Of Medicine, Magic and Original Sin

The Wanderer National Catholic Weekly/ The Diocese Report ^ | Brian J. Kopp, DPM

[RnMomof7]

The root problem is a fundamental fear of death. Disease is simply a stage on the road to that death introduced by original sin. So man must come to terms with his own death.

If you have assurence of where you are "going" when you die there is no fear..

When I worked with the dying those that knew Christ went "home" in peace.Those that were not sure cried out in fear..

[mercy]

Thanks again for the bump. As a militant Protestant it was nice to read a catholic article that did not encourage to worship Mary. It's a good article. I agreed with almost all of it but the tiny bit of promoting 'catholic' thought as the progenitor of modern science. They held it back and down as long as they could and like the good politicians they were, when they realized they could not beat em they joined em.

[Hajman]

Just like the human race is too stupid to fly, make a nuclear reactor, build a computer, etc... The only thing that separates humans from immortality is knowledge... The only thing that separates us from that knowledge is time...

Consciousness has the power to understand anything in existence when presented with the facts in context...

Humans possess consciousness, so there is nothing we can't understand once we figure it out...

This isn't about knowledge. It's about application of the knowledge once we have it, and the effects from that knowledge. And a global effect would be overpopulation in less time it takes for your grandkids to have grandkids. Humans arn't mature enough to take the kind of responsability needed to insure a stable environment in this kind of situation. Thousands of years we've lived, and we're still no closer to such an end then we were when we started. Human nature has it's consequences.

The human population is not increasing exponentially... Not even close... In fact, there is evidence that world population is decreasing...

Even if the population was growing exponentially, the technology to solve overpopulation "problems" would easily be invented...

If you had read what I wrote, you would have seen my statement followed the premise that no one dies. In this case, the population would increase expodentially. We couldn't keep up with population growth fast enough once it reached a certain level. Nature would take over, and people would die due to necessity. We have relatively slow population growth now, with negative growth rate in some areas. Imagine if you will, if those natural boundries...dissapeared. Do you realize how fast expodential growth would rise? What would be your solution?

Only if corruption is allowed...

Corruption doesn't need permission to exist. Take the Clinton's for example. If we can't keep corruption down even when the corrupt do die off, how do we expect to keep it down if they didn't?

Keep in mind, once humans get to choose if they die or not, all the power gets shifted to the individual from the central power collective...

This is only true in anarchy. As long as we recognize government, we recognize and accept central power control. This is an effect of government. And our Republic government is the closest we've ever come to keeping that effect to the minimal.

That guarantees that all government entities and faux religious authorities who have ruled and controlled conscious humans will be discovered for the worthless nothings they are, and the world will become infinitely better....

No, it just means they won't die and will control further, if immortality is given only to an elite. Old generation who were against them passes away into dust, and using public schools, they gain a new generation who are with them, and the next generation are their's even further. We have discovered many worthless people out there in power, some have gone down, others have not until death. Death is the great equalizer, especially when you have a race of beings that arn't naturally good. Immortality could be akin to, say, unrestricted Presidential terms. Restriction is necessary to keep corruption from overtaking.

Unintended consequences, my friend. What is your solution to them?

-The Hajman-

[JenB]

Interesting piece; I have only one comment. It denegrates herbal medicine at the same time it talks about new age-y stuff. What does the author think people used before antibiotics and such? Herbs, right? Does that mean *everyone* born before whenever penicillin became readily available is doomed to hell?

I don't mean to criticize, it just raised a point in my mind that nobody here seems to have addressed.

[EternalVigilance]

"Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. And we have known and believed that the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgement; because as He is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love."I John 4:15-18

...perfect love casts out fear...

Call on the Lord, my FRiend, and you won't have to be SCARED any more.

[SCARED]

I do not want to argue and in this issue one will never convince the other. so... THANK YOU for your good intentions towards me.

[EternalVigilance]

Oh, you are quite welcome...good night.

[Brian Kopp DPM]

What does the author think people used before antibiotics and such

I think I can speak for the author (since I am the author) and say that the use of herbal medicines is in no way "new age." It has a strong basis in science. Fortunately, most herbal remedies that are actually effective have been made into medicines. Those that do not work have been relegated by science to the snakeoil dustbin. There is tremendous financial incentive in pharmacy science. The pharmaceutical firms have been looking at the claims of herbal medicine for many decades, looking for compounds that have valid use in medicine. When such herbs are discovered they are formalized and sold as pharmaceutical drugs. Those not used most likely have no real practical benefit.

What I have found on occasions too numerous to count is that otherwise decent folks who would never be deceived by New Age medicinal practices are enticed into it by herbal concoctions. Therefore the otherwise innocent herbal remedies become like a "gateway drug." Marijauna is considered a gateway drug in that its use leads to use of more dangerous recreational drugs. This is an imperfect analogy because frankly I don't see marijauna use as "harmless." It is illegal and therefore cannot be "harmless" if only from a legal standpoint.

On the other hand, most herbal remedies are indeed harmless. Although there are many well documented cases of severe reactions and deaths using herbal remedies, by and large they are harmless to the user. The corrolary is that if indeed they are harmless, the chances that they are truly pharmacologically useful to the patient is slim to none.

My final analysis is that though herbal remedies taken by themselves as a group of alternative medicine recommendations are harmless spiritually, they can lead unsuspecting folks into deeper spiritual danger. likewise, while they are relatively safe, they are also relatively useless from a pharmacological standpoint. Which means there is tremendous deception and fraud when remedies are sold as efficacious when in reality they are not. In other words. people waste hard earned money on useless herbs. Therefore those selling them, whether they realize it or not, are engaging in immoral behavior.

This is just my opinion. I have no doubt some will vociferously disagree, and even flame me for stating it so bluntly.

[nobdysfool]

but sidestepped the real point. the unbelievibly horrendous vengence for the choice made. "i am a vengeful god". i guess so. hell of an attribute for a perfect being.

How about a JUST God? God's perfection demands justice for disobedience. What you call vengeance, God calls justice. God gave Adam and Eve one command. "Don't eat of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, for in the day you eat of it, you shall surely die." What part of that don't you understand?

In your world, God tells Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree in the midst of the garden, and then after they do, God just says, "oh, that's OK...maybe it was a stupid command. I'll just pretend it didn't happen". What kind of god would do that? Not any kind of god that I would want to serve, because he couldn't be trusted. He could change his mind on a whim, and I couldn't believe any promise he made to me, because he could just decide not to fulfill it. Is that the kind of god you want?

God is Holy, and His Holiness cannot abide sin (disobedience or rebellion) in His presence. The Bible says His Holiness will kill you because no sinful flesh can stand in the presence of God. Face it. You are human. That means that Adam was your ancestor, and sin passed onto the whole human race because of Adam's sin. You were literally in Adam (as a potential human being) when he sinned. You want to know how serious sin is? It is so serious that God's imputation of sin to Adam and Eve caused a genetic change, which is passed down to this day. Sin is so serious that when Lucifer sinned and became Satan, He was kicked out of Heaven, along with 1/3 of the angels, those who rebelled with him. Sin is so serious to God that He flooded the whole earth, and only saved 8 people, because the rest of the world was so sinful that it actually caused God to regret that He had made man. Sin is so serious that the only way God could make it possible for man to have fellowship with Him, He had to become a man, in the person of His Son, Jesus, a new race of man, sinless, in order to pay the penalty for sin, in order to reconcile man to God, through faith in the Jesus, and repentance from sin. What you so casually dismiss as the acts of a capricious and petty God are acts of ultimate love and grace for you. He did it even though you don't deserve it. He did it because He loves you that much, that He would suffer death to make it possible for you to experience life with Him.

Now, do you want to reconsider your position?

[Titanites]

I agreed with almost all of it but the tiny bit of promoting 'catholic' thought as the progenitor of modern science. They held it back and down as long as they could and like the good politicians they were, when they realized they could not beat em they joined em.

Try reading a book sometime.

[JenB]

Somehow I missed you wrote the piece, and I sincerely hope my comment did not offend you; it was not meant to. Since you stated your position clearly, I can say I mostly agree with it; I don't use herbs myself, since I feel we have better ways to treat disease now. I was simply interested, as I said, in your position on pre-modern medical treatments in earlier times. I won't address the marijuana issue as I have no real knowledge on the topic.

[Aquinasfan]

Granted, St. Thomas Aquinas dealt with theology and philosophy. Yet it was Thomistic thought, the rational, reasoned examination of concepts and ideas, from which grew the methods of scientific investigation and by which was discovered the evidence upon which modern western medicine and science is based. The Church was the incubator of the scientific process, and its universities were the seed from which has grown Western scientific thought.

I gotta subscribe to the Wanderer. Great article. Very insightful.

[Aquinasfan]

I said that the Church no longer teaches that an infant will not go to Heaven if it were to die without being baptised first, in lieu of original sin.

The Church never taught that dogmatically, so the Church's position cannot have changed. We are permitted to hope that God gives these children, who have died before being baptized, an opportunity to choose for God and hence attain heaven. But even the doctrine of limbo, that these children attain "natural happiness" without attaining heaven, is still a permissible position. It remains an open question, to some extent.

[Aquinasfan]

"i am a vengeful god". i guess so.

This is the same God who humbled Himself to become a man and die a humiliating death on the cross to atone for our sins. You must counter-balance your criticism with this dogmatic teaching of the Church.

Evil and suffering is a great mystery, there is no doubt about that. But the ultimate "answer" is to be found at Calvary.

[US admirer]

RE: post 33 With all due respect, what a load of sophistic tripe. Your statements remind me of why, after being raised a catholic, I no longer respect most religions.

[Aquinasfan]

Try reading a book sometime.

I second that motion.

[ShadowAce]

Very good answer. I have been trying to phrase something along those lines to answer SCARED, but I feel you hit the nail on the head with that one.

We need a God who will keep his word--who will be just and be absolutely holy. Unfortunately, most people these days do not understand what holiness is. They feel it is Mother Theresa, or Ghandi, or Martin Luther King, Jr. turning the other cheek and letting others walk all over them. That is not holiness. Holiness is being perfectly righteous, and not abiding evil (in whatever form) to have a place in your life. Holiness does not even tolerate evil.

[Aquinasfan]

With all due respect, what a load of sophistic tripe.

With all due respect, can you tell me where I'm wrong?

[Aquinasfan]

Have you read Stanley Jaki's book, "Science and Creation"? Jaki contends that Newtonian physics arose soon after the Church's promulgation of the doctrine of creation ex nihilo. He makes a very strong case.

[US admirer]

I'm not debating the accuracy of your statements regarding catholic doctrine. I refer to their absurdity.