Posted on 09/30/2016 7:38:16 PM PDT by ebb tide
Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec said he has no intention to follow in the steps of his fellow Canadian bishops of Alberta and the Northwest Territories in refusing funerals for those who asked to be euthanized.
“I don’t plan specific directives aimed at refusing this support or refusing access to the anointing of the sick and the celebration of funerals,” Cardinal Lacroix said in a statement Sept. 29. The cardinal was reacting to a document published earlier this month by the bishops of Alberta and the Northwest Territories, addressed to the clergy, in which they said these sacraments and celebrations may be refused for those opting for assisted suicide or euthanasia.
“The Catholic Church accompanies people in every step of their life. We do that in dialogue with every person and every family that wishes to be accompanied,” added the cardinal.
He also reminded people of everyone’s “unconditional dignity in the eyes of God.”
“This is why we will always opt for palliative care accessible for everyone instead of euthanasia,” Cardinal Lacroix said.
He recognized that recent changes in the laws of the province of Quebec and in the Canadian Penal Code offer “new pastoral challenges” for the Catholic Church.
In Montreal, Archbishop Christian Lepine also said he does not intend to ask his priests to refuse funerals for those who choose the now legal medically assisted dying.
In their 34-page Guidelines for the Celebration of the Sacraments with Persons and Families Considering or Opting for Death by Assisted Suicide or Euthanasia, published in mid-September, the Alberta and Northwest Territories bishops said euthanasia is a “grave violation of the law of God.” They offered pastoral guidance and indicated that a person’s judgment may be impaired through “depression, drugs, or pressure from others.”
They said it would be “truly scandalous” if funerals were to become a celebration of the decision to choose euthanasia or assisted suicide. “Such a request for funeral rites must be gently but firmly denied,” said the document.
One of the things I learned in Canada is that if you want to find a strong culture of Catholicism or even just strong public morals, the last place you’d bother looking is in the one province that was predominantly Catholic.
I agree with this decision. It’s hard enough to lose a loved one for any reason. A funeral is a ceremony to honor the memory and pray for that person’s soul. It is not necessarily meant to be a trial of judgement. There are of course limits to that concept.
If the deceased were a murderer or someone guilty of the vile or the violent, then perhaps a church ceremony would not be appropriate, at least not a fully attended ceremony. One reason we must deal with this question is because science has progressed enough so that someone can be kept alive solely through machines and artificial means. Some people don’t consider this living.
Interestingly, the Church used to have the same approach for dealing with ANY suicide cases, but that was relaxed as modern research revealed the existence of legitimate medical conditions and mental illnesses that were not known in the past. A person who pursues an "assisted suicide" course of action, however, demonstrates a clear complicity in their own demise that cannot be attributed to a legitimate mental condition.
One reason we must deal with this question is because science has progressed enough so that someone can be kept alive solely through machines and artificial means. Some people don’t consider this living.
The Catholic Church has explicit moral teachings on end-of-life questions like this. Nobody is under any obligation to be kept alive through machines and artificial means (other than nutrition and hydration).
The Catholic Church recognizes that suicides are often severely depressed individuals whom God may take mercy on.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm
“”Euthanasia
2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.
2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.
Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.
2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of “over-zealous” treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one’s inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.
2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.
Suicide
2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.
2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.
2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.
Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.
2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.””
The Novus Ordo already allows funerals for those who commit suicide (once prohibuted by the Catholic Church). This is just their next logical step.
If we follow your logic, why wouldn’t we also want to hold a funeral and pray for the soul of the murderer?
Why not? The person is just asking someone else to do the dirty work for them.
That’s the point. Someone who is lucid enough to sign a legally binding document — with medical and legal oversight, mind you — allowing someone else to do grave harm cannot possibly be dealing with a mental incapacity.
Right — but there is a huge difference between someone who commits suicide on a whim over some unfortunate (real or perceived) circumstances, and someone who goes through a legal process to get someone else to kill him.
That’s BS. You absolutely can still have mental incapacity and sign a document.
Of course. But then why bother with a funeral at all? They probably didn’t have the mental capacity to exercise their faith at all.
Pre-Vatican II the Catholic Church never allowed for funerals for ANY suicide. If a change in teaching can happen for "regular" suicides, why not "assisted suicides"?
The answer is it can...and it will. It's just a matter of time. Let's not pretend that assisted suicides are really any different in the grand scheme of things. The real question should be: should this change for "regular" suicides have ever happened in the first place?
There is no obligation, per Church doctrine, moral law or statute law, to accept or continue excessively burdensome or futile treatments. But that is not news. Patients have always had the right to end futile aggressive interventions and opt for palliative care.
People with good palliative care---nutrition, hydration, pain and anxiety management, clean and comfortable --- have no reason to try to inveigle self-murder. Governments push self-murder as a "right" because they don't want to bother with decent hospice care.
“governments ... don’t want to bother with decent hospice care”
___________________
Bingo! It just costs too much.
My father recently passed and I thank God we were able to have him in a private home. He had wonderful caregivers, delicious food, etc. (I had dinner with him often).
Maxed out my credit card flying to Chicago four times since Christmas and staying at a motel for weeks at a time. I just had a feeling I needed to spend time with him.
But it was worth every penny. I miss him so much.
One big problem with assisted suicide is that the person is asking another person to commit a grave sin.
True. People don’t even bother to get married in Quebec anymore.
I know that in Sicily, the Church has been known to forbid funerals for Mafia gangsters, because of the element of public scandal. If murderers are denied funerary honors, it is because they are denied "honors." It doesn't mean we don't pray for them. We even have Masses offered for them.
That wasn’t the point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.