Action Alert!

the birds & the bees

By Diogenes (articles ) | Jun 04, 2005

The New York Times, with the energetic, if uncertain, help of a prominent Catholic moralist, takes a valiant stab at answering the old question.

Avoiding the term embryo merely "avoids a moral question that is very much in the public consciousness," said Lisa Cahill, a theology professor at Boston College. After all, she said, those balls of cells, however created, can develop and if implanted in a woman's womb, could in theory become babies.

In theory?

Sound Off! supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 3 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: frjimc - Jun. 04, 2005 5:22 PM ET USA

    This woman Cahill is so heterodox I have trouble believing that she's employed by a Catholic college. Oh, wait, it's Jesuitical Boston College. Never mind. Actually, the former St. John's Seminary moral theology professor (Walter Woods -- now a pastor in toney Acton) authored a book with her and used her material as a counterpoint to the Church's authentic moral theology. Which is worse -- a heretic at BC or a heretic teaching future priests? Yet nobody made a move to reprove him . .

  • Posted by: Fr. William - Jun. 04, 2005 2:19 PM ET USA

    Indeed, use of the term "in theory" indicates that Miss Cahill is in desperate need of a basic course in human biology and reproduction.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 04, 2005 12:15 PM ET USA

    As both St. Thomas and Aristotle have pointed out, the path to sanity (and ultimately sanctity) requires that you deal with the real world and as it really is. This went out of vogue with Ocham and all of his successors because it required too much thinking. So what good is a mind if you are not really going to use it?