THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Where Fellowship and Camaraderie lives: that place where the CPS membership values fun and good fellowship as the cement of the community
User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 35481
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Del » Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am

wosbald wrote:
Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:55 am
+JMJ+

Catholic Cyber-Militias and the New Censorship
Image
Fr James Martin SJ / Kerry Weber / Wikipedia / CC BY-SA 4.0

This sort of vitriol is profoundly changing the communion of the Catholic Church. And not just in its ethos, but also in the way it functions.

Many people were shocked when Theological College in Washington (DC), the national seminary of the Catholic University of America, recently canceled a lecture by Fr James Martin SJ.

The popular Jesuit author was to speak on ideas he raised in his 2014 book, “Jesus: A Pilgrimage”. But the seminary disinvited him because of “increasing negative feedback from various social media sites” related to the priest’s newest book on the Church and gay Catholics, “Building a Bridge”.

The cancellation does not only concern Fr Martin and the Church’s LGBT community. Actually, it should worry all Catholics. That is not only because this was the third time that the Jesuit was disinvited from giving a previously arranged lecture. More seriously, it was linked to a campaign of hatred and personal attacks against the priest.

This sort of vitriol is profoundly changing the communion of the Catholic Church. And not just in its ethos, but also in the way it functions. It signals a new kind of censorship that uses verbal violence to intimidate individual Catholics, as well as institutions within the Church – institutions that exist (also) to protect the rights of Catholics. …
Distracting from guilt by blaming the messenger. Clever!

Father Martin is teaching immorality. He wants us to confirm and encourage others in their sins. This is not love.

Catholic faithful are rising up with a large voice and saying that he should not be given honored platforms to spread this message.

Social media is the way that modern folk share our news. And we apologize for the folks who behave badly there. But Fr. Martin was cancelled from three prestigious speaking engagements because he wants us to celebrate souls who are in sexual sin, not because of "a campaign of hatred and personal attacks."

It is not "vitriol." It is not "changing the communion of the Church." And it is not a new kind of censorship. It is exactly the same old kind of censorship that we have always relied on to guard the Truth of the Gospel.

The Truth of the Gospel is the message of Jesus to His People: "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is here!" His message to repentant persons was, "Your sins are forgiven. Go and sin no more."

Yet we always suffer attacks from false teachers saying, "You don't have to repent. You are already saved, even as you sin. Just carry on."
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you." - Eph 4

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 17800
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by wosbald » Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:58 am

+JMJ+
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
Distracting from guilt by blaming the messenger. Clever!

Father Martin is teaching immorality. He wants us to confirm and encourage others in their sins. …
Seems to me that that's not quite what Abp Chaput says …

Civility and Church Life
… But Dr. Faggioli’s main focus is Fr. James Martin, S.J. And for good reason. Some of the recent attacks on Martin, sparked by his book Building a Bridge, have been inexcusably ugly. Fr. Martin is a man of intellect and skill whose work I often admire. Like all of us as fellow Christians, he deserves to be treated with fraternal good will. It’s one thing to criticize respectfully an author’s ideas and their implications. It’s quite another to engage in ad hominem trashing. In Dr. Faggioli’s view, Fr. Martin is yet another victim brought low by a mob of conservative cyber-militias. And these militias have allegedly been fostered by a generation of John Paul II and Benedict XVI bishops, who reshaped “the U.S. episcopate in the image of the ‘culture warrior.’”

That last line is worth a pause. As someone appointed as a bishop by the late John Paul, I’ll offer just two brief thoughts.

[…]

Second, before we prematurely enter another name on our list of Catholic martyrs, we should remember that Fr. Martin’s book is not above legitimate, serious criticism that has nothing to do with ad hominem rancor.

Some might suggest that disputes over Building a Bridge, given its call for closer dialogue with the LGBT community, are really about whether we’re willing to eliminate judgmentalism from Church life. But that’s simply wrong. Clear judgment, tempered by mercy but faithful to Scripture and constant Church teaching, is an obligation of Catholic discipleship—especially on moral issues, and especially in Catholic scholarship. The perceived ambiguities in some of Fr. Martin’s views on sexuality have created much of the apprehension and criticism surrounding his book. There’s nothing vindictive in respectfully but firmly challenging those inadequacies. Doing less would violate both justice and charity.

We live at a time when civility is universally longed for and just as universally (and too often gleefully) violated. In many ways, our time resembles the widespread unrest on the brink of the Reformation, a kind of “Reformation 2.0” moment. The details of our moral and ecclesial disputes are very different from those of five centuries ago—none of the Reformers, Protestant or Catholic, could have imagined what they would loose or where it would lead—but the gravity of our arguments is just as real, and the results will be just as far-reaching. …
———————————————————————————————————————
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
… But Fr. Martin was cancelled from three prestigious speaking engagements because he wants us to celebrate souls who are in sexual sin, not because of "a campaign of hatred and personal attacks." …
And that doesn't seem to be quite the position of those who cancelled him …

Backlash over Martin’s LGBT book prompts speech cancellations
… “This decision does not reflect the University’s policy on inviting speakers to campus, nor does it reflect the specific counsel received from the University and leadership,” according to a statement released by the university on Saturday.

“The campaigns by various groups to paint Fr. Martin’s talk as controversial reflect the same pressure being applied by the left for universities to withdraw speaker invitations,” said John Garvey, President of The Catholic University of America.

“Universities and their related entities should be places for the free, civil exchange of ideas. Our culture is increasingly hostile to this idea. It is problematic that individuals and groups within our Church demonstrate this same inability to make distinctions and to exercise charity,” said Garvey.

“Rev. Gerald McBrearity, P.S.S., rector of the seminary, reached the decision in the interest of avoiding distraction and controversy…in no way does this decision signal approval or agreement with the comments or accusations that the various social media sites have made over the recent weeks,” according to the seminary press release. …




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
hugodrax
All Around Nice Guy
All Around Nice Guy
Posts: 14287
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by hugodrax » Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:18 am

wosbald wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:58 am
+JMJ+
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
Distracting from guilt by blaming the messenger. Clever!

Father Martin is teaching immorality. He wants us to confirm and encourage others in their sins. …
Seems to me that that's not quite what Abp Chaput says …

Civility and Church Life
… But Dr. Faggioli’s main focus is Fr. James Martin, S.J. And for good reason. Some of the recent attacks on Martin, sparked by his book Building a Bridge, have been inexcusably ugly. Fr. Martin is a man of intellect and skill whose work I often admire. Like all of us as fellow Christians, he deserves to be treated with fraternal good will. It’s one thing to criticize respectfully an author’s ideas and their implications. It’s quite another to engage in ad hominem trashing. In Dr. Faggioli’s view, Fr. Martin is yet another victim brought low by a mob of conservative cyber-militias. And these militias have allegedly been fostered by a generation of John Paul II and Benedict XVI bishops, who reshaped “the U.S. episcopate in the image of the ‘culture warrior.’”

That last line is worth a pause. As someone appointed as a bishop by the late John Paul, I’ll offer just two brief thoughts.

[…]

Second, before we prematurely enter another name on our list of Catholic martyrs, we should remember that Fr. Martin’s book is not above legitimate, serious criticism that has nothing to do with ad hominem rancor.

Some might suggest that disputes over Building a Bridge, given its call for closer dialogue with the LGBT community, are really about whether we’re willing to eliminate judgmentalism from Church life. But that’s simply wrong. Clear judgment, tempered by mercy but faithful to Scripture and constant Church teaching, is an obligation of Catholic discipleship—especially on moral issues, and especially in Catholic scholarship. The perceived ambiguities in some of Fr. Martin’s views on sexuality have created much of the apprehension and criticism surrounding his book. There’s nothing vindictive in respectfully but firmly challenging those inadequacies. Doing less would violate both justice and charity.

We live at a time when civility is universally longed for and just as universally (and too often gleefully) violated. In many ways, our time resembles the widespread unrest on the brink of the Reformation, a kind of “Reformation 2.0” moment. The details of our moral and ecclesial disputes are very different from those of five centuries ago—none of the Reformers, Protestant or Catholic, could have imagined what they would loose or where it would lead—but the gravity of our arguments is just as real, and the results will be just as far-reaching. …
———————————————————————————————————————
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
… But Fr. Martin was cancelled from three prestigious speaking engagements because he wants us to celebrate souls who are in sexual sin, not because of "a campaign of hatred and personal attacks." …
And that doesn't seem to be quite the position of those who cancelled him …

Backlash over Martin’s LGBT book prompts speech cancellations
… “This decision does not reflect the University’s policy on inviting speakers to campus, nor does it reflect the specific counsel received from the University and leadership,” according to a statement released by the university on Saturday.

“The campaigns by various groups to paint Fr. Martin’s talk as controversial reflect the same pressure being applied by the left for universities to withdraw speaker invitations,” said John Garvey, President of The Catholic University of America.

“Universities and their related entities should be places for the free, civil exchange of ideas. Our culture is increasingly hostile to this idea. It is problematic that individuals and groups within our Church demonstrate this same inability to make distinctions and to exercise charity,” said Garvey.

“Rev. Gerald McBrearity, P.S.S., rector of the seminary, reached the decision in the interest of avoiding distraction and controversy…in no way does this decision signal approval or agreement with the comments or accusations that the various social media sites have made over the recent weeks,” according to the seminary press release. …
Do you think Del will get it? Does truth even matter or does it only distract from his narrative?
Etiam mihi opinio anserem perirent.

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 35481
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Del » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:16 am

hugodrax wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:18 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:58 am
+JMJ+
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
Distracting from guilt by blaming the messenger. Clever!

Father Martin is teaching immorality. He wants us to confirm and encourage others in their sins. …
Seems to me that that's not quite what Abp Chaput says …

Civility and Church Life
… But Dr. Faggioli’s main focus is Fr. James Martin, S.J. And for good reason. Some of the recent attacks on Martin, sparked by his book Building a Bridge, have been inexcusably ugly. Fr. Martin is a man of intellect and skill whose work I often admire. Like all of us as fellow Christians, he deserves to be treated with fraternal good will. It’s one thing to criticize respectfully an author’s ideas and their implications. It’s quite another to engage in ad hominem trashing. In Dr. Faggioli’s view, Fr. Martin is yet another victim brought low by a mob of conservative cyber-militias. And these militias have allegedly been fostered by a generation of John Paul II and Benedict XVI bishops, who reshaped “the U.S. episcopate in the image of the ‘culture warrior.’”

That last line is worth a pause. As someone appointed as a bishop by the late John Paul, I’ll offer just two brief thoughts.

[…]

Second, before we prematurely enter another name on our list of Catholic martyrs, we should remember that Fr. Martin’s book is not above legitimate, serious criticism that has nothing to do with ad hominem rancor.

Some might suggest that disputes over Building a Bridge, given its call for closer dialogue with the LGBT community, are really about whether we’re willing to eliminate judgmentalism from Church life. But that’s simply wrong. Clear judgment, tempered by mercy but faithful to Scripture and constant Church teaching, is an obligation of Catholic discipleship—especially on moral issues, and especially in Catholic scholarship. The perceived ambiguities in some of Fr. Martin’s views on sexuality have created much of the apprehension and criticism surrounding his book. There’s nothing vindictive in respectfully but firmly challenging those inadequacies. Doing less would violate both justice and charity.

We live at a time when civility is universally longed for and just as universally (and too often gleefully) violated. In many ways, our time resembles the widespread unrest on the brink of the Reformation, a kind of “Reformation 2.0” moment. The details of our moral and ecclesial disputes are very different from those of five centuries ago—none of the Reformers, Protestant or Catholic, could have imagined what they would loose or where it would lead—but the gravity of our arguments is just as real, and the results will be just as far-reaching. …
———————————————————————————————————————
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
… But Fr. Martin was cancelled from three prestigious speaking engagements because he wants us to celebrate souls who are in sexual sin, not because of "a campaign of hatred and personal attacks." …
And that doesn't seem to be quite the position of those who cancelled him …

Backlash over Martin’s LGBT book prompts speech cancellations
… “This decision does not reflect the University’s policy on inviting speakers to campus, nor does it reflect the specific counsel received from the University and leadership,” according to a statement released by the university on Saturday.

“The campaigns by various groups to paint Fr. Martin’s talk as controversial reflect the same pressure being applied by the left for universities to withdraw speaker invitations,” said John Garvey, President of The Catholic University of America.

“Universities and their related entities should be places for the free, civil exchange of ideas. Our culture is increasingly hostile to this idea. It is problematic that individuals and groups within our Church demonstrate this same inability to make distinctions and to exercise charity,” said Garvey.

“Rev. Gerald McBrearity, P.S.S., rector of the seminary, reached the decision in the interest of avoiding distraction and controversy…in no way does this decision signal approval or agreement with the comments or accusations that the various social media sites have made over the recent weeks,” according to the seminary press release. …
Do you think Del will get it? Does truth even matter or does it only distract from his narrative?
It is hard to know what is "truth" anymore. I don't trust university presidents, who are generally not in the job of speaking truth.

I respect Archbishop Chaput. Chaput would know vitriol when he sees it; he was also a victim of fierce personal attacks.

So I guess there really is a hue and cry of opponents to Fr. Martin, spewing hate and vitriol. I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to go looking for it.

But I am not surprised that God-fearing conservatives are starting to imitate the fascist tactics of the left, shouting and rioting against messages that they don't want to hear. A sign of the times, and not a good one.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you." - Eph 4

User avatar
hugodrax
All Around Nice Guy
All Around Nice Guy
Posts: 14287
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by hugodrax » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:23 am

Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:16 am
hugodrax wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:18 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:58 am
+JMJ+
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
Distracting from guilt by blaming the messenger. Clever!

Father Martin is teaching immorality. He wants us to confirm and encourage others in their sins. …
Seems to me that that's not quite what Abp Chaput says …

Civility and Church Life
… But Dr. Faggioli’s main focus is Fr. James Martin, S.J. And for good reason. Some of the recent attacks on Martin, sparked by his book Building a Bridge, have been inexcusably ugly. Fr. Martin is a man of intellect and skill whose work I often admire. Like all of us as fellow Christians, he deserves to be treated with fraternal good will. It’s one thing to criticize respectfully an author’s ideas and their implications. It’s quite another to engage in ad hominem trashing. In Dr. Faggioli’s view, Fr. Martin is yet another victim brought low by a mob of conservative cyber-militias. And these militias have allegedly been fostered by a generation of John Paul II and Benedict XVI bishops, who reshaped “the U.S. episcopate in the image of the ‘culture warrior.’”

That last line is worth a pause. As someone appointed as a bishop by the late John Paul, I’ll offer just two brief thoughts.

[…]

Second, before we prematurely enter another name on our list of Catholic martyrs, we should remember that Fr. Martin’s book is not above legitimate, serious criticism that has nothing to do with ad hominem rancor.

Some might suggest that disputes over Building a Bridge, given its call for closer dialogue with the LGBT community, are really about whether we’re willing to eliminate judgmentalism from Church life. But that’s simply wrong. Clear judgment, tempered by mercy but faithful to Scripture and constant Church teaching, is an obligation of Catholic discipleship—especially on moral issues, and especially in Catholic scholarship. The perceived ambiguities in some of Fr. Martin’s views on sexuality have created much of the apprehension and criticism surrounding his book. There’s nothing vindictive in respectfully but firmly challenging those inadequacies. Doing less would violate both justice and charity.

We live at a time when civility is universally longed for and just as universally (and too often gleefully) violated. In many ways, our time resembles the widespread unrest on the brink of the Reformation, a kind of “Reformation 2.0” moment. The details of our moral and ecclesial disputes are very different from those of five centuries ago—none of the Reformers, Protestant or Catholic, could have imagined what they would loose or where it would lead—but the gravity of our arguments is just as real, and the results will be just as far-reaching. …
———————————————————————————————————————
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
… But Fr. Martin was cancelled from three prestigious speaking engagements because he wants us to celebrate souls who are in sexual sin, not because of "a campaign of hatred and personal attacks." …
And that doesn't seem to be quite the position of those who cancelled him …

Backlash over Martin’s LGBT book prompts speech cancellations
… “This decision does not reflect the University’s policy on inviting speakers to campus, nor does it reflect the specific counsel received from the University and leadership,” according to a statement released by the university on Saturday.

“The campaigns by various groups to paint Fr. Martin’s talk as controversial reflect the same pressure being applied by the left for universities to withdraw speaker invitations,” said John Garvey, President of The Catholic University of America.

“Universities and their related entities should be places for the free, civil exchange of ideas. Our culture is increasingly hostile to this idea. It is problematic that individuals and groups within our Church demonstrate this same inability to make distinctions and to exercise charity,” said Garvey.

“Rev. Gerald McBrearity, P.S.S., rector of the seminary, reached the decision in the interest of avoiding distraction and controversy…in no way does this decision signal approval or agreement with the comments or accusations that the various social media sites have made over the recent weeks,” according to the seminary press release. …
Do you think Del will get it? Does truth even matter or does it only distract from his narrative?
It is hard to know what is "truth" anymore. I don't trust university presidents, who are generally not in the job of speaking truth.

I respect Archbishop Chaput. Chaput would know vitriol when he sees it; he was also a victim of fierce personal attacks.

So I guess there really is a hue and cry of opponents to Fr. Martin, spewing hate and vitriol. I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to go looking for it.

But I am not surprised that God-fearing conservatives are starting to imitate the fascist tactics of the left, shouting and rioting against messages that they don't want to hear. A sign of the times, and not a good one.
It's not right to silence thought. I don't agree with Martin. I don't think his message is a good one. But I think debate is the method to silence him, not withdrawing invitations to speak because his message isn't popular. I mean, Wos and I are fresh out of green wood. Proper matches are getting harder and harder to find. We're going to have to talk to this one.
Etiam mihi opinio anserem perirent.

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 17800
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by wosbald » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:33 am

+JMJ+
hugodrax wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:23 am
It's not right to silence thought. I don't agree with Martin. I don't think his message is a good one. But I think debate is the method to silence him, not withdrawing invitations to speak because his message isn't popular. I mean, Wos and I are fresh out of green wood. Proper matches are getting harder and harder to find. We're going to have to talk to this one.
I'm not familiar enough with his views or the book to either agree or disagree. You may be much more familiar than I, of course. But at first blush, this comment (from this article) seems like a good sign. …
Father Martin told America that he expected criticism of the book—“from the far left it would be ‘Not far enough,’ and from the far right, ‘Too far,’” as he put it— …

And, from the same article, this seems like a reasonable answer to certain criticisms. …
… Other critics have questioned why Father Martin does not include a section in his book on church teaching, which prohibits sexual relations between two people of the same gender.

“The reason I avoided topics of sexuality is that it’s not a book on sexual morality or on the sexual behavior of L.G.B.T. people,” he said. “It’s on dialogue and prayer. It’s amazing that for some Catholics the only lens that they can see L.G.B.T. through is sex.” …




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 35481
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Del » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:54 am

hugodrax wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:23 am
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:16 am
hugodrax wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:18 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:58 am
+JMJ+
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
Distracting from guilt by blaming the messenger. Clever!

Father Martin is teaching immorality. He wants us to confirm and encourage others in their sins. …
Seems to me that that's not quite what Abp Chaput says …

Civility and Church Life
… But Dr. Faggioli’s main focus is Fr. James Martin, S.J. And for good reason. Some of the recent attacks on Martin, sparked by his book Building a Bridge, have been inexcusably ugly. Fr. Martin is a man of intellect and skill whose work I often admire. Like all of us as fellow Christians, he deserves to be treated with fraternal good will. It’s one thing to criticize respectfully an author’s ideas and their implications. It’s quite another to engage in ad hominem trashing. In Dr. Faggioli’s view, Fr. Martin is yet another victim brought low by a mob of conservative cyber-militias. And these militias have allegedly been fostered by a generation of John Paul II and Benedict XVI bishops, who reshaped “the U.S. episcopate in the image of the ‘culture warrior.’”

That last line is worth a pause. As someone appointed as a bishop by the late John Paul, I’ll offer just two brief thoughts.

[…]

Second, before we prematurely enter another name on our list of Catholic martyrs, we should remember that Fr. Martin’s book is not above legitimate, serious criticism that has nothing to do with ad hominem rancor.

Some might suggest that disputes over Building a Bridge, given its call for closer dialogue with the LGBT community, are really about whether we’re willing to eliminate judgmentalism from Church life. But that’s simply wrong. Clear judgment, tempered by mercy but faithful to Scripture and constant Church teaching, is an obligation of Catholic discipleship—especially on moral issues, and especially in Catholic scholarship. The perceived ambiguities in some of Fr. Martin’s views on sexuality have created much of the apprehension and criticism surrounding his book. There’s nothing vindictive in respectfully but firmly challenging those inadequacies. Doing less would violate both justice and charity.

We live at a time when civility is universally longed for and just as universally (and too often gleefully) violated. In many ways, our time resembles the widespread unrest on the brink of the Reformation, a kind of “Reformation 2.0” moment. The details of our moral and ecclesial disputes are very different from those of five centuries ago—none of the Reformers, Protestant or Catholic, could have imagined what they would loose or where it would lead—but the gravity of our arguments is just as real, and the results will be just as far-reaching. …
———————————————————————————————————————
Del wrote:
Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:27 am
… But Fr. Martin was cancelled from three prestigious speaking engagements because he wants us to celebrate souls who are in sexual sin, not because of "a campaign of hatred and personal attacks." …
And that doesn't seem to be quite the position of those who cancelled him …

Backlash over Martin’s LGBT book prompts speech cancellations
… “This decision does not reflect the University’s policy on inviting speakers to campus, nor does it reflect the specific counsel received from the University and leadership,” according to a statement released by the university on Saturday.

“The campaigns by various groups to paint Fr. Martin’s talk as controversial reflect the same pressure being applied by the left for universities to withdraw speaker invitations,” said John Garvey, President of The Catholic University of America.

“Universities and their related entities should be places for the free, civil exchange of ideas. Our culture is increasingly hostile to this idea. It is problematic that individuals and groups within our Church demonstrate this same inability to make distinctions and to exercise charity,” said Garvey.

“Rev. Gerald McBrearity, P.S.S., rector of the seminary, reached the decision in the interest of avoiding distraction and controversy…in no way does this decision signal approval or agreement with the comments or accusations that the various social media sites have made over the recent weeks,” according to the seminary press release. …
Do you think Del will get it? Does truth even matter or does it only distract from his narrative?
It is hard to know what is "truth" anymore. I don't trust university presidents, who are generally not in the job of speaking truth.

I respect Archbishop Chaput. Chaput would know vitriol when he sees it; he was also a victim of fierce personal attacks.

So I guess there really is a hue and cry of opponents to Fr. Martin, spewing hate and vitriol. I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to go looking for it.

But I am not surprised that God-fearing conservatives are starting to imitate the fascist tactics of the left, shouting and rioting against messages that they don't want to hear. A sign of the times, and not a good one.
It's not right to silence thought. I don't agree with Martin. I don't think his message is a good one. But I think debate is the method to silence him, not withdrawing invitations to speak because his message isn't popular. I mean, Wos and I are fresh out of green wood. Proper matches are getting harder and harder to find. We're going to have to talk to this one.
The toothpaste is out of the tube already.

On one hand, we have dissidents who are pushing an agenda against our Catholic faith. Fr. Martin appears to be one of these, as he appears to promote homosexual acts and gay marriage as new virtues which the Church should bless. When Catholic audiences learn about this, they request that he not speak to them. [This is what happened to Fr. Martin as he was uninvited to speak to the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre, Eastern Lieutenancy (New York & surrounding states). He wasn't even going to talk about his gay stuff, but the Order did not want to lend their gravitas to his controversy.]

This is not about "silencing ideas" at all.... It is about avoiding scandal; i.e., giving the world an impression that it is okay to indulge in some sin.

On the other hand, we have peaceful and thoughtful speakers trying to talk to willing audiences -- and being disrupted by demonstrations and riots and threats of riots from the opposition. They accuse innocent speakers of hatred, bigotry, and all the deplorable stuff. This is "silencing thought" at secular universities, and now it's spilling over into our own realm of truth and peace.

Fr. Martin could clean up his reputation quickly. He could make a clear statement that repeats what the Catechism says about disordered behavior, loving persons with moral temptations, and how his ministry is helping them to enjoy chaste lives.

But I don't know how to restore our culture to civility, now that protests and rioting behaviors have come to be expected. Social media storms are unavoidable. A guy can't even enjoy watching football these days.

What is wisdom here? It seems to me that a knight in this culture crusade must choose his battles very carefully.... most of them leave us needlessly bruised and injured with little effect. Guard your own family as a Christian father, maybe join the pro-life vigil in your local community. Stay away from social media fights.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you." - Eph 4

User avatar
hugodrax
All Around Nice Guy
All Around Nice Guy
Posts: 14287
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by hugodrax » Thu Sep 28, 2017 11:16 am

I can't say I disagree with you on principle. However (hah!), there's a difference in my mind between a truly private entity and a teaching institution.

If we refuse to counter Fr. Martin, if our theologians do not confront his ideas with truth, then, to me, we've effectively given his beliefs a traction that they do not deserve. The counterargument or response to Fr. Martin and his ilk cannot be "because." As long as that's our response, we lose face. It strengthens his position if it looks like we're afraid to debate.
Etiam mihi opinio anserem perirent.

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 17800
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by wosbald » Fri Sep 29, 2017 6:28 am

+JMJ+

Pope Francis wants the Catholic Church to tackle ‘fake news’
Image
(Credit: Stock image.)

For the next World Day of Social Communications, Pope Francis wants the Catholic Church to make a contribution to the mounting issue of "fake news," in part by seeking to promote "professional journalism which always seeks the truth, and therefore a journalism of peace that promotes understanding between people.”

[…]

According to a statement released by the Vatican’s Secretariat for Communications, the message is directly linked to so-called fake news, “namely, baseless information that contributes to generating and nurturing a strong polarization of opinions.”

Given the fact that key internet companies, institutions and the world of politics all have begun to address the phenomenon, which involves “an often misleading distortion of facts, with possible repercussions at the level of individual and collective behavior,” the Church too, wants to contribute, the statement said.

That contribution will come in the form of “a reflection on the causes, the logic and the consequences of disinformation in the media,” and also by helping with the promotion of “professional journalism, which always seeks the truth, and therefore a journalism of peace that promotes understanding between people.” …




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 17800
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by wosbald » Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:28 pm

+JMJ+

Pope’s prayer video extols dignity of work, seeks jobs for unemployed
Image
Pope Francis is cheered by workers at the ILVA steel-making company in Genoa, Italy, Saturday, May 27, 2017. (Credit: Luca Zennaro/ANSA via AP.)

Pope Francis's prayer video for the month of October is dedicated to all workers, so that they “may receive respect and protection of their rights, and that the unemployed may receive the opportunity to contribute to the common good.”

ROME – In his monthly prayer video for October, Pope Francis focuses on the rights of workers and the unemployed, condemning situations that violate their dignity.

“We should always remember the dignity and rights of those who work, condemning situations in which that dignity and those rights are violated, and helping to ensure authentic progress by man and society,” the pontiff says in the video, which was released on Tuesday afternoon in Rome.

The pope’s words are actually a quote from a document by St. Pope John Paul II, his 1981 encyclical Laborem Exercens, which translates as “Through Work,” which the Polish pope wrote to mark the 90th anniversary of Rerum Novarum, an encyclical by Pope Leo XIII in 1891 considered the foundational text of modern Catholic social teaching.

Francis’s prayer intention is for all workers, so that they “may receive respect and protection of their rights, and that the unemployed may receive the opportunity to contribute to the common good.” …

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csr1ZgYSZss




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 17800
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by wosbald » Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm

+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 35481
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Del » Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:31 pm

wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm
+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …
This raises all sorts of issues that we can't talk about, because they are "political."

Socialized medicine + contraception/abortion/euthansia = a cultural mindset in which it is better (i.e., cheaper) to kill people than to care for them.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you." - Eph 4

User avatar
Rusty
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
Posts: 24868
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Beelzebub's Rare Tobacco Emporium

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Rusty » Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:37 pm

Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:31 pm
wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm
+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …
This raises all sorts of issues that we can't talk about, because they are "political."

Socialized medicine + contraception/abortion/euthansia = a cultural mindset in which it is better (i.e., cheaper) to kill people than to care for them.
I think this can be discussed without treading into politics. Your second statement (Socialized medicine...) is political. It might be that you are constitutionally incapable of having such a nonpolitical discussion. Avoid sweeping generalizations about socialized medicine, political groups that you imagine exist, and, your usual hit list and I think it can be discussed.

I think it's surprising that a Catholic group is espousing this. I think it should be discussed. So what are the "certain circumstances"? That's only the first question. I think the possible consequences are worth discussion too.

Here is the Brother's of Charity pov on this (PDF)... View of the Brothers of Charity Group in Belgium of euthanasia for mental
suffering in a non-terminal situation


There may be more than this on their site but it is a start & is interesting.
"I am not the orthodox light-quantizer for whom you take me." Einstein reassurance to Lorentz, Jan. 1911

Image

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 35481
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Del » Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:58 pm

Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:37 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:31 pm
wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm
+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …
This raises all sorts of issues that we can't talk about, because they are "political."

Socialized medicine + contraception/abortion/euthansia = a cultural mindset in which it is better (i.e., cheaper) to kill people than to care for them.
I think this can be discussed without treading into politics. Your second statement (Socialized medicine...) is political. It might be that you are constitutionally incapable of having such a nonpolitical discussion. Avoid sweeping generalizations about socialized medicine, political groups that you imagine exist, and, your usual hit list and I think it can be discussed.

I think it's surprising that a Catholic group is espousing this. I think it should be discussed. So what are the "certain circumstances"? That's only the first question. I think the possible consequences are worth discussion too.

Here is the Brother's of Charity pov on this (PDF)... View of the Brothers of Charity Group in Belgium of euthanasia for mental
suffering in a non-terminal situation


There may be more than this on their site but it is a start & is interesting.
"Socialized" medicine is a shortcut for talking about our collective way of paying for healthcare. Doesn't matter whether the collective is a government bureaucracy or a insurance corporation.... as soon as I expect that you should pay for my healthcare[ through the trustees of a gov/corp], then you guys are tempted to think that a lethal injection is cheaper than years of chemotherapy and palliative care. You don't care about me (a stranger) as much as you care about your own wallet (an intimate item, close to something like your heart).
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you." - Eph 4

User avatar
Rusty
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
Posts: 24868
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Beelzebub's Rare Tobacco Emporium

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Rusty » Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:15 pm

Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:58 pm
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:37 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:31 pm
wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm
+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …
This raises all sorts of issues that we can't talk about, because they are "political."

Socialized medicine + contraception/abortion/euthansia = a cultural mindset in which it is better (i.e., cheaper) to kill people than to care for them.
I think this can be discussed without treading into politics. Your second statement (Socialized medicine...) is political. It might be that you are constitutionally incapable of having such a nonpolitical discussion. Avoid sweeping generalizations about socialized medicine, political groups that you imagine exist, and, your usual hit list and I think it can be discussed.

I think it's surprising that a Catholic group is espousing this. I think it should be discussed. So what are the "certain circumstances"? That's only the first question. I think the possible consequences are worth discussion too.

Here is the Brother's of Charity pov on this (PDF)... View of the Brothers of Charity Group in Belgium of euthanasia for mental
suffering in a non-terminal situation


There may be more than this on their site but it is a start & is interesting.
"Socialized" medicine is a shortcut for talking about our collective way of paying for healthcare. Doesn't matter whether the collective is a government bureaucracy or a insurance corporation.... as soon as I expect that you should pay for my healthcare[ through the trustees of a gov/corp], then you guys are tempted to think that a lethal injection is cheaper than years of chemotherapy and palliative care. You don't care about me (a stranger) as much as you care about your own wallet (an intimate item, close to something like your heart).
I think you're misinformed and biased to see it that way. I understand that you have a message to send and preferred belief about this but it ain't true. Never mind socialized medicine. Leave it out. I doubt that it's pertinent.
Move on with the Brothers...

Sept. 2017: Belgian Brothers of Charity reaffirm euthanasia stance
The Head of the Brothers of Charity in Belgium Raf De Rijcke told journalists that "Out of concern for a person that is suffering, it is our task to assist that person with compassion and to help them.”

"Indeed we must do all we can to prevent them from taking the step towards euthanasia, but there are exceptional circumstances in which were end up in a hopeless situation that can’t be treated. It is then that the step can be taken and that is something that is as one with Christian values”.

This means that the Belgian Brothers of Charity are sticking to their guns.
Interesting. They (The Brothers of Charity) think their policy is consistent with Christian values.
Last edited by Rusty on Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I am not the orthodox light-quantizer for whom you take me." Einstein reassurance to Lorentz, Jan. 1911

Image

User avatar
hugodrax
All Around Nice Guy
All Around Nice Guy
Posts: 14287
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by hugodrax » Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:54 pm

Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:15 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:58 pm
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:37 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:31 pm
wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm
+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …
This raises all sorts of issues that we can't talk about, because they are "political."

Socialized medicine + contraception/abortion/euthansia = a cultural mindset in which it is better (i.e., cheaper) to kill people than to care for them.
I think this can be discussed without treading into politics. Your second statement (Socialized medicine...) is political. It might be that you are constitutionally incapable of having such a nonpolitical discussion. Avoid sweeping generalizations about socialized medicine, political groups that you imagine exist, and, your usual hit list and I think it can be discussed.

I think it's surprising that a Catholic group is espousing this. I think it should be discussed. So what are the "certain circumstances"? That's only the first question. I think the possible consequences are worth discussion too.

Here is the Brother's of Charity pov on this (PDF)... View of the Brothers of Charity Group in Belgium of euthanasia for mental
suffering in a non-terminal situation


There may be more than this on their site but it is a start & is interesting.
"Socialized" medicine is a shortcut for talking about our collective way of paying for healthcare. Doesn't matter whether the collective is a government bureaucracy or a insurance corporation.... as soon as I expect that you should pay for my healthcare[ through the trustees of a gov/corp], then you guys are tempted to think that a lethal injection is cheaper than years of chemotherapy and palliative care. You don't care about me (a stranger) as much as you care about your own wallet (an intimate item, close to something like your heart).
I think you're misinformed and biased to see it that way. Never mind socialized medicine. Leave it out. I doubt that it's pertinent.
Move on with the Brothers...

Sept. 2017: Belgian Brothers of Charity reaffirm euthanasia stance
The Head of the Brothers of Charity in Belgium Raf De Rijcke told journalists that "Out of concern for a person that is suffering, it is our task to assist that person with compassion and to help them.”

"Indeed we must do all we can to prevent them from taking the step towards euthanasia, but there are exceptional circumstances in which were end up in a hopeless situation that can’t be treated. It is then that the step can be taken and that is something that is as one with Christian values”.

This means that the Belgian Brothers of Charity are sticking to their guns.
Interesting. They (The Brothers of Charity) think their policy is consistent with Christian values.
People rarely do what they think is wrong, Rusty, wouldn't you agree? Ending suffering is a Christian value. How you do it represents the debate.
Etiam mihi opinio anserem perirent.

User avatar
Rusty
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
Posts: 24868
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Beelzebub's Rare Tobacco Emporium

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by Rusty » Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:13 pm

hugodrax wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:54 pm
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:15 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:58 pm
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:37 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:31 pm
wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm
+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …
This raises all sorts of issues that we can't talk about, because they are "political."

Socialized medicine + contraception/abortion/euthansia = a cultural mindset in which it is better (i.e., cheaper) to kill people than to care for them.
I think this can be discussed without treading into politics. Your second statement (Socialized medicine...) is political. It might be that you are constitutionally incapable of having such a nonpolitical discussion. Avoid sweeping generalizations about socialized medicine, political groups that you imagine exist, and, your usual hit list and I think it can be discussed.

I think it's surprising that a Catholic group is espousing this. I think it should be discussed. So what are the "certain circumstances"? That's only the first question. I think the possible consequences are worth discussion too.

Here is the Brother's of Charity pov on this (PDF)... View of the Brothers of Charity Group in Belgium of euthanasia for mental
suffering in a non-terminal situation


There may be more than this on their site but it is a start & is interesting.
"Socialized" medicine is a shortcut for talking about our collective way of paying for healthcare. Doesn't matter whether the collective is a government bureaucracy or a insurance corporation.... as soon as I expect that you should pay for my healthcare[ through the trustees of a gov/corp], then you guys are tempted to think that a lethal injection is cheaper than years of chemotherapy and palliative care. You don't care about me (a stranger) as much as you care about your own wallet (an intimate item, close to something like your heart).
I think you're misinformed and biased to see it that way. Never mind socialized medicine. Leave it out. I doubt that it's pertinent.
Move on with the Brothers...

Sept. 2017: Belgian Brothers of Charity reaffirm euthanasia stance
The Head of the Brothers of Charity in Belgium Raf De Rijcke told journalists that "Out of concern for a person that is suffering, it is our task to assist that person with compassion and to help them.”

"Indeed we must do all we can to prevent them from taking the step towards euthanasia, but there are exceptional circumstances in which were end up in a hopeless situation that can’t be treated. It is then that the step can be taken and that is something that is as one with Christian values”.

This means that the Belgian Brothers of Charity are sticking to their guns.
Interesting. They (The Brothers of Charity) think their policy is consistent with Christian values.
People rarely do what they think is wrong, Rusty, wouldn't you agree? Ending suffering is a Christian value. How you do it represents the debate.
Yes, I agree. But there is a Catholic organization that has adopted this policy. That's surprising.
Del's comments often have an ideological bias and a message that he wants to go out. It's an interesting and devious connection though but verboten to discuss and I think he'd like to believe it works that way.
"I am not the orthodox light-quantizer for whom you take me." Einstein reassurance to Lorentz, Jan. 1911

Image

User avatar
hugodrax
All Around Nice Guy
All Around Nice Guy
Posts: 14287
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by hugodrax » Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:03 pm

Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:13 pm
hugodrax wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:54 pm
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:15 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:58 pm
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:37 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:31 pm
wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:19 pm
+JMJ+

Brothers of Charity euthanasia controversy could have far-reaching implications
Image
Euthanasia medical syringe. (Credit: sfam_photo_Shutterstock via CNA.)

The Brothers of Charity in Belgium are trying to find a way to keep euthanasia from happening at the hospitals they sponsor, but the hospitals' board who is made up mostly of laity has issued a defense of their decision to offer euthanasia that a Belgian lawyer claims will have "far-reaching" consequences.

[…]

Fernand Keuleneer, an attorney in Brussels who served as a member of the Belgian euthanasia commission from 2002 through 2012 and who is advising the Brothers of Charity on the issue, told CNA that the board’s position paper has “repeatedly stated that euthanasia is part of the ‘therapeutic liberty’ of medical doctors.”

According to Keuleneer, “such a position implies that the board of trustees consider euthanasia to be a medical act.”

Keuleneer explained that the position paper is problematic because it “denies the legal autonomy and liberty of institutions to refuse the execution of euthanasia, but moreover it does so by declaring euthanasia a medical act, which will have implications far beyond its own institution.”

The attorney explained that if euthanasia is a medical act, a claim unique to the position paper, “even if all medical doctors in a psychiatric care institution would adhere to the conditions and procedures of the position paper, nothing would prevent a patient from bringing in an outside physician. Such are the far-reaching consequences of this position paper.”

Keleuneer also noted that “the fact that an association calling itself Brothers of Charity, which is in addition explicitly confirming its Christian identity, adopts this position will receive worldwide attention and will be used on a global level.” …
This raises all sorts of issues that we can't talk about, because they are "political."

Socialized medicine + contraception/abortion/euthansia = a cultural mindset in which it is better (i.e., cheaper) to kill people than to care for them.
I think this can be discussed without treading into politics. Your second statement (Socialized medicine...) is political. It might be that you are constitutionally incapable of having such a nonpolitical discussion. Avoid sweeping generalizations about socialized medicine, political groups that you imagine exist, and, your usual hit list and I think it can be discussed.

I think it's surprising that a Catholic group is espousing this. I think it should be discussed. So what are the "certain circumstances"? That's only the first question. I think the possible consequences are worth discussion too.

Here is the Brother's of Charity pov on this (PDF)... View of the Brothers of Charity Group in Belgium of euthanasia for mental
suffering in a non-terminal situation


There may be more than this on their site but it is a start & is interesting.
"Socialized" medicine is a shortcut for talking about our collective way of paying for healthcare. Doesn't matter whether the collective is a government bureaucracy or a insurance corporation.... as soon as I expect that you should pay for my healthcare[ through the trustees of a gov/corp], then you guys are tempted to think that a lethal injection is cheaper than years of chemotherapy and palliative care. You don't care about me (a stranger) as much as you care about your own wallet (an intimate item, close to something like your heart).
I think you're misinformed and biased to see it that way. Never mind socialized medicine. Leave it out. I doubt that it's pertinent.
Move on with the Brothers...

Sept. 2017: Belgian Brothers of Charity reaffirm euthanasia stance
The Head of the Brothers of Charity in Belgium Raf De Rijcke told journalists that "Out of concern for a person that is suffering, it is our task to assist that person with compassion and to help them.”

"Indeed we must do all we can to prevent them from taking the step towards euthanasia, but there are exceptional circumstances in which were end up in a hopeless situation that can’t be treated. It is then that the step can be taken and that is something that is as one with Christian values”.

This means that the Belgian Brothers of Charity are sticking to their guns.
Interesting. They (The Brothers of Charity) think their policy is consistent with Christian values.
People rarely do what they think is wrong, Rusty, wouldn't you agree? Ending suffering is a Christian value. How you do it represents the debate.
Yes, I agree. But there is a Catholic organization that has adopted this policy. That's surprising.
Del's comments often have an ideological bias and a message that he wants to go out. It's an interesting and devious connection though but verboten to discuss and I think he'd like to believe it works that way.
I think what can often happen is that an organization starts out as a Catholic organization, then disagrees fundamentally with the teachings of the Church. It can be so hard to understand for the gaijin, but at that moment, for us, serious doubts arise about their actual catholicism.

SSPX is a great example, but the one I like to use is the "American Catholic Church." It uses the same ceremonies and words as the RC, but it exists to perform marriages, including of divorced couples, for a fee in Las Vegas. It really does come down to communion with Rome for us.

I'd never say these people were evil per se, nor even that they're pulling a fast one. They're acting in accordance with their consciences. But the minute they disobey an order from the Vatican, they are no longer Catholi in my eyes.
Etiam mihi opinio anserem perirent.

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 17800
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by wosbald » Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:59 pm

+JMJ+
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:13 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:58 pm
"Socialized" medicine is a shortcut for talking about our collective way of paying for healthcare. Doesn't matter whether the collective is a government bureaucracy or a insurance corporation …
Del's comments often have an ideological bias and a message that he wants to go out. It's an interesting and devious connection though but verboten to discuss and I think he'd like to believe it works that way.
I bet to differ. Del's not an ideologue, though he seems to often use ideologically-loaded terminology which, thus, can leave him open to misinterpretation. As he just emphasized, "socialized healthcare" is his "shorthand" for the distortions engendered by either strictly socialistic or strictly capitalistic imperatives.




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
hugodrax
All Around Nice Guy
All Around Nice Guy
Posts: 14287
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: THE CATHOLIC THREAD

Post by hugodrax » Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:02 pm

wosbald wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:59 pm
+JMJ+
Rusty wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:13 pm
Del wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:58 pm
"Socialized" medicine is a shortcut for talking about our collective way of paying for healthcare. Doesn't matter whether the collective is a government bureaucracy or a insurance corporation …
Del's comments often have an ideological bias and a message that he wants to go out. It's an interesting and devious connection though but verboten to discuss and I think he'd like to believe it works that way.
I bet to differ. Del's not an ideologue, though he seems to often use ideologically-loaded terminology which, thus, can leave him open to misinterpretation. As he just emphasized, "socialized healthcare" is his "shorthand" for the distortions engendered by either strictly socialistic or strictly capitalistic imperatives.
Wos,

Don't lessen your own considerable credibility.

Yours, etc.,

Drax.
Etiam mihi opinio anserem perirent.

Post Reply