of minds of the past two weeks has yielded an increase of co-sponsorhips and support for the proposal put forward by Costa Rica. Also in light of this, my delegation wishes to reaffirm its view that the matter before us can be resolved through the earliest ban on human embryonic cloning.

It must be clear that the position my delegation takes is not, in the first instance, a religious one. It is a position informed by the process of reason that is in turn informed by scientific knowledge.

We have heard a number of statements from a variety of delegations that this is a “complex” issue. We have also heard pleas that we must avoid divisiveness, that we must not impose views, and that we must strive toward a consensus on this item for time is running short. We have also been reminded that the matter of research cloning must be sensitive to diverse belief systems and religious perspectives, cultures, and personal circumstances. It has been stated on several occasions that whilst we must move quickly to ban human reproductive cloning we must, on the contrary, move slowly on human research cloning.

Some delegations have put forward proposals with a view to promote freedom from certain regulation-the freedom from the imposition of a universal obligation against research or therapeutic cloning. The very juridical instrument of a Convention, which can be acceded to or not, I believe, does guarantee such a freedom. However, I would like to mention another important freedom. This, Mr. Chairman, is the freedom for life itself which is the core norm of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. To be free for the protection of human life is the reality underpinning our work here in this Committee.

Mr. Chairman, the science may be complex, but the issue for us is simple and straightforward. The matter of human cloning that involves the creation of human embryos is the story of the beginning of human life-a life that is not just a local issue, not a national issue, not a regional issue. It is above all a universal issue, because an embryo is a human being regardless of its geography. If reproductive cloning of human beings contravenes the law of nature-a principle with which all delegations appear to agree-so does the cloning of the same human embryo that is slated for research purposes. A cloned embryo, which is not destined for implantation into a womb but is created for the sole purpose of extraction of stem cells and other materials, is destined for pre-programmed destruction.

Some would argue, Mr. Chairman, that whilst we must act quickly to ban human reproductive cloning, we must take more time to study all aspects of research cloning-a procedure that intentionally destroys human life. How many human lives are we willing to take in this process? Since the process is unnecessary and would require more than one embryo per patient treated, hundreds of millions of cloned human embryos would be required to treat even one disease, such as diabetes, in any developed nation.

In closing, my delegation wants to remind this distinguished assembly that one of the fundamental missions of the United Nations is to uphold the rights of all human beings. If the United Nations were to ban reproductive cloning without banning cloning for research, this would, for the first time, involve this body in legitimizing something extraordinary: the creation of human beings for the express purpose of destroying them. If human rights are to mean anything, at any time, anywhere in the world, then surely no one can have the right to do such a thing. Human rights flow from the recognition that human beings have an intrinsic dignity that is based on the fact that they are human. Human embryos are human, even if they are cloned. If the rest of us are to have the rights that flow from the recognition of this dignity, then we must act to ban cloning in all its forms.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.


‘Pro-Life’ and the fundamental value of human life

Comments Off on ‘Pro-Life’ and the fundamental value of human life

Angelus Address of Pope John Paul II on Sunday, 3 February 2002, on the occasion of ‘Pro-Life Day’ in Italy.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

1.Today, the first Sunday of February, Italy is celebrating “Pro-Life Day“, a wonderful occasion to reflect on the fundamental value of human life. Recognize means to guarantee the right of the human person to lifelong development. The subject that the bishops proposed this year is: “Recognize Life”. To recognize means, above all, to rediscover with renewed wonder what reason itself and science do not hesitate to call a “mystery”. Life, especially human life, inspires a fundamental question that the Psalmist expresses so well: “What is man that you are mindful of him; the son of man that you care for him?” (Ps 8,5).

Moreover, to recognize means to guarantee to every human being the right to develop according to his own potential, ensuring his inviolability from conception until natural death. No one is master of life; no one has the right to manipulate, oppress or even take life, neither that of others nor his own. Much less can he do so in the name of God, who is the only Lord and the most sincere lover of life. The martyrs themselves do not take their own lives but, in order to remain faithful to God and to his commandments, they allow themselves to be killed.

2. To recognize the value of life implies consistent measures from the legal point of view, especially the protection of human beings who are unable to defend themselves, such as the unborn, the mentally handicapped, and the most critically or terminally ill. In particular, in the study of the human embryo, science has now demonstrated that it is a human individual who possesses his own identity from the moment of fertilization. Therefore, it is logical to call for this identity to be legally recognized, above all, in its fundamental right to life, as the Italian “Pro-Life Movement” demands with praiseworthy initiative.

3. We entrust to the Holy Mother of Christ and of all human beings, the commitment in Italy and the whole world in favour of life, especially, wherever it is despised, marginalized or violated. May Mary teach us to “recognize life” as a mystery and responsibility, remembering that “gloria Dei vivens homo”, “the glory of God is living man” (St Irenaeus).

After the Angelus, the Holy Father greeted in Italian and in English special groups who were present. Here is the English speaking greeting and a further Pro-Life greeting.

I warmly greet the group of families of the Diocese of Rome with the Auxiliary Bishop in charge of family life concerns, and I give a special blessing to the mothers who are expecting a child. I am pleased that in Rome the Pro-Life Day has taken the form of a Diocesan Week for Life and for the Family, at the end of which next Sunday, parishes will reflect on the welcome they give to new families who have come to live in their neighbourhood.

I am particularly pleased with the initiative of some university professors, who these days at the University of Rome “La Sapienza” have been studying in depth the theme “The embryo as patient”, putting into a “declaration” the conclusions they reached about the dignity of the human being in the first phase of his existence.

I welcome all the English-speaking visitors, especially the pilgrims from St Pius the Tenth Parish in Tachikawa, Japan. Upon you and your families I cordially invoke God’s blessings of joy and peace.


The Embryo: A Sign of Contradiction

Comments Off on The Embryo: A Sign of Contradiction

We need only look at the data bank of bioethical and medical writing on the subject to see how this is so. In the years 1970-1974 rather more than five hundred works dealing with the biomedical aspect of the question existed, and there were twenty-seven works of a philosophical-theological character. In the years 1990-1994 there were nearly 4,200 works on the biomedical dimension of the subject and 242 on the philosophical-theological aspect of the debate. The reasons for this are more than evident, and we are not dealing here, as before, with the mere question of abortion, however present, painful and controversial that topic may be.

The subject of abortion has indeed been of major public interest. There was, for example, the special commission of the American Senate which met on 23 April 1981, a commission established by President Reagan and to which Professor Lejeune gave evidence. There have also been a large number of legislative proposals aimed at making abortion lawful in such Latin American coun tries as Peru and Mexico. These proposals have necessarily involved the question of the status of the embryo and the fetus, either directly or indirectly, if only because the life of the fetus and that of the mother have been considered in relation to each other. But at the present day there are two other great questions which have brought bioethics and biolaw to the center of public attention:

a) the question of in vitro procreation which involves the phenomenon of the surplus production of embryos wh ich come to be termed “supernumerary” (a new category of human being) and where a number of abuses take place: freezing, transfers which cause death, experiments, periodic destruction ordered by governments, and the removal of cells;

b) the question of new products, methods and vaccines which are deemed contraceptive, interceptive or anti-pregnancy but which are in reality techniques of abortion because they prevent the implanting or the process of implanting of an ovule which has already been fertiliz ed. Amongst these, reference should be made to the IUD, the day-after pill, the northplant, and vaccines. Evangelium Vitae deals with this whole area at n. 13. It is in relation to these questions, and above all in relation to in vitro procreation, that the highly sophisticated and groundless theories of the pre-embryo (the early embryo of the first fifteen days of life) or the pro-embryo (the embryo of the first eight days of life) have sprung up. The basic biological and philosophical dimensions of these ideas and theories will, I imagine, be examined by those who are to contribute to this round table.
I would like here to draw attention to a quotation from one of the Fathers of the Church, Tertullian: “homo est qui venturus est.”

I would like to draw even greater attention to a passage from the instruction Donum Vitae which is in turn quoted by the encyclical Evangelium Vitae: “From the moment when the ovule is fertilized a life begins which is not that of the father or of the mother but of a new human being which develops of its own accord. It can never be human if it is not human from that moment… At the moment of fertilization is begun the adventure of human life, and each of the great capacities of this life needs time to find its balance and to prepare itself to act.” (Donum Vitae, I,1; Evangelium Vitae, no. 60).

The proof of this statement is to be found above all else in biological facts:

  1. From the moment of fertilization we are in the presence of a new, independent, individualized being which develops in continuous fashion. There is no moment which is less necessary than another (and this is even recognized in the Warnock Report), and each stage is strictly dependent upon the stage which precedes it and which determines it.
  2. Objections based upon the fact of gemination, upon the appearance of the primitive streak and of the nervous system bud, and upon the relevance of the implanting as a decisive event for the conti nuation of development, do not bear in the least upon the individuality of the embryo or the continuity of development: in the process of didymous separation the residual part does not lose the individuality of being human and the new part which separates off has its own new individuality; the appearance of the primitive streak and of the nervous system-like the whole process of organogenesis-are the outcome of this active and individualized development.

The two moments of real discontinuity in the lif e of an individual are to be found in the acts of fertilization and of death. Leaving this reality apart, human and philosophical reason must go beyond functionalist or phenomenologist forms of mentality which approach facts in relation to their operative capacities and with reference to the demonstration of such capacities. Human reason-if, that is, it really seeks explanations and gives explanations for facts-cannot but affirm that authentic explanation which is given to us by the recognition of the exis tence of a special and specific energy which informs and animates the whole of the human being; which vitalizes it and individualizes it. This is none other than a self capable of spirituality, a personal self, which bears within itself all that active capacity which fulfills and realizes itself in the person.

R. Colombo, a molecular biologist, observes: “None of the scientific knowledge available to us allows certain support for the objections raised to the rational nature of the human embryo and the human fetus and its individualization.”
In order to investigate this subject the Academy for Life has set up a multidisciplinary task force which will study all the aspects of the whole question and then publish a work on the subject.

Most Rev. Elio Sgreccia
Vice President of the Pontifical
Council for Life Council for Life


Identity and Status of the Human Embryo

0 comments

The third Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life held in Vatican City, 14-16 February, 1997. At this Assembly papers were presented on the work carried out in the last two years on the subject Identity and Status of the Human Embryo by a study group (Task Force) established by the same Academy and composed of experts in various disciplines connected with this topic.

Biologists, physicians, philosophers, theologians and jurists from different countries, have worked together on the question of the identity and status of the human embryo, which is both complex and of great importance.

This issue has arisen especially in relation to the possibility of manipulating the human embryo as a result of artificial conception and of scientific research on the early stages of the development of the individual life.

The work of the Assembly – faithful to the character of the Academy itself – has developed in the context of an interdisciplinary discussion, which has brought together contributions from a number of different approaches which, in their nature and methods, are demanded by the question at issue.

From a biological standpoint,the formation and the development of the human embryo appears as a continuous, coordinated and gradual process from the time of fertilization, at which time a new human organism is constituted, endowed with the intrinsic capacity to develop by himself into a human adult. The most recent contributions of the biomedical sciences offer further valuable empirical evidence for substantiating the individuality and developmental continuity of the embryo. To speak of a pre-embryo thus is an incorrect interpretation of the biological data.

Judgement – as an act of the human mind – on the personal nature of the human embryo springs necessarily from the evidence of the biological datum which implies the recognition of the presence of a human being’s with an intrinsic active capacity for development, and not a mere possibility of life.

The ethical exigency of respect and care for the life and integrity of the embryo, demanded by the presence of human being is motivated by a unitary conception of man (“Corpore et anima unus”), whose personal dignity must be recognized from the beginning of his physical existence.

The theological perspective, beginning with the light which revelation sheds on the meaning of a human life and on the dignity of the person, supports and sustains human reason in regard to these conclusions, without in any way diminishing the validity of contributions based on rational evidence. Therefore the duty of respecting the human embryo as a human person derives from the reality of the matter and from the force of rational argumentation, and not exclusively from a position of faith.

From the juridical point of view, the core of the debate on the protection of the human embryo does not involve identifying earlier or later indices of “humanity” which appear after insemination, but consists rather in the recognition fundamental human rights by virtue of the presence of a human being. Above all, the righit to life and to physical integrity from the first moment of existence, in keeping with the principle of equality, must be respected.

In this great challenge of defending the life and dignity of the human embryo, special commitment is needed on the part of families, and particularly parents, as well as that of the scientific community. The woman is the first person called to welcome and nourish in love and solicitous dedication the human being who has been conceived in her womb. The irreplaceable role of a guardian of human life entrusted to a woman’s motherhood must be encouraged and actively supported in civil society.

The Assembly hopes that its own contribution will serve as an occasion for reflection and dialogue with all those who understand that the expanding frontiers of civilization and the authentic progress of society rest on the unconditional defence of human life.


Identity and Status of the Human Embryo

Comments Off on Identity and Status of the Human Embryo

Address of Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy for Life at the opening of the Congress on “Identity and Status of the Human Embryo”.

Friday, 14 February 1997

Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate,
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,

1. I am pleased to extend my cordial greetings to you, dear Members of the Pontifical Academy for Life, who have gathered for your third general assembly. I especially thank the President, Prof. Juan de Dios Vial Correa, for the friendly words he has just addressed to me on behalf of you all.

I know that some of you, ordinary members, are present for the first time, since you have only recently been appointed. Likewise the corresponding members, who are taking part in this meeting for the first time, also serve in the life of the Academy as a valuable link with society. I extend my welcome to all, receiving you as a distinguished community of intellectuals at the service of life.

First of all I would like to express my satisfaction with the activity that the Academy has carried out in this short period since its foundation: I would like especially to stress the valuable works that have already been published as a commentary on the Encyclical Evangelium vitae, and the active collaboration offered to the various dicasteries for courses and study conventions on the contents of both the Encyclical and other pronouncements by the Magisterium in the delicate area of life.

2. The theme that you chose for this assembly — “Identity and Status of the Human Embryo” — with the approach of the 10th anniversary of the Instruction Donum vitae, published on 22 February 1987, is also in line with your commitment and today has a particular cultural and political relevance.

In fact, it is first of all a question of reaffirming that “the human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception; and therefore from that same moment his rights as a person must be recognized, among which in the first place is the inviolable right of every innocent human to life” (Donum vitae, I, 1). Such statements, solemnly restated in the Encyclical Evangelium vitae, are entrusted to the conscience of humanity and are increasingly accepted even in the areas of scientific and philosophical research.

Appropriately during these days you have tried to clarify further the misunderstandings in the modern cultural context stemming from preconceptions of a philosophical and epistemological nature which cast doubt on the very foundations of knowledge, especially in the field of moral values. In fact the truth about the human person must be freed from every possible exploitation, reductionism or ideology, in order to guarantee full and scrupulous respect for the dignity of every human being from the first moments of his existence.

3. How can we fail to recognize that our age is unfortunately witnessing an unprecedented and almost unimaginable massacre of innocent human beings, which many States have legally endorsed? How many times has the Church’s voice, raised in defence of these human beings, gone unheard! And how many times, unfortunately, from other parts has what is an aberrant crime against the most defenceless of human beings been presented as a right and sign of civilization!

But the historic and pressing moment has come to take a decisive step for civilization and the authentic welfare of peoples: the necessary step to reclaim the full human dignity and the right to life of every human being from the first instant of life and throughout the whole prenatal stage. This objective, to restore human dignity to prenatal life, demands a joint and unbiased effort of interdisciplinary reflection, together with an indispensable renewal of law and politics.

When this journey has begun, it will mark the beginning of a new stage of civilization for future humanity, the humanity of the third millennium.

4. Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, it is quite clear how important is the responsibility of intellectuals in their task of conducting research in this field. It is a matter of restoring legal protection to specific areas of human existence, first and foremost that of prenatal life.

On this restoration, which is the victory of truth, the moral good and rights, depends the success of the defense of human life in its other more fragile moments such as its final phase, illness and handicap. Nor should it be forgotten that the preservation of peace and even the protection of the environment presuppose, by logical coherence, the respect and defence of life from the very first moment until its natural end.

5. The Pontifical Academy for Life, which I sincerely thank for the service it is rendering to life, has the duty of contributing to a deeper awareness of the value of this basic good, especially through dialogue with experts in the biomedical, legal and moral sciences. To achieve this goal, the work of your study and research community will have to rely on an intense life ad intra, characterized by exchange and multidisciplinary scholarly collaboration. It will thus be able to offer ad extra, in the world of culture and society, beneficial encouragement and worthwhile contributions for an authentic renewal of society.

Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, the generous beginning of your activity reassures us in this hope. I wish here to encourage you to continue on the path you have taken, in memory of the praiseworthy insight of your first President, Prof. Lejeune, that valiant and tireless defender of human life.

The Church today feels the historical need to protect life for the good of man and of civilization. I am convinced that future generations will be grateful to her for having so firmly opposed the many manifestations of the culture of death and every form of diregard for human life.

May God bless your every effort and may the Blessed Virgin, the Mother of Christ, the Way, the Truth and the Life, make your research fruitful. In testimony to the interest with which I follow your activity, I willingly impart a special Apostolic Blessing to you all.

© Copyright 1997 – Libreria Editrice Vaticana


Next Entries »