Good Question

This is about the Declaration on Euthanasia, written by Pope John Paul in 1980 I think.

It's a little complicated, and I don't want to use names of course, in case someone reading this knows the family.

I have a friend, a nurse, who's relative, a 96 yr old widow, had a stroke a couple of weeks ago. They called it a storm, meaning most of her brain has been affected. She is paralyzed on her left side and cannot talk, though she seems to be aware of her surroundings, responds to them and can make noises. She also "fusses" when they move her or change her clothes, so she is very much "with us" though she cannot communicate clearly.She is stable enough; so that they were able to bring her home last week. The woman's daughter lives with her, and they have home health help.

The problem is this: the hospital personnel and doctors involved with her in the beginning, even the home health nurse who was with her at the time of the stroke, said that since she has a DNR in place, and has signed a living will, that they would recommend that she not receive care. They even felt that she should not receive nourishment.

My friend, being an in-law, and not the blood kin, had kept her mouth shut until this point. She insisted that the Church requires that a patient receive basic care and that would include nourishment, even if that involved a feeding tube. She was surprised at the response she got from the hospital personnel and even from her own family members, one of whom is a hospital administrator. She was told that the lady was old and it would be unfair to force her to live when she was in such a state. They said her "quality of life" would be poor, and besides it was not her decision anyway. My friend said she felt that they were being pressured to let the woman die.

So she encouraged her husband to consult their priest, before making a decision. Apparently the lady's daughter agreed with her, and said she had no intention of starving her mother to death, and requested they insert the feeding tube. Which they did. The lady is holding her own and seems happy to be in her own home. The next day they spoke with their priest (and this is the clincher) Father said the feeding tube could be considered "extraordinary measures" and it would not have been wrong to decline it. He is saying the feeding tube is "invasive" .

Who gets to decide what are extraordinary means? We have read this Declaration as part of our biology class and it IS vague to me. Do we leave these decisions up to the doctors? I hope not. How can the mere act of feeding a person be considered extraordinary?

We need to read those "living wills" carefully; so that we do not give someone too much choice over our own lives. Or we need to be clear, so that our families don't have to make these kinds of decisions, or have these kinds of disagreements.(emphasis Adam's)

This is so important, I would love to hear other opinions.

And the 3rd Question...

third, in reading the ligorian it discusses how the 6th commandment says not to commit adultery but that does not mean premaritial sex is wrong. since i also found that odd, i would like some other opinion on it too please.

2nd Question

second question, on one(true faith) podcast it discussed how the rapture as most people know it is not what the bible really says will happen. it discussed how wrong the left behind notion is. i was wondering everyones opinion on it.

New question-first of 3

In a discussion with someone they wanted to know why attending mass (or church) every week was required. the commandment only says keep it holy. what is the argument on that?

Vatican Councils Question

Anonymous said...
I had a discussion with a friend about the Church and he is convinced "some" of the Vatican Councils are flawed. I don;t know enough to know the difference. Can you help with this question?thanks!
April 21, 2008 7:19 AM

I find it impossible to address this. Many holy people have spent their entire lives researching and commenting on these Councils of the Church and this small space and my feeble thoughts and words are insufficient to the task.

2nd Question

I have a question-Help me explain to my Protestant friends/family why Good Friday can't just be glossed over "in favor of" (for lack of a better phrase) Easter.Thanks!

1st Question--a biggie

I'm struggling with the concept that there is some disparity in how reverent you are if you choose to receive Holy Communion in your hands. I think if it's okay with Rome, it shouldn't be identified as you being irreverent.

• this is an issue being widely discussed. Reverence is required in either case. I think this is a tradition rather than a cause for division. The early Church did not have communion hosts and used hands. St. Cyril of Jerusalem (AD 390) indicated that the early Church practiced Communion in the hand. Later, communion was received on the tongue ONLY. Now we are under an indult that ALLOWS either.
  
• This instruction is from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops:

Distribution of the Body and Blood of the Lord

41. Holy Communion under the form of bread is offered to the communicant with the words "The Body of Christ." The communicant may choose whether to receive the Body of Christ in the hand or on the tongue. When receiving in the hand, the communicant should be guided by the words of St. Cyril of Jerusalem: "When you approach, take care not to do so with your hand stretched out and your fingers open or apart, but rather place your left hand as a throne beneath your right, as befits one who is about to receive the King. Then receive him, taking care that nothing is lost." (51)

51. Cf. GIRM, no. 73(GIRM-General Instructions of the Roman Missal 2002)

Personally, I see the importance of being reverent in either case, but according to the Church, the issue is being careful with the Body of Christ and proper care and reverence means that nothing should be lost to your fingers or the floor. Not many observe this level of care due mainly to lack of instruction. People that promote receiving communion on the tongue are also required to use the same care although receiving on the tongue combined with the use of a paten seems to minimize the chance of loss of any fragments (provided they consume the host with the mouth closed and yes....--don't ask).

All this said, I was trained to receive by hand. I have received on my tongue as well. I am reverent in either case. Avery (who is also reverent IMO) had a problem with the host as some of you know. He COULDN'T receive it without almost gagging when he was smaller--drove the wife NUTS! He got over it and now feels more comfortable taking it in his hands. He's gone to a TLM at Blessed Sacrament and did just fine.

I think we have to be careful to make sure we have the right motive of true Charity when we talk about all these topics. We also have to resist becoming overly scrupulous. We must be open to discuss but be gentle in our fervor to persuade. Hope this helps> I'll also try to get a TLM response to this question since I have less experience in that form.