Editorial: Bioethics and Politics: The Axing of the Bioethics Council, Toi te Taiao
Michael McCabe
Issue 27, April 2009
The recent axing of the Bioethics Council – Toi te Taiao – by the National Government is a matter of regret and real concern.
Synthetic Life: Playing God? No, Not Yet.
John France
Issue 31, August 2010
The physical and biological characteristics of nearly all living organisms are largely determined by the genes possessed through inheritance from both parents, though some simple organisms including most bacteria have only a single parent. Genes consist of paired strands of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) linked in a coiled double helix and are commonly packaged in structures called chromosomes and located in the nucleus of a cell. Together, they constitute the genome of the individual. Recently, J. Craig Venter (a genome researcher) and his 23 collaborators reported the design, synthesis and assembly of a new subspecies of the bacterium Mycoplasma mycoides. This remarkable achievement, attracting attention worldwide, was the first time an organism had come into being with an artificial genome in place of an inherited one, that is, it was a synthetic life form. In their paper in the May 20th online issue of Sciencexpress, the researchers describe how they created a cell containing a chromosomal genetic system in which the DNA had been chemically synthesized in sequences designed by a computer programme based on published gene sequences of M. mycoides. This cell exhibited the expected observable characteristics (phenotype) and was capable of continuous self-replication.
"It's life Jim but not as we know it."
Rev Dr Graham O'Brien - On behalf of the Interchurch Bioethics Council
Issue 31, August 2010
In May 2010 scientists at the J. Craig Venter Institute announced the creation of the first self-replicating synthetic bacterial cell, however claims that the Venter team had created new life are an over exaggeration (CNN: "Scientists Create a Living Organism.") What the scientists have done is to make a synthetic copy of a bacterial genome - the 1.08 million base pair chromosome of a modified Mycoplasma mycoides - and insert this into another bacterium Mycoplasma capricolum , resulting in a self-replicating cell controlled solely by the synthetic genome - effectively turning Mycoplasma capricolum into Mycoplasma mycoides. The result is the culmination of 15 years of research and marks a significant development in our understanding of how DNA controls cellular growth and also represents the construction of the largest synthetic molecule of a defined structure.
"God, meet Synthia. Synthia, this is God."
John Kleinsman
Issue 31, August 2010
The creation of the first life form with a totally synthetic genome, affectionately dubbed "Synthia," has generated huge interest. While some would claim that J. Craig Venter and his team have mimicked the creation of life rather than originating something new, there is no doubt that it represents, as Julian Savulescu puts it, "a step towards something more controversial: [the] creation of living beings with capacities and natures that could never have naturally evolved." [1] Savulescu has also noted that while the potential for good is real and significant, even though far in the future, "the risks are also unparalleled." [2]
Biofuels - a burning issue
Martin de Jong
Issue 32, November 2010
Biofuels are being embraced worldwide as a renewable alternative to finite fossil fuels, while also generating less carbon emissions than conventional fuels. But is the enthusiasm misguided – and what principles should be borne in mind when considering their production and use? Production of some biofuels may be more polluting than fossil fuels, when considering greenhouse gas emissions over the complete production cycle. There is also clear evidence that large-scale conversion of land to grow fuel crops has impacted food prices and availability, and is affecting people's livelihoods and way of life in significant parts of the world.
Book Review - Judgement day: The struggle for life on earth
Susan Wilson offers a thoughtful critique of Paul Collin's new book, Judgement day: The struggle for life on earth, in which he reflects on human responsibility for the many ecological crises we face.
Submission to the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification
Issue 2, November 2000
The submission of the New Zealand Catholic Bishops' Conference to the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification.
Christianity and the ecological crisis: ‘lament, hope and action’
Jonathan Boston
The following article is based on a sermon given by the writer on Sunday 7 October 2012 as part of the conference Christianity and the Ecological Crisis: Lament, Hope and Action.
Humanity is blessed to inhabit a planet of exquisite beauty, diversity, richness and wonder; a planet set within a cosmos of extraordinary scale, grandeur, splendor and mystery. Unsurprisingly, the first chapter of Genesis culminates with the firm proclamation that "God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good" (Gen. 1:31). Yet the nature of this goodness needs clarification. After all, creation is ongoing; it is in the process of becoming; it is not yet finished. New stars continue to be born; species continue to evolve. Further, cosmologists believe that the universe of which we are part will eventually end, possibly collapsing in upon itself in a so-called 'big crunch'.
In what sense, then, is God's creation ‘very good’? Saint Irenaeus of Lyons suggests we should think of goodness in terms of "that which is destined for perfection" (Gunton, 1998). From this perspective, the assessment of creation as being "very good" refers to the point when temporal history as we know it ends and the cosmos is renewed and redeemed by God - not replaced or done away with, incidentally. This belief in the eventual transformation of creation constitutes what the theologian Richard Bauckham (2012) refers to as our "ultimate hope". The self-giving of Christ and his bodily resurrection are signs of God’s deep concern with the material world and his commitment to its eventual transfiguration.
Whereas St. Paul talked of the ‘groaning’ of creation, today, viewed through the lens of evolutionary biology we would say that the natural world is characterised by competition, predation, violence and pain. Put bluntly, God's evolving creation is deeply ambiguous. There is great majesty, orderliness, cooperation, interdependence, productivity and thriving. Yet there is also extraordinary wastefulness, indifference, randomness, selfishness and brutality. The God who made this universe has made a world where there is the potential for colossal destruction and enormous harm.
Over the past 540 million years we know of at least five mass extinction events, that is, events where more than 50% of this planet's species were destroyed. We are now in the midst of a sixth great extinction event that is gathering pace. Whole ecosystems are being destroyed; whole ways of being lost forever. But what makes this latest mass extinction different from those of previous epochs is the cause. The reason lies not in massive volcanic activity or asteroid impacts, but the willful actions of human beings.
We are devastating the great tropical rain forests. We are polluting the waterways, lakes and oceans. We are destocking the oceans of fish. We are changing the chemistry of the atmosphere and warming the planet. We are eroding the fertility of our soils. We are draining the Earth of its precious supplies of fossil water and fossil fuels. We are borrowing from the future and leaving our grandchildren a dreadful legacy in the form of a huge ecological debt.
These claims are the studied conclusions of thousands of the world's best scientists. Thus far, their concerted pleas for humanity to change its ways have largely gone unheeded. As a result, the ecological crisis is deepening. Even with radical policy changes now, the legacy of the environmental damage we have wrought will be long and bitter. Much harm is now unstoppable. In short, we are living beyond our means.
To give but one example: recent scientific evidence suggests that global warming will cause the sea level to rise by as much as a metre by the end of this century, and many more metres in subsequent centuries. There is little we can now do to prevent this. Yet even a rise of one metre could displace over 150 million people globally.
There is thus much to lament. There is a sobering irony in the fact that the species who is wreaking such havoc is one who bears the image of God and ranks as the crowning pinnacle of this planet's 4.5 billion year journey. What might constitute a proper Christian response? Let me offer six quick reflections.
First, as Christians we must acknowledge the disturbing challenges that confront us. Humanity has the potential to eliminate much of the life on this planet - possibly all life. God has given us this remarkable freedom either to destroy or affirm His creation. There is neither place for complacency nor room for denial, avoidance, evasion or escapism. The path we follow should be informed by the best available evidence and guided by wisdom, prudence and precaution.
Second, we must avoid being overwhelmed by the magnitude of the task ahead or paralysed by fear, foreboding or depression. We need to be constantly reminded of Jesus' comforting words when his disciples were fearful or anxious: “Take courage, it is I; do not be afraid” (Matthew 14:27). God has not abandoned us. "Behold," Jesus said, "I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:20).
Third, we should not be presumptuous. We should not expect God to save us from our folly. We cannot lay waste to countless ecosystems or destabilise the planet's climate system without suffering the consequences. God calls us to exercise intelligent, responsible stewardship, to protect the natural order.
Fourth, we should avoid an improper faith in the power of technology to save us from the perils that lie ahead. We cannot change the basic laws of nature. There are real biophysical limits within which we must live. We who are Christians should not delay in making the required policy and lifestyle changes on the basis that ‘something will turn up’ or that ‘science will save us’. We have no right to pass the buck to future generations.
Fifth, the unfolding ecological crisis should not be welcomed - whether on the basis that it signals the imminent return of Christ or on the grounds that previous mass extinctions have led, albeit only after millions of years, to a new flowering in the long evolutionary journey of our biosphere. There is nothing good about destroying countless species or degrading this planet's life-support systems. It needs to be stopped.
Finally, our efforts to conserve, heal and restore God's creation will never be in vain. Nor should we value our efforts simply on the basis of the progress, or lack thereof, that we can see. Doing what is right is important and valuable, regardless of the apparent outcome. When Paul remarks that "our labour in the Lord will not be in vain" (1 Cor 15:58), he does not imply that our strivings will inevitably lead to an improvement in our current circumstances. Rather, that they “will have effects that will be preserved in the new creation" (Bauckham, 2012).
This is where faith is crucial. We worship a God who has entered our history, embraced the life of humanity, and triumphed over the forces of darkness. This God is faithful and full of grace. Hence, as Rowan Williams has put it, "we have to say, as believers, that the possibility of life is never exhausted within creation: there is always a future.
The ecological crisis today confronts each of us with a choice. What kind of legacy will we leave for future generations? Will we live in a way that honours rather than threatens the planet? Will we show a reverence for the whole of life and respond to God's summons to demonstrate responsibility? Or will we continue to create a scarred and impoverished planetary wasteland? God has given us this choice.
A full transcript of the original sermon with complete references is available on request.
Jonathan Boston is Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies in the School of Government at the Victoria University of Wellington.
References:
Bauckham, R. (2012) "Ecological Hope in Crisis?" John Ray Initiative, JRI Briefing Paper No. 23.
Gunton, C. (1998) The Triune Creator: A Historical and Systematic Study (Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press).
Williams, R. (2009) "The Climate Crisis: Fashioning a Christian Response", 13 October.