Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life ed. by Thomas V. Berg, L.C., and Edward J. Furton (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 657 extend it equally to the ecclesial mission of the priesthood, religious life, and indeed each of the faithful. Ouellet insists as a main point on "the sacramental grace of marriage as it grounds the ecclesiality of the couple and the family" (168). No doubt one can relate the ecclesial mission of the spouses to the sacrament of matrimony they have received, though it is perhaps more clearly grounded in their baptism. One undoubtedly can and should speak of the ecclesial mission of the family; but in this case the sacramental ground for this mission would seem to lie in baptism, common to all the family members, rather than in matrimony, peculiar to the spouses. It would not be right to end without drawing attention to what may be a typographical oversight but is nevertheless regrettable: the fact that a translation (198) from the Supplementum to Aquinas's Summa Theologiae identifies the bona of marriage and its ends. This is not consistent with the mind of St. Augustine or St. Thomas. The bona refer to the distinctive characteristics of the conjugal covenant (exclusiveness, permanence, openness to life). To confuse them with its ends (the good of the spouses and the procreation/education of children) makes any logical analysis of marriage impossible. This is all the more important in that no small amount of confusion has been created over recent years, in both theological and canonical writing, by a failure to distinguish properties and ends. Strathmore University Nairobi, Kenya CORMAC BURKE Human Embryo Adoption: Biotechnology, Marriage, and the Right to Life. Edited by THOMAS V. BERG, L.C., and EDWARDJ. FURTON. Foreword by ROBERT P. GEORGE. Philadelphia: The National Catholic Bioethics Center; Thornwood, N.Y.: The Westchester Institute for Ethics & The Human Person, 2006. Pp. 347. $24.95 (paper). ISBN 978-0-935372-50-2. Such an extraordinary book cannot easily be laid down. It contains a wealth of bioethical thinking on a question that the Magisterium of the Church has not yet pronounced upon (as of the writing ofthis review): namely, whether it is licit for a woman, married or not, to rescue by a medical transfer into her womb an abandoned embryo that has been frozen by a process of cryopreservation after in-vitro fertilization. Written by sixteen scholars, this brilliant work takes into account both sides ofthe question and seemingly exhausts all possible arguments. Each of the authors attempt to think with the Church, and argue politely for or against each others' positions. Perhaps the best book review is found in the 658 BOOK REVIEWS preface and the afterword of the book, crafted as much intelligence as the essays themselves. With different nuances, six authors defend the liceity of heterologous embryo transfer (hereafter HET) and six others attempt to show that HET is intrinsically evil. It is taken for granted that this embryo is a human person by both sides, based upon both science and philosophy. The "Afterword" attempts to show why a theologian or counselor cannot impose his view ofthe question on women considering this procedure but must give both views as objectively as possible and let the women (with their husbands' consent, if they are married, or even single women) make the decision themselves. The theologian is not the Magisterium and lacks the authority to advise in its name when the Church's official teacher remains silent. Summarizing both positions of this book, pro and con, is difficult because each author adds some distinctions which are not always commented upon by others. Notwithstanding, these subtleties in turn make the text very rich reading indeed. Hence, I will attempt to give the major viewpoints of both sides of the debate, even at the risk of oversimplification. Those authors in favor of the process of adopting embryos (May, Brugger, Ryan, et al.) begin with the notion that the object of the act is bringing a person into the womb of the mother as a home, and its intent is to save the life of a human being. These persons who are frozen have been placed unjustly in a canister filled with nitrogen, and if someone has the courage and generosity to save them, the moral object is...