Recent years have seen the emergence of a certain opposition to the neurological criteria used to determine death, generally known as cerebral death. There is a medical basis to the controversy, but it is played out fundamentally in the philosophical arena. The article presents what the author believes is a correct understanding of cerebral death as a diagnostic procedure, and not as an attempt to alter the concept of death, which certainly would lead to serious difficulties in the context of a Christian anthropology. The fact that there might be clinical evidence to suggest more depth in the way this diagnosis is conducted does not imply, at least with the data at hand, that a criterion for determining death, which if applied with technical exactitude is more viable than the cardiopulmonary criterion, should be abandoned. Hence, this criterion could continue to be used to certify death in cases involving organ transplants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]