# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1998_S350 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 348 THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS our work will be to discipline our reason by reference to the guidance pro- vided in God’s Word.* Procreative Ethics Many of the most difficult ethical problems in contemporary life are related to human procreation, to questions about giving birth, and to the technological means that may be used to bring about or prevent new life. Many moral questions hover around the problems of infertility, technologi- cal reproduction, contraception and abortion. How much should children matter to a marriage? Of what moral significance is the biological connection between parent and child? What medical techniques may be permissibly used in pursuit of conception? Are some means of gaining children morally superior to others? In a hungry world how much may couples justifiably spend in pursuit of children? Is voluntary childlessness a responsible choice for married life? Contemporary methods of genetic screening as well as current adop- tion practices raise questions about choices parents might wish to make concerning their child's characteristics and makeup. If genetic screening, can provide vital information at the earliest stage of conception, how should Christian parents use that information? Should prospective parents be willing to accept any available adoptive child or may they rightly spec- ify some characteristics that they wish the child to have and others that they wish the child not to have? Questions such as these regularly face Christians in their daily lives. Christian communities should be prepared to help people relate these questions to the biblical faith. We intend in this document to provide a resource that can be read and discussed by study groups within a congre- gation. We also intend to help Christians who work their way through this document to practice and reflect on what is involved in biblically disci- plined moral reasoning. The questions we will be addressing are not easi- ly answered, and they sometimes are so perplexing that they leave Chris- tians in disagreement concerning God's will. For this reason attention will be given not simply to arriving at one set of answers. Instead, we will also ’ Reflection on the nature of human reason has led to the development of qumerous accounts of reason’s tasks and capabilities. This document draws on an account called the ~interrogative model” of reasoning. This account has been developed over the last several decades by Jaakko Hintikka and his associates, The interrogative model has been used for this document both because it is simple and because it seems well suited for highbghting ways in which human reasoning can be disaphned by biblical faith. Two resources that pro: vide background information concerning the interrogative model are Jaakko Hintikka and James Bachman, What If . ? Toward Excellence in Reasoning (Mountain View, CA: Mayheld Publishing Company, 1991), and James Bachman, “The Appeal to Authority,” in Fallacies Classical and Contemporary Readings, ed. Robert C. Pinto and Hans V Hansen (University Park, Penn.: Pennsylvania State University Press. 1995). 5 CASE 1: CHOOSING AGAINST CHILDLESSNESS We begin with a case based on questions originally raised in a local congregation. Harriet teaches fifth grade in a Lutheran school. She and her husband Albert have been married for 10 years and have two children. They have become close friends with James and Rachel, a childless couple in their congregation. After many months of conversation and study, the four have gradually settled upon a plan for Harnet to be a nonpaid surrogate moth- er for the child that James and Rachel so much desire Harmiet would be artificially inseminated with James’ sperm, and the baby would be legally adopted by James and Rachel. Because all four are active members of the congregation, and because Harriet’s vocation is teaching at the Lutheran school, Harriet went to Pas- tor Amold to discuss the plan with him. They quickly agreed to pursue the issues further in a conversation involving both couples, Pastor Arnold, an elder, and two other members of the church council Initial Observations Perhaps you already have a firm opinion concerning the proposal that Harriet serve as a surrogate to help James and Rachel have a child. Perhaps your study group is also reasonably well agreed in what to think about this plan. On the other hand, some of you may be perplexed as to just what to think at this point. Regardless of your own opinions, we ask you to imagine for a time that you find yourself in a situation in which members of your congrega- tion are not initially in agreement about what choices are right or wrong in this case. Then, assuming there is some perplexity and disagreement, spend some time writing down and communicating to each other a list of steps that might be taken to help your group or congregation think through this case. What did you come up with? We imagine that a number of possible steps came to mind, perhaps such as these: © Seeking to learn more about how and why the two couples settled on this choice. explore how thoughtful Christians can become more practiced and adept at biblically disciplined moral reasoning. In this way we will be able to understand the significance of disagreements that we may have and to see how we can continue to reason together concerning God’s guidance. We will also be in a position to take up related questions or new issues that are not directly addressed in this document. Reflection on our disagreements also serves us well by reminding us that right reasoning is not the key to righteousness before God. In this, as in all endeavors of life, even our best efforts are in need of Christ’s redemp- tion. We give thanks that our righteousness before God is given freely by grace through faith. One way of living out our thanks is by attending seri- ously to the ways in which God may be guiding us in the midst of the dif- ficult choices that confront us in life. * Praying together for God’s guidance, especially when the conver- sations are becoming difficult or stressful. * Seeking biblical materials that may be relevant to the case. Asking if other Lutheran congregations or our Synod or its theolo- gians have offered any advice about nonpaid surrogacy by a friend for friends. © Looking for relevant discussions of this matter among Christians in other confessional communities. * Examining discussions of surrogacy found in medical, psychologi- cal, sociological, legal, philosophical, and other literature. © Raising questions about the effect of this choice on children in the school and on the congregation. * Exploring your own moral and ethical insights / principles /intu- itions concerning this set of choices. DISCIPLINED CHAOS‘ This list of possible steps to follow in considering this case is by no means exhaustive, but it illustrates what is needed when we begin to address a difficult and perplexing issue. Notice what happens when peo- ple patiently listen to each other in the first phase of reflection on a prob- lem. People typically begin to suggest lines of reasoning that they think ought to be considered. What first emerges in their responses can be called disciplined chaos. Thoughtful people throw out a number of possibilities and some tentative proposals. They try to look at the problem from several dif- ferent perspectives. Disciplined chaos is needed in the first phase of practical reasoning concerning a challenging problem. We know from experience that our problem-solving skills are enhanced when we permit some disorder to enter into our initial approach to a puzzle. We are troubled when people try to cut through the disorder too quickly, insisting on their own preferred shortcut to a solution. Some suggest that religious communities are espe- cially tempted to insist on shortcuts, but impatience with disorder is a uni- versal phenomenon. The initial phase of disciplined chaos more often than not takes us down some blind alleys and leads us to some information that turns out not to be relevant or useful. We can become anxious about the seeming, “chaos” of information we are receiving. We need to have confidence that the initial overload of information will gradually be sorted out into what is significant “The word chaos refers here to the process of “brainstorming,” which Webster's Colle- giate Dictionary (10th edition) defines as “a group problem-solving technique that involves the spontaneous contribution of ideas from all members of the group.” 8