Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 24

Author Topic: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article  (Read 22426 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline confederate catholic

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 823
  • Reputation: +304/-44
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
« Reply #45 on: November 26, 2020, 10:00:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Yes they absolutely kill people to get major organs
    Logged
    قامت مريم، ترتيل وفاء جحا و سلام جحا

    Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11934
    • Reputation: +7293/-500
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #46 on: November 26, 2020, 10:52:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: confederate catholic on November 26, 2020, 10:00:40 PM
    Yes they absolutely kill people to get major unpaired organs
    There. Fixed it.
    Logged
    Help of Christians, guard our land from assault or inward stain,
    Let it be what God has planned, His new Eden where You reign.

    +RIP 2024

    Offline confederate catholic

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 823
    • Reputation: +304/-44
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #47 on: November 26, 2020, 11:18:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Was referring to things that are not cadaver skin and corneas which can be gotten from actual dead people.
    They'd be happy to kill you for 2 kidneys
    Logged
    قامت مريم، ترتيل وفاء جحا و سلام جحا

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #48 on: November 27, 2020, 06:00:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on November 26, 2020, 09:18:46 PM
    Except that this is inapplicable, because the HEK293 did in fact come from an abortion.
    How is the HEK293 that came from an abortion differ from an organ transplant coming as a result of a murder?  In this case how is the recipient of the vaccine that resulted from an abortion differ from the recipient of an organ transplant as a result of a murder? I am specifically referring to situations where the abortion/murder did not happen to cause the HEK293/organ availability.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #49 on: November 27, 2020, 06:02:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Nadir on November 26, 2020, 09:42:14 PM
    Not to change the subject but...
    It is my understanding that all heart transplants use the heart of a person who was killed for the specific purpose. A beating heart is needed. I suggest you further investigate this.
    OK, if this is true, then pick any kind of organ transplant as a result of a death (not caused to get said organ).
    Logged

    Offline Mr G

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2413
    • Reputation: +1580/-94
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #50 on: November 27, 2020, 06:57:26 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • FYI:  https://lifeguardianfoundation.org/

    Also,

    http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/medical/brain_death_and_organ_harvesting.htm

    The Dead Donor Rule False
    A very interesting contribution to the whole consideration of the morality of the removal of organs from persons said to be brain dead has come from an unexpected source. It is the New England Journal of Medicine that published, on August 14, 2008, vol. 359 (7), p. 674-675, an article that demonstrates beyond all serious doubt that the harvesting of organs is done from persons that truly are living, and that in point of fact it is the harvesting of the organs necessary for life, such as lungs, heart, two kidneys, complete liver and pancreas, that is actually the cause of death.

    The authors do not conclude that organ transplantation ought not therefore to be done, but to the contrary justify it on the purely utilitarian non-principle that the person was going to die in any case. This we cannot accept, as the Church has constantly taught, for the end does not justify the means, and you cannot kill a person on account of the good that can come to another person. Nevertheless, the passage attached as a note below illustrates the principle that the donor of the organs is indeed a living person, and hence that act of taking the organs is the deliberate termination of life, and that transplantation of organs necessary for life can only be justified as the taking of one life to save or prolong another life—that is, by playing God. The authors are entirely in favor of such immorality, but at least they avoid the hypocrisy of attempting to justify it by pretending that the brain dead person is actually a dead non-person, pointing out that he retains many vital functions, and can live for years in such a state.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #51 on: November 27, 2020, 07:14:16 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Does anyone have an authoritative traditional source declaring we can use the organs of murder victims?
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline PAT317

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 916
    • Reputation: +787/-117
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #52 on: November 27, 2020, 07:31:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on November 27, 2020, 07:14:16 AM
    Does anyone have an authoritative traditional source declaring we can use the organs of murder victims?
    I would be fascinated to see such a source as well. 
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #53 on: November 27, 2020, 07:38:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Not traditional, but this article cites the 1992 conciliar catechism as implicitly rejecting the moral permissibility of using the organs of a murder victim:

    “It is not morally acceptable if the donor or his proxy has not given explicit consent (no. 2296).”

    https://sites.sju.edu/icb/position-catholic-church-organ-donation/

    Obviously, a murder victim does not consent to donate his organs.

    The reasons for the impermissibility would be identical to those Don Curzio Nitoglia mentions in the other thread pertaining to abortions (ie., failure to meet several criteria necessary for applying double effect: The good effect comes directly from the evil act; the evil outweighs the good effect; etc.).
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #54 on: November 27, 2020, 08:40:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on November 27, 2020, 07:38:45 AM
    Not traditional, but this article cites the 1992 conciliar catechism as implicitly rejecting the moral permissibility of using the organs of a murder victim:

    “It is not morally acceptable if the donor or his proxy has not given explicit consent (no. 2296).”

    https://sites.sju.edu/icb/position-catholic-church-organ-donation/

    Obviously, a murder victim does not consent to donate his organs.

    The reasons for the impermissibility would be identical to those Don Curzio Nitoglia mentions in the other thread pertaining to abortions (ie., failure to meet several criteria necessary for applying double effect: The good effect comes directly from the evil act; the evil outweighs the good effect; etc.).
    First of all, just a general comment that my head is spinning watching quotes from the SSPX and the "Conciliar" church being used/not used depending upon whether it supports one's position.  I think everyone here needs to realize that there are no authoritative (aka pre-Vatican II) teachings on this topic.

    With respect to the above post, it does mention explicit consent from a "proxy", so I suspect that if a family member consented to the transplant that would change the morality of someone receiving the organ. It doesn't have to be from the murder victim.  

    As a result, I don't see how those receiving the transplant are guilty of, an accomplice to, or in any way supporting the murder act itself.  The discussions regarding a vaccine using fetal cells tend to suggest that those that use the vaccine would be doing at least one of those things.  

    I lean towards not taking these vaccines by the way, but I don't have the authority to expect others to do the same.  I don't think this is as black and white as many are making it.  And I think that is why there are theologians who teach the material/remote aspect to the topic.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #55 on: November 27, 2020, 08:57:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on November 27, 2020, 08:40:27 AM
    First of all, just a general comment that my head is spinning watching quotes from the SSPX and the "Conciliar" church being used/not used depending upon whether it supports one's position.  I think everyone here needs to realize that there are no authoritative (aka pre-Vatican II) teachings on this topic.

    With respect to the above post, it does mention explicit consent from a "proxy", so I suspect that if a family member consented to the transplant that would change the morality of someone receiving the organ. It doesn't have to be from the murder victim.  

    As a result, I don't see how those receiving the transplant are guilty of, an accomplice to, or in any way supporting the murder act itself.  The discussions regarding a vaccine using fetal cells tend to suggest that those that use the vaccine would be doing at least one of those things.  

    I lean towards not taking these vaccines by the way, but I don't have the authority to expect others to do the same.  I don't think this is as black and white as many are making it.  And I think that is why there are theologians who teach the material/remote aspect to the topic.

    1) Could you please refute Fr. Scott?

    2) If so, could you then please attempt to apply double effect (ie., refute Don Nitoglia)?

    At present, those arguments are the roadblocks standing in the way of liberty to use abortive vaccines.

    If neither can be done (and the latter definitely cannot), then on what justification do your positions in favor of liberty remain?

    Nobody wants to constrain Catholics unnecessarily, but you need to justify the liberty of action you are arguing for, instead of just repeating, “I don’t see why,” and “I don’t understand why,” etc.

    There may be no authoritative magisterial declaration on the issue (contrary to what the SSPX sees in the 2005 doc, which was my first objection on p.1 of the first thread), but there are pre-conciliar principles of moral theology (double effect) which clearly show the immorality of using abortive fetal cells in the development of vaccines.

    If you doubt these principles are properly applied, then you should refute Don Nitoglia.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #56 on: November 27, 2020, 10:04:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • But there have been other Catholic moral principles used by others of which you and others disregard.  Every single explanation is an interpretation of Catholic moral principles.  Who is to say which is correct and MUST be followed on pain of mortal sin?

    Fact is...there is none.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #57 on: November 27, 2020, 10:19:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on November 27, 2020, 10:04:18 AM
    But there have been other Catholic moral principles used by others of which you and others disregard.  Every single explanation is an interpretation of Catholic moral principles.  Who is to say which is correct and MUST be followed on pain of mortal sin?

    Fact is...there is none.

    I haven’t disregarded any arguments based on Catholic moral principles.  Rather, I have chosen Fr. Scott (and the old SSPX), and failing that, of Don Nitoglia, over the arguments of the neoSSPX and 2005 PAFL.

    The arguments I am disregarding are those not based on moral principles (eg., Confederate Catholic seems to want to preempt the moral discussion altogether, by advancing uncited medical assertions, like today’s HEK293 contains no fetal matter, or others attempting to create doubt regarding the fact of the 1972 abortion, despite practically the entire pharmaceutical industry acknowledging the fact, etc).

    Note also that, because I am not sedevacantist, I do not reject the conclusions of conciliar prelates simply because they are conciliar, as you must.  Consequently, when they reach correct conclusions (as I believe so many have on this issue), I will hold them out in support of the old SSPX position, even if at present their unsupported (as yet) conclusions are only arguments from authority, rather than the application of principles.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #58 on: November 27, 2020, 10:44:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on November 27, 2020, 10:19:31 AM
    I haven’t disregarded any arguments based on Catholic moral principles.  Rather, I have chosen Fr. Scott (and the old SSPX), and failing that, of Don Nitoglia, over the arguments of the neoSSPX and 2005 PAFL.

    The arguments I am disregarding are those not based on moral principles (eg., Confederate Catholic seems to want to preempt the moral discussion altogether, by advancing uncited medical assertions, like today’s HEK293 contains no fetal matter, or others attempting to create doubt regarding the fact of the 1972 abortion, despite practically the entire pharmaceutical industry acknowledging the fact, etc).

    Note also that, because I am not sedevacantist, I do not reject the conclusions of conciliar prelates simply because they are conciliar, as you must.  Consequently, when they reach correct conclusions (as I believe so many have on this issue), I will hold them out in support of the old SSPX position, even if at present their unsupported (as yet) conclusions are only arguments from authority, rather than the application of principles.
    OK, so I was trying very hard not to inject the topic of sedevacantism into this discussion.  But since you did, you're right: your position allows you to sift the teachings of what you claim to be your authority.  If that's okay for you, why can't other Catholics sift and interpret how they see fit? 

    I'll be honest.  I have no idea what CC is talking about, so I won't comment on it.  

    As for the 1972 abortion, I think it's pertinent.  Yes, the pharmaceutical industry says it was an elective abortion.  It also states that other vaccines used in the 1960's such as the MMR used elective abortions.  Why is it that you trust what they say?  Big Pharma is suddenly trustworthy?  If these abortions were illegal (which they would have been at that time), how did they get the cells? Perhaps I have no idea what I'm talking about with this, but 2+2 doesn't = 4 for me.     
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Chazal on SSPX/COVID19 Vaccinations Article
    « Reply #59 on: November 27, 2020, 11:19:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on November 27, 2020, 10:44:01 AM
    OK, so I was trying very hard not to inject the topic of sedevacantism into this discussion.  But since you did, you're right: your position allows you to sift the teachings of what you claim to be your authority.  If that's okay for you, why can't other Catholics sift and interpret how they see fit?

    I'll be honest.  I have no idea what CC is talking about, so I won't comment on it.  

    As for the 1972 abortion, I think it's pertinent.  Yes, the pharmaceutical industry says it was an elective abortion.  It also states that other vaccines used in the 1960's such as the MMR used elective abortions.  Why is it that you trust what they say?  Big Pharma is suddenly trustworthy?  If these abortions were illegal (which they would have been at that time), how did they get the cells? Perhaps I have no idea what I'm talking about with this, but 2+2 doesn't = 4 for me.    

    You are listening to an anonymous forum poster (who has no idea what they are talking about), and which contradicts what the rest of the planet attests to as a matter of fact, to form doubt there really was an abortion??

    Abortions were illegal in the Netherlands until 1984, EXCEPT TO SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER:

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/medicalxpress.com/news/2020-10-fetal-cells-1970s-power-medical.amp
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."
    Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 24
    « previous next »