About his book titled Biotechnology, Bioethics, Biotheology, which was recently published, the Metropolitan of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlasiou, Mr. Hierotheos, speaks to “Orthodox Truth” (2/2/26). In the book, in addition to the bioethical and biotheological issue, a brief update is given on the developments in the field of biotechnology and the problems that arise.
In the interview that follows, the Metropolitan of Nafpaktos refers, among other things, to the prospects for dialogue between the Church and Science, to the research work of scientists as well as to the searches of young people regarding Bioethics. He particularly emphasizes that “Orthodox Theology must go beyond humanistic Bioethics, which connects Humanism with the Enlightenment and globalization, and offer an Orthodox Biotheology.”
In the interview that follows, the Metropolitan of Nafpaktos refers, among other things, to the prospects for dialogue between the Church and Science, to the research work of scientists as well as to the searches of young people regarding Bioethics. He particularly emphasizes that “Orthodox Theology must go beyond humanistic Bioethics, which connects Humanism with the Enlightenment and globalization, and offer an Orthodox Biotheology.”
QUESTION: Beginning this interview, I would like to ask to what extent today’s conditions favor the development of a fruitful dialogue between the Church and those who serve in the fields of medicine and technology.
ANSWER: There must always be a fruitful dialogue between the Church and the sciences—especially with medicine and technology—because this will bring benefit to human beings. Through her theology, the Church has always been in dialogue with the world; this is her ministry, so that she may communicate with people. The Church is primarily concerned with man, toward whom she must exercise pastoral care. The work of the Church is twofold: to confess faith in Christ and to shepherd man for his salvation. This is something that must take place especially today in relation to medicine and technology, the so-called biotechnology, in which molecular biology meets genetic engineering. This dialogue must indeed be, as you say, fruitful, and I know that the conditions of our time favor it, since we have scientists who seek such dialogue, as well as theologians who know this subject—namely, who are familiar both with Orthodox theology and with the contemporary quests of scientists.
QUESTION: Do you agree with those who maintain that limits should be set on the research pursuits of science?
ANSWER: By its nature, science is concerned with the investigation of particular scientific data and has the ability to solve various problems, to identify new data, and to seek the discovery of other mysteries that exist in the sensible world. Research attracts scientists. However, scientists themselves understand that limits must be set on their research, because there is the danger that, instead of bringing benefit to human beings and the environment, it may cause harm that could even be irreversible. Thus, from the 1970s onward, bioethical concerns arose in the West and subsequently developed into an academic discipline, the so-called Bioethics, which was linked with the humanities in order to help people. In this way, the bioethics of biomedicine and biotechnology must make use of knowledge derived from philosophy, theology, law, politics, as well as from the experience we have in the educational and social spheres in which people live.
QUESTION: Are there areas in the field of the sciences which, in the course of their development, provoke awe and questions in the global community, making it difficult for people to understand their achievements?
ANSWER: Science is involved with many areas of life that concern the world and people, such as astronomy, physics, chemistry, biomedicine, and others. Particularly in biotechnology there are cases that inspire awe and fear for human life. There is frequent reference to the “age of biotechnology” (Jeremy Rifkin), during which recombination of segments of DNA takes place, and even partial reprogramming of the genetic code of living organisms, in order to serve various economic needs and human desires. Thus, some scientists display a tendency to “reconstruct the world,” to carry out a second “Creation,” presenting scientists “as gods,” within the perspective of a eugenic and euthanistic mentality of our age. This provokes fear for human life and for the environment in which it lives — not only among us, but also among prudent scientists.
QUESTION: Are there areas in the sciences whose evolutionary course arouses your interest and your desire to follow their progress closely?
ANSWER: I am a theologian and a shepherd; I have not studied other sciences. Nevertheless, within the framework of my pastoral ministry, I always try to observe the development of contemporary sciences in order to help people. That is, the very people whom I seek to help present me with many problems, which I attempt to investigate. Just as scientists themselves set limits on their research and the science of bioethics developed, so in me there arose an interest in interpreting these contemporary data, and thus I arrived at biotheology. Within this framework, I became particularly involved with the results of biomedical science and digital technology. As the saying goes, “The load awakens the muleteer.” Moreover, Saint Nektarios, Bishop of Pentapolis, writes in his book Pastoral Theology that the clergyman — especially the bishop — must possess various encyclopedic and scientific forms of knowledge, must be educated and widely learned, and must be a teacher of both the wise and the simple, in order to help the members of his flock by addressing the questions that arise from a theological perspective, as the great Fathers of the Church did in their own time. I recall Saint Basil the Great and Saint Gregory the Theologian.
QUESTION: Given that in the past you have taught the course of Bioethics to students of the Theological School of Balamand in Lebanon, what conclusions have you reached regarding the concerns of young people on this subject?
ANSWER: Indeed, as you note, I was invited to teach the courses “Orthodox Ethics” and “Bioethics” to students of the Orthodox Theological School of Lebanon, “Saint John of Damascus,” and thus I was challenged to study medical topics as well. One cannot teach about the beginning of life (cloning, assisted medical reproduction), the prolongation of life (cellular and gene therapies, transplants), or the end of biological life (euthanasia), without having some basic knowledge of medical science. Thus arose the book Bioethics and Biotheology, and the more recent book Biotechnology, Bioethics, and Biotheology, which I co-authored with the nuclear physician Tryphon Spyridonidis. This and other books attracted the interest of the Medical School of the University of Ioannina, which honored me with the title of honorary doctor. This long-term engagement with bioethical issues led me to the conclusion that one cannot communicate with young people without possessing such contemporary knowledge. Young people are concerned with issues of biotechnology and digital technology. Of course, our ultimate goal is to reach the Creator of the world, God, and to help young people in their existential quests — beyond the scientific ones — and to encounter God in the Person of Christ. We see this, for example, in the renowned geneticist Francis Collins, who, while studying the human genome, moved from agnosticism to faith in God.
QUESTION: Every day we learn about new medical methods, new drugs, and new technological developments that are called to offer their services to humanity by improving life. Do all of these constitute yet another threat, reinforcing the materialistic character of modern humanity?
ANSWER: Indeed, what you describe is observed: a new materialistic mentality is being created in modern humanity, whereby people view things only externally — the improvement of biological life, the extension of life, or even “digital immortality” — thus creating the so-called “one-dimensional human being.” Fortunately, however, in our time existential philosophy and psychology are also developing, which approach matters more inwardly and seek the meaning of life. Precisely toward this aim — the meaning of life — Orthodox theology is directed. For this reason, we clergy and theologians bear great responsibility in our time, beyond liturgical services, to offer the wealth of our theological tradition to modern humanity, so that people may not remain only within the sensible and bodily-biological world, but may also advance toward the theological meaning of life. Orthodox theology, however, must go beyond humanistic bioethics — which links humanism with the Enlightenment and globalization — and offer Orthodox biotheology. We must not ignore the contemporary world, but enter into Orthodox dialogue with it, in order to fertilize it through Orthodox ecclesiastical theology.
QUESTION: Do you believe that in the coming period changes should be initiated in the code governing the practice of the medical profession and medical ethics in Greece?
ANSWER: In the past I had the honor of participating in a committee of the Ministry of Health for the drafting of the Code of Medical Ethics, and I realized how difficult it is for Orthodox theological principles to be incorporated into such codes, which refer to general principles. As I noted earlier, a eugenic and euthanistic mentality is widely prevalent in our time, and this is addressed humanistically, from the perspective of modernity and post-modernity. Since then, I have not followed developments in the area of the code governing medical practice. I believe, however, that physicians and the State, in addition to the science of bioethics and the humanistic principles defined by various global or European declarations, must take into account contemporary existential philosophy and psychology — and above all Orthodox theology — which respond to these eternal inner needs of the human person: the hunger and thirst for God and for eternal life. Man is not merely a biological animal, but a “deified living being,” according to Saint Gregory the Theologian. This is necessary because there are many Orthodox physicians who wish to apply Orthodox principles and should not be compelled by laws and codes to perform actions that violate their conscience.
Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.
