The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Calling MD's and Theologians

I am doing an internship in medical illustration at the veterinary school here. My mentor, a practicing Roman Catholic gentleman, has a scholarly interest in the history of veterinary medicine, and is himself an accomplished illustrator.

I had asked him about what relevant things I might have a look at if we ever go to Chicago. He'd suggested the "Bodyworlds" exhibit; whereupon I told him I really didn't know how I felt about that ethically. It opened up a great discussion. One thing I had been wondering about was the question of when it was that the whole idea of human gross dissection became an acceptable practice in medical training. I know it used to be frowned upon, but my guess is that right around the time of Vesalius and the Renaissance that frown began to disappear, and must have been gone entirely by the time of the Enlightenment. Telling me that that was a question that had long interested him as well, he thought that the matter had been largely settled by the Pope of the time.

One of these days I may have to do a gross human anatomy. The idea does not thrill me even though I have attended veterinary animal postmortems from which I have learned much. I'm wondering if anyone can point me to any resources on how the Reformed divines managed this problem.

Here is an excerpte of an email exchange between my mentor and me:

Mentor: (regarding von Hagan's "BodyWorlds" exhibit) There are a couple of groups of mid-west medical illustrators (e.g., the
Illinois alumni group) that are going to the Chicago BodyWorlds Exhibit around
this time. They have arranged special group tours with dinners afterwards. It
runs through Labor Day if you change your mind.

http://www.bodyworlds.com/en/pages/ausstellung_usa.asp

I have the catalog from the London exhibit I saw three years ago in my office
at School. You are welcome to it, unless Dr. Hill (and/or Coppoc) has not
returned it. It should be somewhere on that rolling table in my office. The
guy actually sells books and brochures at this thing. Most of the email on the
AMI's listserve indicates that medical illustrators think this exhibit is just
fantastic. Butb few of them would have the intellect to go much further beyond
the surface of what interests them.

I'm not sure what to think? I do think von Hagens is an operator, and has
marketed this whole thing. If he's crazy he's crazy like a fox...."

My reply:

"This issue is one of those things that needs a lot of time and discussion with a variety of different input. I don't know if I have the time to make an in-depth study of the ethics involved in the manner that the subject deserves, but I will think on how such a thing might be approached.

My initial thoughts (as a Calvinist who believes in the authority and infallibility of Scripture) are only very rudimentary at this point:

First, the Scriptures tell me that Man is made in the Image of God. A lot of ink has been spilled over that one, but it does seem clear that Man is different in value and esteem to God than the rest of Creation. God created the Animals, but into none of them did He breathe His own breath. Therefore, no man may be used in the same way as an animal or used exploitatively-- not even with his own consent. Man does not belong to or have authority over himself; he is the property of God, His Creator. At the same time, animals have been placed under the authority of Man, to be used as his helpers and servants, and were given to him for food. All these things can be found in the book of Genesis.

Second, the Scripture tells me that the body of Man is the temple of His Spirit. In the Old Testament, the glory of God came to rest in the Temple, and the New Testament analogy is both corporate and individual. His Spirit is in his Church (those whom He has elected...that should tell you that I'm a strict Calvinist, ha!), but it is also in individuals who believe Him. Therefore to abuse or exploit the body of a man is to abuse and exploit what God has designed to be a temple of His Spirit (whether a person believes God or not).

Thirdly, and perhaps this one is merely the basis of the others, because Man is both Image and potential Temple, to abuse and exploit a man's body is to disahonor God Himself. It is akin to defacing a picture of, say, the President of the United States, or to break the windows of the White House. Everyone knows what that action would be meant to communicate.

So you can imagine my ambivalency towards von Hagen's work, and towards the Atlas by Pernkopf. Not that they were done for similar reasons at all, but I do think that both are terribly problematic ethically.

All the Christian doctors I know are deeply grateful for their gross anatomy sbjects-- one told me that he was awed by people's dedication and selflessness in allowing their own body to be a teaching tool for him so that he could become a more effective doctor. No theologian I know of has ever been bothered by it that I know of. The closest I've ever come are those who object to cremation, an argument which I think may have some merit but am not decided on, really.

So that's where my thoughts are at this point. They are somewhat malleable. As always, I welcome yours!"

An afterword: I could have been alot more abrupt about the whole thing, but the fact is that this man is an older gentleman (I use that term intentionally) whom I respect and like very much. This is an important conversation that I would love to keep going, and I want it to stay on the decidedly gracious, and not combative side.

Also, the Atlas to which I refer was an illustrated Atlas of the Hman body carried out by a teeam of Grermans during WW2. You can guess at who their subjects were. Yes, it's that bad and worse. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/ugh.gif" alt="" />

My thoughts are immediate and not at all thought out.... so bear that in mind. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> I like your arguments against this exhibition and I do think they bear considerable weight. Personally, I do not approve of exhibiting the human body to the general public as if were some kind of entertainment, although one could argue that it is educational, which it can be. However, in my mind, such things are only relevant and appropriate for those studying medicine and whose intent is to make a career in the medical field.

Just my

In His grace,