Need Help! Organ Donation & IVF

[TotusTuusMaria]

So, I have this Orthodox friend I really admire, and due to some conversations about the differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism it has come to my knowledge that the Russian Orthodox Church allows for IVF if it is between a married couple and there are no embryos left and the couple has their pastors permission. One can read about that here.

My friend is not Russain Orthodox and he insists that he does not agree with the RO on this issue, but nevertheless he continues to defend it because he says he is defending the pastors right to call this decision in the light of the principle of economia (which is also used to apparently defend divorce and remarriage and in some churches contraception).

I see IVF as wrong because 1) A child deserves to be a product of a loving embrace between husband and wife 2) God designed the marital embrace to have two components (unitive and procreative) and IVF attempts to separate those two. Procreative is the only goal and the sexuality is torn asunder by IVF 3) It turns the child into a commodity, something to be produced in a laboratory with doctors and technicians who are a part of the conception process.

I am respectfully frustrated by his defense of this. Here is my frame of thinking (and please correct me if I am misinformed or should perhaps logically change that frame)...

1) IVF is wrong because of the above reasons 

2) Even if all the embryos are treated with dignity (not sure if that is possible, but lets pretend it is for the sake of scenario), there is still the necessity for moral evils (pornography and masturbation) to occur for IVF to take place and I hold to the philosophical premise that one cannot do evil that a good may come. 

He rejects this and says ... 

1) a pastors decision trumps all of this 

2) Sperm can be extracted in other ways? 

3) Sexual ethics are not as important as the Filioque. 

Now... please tell me what you think about all of this, but what I really need help coming up with is a response to this... 

So, one top of all of this he holds that it is immoral to give ones organs to another person. He is comparing the two. He finds it illogical that I should find organ donation to be moral while I find IVF to be immoral. He holds that we are body and soul and if an organ is taken from one baptized person and given to an unbaptized person it would be immoral as the organ has a sacred something about it (he said this way better). I know deep down that all of this is illogical, but I cannot find the words to express why this is different than IVF... probably because I am so frustrated. 

Any help to express why organ donation and IVF cannot be compared would be much appreciated... 

 

Edited November 14, 2015 by TotusTuusMaria

[Maggyie]

I guess I don't understand his argument about organ donation being compared to IVF. Organs have a "sacred something"? I think this attitude only applies in Catholicism to eggs/ovaries and sperm/testicles (although I'm curious what the Church's opinion will be about recent advances in uterine transplants). For whatever reason we think of those as connected to the soul. I wonder does he object to blood donation?

For his #1, a pastors determination can never fully override the teaching of the church, just ask the Orthodox what they would think of a priest saying that gay marriage is ok.

For his #2, yes sperm can be extracted in other ways. For instance the couple have sex and then the sperm is retrieved (trying not to be graphic) but this doesn't solve the church's main problem with IVF which is that conception takes place outside the womb. To be honest the "unitive and procreative" stuff is kind of theological window dressing, although it's true IVF as commonly practiced violates that as well, the real problem is spelled out in the name , IN VITRO (in glass) fertilization.

This is why the church isn't against GIFT (gamete inter fallopian transfer) which is a procedure almost identical to IVF but conception occurs in the Fallopian tube. Children are not to be conceived and "cultivated" outside their mother's womb. 

#3 I don't know enough about the Filiioque arguments to help but his statement on this seems ludicrous as well.