o{]:¬)

Fr. Z is Moderator of the Catholic Online Forum and the ASK FATHER Question Box. The WDTPRS columns appear weekly in The Wanderer. Fr. Z lives in Rome, though he is often in the USA. He is available for retreats and conferences. E-mail


   Fr. Z on WDTPRS

↑ Grab this Headline Animator


Recent Posts
  • MINI MOVIE REVIEW: Prince Caspain
  • Prayer request - ordination
  • Am I blue? You'd be too ... were you a Passerina cyanea
  • WDTPRS: Trinity Sunday
  • Octave of Pentecost PODCAzTs
  • PODCAzT 60: Pentecost customs; St. Ambrose on the dew of the Holy Spirit
  • Let's get the famous quote right, please?
  • New Sabine guest! Oooo ... look at the colors

  • Recent Comments:

    • elizabeth mckernan: Some of these comments remind me of the old joke:- = Where did you get the idea for your new...
    • Mark M: Gosh; doesn’t sound like the book! Father: if you want the definitive Chronicles of Narnia, then watch...
    • GOR: Great pictures Father! Yes, the Cowbirds are unfazed by any other visitors and if you get a few of them at once,...
    • boredoftheworld: Classically, I can handle my kids watching pg-13 violence, but not pg-13 sex; you liberals will have...
    • John: The difference between the two is striking; most notably in that they ask for totally different things. The old...

  • Visit the new WDTPRS Store!
    Buy WDTPRS stuff!

    Click below and vote !My site was nominated for Best Religion Blog!


    Calendar

    September 2007
    S M T W T F S
    « Aug   Oct »
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    30  

    The Pilgrimage

    Subscribe to ...
    The Wanderer

    Subscribe to ... The Catholic Herald - UK






    This blog is hosted by

    Joyent


    Thanks for the support!


























    WINNER of...

    The 2007 Weblog Awards

















    Add to Technorati Favorites

    Add to Google Reader or Homepage

    Add to My AOL

    Subscribe in Bloglines

    Powered by FeedBurner

    14 September 2007

    CDF: CONCERNING ARTIFICIAL NUTRITION AND HYDRATION

    CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 10:50 am

    The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has issued an important statement.

    It concerns artificial nutrition and hydration.  Do you remember some years ago Pope John Paul II issued a forceful statement to a meeting in Rome about nutrition and hydration of patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS).  The Pope really changed Catholic teaching with that statement.  I wrote a long piece on this issue for The Wanderer.

    Here is another development.

    The original language of the statement of the CDF is in Latin.  I will get to the English when I have more time.

    RESPONSES TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS

    OF THE UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS

    CONCERNING ARTIFICIAL NUTRITION AND HYDRATION

    RESPONSA AD QUAESTIONES

    AB EPISCOPALI CONFERENTIA FOEDERATORUM AMERICAE STATUUM

    PROPOSITAS CIRCA CIBUM ET POTUM ARTIFICIALITER PRAEBENDA

     

    First question: Is the administration of food and water (whether by natural or artificial means) to a patient in a "vegetative state" morally obligatory except when they cannot be assimilated by the patient’s body or cannot be administered to the patient without causing significant physical discomfort?

    Response: Yes. The administration of food and water even by artificial means is, in principle, an ordinary and proportionate means of preserving life. It is therefore obligatory to the extent to which, and for as long as, it is shown to accomplish its proper finality, which is the hydration and nourishment of the patient. In this way suffering and death by starvation and dehydration are prevented.

     

    1. Quaeritur: Estne moralis obligatio subministrandi cibum et potum – sive naturali sive artificiosa ratione – aegroto qui versatur in "statu vegetativo", excepto casu quo haec alimenta a corpore aegroti recepi nequeant seu solummodo cum gravi molestia physica ministrari possunt?

    Respondetur affermative; quandoquidem cibi potusque subministratio, artificiali etiam methodo peracta, in linea principii, servandae vitae medium ordinarium et proportionatum evadit. Quapropter eiusdem procurandae moralis viget obligatio, quatenus consequi comprobetur finem suum proprium, nempe nutritionem et imbibitionem aegroti; qua quidem subministratione dolores et mors inanitionis et dysydrationis causa vitantur.

     

    Second question: When nutrition and hydration are being supplied by artificial means to a patient in a "permanent vegetative state", may they be discontinued when competent physicians judge with moral certainty that the patient will never recover consciousness?

    Response: No. A patient in a "permanent vegetative state" is a person with fundamental human dignity and must, therefore, receive ordinary and proportionate care which includes, in principle, the administration of water and food even by artificial means.

     

    2. Quaeritur: Si cibus et potus methodis artificialibus aegroto in "statu vegetativo permanente" versanti procurantur, possunt cessare erogari ex idoneorum medicorum sententia, vi certitudinis moralis praedita, secundum quam aegrotus numquam conscientiam suam recuperaturum esse censetur?

    Respondetur negative; etenim aegrotus in "statu vegetativo permanente" versans semper persona est, dignitate humana nullatenus destituta, cui ex hac ipsa ratione curae ordinariae et proportionatae debentur; inter quas, in linea principii, subministratio cibi et potus, etiam methodo artificiali obtinenda, connumeranda est.

     

    The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, approved these Responses, adopted in the Ordinary Session of the Congregation, and ordered their publication.

     Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, August 1, 2007.

    William Cardinal Levada
    Prefect

     Angelo Amato, S.D.B.
    Titular Archbishop of Sila
    Secretary

     

    Summus Pontifex Benedictus XVI, in Audientia infrascripto Cardinali Praefecto concessa, haec responsa in Sessione Ordinaria huius Congregationis deliberata, adprobavit et publici iuris fieri iussit.

    Datum Romae, ex Aedibus Congregationis pro Doctrina Fidei, die I mensis Augusti anno MMVII.

    Gulielmus Cardinalis Levada
    Praefectus

     

     Angelus Amato, S.D.B.
    Archiepiscopus tit. Silensis
    Secretarius

     

    One of the important points to remember is that food and water are not medicine.  A person is a vegetative state remains a human being with the need for what is basic to human life.  If people see food and water as medicine, as if that person was receiving them as if they were therapy, then you can more easily argue for their denial.  Of course there are situations in which adminstering food and water actually harm a person more than they help.  Then hard decisions must be made.

    But never forget, and keep yourselves attuned to the basic principles.  If food and water are seen as therapy for a bad condition, they can be more easily denied.  That is the fundamental error being made in many cases.   That is why this statement, the response from the CDF, is so important.


    • • • • • •

    EWTN broadcast of Solemn Mass with the 1962 Missal… problems?

    CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 10:39 am

    I am in the UK right now, enjoying wonderful people and gracious hospitality… and fine liturgy, but I am still in direct contact with my satellite dish and DVR back in the USA through my fabulous Slingbox (another material proof that God loves us).  I just finished setting it up to record the Solemn Mass EWTN will rebroadcast today.

    However, someone e-mailed to tell me that the broadcast got fouled up somehow.  What happened?

    I remember that around the time the Motu Proprio was released, EWTN had a rather poor show about it, filled also with technical problems.

    Odd.

    • • • • • •

    Card. Castrillón Hoyos, Pres. of the Pont. Comm. “Ecclesia Dei” on the Motu Proprio

    CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 10:31 am

    His Eminence Darío Card. Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" has spoken Vatican Radio about the Motu Proprio and ZENIT reported it.

    My emphases and comments.

    INTERVIEW

    Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos on "Summorum Pontificum"
    Prelate Hopes Eucharist Is Not Motive for Discord

    VATICAN CITY, SEPT. 13, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos says he hopes that the Eucharist is never a motive for discord, but only love.

    The president of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei said this on Vatican Radio today, the day before "Summorum Pontificum"—Benedict XVI’s letter issued "motu proprio" (on his own initiative) on liberalizing the use of the 1962 Roman Missal—goes into effect.

    The cardinal spoke about the true meaning [Okay… I wonder if His Eminence used the phrase "true meaning" of if that is a gloss by Vatican Radio or Zenit, both of which are filters.] of the pontifical document.

    Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos: I would say that John Paul II wanted to give to the faithful who loved the ancient rite—some of whom left to join Archbishop Lefebvre’s movement, but who later returned in order to maintain full unity with the Vicar of Christ—the opportunity to celebrate the rite that was nearest to their sensibility.

    The Holy Father Benedict XVI participated from the beginning in the Lefebvrite question and therefore knew well the problem created for those faithful by the liturgical reform.  [But this isn’t just about those faithful.  It is really about anyone for whom this older form of Mass is "nearer to their sensibility".]

    The Pope has a special love for the liturgy—a love that is translated into a capacity for study, of learning more about the liturgy itself. [And action: he, as Pope, presided over a Synod on the Eucharist, and issued Sacramentum caritatis and Summorum Pontificum.] This is why Benedict XVI considers the liturgy from before the Council reform an inestimable treasure.

    The Pope does not want to go backward. It is important to know and underline that the Council did not prohibit the liturgy of St. Pius V and we must also say that the Fathers of the Council celebrated the Mass of Pius V.

    It is not—as many sustain because they don’t know the reality—a step backward. On the contrary.  [If he says "on the contrary", then it is a step forward.]

    The Council wanted to give ample freedom to the faithful. One of these freedoms was that of taking this treasure—as the Pope says—which is the liturgy, to keep it alive.

    Q: What has changed, really, with this "motu proprio"?

    Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos: With this "motu proprio," in reality, there has not been a big change. [I think this is a purposeful understatement.  He is downplaying the changes.  In fact, I think there is a very big change.] The important thing is that in this moment, priests can decide, [and this is the change!  The truly remarkable point of Summorum Pontificum is that it emphasizes the rights of priests, but bishops.  This is a huge deal for the bishops, of course, some of whom see that fact as a negative.] without permission from the Holy See or the bishop, to celebrate the Mass in the ancient rite. And this holds true for all priests. It is the parish priests who must open the doors to those priests that, having the faculty, go to celebrate. It is not therefore necessary to ask any other permission.  [Priests.... get it?]

    Q: Your Eminence, this document was accompanied by fear and polemics. What is not true about what has been said or read?

    Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos: It is not true, for example, that power was taken away from bishops over the liturgy, because the Code of Canon Law says who must give permission to say Mass and it is not the bishop: The bishop gives the "celebret," the power [well… I am sure H.E. means the permission to celebrate.  The power to celebrate comes with ordination.  A priest must have permission is use that power.  But I am splitting hairs.] to be able to celebrate, but when a priest has this power, it is the parish priest and the chaplain who must grant the altar to celebrate.

    If anyone impedes him, it is up to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, in the name of the Holy Father, to take measures until this rightwhich is a right that is clear to the faithful by now—is respected. [Yes… people’s rights are now made clear.]

    Q: On the vigil of the "motu proprio" taking effect, what are your hopes?

    Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos: My hopes are these: The Eucharist is the greatest thing we have, it is the greatest manifestation of love, of God’s redemptive love who wants to stay with us with this Eucharistic presence. [1] This must never be a motive for discord but only love.

    I hope that this can be [2] a reason for joy for all those who love tradition, a reason for joy for all those parishes that will no longer be divided, but will have—on the contrary—a multiplicity of holiness with a rite that was certainly a factor and instrument of sanctification for more than a thousand years. [I think we must be wary of the argument of the older Mass’ value stemming from its antiquity.]

    We thank, therefore, the Holy Father who recovered this treasure for the Church. Nothing is imposed on anyone, the Pope does not impose the obligation; the Pope does impose offering this possibility where the faithful request it.  [I wonder what he really said.  This sounds strange, but you get the point.]

    If there is a conflict, because humanly speaking two groups can enter into conflict, the authority of the bishop—as written in the "motu proprio"—must intervene to avoid it, but without canceling the right that the Pope gave to the entire Church.

    • • • • • •
    Powered by: Luke 5:1-11 and WordPress