I found this when I was looking for Fr Cekada's articles about the Schiavo case. I think it was originally posted on a French site and then translated.
Daly is Englishman living in France who teaches at a traditional school there, so he wasn't in the middle of all the media controversy here in 2005 and gives an "outsider's" take on it.
-----------------------------
Father Cekada, Euthanasia, and the Terri Schiavo Affair
John DALY, May 4th, 2006
The name of Father Anthony Cekada is not unknown in France, mainly because of his book The Problems With the Prayers of the Modern Mass, a learned study on the liturgical propers of the Novus Ordo and the principles governing their divergence from the traditional formulas.
More recently, this traditional American priest, ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1977 (but no longer with the Society of St. Pius X), has made two appearances recently in French in connection with the present controversy over the validity of the new rite of Episcopal consecration. This controversy has been prohibited on this forum, for the undeniable reason that the invalidity theory directly questions the legitimacy of the authority which promulgated this rite. But I believe I am not abusing the Forum by trying to get to the bottom of another controversy surrounding Fr. Cekada. I would rather do it here than on the forums specializing in calumny. Because in the face of his article on the consecrations and his interview on Radio Courtoisie last week, several Catholics have tried to destroy Fr. Cekada’s credibility by accusing him of promoting euthanasia in the famous case of Terri Schiavo, who died in 2005 after her feeding and hydration tubes were removed. And that hopeless website “Honor” did not of course refrain from its habit of dishonoring itself by trying to dishonor others without any regard for the truth.
It is never right, in any controversy, to attack your opponent’s reputation rather than his arguments. And in this case it appears to me that the accusation is completely unfair. I shall therefore allow myself to lay out the principal elements of the case…
Terri Schiavo, an American housewife, had been in an advanced vegetative state for fifteen years as a result of incurable cerebral lesions. Bed-ridden, without the ability to communicate, and, according to medical experts, having no knowledge beyond the level of her senses, she was being given solid and liquid nourishment by means of tubes. Her husband wanted the doctors to withdraw these means of prolonging this life of a vegetable. But her parents were of the opposite opinion and took him to court. The case became a cause célèbre for the Pro-Life Movement. The accusation of murder was heard.
Fr. Cekada put together an article on these matters, which made waves by being opposed to the almost unanimous voice of Catholics and conservatives. His main arguments were as follows:
1. The Pro-Life Movement, where Catholics work hand-in-hand with Protestants, Jєωs and humanists, sometimes tends to make an absolute out of prolonging human life, something which is not in conformity with sound doctrine. In such cases, we must always resist being dragged down to the emotional level and make our judgments based on the teachings of the Holy See and approved theologians.
2. The Church teaches that it is not against the 5th Commandment to terminate extraordinary means of prolonging life.
3. The permanent use of feeding and hydration tubes for the benefit of a sick person, without any hope of recovery to more than a semi-vegetative state can be considered as an extraordinary means. Such is the judgment of several respected theologians from the time of Pius XII.
4. In a case where solid arguments exist in favor of the legality of terminating the means of artificially maintaining life, where civil law is neutral, and where the doctors leave the decision to others, the one and only person (according to Catholic theology) competent to make such a decision for a married woman, is her husband, and not her parents.
5. This being the case, it is far from obvious that a mortal sin would be committed in removing the feeding tubes from Terri Schiavo. To maintain the contrary argument is to pervert the conscience of Catholics not only as regards their obligations to maintain life artificially, but also on the matter of spousal rights.
In following this outline, Fr. Cekada’s article certainly whipped up an outcry. From the torrent of emotional abuse only five arguments can be extracted that amount to even the slightest importance:
1. The media had falsified the facts concerning the real state of Mrs. Schiavo. In fact, she was able to swallow naturally and at times she could communicate by understandable words, she was not totally deprived of intelligence, etc.
2. The husband of Mrs. Schiavo was a depraved individual, already living in sin with another woman, and who wanted to rid himself by any means of his embarrassing wife, without even the slightest interest in the moral aspect of the case.
3. The use of feeding and hydration tubes in this particular case was not an extraordinary means.
4. The death which follows the removal of these tubes is particularly painful.
5. If the courts authorized that Mrs. Schiavo should be allowed to die, soon all kinds of euthanasia would be legalized… and even made obligatory soon after that, in certain cases.
To which Fr. Cekada replies roughly as follows:
1. His article presumes that the medical facts of the case are correct, and does so with all confidence, given the qualifications and the number of doctors who testified to them. In any case, even if the facts did not turn out to be exactly right, this would only change the judgment of this particular case, and not the moral principles—Fr. Cekada’s point of interest.
2. Certainly one could not trust the husband to have taken any moral principles into account in deciding the fate of his wife. But a lawful act can not be forbidden on the grounds that the person acting would have acted the same way even if it had been unlawful. Certainly Mr. Schiavo would not have given much weight to the presumed will of his wife, but neither is he strictly obliged to do so. It is not like writing a blank check to say that a husband, no matter how rotten he is, is still the husband, and that he alone has the right to decide, in any morally neutral matter, on behalf of his wife who is incapable of acting for herself.
3. If the extraordinary/ordinary character of the use of feeding tubes in such cases is up for discussion, then this demonstrates that their continued use cannot be made obligatory under pain of sin. Theoretical judgment belongs to Catholic moral theologians and not to sentimentalists.
4. The life which continues as long as the tubes are left in place is also very painful, both for the patient and for other persons, for many long years. This isn’t a question of some kind of quantitative evaluation of pain (which is impossible) but rather of the morality of allowing death to occur by removing means which have been judged by moral theologians to be, at least probably, extraordinary. The suffering of death, even though it may be eased, is an evil. This evil may be permitted in the face of a proportionate good.
5. A priest may not allow, out of any political motive, the consciences of Catholics to be seriously perverted. It is not clear that Terri Schiavo was killed unlawfully, and there is nothing that allows the opposite to be claimed.
It is not my intention here to enter into detailed discussion about these remarks. My intention is simply to defend the serious and good name of Fr. Cekada, by showing that his role in the Schiavo controversy contains nothing manifestly contrary to faith or morals, nothing manifestly stupid or pernicious, as some would have us believe.
Consequently, the other positions of Fr. Cekada, on questions of liturgy or whatever, cannot be settled by accusing the author of any lack of substance. The book The Problems With the Prayers of the Modern Mass, which a great number of us value highly, maintains all its worth. For the other positions of the author—tantum valent quantum rationes allatae.
Topic: Fr. Cekada, Euthanasia and the Terri Schiavo Affair (Read 7653 times)