Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, disaster, error, family, General Catholic, horror, sadness, secularism, Society.
While much of the world is heaping praise on an Oklahoma mom who has determined to carry what doctors have determined is a child with anencephaly (virtually no brain development) to term, the reason she has specified for doing so gives pause. Her intent in carrying the child to term is to donate her organs to people in need.
There are several important aspects that the article quoted below leaves out. It is true that most children afflicted with this disorder die shortly after birth, if they make it to birth. But a growing number have lived for months or even years with this condition, defying all medical logic, such as it is as this time. The other salient factor is that to donate organs like a heart or liver – which would seem to be too small in this case to be much use to all but the youngest patients – the donor must be killed in the process of organ removal.
What the article does not tell us is how the family plans to proceed if the baby is born alive – which it is expected to be – and does not immediately die of its disorder. It reads as if they plan on letting doctors dismember their child alive in order to get at the organs. I pray this is not the case, but since the parents have apparently already determined to donate organs, and if the baby dies before the organs are removed it will defeat the stated purpose, it seems as if the baby will be whisked away to an operating room to be harvested for parts shortly after birth. Since I don’t know this to be the case – the coverage all seems to stem from the same fluffy, incomplete article – I won’t engage in speculation as to what the parents plan to do if death is not eminent for their daughter after birth, but I will note that killing a baby or any person for the purpose of getting at their organs, even to ostensibly save other lives, is morally repugnant and reduces some humans – even if this is not the intent – to virtual farm animals groomed for parts to benefit others.
Keri Young feels the kicks, has the hiccups and can hear her daughter’s heartbeat, but unlike most mothers, she won’t get to see her daughter grow up.
Her unborn daughter Eva has anencephaly and doesn’t have a brain.
Keri Young and her husband Royce, of Oklahoma City, have shared heartbreaking details of the pregnancy in a series of posts on social media.
At 19 weeks, they found out their daughter would only have 24 hours to live at birth if they decided to keep her. [This is not true in every case. As I said, a growing number of babies with this affliction have lived even for several years, and brought great joy to their families.]
Faced with terrible options, Keri said they decided to continue with the pregnancy to full term to give other children a chance at life. [Even if that means denying their own child it’s own chance?]
I don’t write this to further hurt a family going through something unimaginable. Having had to confront the mortality of one of my own children recently, I have some inkling of how incredibly painful this must be.
And it’s certainly preferable that the parents chose to at least carry the baby to term, rather than have it murdered in the womb as many people would prefer.
Nevertheless, given that anencephaly is not necessarily an automatic death sentence (and keeping in mind that we only have a tiny, distorted picture of the case), and given that donation of vital organs is……..this is really not something to be praised but to be at least questioned, pending further information, if not outright condemned. Doctors make mistakes. Babies have stunned doctors with “impossible” recoveries or by at least living for periods of time medical science says could not occur.
Decades of murdering millions of babies and treating people materialistically to get at their good parts when their lives are in jeopardy or they are in a persistent coma, etc., has played a key role in the broader devaluing of human life in our culture today. This post may well be seen as harsh or mean-spirited, but it is simply an attempt to call to mind the Truth Christ has revealed, that we must respect and do all we can to support human life from conception to natural death, no matter what the “experts” say about the futility of such support. The organ donation process – for vital organs – is wholly and integrally opposed to this respect, and exists on the basis of what often turn out to be flawed medical opinions. And yet we see how far respect for human life and a proper understanding of what that respect entails in the effusive praise that is being directed at this family, which may have morally-upright intentions, but also may not.
I pray this couple gives their baby the full chance for life God intends her to have. I cannot imagine having my child carved up into parts while still alive, no matter how great the perceived benefit to others might be nor how grim their prognosis may be.
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Lent, priests, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
Fr. James Buckley, FSSP will be hosting a Lenten mission at Mater Dei parish nightly March 6-10 from 7-8pm. Everyone is invited, you do not need to be a Mater Dei to attend. I do not have a list of topics to be covered, but judging from Father’s sermons they will probably touch on the practice of penance and self-denial generally for souls who are awash in a hedonistic, self-serving culture.
Mater Dei parish is located at 2030 E. Hwy 356 (Irving Blvd) in Irving, TX. There is no cost for attending.
Sorry for the tardiness of the notice, but you people are quick thinkers, able to improvise, overcome, and adapt to bad blogging.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, the enemy, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
And, beyond that, features himself in what is an obviously perverse and blasphemous work of “art.” Paglia is one of several well known extreme modernist bishops from the Italian episcopate that have experienced a rapid rise during Francis’ pontificate. Particularly shocking is the fact that this same archbishop who seems to tip his hand quite obviously regarding his own proclivities and, quite probably, extracurricular activities, has been made the president of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family and the head of the Pontifical Academy for Life. These appointments are part of a clear trend under the current Bishop of Rome to grant cover and partronage to the sodomite underworld prevalent in the clery, as Francis’ recent rollbacks of penalties put into place for priest sex abuse have helped underscore.
Many wondered how Francis would deal with this lavendar mafia. Little did they know the several-hundred page dossier on pervert priests compiled under Benedict would be used by Francis as recommendations for promotions and advancement. Of course, given the tight correlation between sodomy and hatred for the constant belief and practice of the Faith, it is probable that much of Francis’ most fervent support within the episcopate comes from those lost in this reprobate lifestyle. In spite of the fact that this archbishop and his painting were very controversial within Italy, Francis has still seen fit to give him two plum and highly influential assignments, both centering on what appears to all the world to be an attempt to undermine and ultimately destroy the moral edifice of the Faith:
The archbishop now at the helm of the Pontifical Academy for Life paid a homosexual artist to paint a blasphemous homoerotic mural in his cathedral church in 2007. The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself.
The archbishop, Vincenzo Paglia, was also recently appointed by Pope Francis as president of the Pontifical Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family.
The massive mural still covers the opposite side of the facade of the cathedral church of the Diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia. It depicts Jesus carrying nets to heaven filled with naked and semi-nude homosexuals, transsexuals, prostitutes, and drug dealers, jumbled together in erotic interactions.
Included in one of the nets is Paglia, the then diocesan bishop. The image of the Savior is painted with the face of a local male hairdresser, and his private parts can be seen through his translucent garb.According to the artist, a homosexual Argentinean named Ricardo Cinalli who is known for his paintings of male bodies, Bishop Paglia selected him out of a list of ten internationally-known artists specifically for the task of painting the inner wall of the facade. Bishop Paglia, along with one Fr. Fabio Leonardis, oversaw every detail of Cinalli’s work, according to Cinalli, who approvingly notes that Paglia never asked him if he believed in the Christian doctrine of salvation.
“Working with him was humanly and professionally fantastic,” Cinalli told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica in March of last year. “Never, in four months, during which we saw each other almost three times each week, did Paglia ever ask me if I believed in salvation. He never placed me in an uncomfortable position.” [Of course not! We wouldn’t want to disrupt all that pleasant “accompaniment” and “welcoming” with any talk of such a minor and trivial subject as the state of one’s eternal soul!]
“There was no detail that was done freely, at random,” added Cinalli. “Everything was analyzed. Everything was discussed. They never allowed me to work on my own.” [Ergo, Paglia endorsed every portion of the monstrosity, which you can view below]
Cinalli admits to La Repubblica that the naked people in the nets are meant to be “erotic,” although Bishop Paglia drew the line when Cinalli proposed to show people actually copulating.“In this case, there was not – in this sense – a sexual intention, but erotic, yes,” said Cinalli. “I think that the erotic aspect is the most notable among the people inside the nets.” He later added, “The one thing that they didn’t permit me to insert was the copulation of two people within this net where everything is permitted.” [In a sane Church, this artist would never have been considered. This is the reduction of the Church to mere platform for the advancing of worldly left-wing ideals and, more importantly, the personal vanity of an unworthy prelate.]
The reason he wasn’t allowed to be so explicit, says Cinalli, is that his painting had already done enough to demonstrate the notion that man has “freedom” in this life and even in the next, apparently to engage in whatever sexual behavior he deems appropriate. “The bishop and Fr. Leonardis . . . told me that they didn’t think it was necessary to arrive at that extreme to demonstrate the freedom that man, in reality, has in this world and in the next.” [Orwellian. Slavery is freedom. God condones sodomy, prostitution, and drug use in “heaven.” Please. All this does is reveal to total immorality of Paglia, the priests involved, and the artist. It says nothing to anyone about God, sin, redemption, the human condition, etc.]
The article then goes on to note how Paglia has moved to undermine the Doctrine of the Faith on numerous occasions since his pontifical appointments, including this:
In July of 2016, still under the direction of Paglia, the Pontifical Council for the Family issued a new sex-ed program that includes lascivious and pornographic images so disturbing that one psychologist suggested that the archbishop be evaluated by a review board in accordance with norms of the Dallas Charter, which are meant to protect children from sexual abuse.
The images in question, which, quite frankly, are of an amateur level of quality and boringly progressive in their message. I wish these geriatric progressive perverts would understand just how tired and predictable their attempts at shocking have become (beware these images contain nudity and are, as stated above, obviously intended to be erotic:
Paglia circled. The image is obviously intended to leave vague whether it be Christ or some male love uplifting the bishop
Yes there are drug dealers and prostitutes and people obviously getting it on if out and out penetration is not show. SOOOO appropriate for a church and children. Consider how diligent a man who has no problem bombarding children with homo-erotic art every day in what should be the sanctuary of the Lord is going to be about protecting children’s innocence generally, or from predatory priests in particular.
And yet Francis has seen fit to install this man over pontifical departments dedicated to upholding the family and the sanctity of life.
Outrage doesn’t begin to describe it.