Author Topic: 3 moral ?s (Read 2492 times)

Antony · « **on:** January 02, 2012, 05:06:06 PM »

My wife and I were recently visiting some novus ordo family. The topic came up of Catholics eating another human in extreme circuмstance like the Donner Party. The novus ordos seemed to have the impression that it would be morally permissable in some circuмstances. I said that I was pretty sure it was always an evil. The topics of organ donation and creamation also came up. Now, I am pretty sure I know the answers to these questions, but does anyone know for sure what the Church has said about these 3 topics. I don't want someone's opinion but what the Church really teaches. While I dont pass personal judgements on these people, I do know that the NO has really taught them corrupt teachings. Thank you.

Vladimir · « **Reply #1 on:** January 02, 2012, 05:21:17 PM »

a human being is body + soul. Since they are seperated at death, eating a corpse is not eating a human being.

It is acceptable.

in certain extreme cases.

Lybus · « **Reply #2 on:** January 02, 2012, 06:15:35 PM »

What Vladimir said is a teaching of Thomas Aquinas, that a human being is body AND soul.

Antony · « **Reply #3 on:** January 02, 2012, 06:23:43 PM »

Quote from: Lybus

What Vladimir said is a teaching of Thomas Aquinas, that a human being is body AND soul.

That still does not answer the question as to whether or not it is morally right to eat a dead body that was once a human being. I am not trying to be confrontational. I really appreciate your comments. Yet,I want a statement a Saint, Doctor, Father of the Church, or Pope has published (and I don't mean publishing in the modern sense of the word). Anyhow, the dead body is sacred and must be treated as such because the dead body once was (if in state of grace) and will be (if in heaven) the temple of the Holy Ghost. That is one of the reasons we bury bodies.

Lybus · « **Reply #4 on:** January 02, 2012, 08:42:35 PM »

During the Black Plague, the church allowed for corpses to be burned in order to attempt to slow the disease that was ravaging Europe. Clearly then, the church gives precedence to life over respect for the remains. If absolutely necessary to preserve the public good, the normal ways of dealing with a body can be suspended. Therefore, I see no reason why a body cannot be cannibalized under the extreme condition of starvation.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #5 on:** January 02, 2012, 08:48:40 PM »

Organ donation and cremation are condemned by the Church. Eating a corpse, on the other hand, would probably be acceptable in extreme cases of starvation.

Sigismund · « **Reply #6 on:** January 02, 2012, 09:34:56 PM »

Where has organ donation been condemned by the church?

Marcelino · « **Reply #7 on:** January 02, 2012, 10:39:23 PM »

"Somehow" the extreme case always seems to wind up being the new rule :tv-disturbed:

Cannibalism on live TV show
On December 20th, 2011 Yahoo News reported a case of televised cannibalism on Dutch TV[180]. The two presenters of live TV show “Proefkonijnen,” Dennis Storm and Valerio Zeno were earlier filmed while they were under local anaesthetic as a surgeon cut a piece of their muscle at a clinic. A chef was brought in to fry their flesh on their TV show, in front of a studio audience. Zeno and Storm then sat for a candlelit dinner - complete with wine - to dine on each other's muscle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism

The example I'm thinking of is abortion. Folks used to say, abortion should be illegal, except in the case of the life of the mother. So, what constitutes a threat to a mother's life? Then I think we were told, it should be up to a woman and her doctor to answer that question. Well, every pregnancy is, to some degree, a threat to the life of the mother. :sign-surrender:

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #8 on:** January 02, 2012, 11:21:06 PM »

I seriously doubt that the only thing the Church rejected about cannibalism in the past was the killing of the person. It also must be morally reprehensible to the Church for people to eat bodies which are otherwise treated as sacred by the Church's previous condemnation of cremation. The body will be resurrected. Chomping on it would be worse than cremation, in my opinion.

It boils down to whether the act of eating a dead body is intrinsically wrong. If it is, the ends never justify the means, even to save one's life.

Darcy · « **Reply #9 on:** January 02, 2012, 11:43:10 PM »

There's supposed to be a food shortage this year coming.

TKGS · « **Reply #10 on:** January 03, 2012, 05:22:02 PM »

Cannibalism: The Church has always defended herself against the charge of cannibalism and has been horrified of the very idea. I doubt that the Church has ever actually formally anathamatized cannibalism. The thought is so very horrid that I cannot see how sane people can even wonder. In some sort of extreme case, I believe it would still be sinful, though I can't provide any evidence from the theologians.

Cremation: The Catholic Church has always condemned cremation. The Conciliar church has, of course, made cremation into a multi-million dollar business.

Organ transplantation: The Church has not formally condemned organ transplantation as long as the organ donor is truly dead. The question that is currently up in the air is whether "brain death" is real or if the organ transplant business has successfully redefined death in such a way that living people are murdered in order to harvest their organs. Personally, I believe that often, these days, people who are not actually dead are murdered for their organs. On the other hand, I do not believe this is always the case as some lay Catholic apologists believe. While I will not be an organ recipient, I would not absolutely reject organ donation for me or a family member as long as I was absolutely sure the potential donor was dead. The absolutely worst thing that goes on these days is for the organ donation vultures to descend upon a family and pressure them to allow organ donation, telling them how the "victim" will be able to give life to others, etc., and not allow them to see any real proof of death other than the doctor's word.

Vladimir · « **Reply #11 on:** January 03, 2012, 05:25:51 PM »

I take back saying that cannibalism is OK in extreme cases. I thought that another member had previously shown sufficient evidence to support that, however, upon review, it is apparent that that thread was not conclusive.

Another honest question - what makes burial more reverent than cremation? It seems rather disgusting to bury a corpse in the earth where it will rot and maggots and worms devour it.

Santo Subito · « **Reply #12 on:** January 03, 2012, 05:33:37 PM »

The CCC states:

Quote

2300 The bodies of the dead must be treated with respect and charity, in faith and hope of the Resurrection. The burial of the dead is a corporal work of mercy;92 it honors the children of God, who are temples of the Holy Spirit.

I doubt "respect and charity" involve "eating".

Antony · « **Reply #13 on:** January 03, 2012, 06:36:41 PM »

Thank you all. Now we are getting somewhere.

TKGS · « **Reply #14 on:** January 05, 2012, 01:41:18 PM »

Quote from: Santo Subito

The CCC states:

Quote
2300 The bodies of the dead must be treated with respect and charity, in faith and hope of the Resurrection. The burial of the dead is a corporal work of mercy;92 it honors the children of God, who are temples of the Holy Spirit.

I doubt "respect and charity" involve "eating".

What if you use the right fork?