|

|

|

|

|

|

|

| | |

| | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | |

| | | | | | | | | | |

When all else fails, we can always resort to, "I'm only human!" Typically delivered with a shrug of the shoulders, the defence of being only human reminds us of two fundamental things: human imperfection and the contingency of human life.

While it is easy to dismiss concern about innovations in biotechnology as overlooking the possible benefits and focusing on exaggerated fears of a Brave New World dystopia, developments in the sphere of biotechnology do raise some serious questions about the future of the human being. It's not the existence of such questions that troubles me; at the moment, I'm more concerned with the apparent silence of the church.

There are a number of ways to approach the issue; however, a slim volume from Michael Sandel entitled The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering explores territory ripe for Christian reflection and response.

While dealing with a range of issues raised by recent biotech developments, Sandel explores the idea that our desire to master nature may have disastrous social consequences. In doing so he draws our attention to the significance of the giftedness of life and what he identifies as the associated social consequences of this idea. For Sandel the loss of a lively concept of the giftedness of life will erode three key features of our moral landscape: humility, responsibility and solidarity.

The more we master our genetic makeup, the less likely we are to hold on to a sense of humility based on human frailty. Being "only human" may no longer be excuse enough for our shortcomings.

Seeing ourselves as creatures of God allows us to recognise that we are not wholly responsible for the way we are. However, the more control we exert over nature, in terms of "enhancements" towards specific goals, the more responsible we become for who we are. The burden of enhancement could become unbearable.

And what of solidarity with our fellow human beings? What do the most advantaged members of society owe the least advantaged? Perhaps the best answer to this question is indebted to the notion of giftedness. After all, if those attributes that have enabled advantage are regarded as a gift, and not purely the product of successful human endeavour, there is more chance that the more advantaged members of society will share their good fortune with those who have less. However, it is important to acknowledge that even without advances in genetic engineering a robust concept of solidarity is under immense strain in contemporary society.

The bioethics debate is raging, although you could be forgiven for not having noticed. When was the last time you heard a sermon that touched on bioethics? As Sandel's reflections demonstrate, the implications of the biotech future are vast. To understand these implications we will, of course, need to brush up on our science. However, to make a uniquely Christian contribution to the debate we will surely have to reflect deeply and with an energetic imagination on one of our central beliefs, the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Stuart Noble