|
2 members (2 invisible),
307
guests, and
27
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,295
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390 |
Originally posted by Slavipodvizhnik:
Let me pose a moral dilemma. A young married girl presents to you with an ectopic pregnancy (The baby is growing OUTSIDE of the womb). This is not an uncommon occurance. 1 in 60 of pregnancies are ectopic. The vast majority miscarry early in the first trimester. However some do not. The girl is a Catholic. The baby cannot live and develop under such conditions, and will die in inside of her. If she does not miscarry, she will most likely die. How do you council her?
Alexandr I would counsel her to seek the advice of her parish priest or spiritual director, praying for their guidance and wisdom, and out of appreciation that I was not faced with such a choice. If I were, I would faithfully submit to the direction I recieved from same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 |
Originally posted by Wondering: Originally posted by Slavipodvizhnik:
[b] Let me pose a moral dilemma. A young married girl presents to you with an ectopic pregnancy (The baby is growing OUTSIDE of the womb). This is not an uncommon occurance. 1 in 60 of pregnancies are ectopic. The vast majority miscarry early in the first trimester. However some do not. The girl is a Catholic. The baby cannot live and develop under such conditions, and will die in inside of her. If she does not miscarry, she will most likely die. How do you council her?
Alexandr But you see what I am saying, it is not always a black and white answer, which I think is one of the reasons why some people said that abortion is not always wrong. Oh, and for those interested, the Catholic position, as outlined to me by the Diocese of Pittsburgh, the approved Catholic treatment is salpingectomy, removal of the fallopian tube, thereby terminating the pregnancy, and sterilizing the woman. Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5 |
Originally posted by Slavipodvizhnik: Originally posted by bruno:
[b] But come on people, if are Catholic (western or eastern), you are required to believe what was defined by the first Vatican Council on this matter, or you are no longer a Catholic because you are a heretic.
Alexandr [/b]A heretic is someone who does not accept one or more doctrines taught by the Catholic Church. Denying a doctrine of the Church is a loss of faith which consequently seperates the heretic from the Church by schism. A heretic is not Catholic. Papal infallibility is doctrine taught by the Catholic Church. Depending on the circumstances, heresy may or may not matter in terms of salvation. I grabbed this quote off the Catholic Encyclopedia (follow the link to read the whole article), but I've looked at other sources in the past when I was figuring this stuff out a few years back. Catholic Encyclopedia Article on Heresy [ newadvent.org] St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". "The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are,therefore,two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church. The believer accepts the whole deposit as proposed by the Church; the heretic accepts only such parts of it as commend themselves to his own approval. The heretical tenets may be ignorance of the true creed, erroneous judgment, imperfect apprehension and comprehension of dogmas: in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the necessary conditions of sinfulness--free choice--is wanting and such heresy is merely objective, or material. On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church. The impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one's own insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more dishonourable. Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called formal, because to the material error it adds the informative element of "freely willed".
Pertinacity, that is, obstinate adhesion to a particular tenet is required to make heresy formal. For as long as one remains willing to submit to the Church's decision he remains a Catholic Christian at heart and his wrong beliefs are only transient errors and fleeting opinions. Considering that the human intellect can assent only to truth, real or apparent, studied pertinacity, as distinct from wanton opposition, supposes a firm subjective conviction which may be sufficient to inform the conscience and create "good faith". Such firm convictions result either from circumstances over which the heretic has no control or from intellectual delinquencies in themselves more or less voluntary and imputable. A man born and nurtured in heretical surroundings may live and die without ever having a doubt as to the truth of his creed. On the other hand a born Catholic may allow himself to drift into whirls of anti-Catholic thought from which no doctrinal authority can rescue him, and where his mind becomes incrusted with convictions, or considerations sufficiently powerful to overlay his Catholic conscience. It is not for man, but for Him who searcheth the reins and heart, to sit in judgment on the guilt which attaches to an heretical conscience.
II. DISTINCTIONS
Heresy differs from apostasy. The apostate a fide abandons wholly the faith of Christ either by embracing Judaism, Islamism, Paganism, or simply by falling into naturalism and complete neglect of religion; the heretic always retains faith in Christ. Heresy also differs from schism. Schismatics, says St. Thomas, in the strict sense, are they who of their own will and intention separate themselves from the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church consists in the connection of its members with each other and of all the members with the head. Now this head is Christ whose representative in the Church is the supreme pontiff. And therefore the name of schismatics is given to those who will not submit to the supreme pontiff nor communicate with the members of the Church subject to him. Since the definition of Papal Infallibility, schism usually implies the heresy of denying this dogma. Heresy is opposed to faith; schism to charity; so that, although all heretics are schismatics because loss of faith involves separation from the Church, not all schismatics are necessarily heretics, since a man may, from anger, pride, ambition, or the like, sever himself from the communion of the Church and yet believe all the Church proposes for our belief (II-II, Q. xxix, a. 1). Such a one, however, would be more properly called rebellious than heretical.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 |
Originally posted by bruno: QUOTE]A heretic is someone who does not accept one or more doctrines taught by the Catholic Church. Denying a doctrine of the Church is a loss of faith which consequently seperates the heretic from the Church by schism. A heretic is not Catholic. Papal infallibility is doctrine taught by the Catholic Church. Depending on the circumstances, heresy may or may not matter in terms of salvation.
I grabbed this quote off the Catholic Encyclopedia (follow the link to read the whole article), but I've looked at other sources in the past when I was figuring this stuff out a few years back.
Catholic Encyclopedia Article on Heresy [newadvent.org]
St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". "The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are,therefore,two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church. The believer accepts the whole deposit as proposed by the Church; the heretic accepts only such parts of it as commend themselves to his own approval. The heretical tenets may be ignorance of the true creed, erroneous judgment, imperfect apprehension and comprehension of dogmas: in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the necessary conditions of sinfulness--free choice--is wanting and such heresy is merely objective, or material. On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church. The impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one's own insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more dishonourable. Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called formal, because to the material error it adds the informative element of "freely willed".
Pertinacity, that is, obstinate adhesion to a particular tenet is required to make heresy formal. For as long as one remains willing to submit to the Church's decision he remains a Catholic Christian at heart and his wrong beliefs are only transient errors and fleeting opinions. Considering that the human intellect can assent only to truth, real or apparent, studied pertinacity, as distinct from wanton opposition, supposes a firm subjective conviction which may be sufficient to inform the conscience and create "good faith". Such firm convictions result either from circumstances over which the heretic has no control or from intellectual delinquencies in themselves more or less voluntary and imputable. A man born and nurtured in heretical surroundings may live and die without ever having a doubt as to the truth of his creed. On the other hand a born Catholic may allow himself to drift into whirls of anti-Catholic thought from which no doctrinal authority can rescue him, and where his mind becomes incrusted with convictions, or considerations sufficiently powerful to overlay his Catholic conscience. It is not for man, but for Him who searcheth the reins and heart, to sit in judgment on the guilt which attaches to an heretical conscience.
II. DISTINCTIONS
Heresy differs from apostasy. The apostate a fide abandons wholly the faith of Christ either by embracing Judaism, Islamism, Paganism, or simply by falling into naturalism and complete neglect of religion; the heretic always retains faith in Christ. Heresy also differs from schism. Schismatics, says St. Thomas, in the strict sense, are they who of their own will and intention separate themselves from the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church consists in the connection of its members with each other and of all the members with the head. Now this head is Christ whose representative in the Church is the supreme pontiff. And therefore the name of schismatics is given to those who will not submit to the supreme pontiff nor communicate with the members of the Church subject to him. Since the definition of Papal Infallibility, schism usually implies the heresy of denying this dogma. Heresy is opposed to faith; schism to charity; so that, although all heretics are schismatics because loss of faith involves separation from the Church, not all schismatics are necessarily heretics, since a man may, from anger, pride, ambition, or the like, sever himself from the communion of the Church and yet believe all the Church proposes for our belief (II-II, Q. xxix, a. 1). Such a one, however, would be more properly called rebellious than heretical. So, you are saying that the Orthodox are indeed, heretics? Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Grateful Member
|
|
OP
Grateful Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528 |
Originally posted by bruno:
But come on people, if are Catholic (western or eastern), you are required to believe what was defined by the first Vatican Council on this matter, or you are no longer a Catholic because you are a heretic.
[ . . . ]
A heretic is someone who does not accept one or more doctrines taught by the Catholic Church. Denying a doctrine of the Church is a loss of faith which consequently seperates the heretic from the Church by schism. A heretic is not Catholic. Papal infallibility is doctrine taught by the Catholic Church. Depending on the circumstances, heresy may or may not matter in terms of salvation. Bruno, you're new here, so I will give you this helpful hint: Your use of the word heretic is offensive. This forum is for everyone who is interested in Eastern / Byzantine Christianity. That includes Catholics, Orthodox, Non-Chalcedonians, Protestants and anyone else. The word "heretic" has been used to justify persecution, killing or just plain hate against all of those groups, by members of all of those groups. Hence, out of respect for those who were persecuted in the past, and to avoid hatred in the present, the word "heretic" is generally not used here. Be well. -- John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Grateful Member
|
|
OP
Grateful Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528 |
The new, revised poll is now available ! Please take the new poll and help us learn more about the people who visit this forum. Thank you.
-- John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,586 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,586 Likes: 1 |
Originally posted by harmon3110:
The new, revised poll is now available ! Please take the new poll and help us learn more about the people who visit this forum. Thank you.
-- John John Confusion is setting in  So far I have voted in 2 polls - am I supposed to be voting again ?? Take pity on an old bewildered pensioner please 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Grateful Member
|
|
OP
Grateful Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528 |
Originally posted by Our Lady's slave of love: Take pity on an old bewildered pensioner please LOL !!! Just vote in whatever you want. I posted the notice only to bump the topic. Be well. -- John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,688
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,688 |
Originally posted by Slavipodvizhnik: Originally posted by Wondering: [b] Originally posted by Slavipodvizhnik:
[b] Let me pose a moral dilemma. A young married girl presents to you with an ectopic pregnancy (The baby is growing OUTSIDE of the womb). This is not an uncommon occurance. 1 in 60 of pregnancies are ectopic. The vast majority miscarry early in the first trimester. However some do not. The girl is a Catholic. The baby cannot live and develop under such conditions, and will die in inside of her. If she does not miscarry, she will most likely die. How do you council her?
Alexandr I would counsel her to seek the advice of her parish priest or spiritual director, praying for their guidance and wisdom, and out of appreciation that I was not faced with such a choice. If I were, I would faithfully submit to the direction I recieved from same. [/b]
Alexandr [/b]Alexandr: the situation you have described would not be an abortion as understood in Catholic moral theology. Abortion, in Catholic moral theology, is the willful termination of the unborn child. The medical procedure seeks to treat the ectopic pregancy. The child will certainly die as a result of this treatment, but the intent of the treatment was not to kill the child.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 576
OrthoDixieBoy Member
|
|
OrthoDixieBoy Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 576 |
The baby cannot live and develop under such conditions, and will die in inside of her. If she does not miscarry, she will most likely die. How do you council her? Death is not absolute in these cases. There have been ectopic pregnancies carried to term with the delivery of a healthy baby and mother. Granted they are rare, but I believe that needs to be taken into consideration. Jason
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5 |
Bruno, you're new here, so I will give you this helpful hint: Your use of the word heretic is offensive. This forum is for everyone who is interested in Eastern / Byzantine Christianity. That includes Catholics, Orthodox, Non-Chalcedonians, Protestants and anyone else. The word "heretic" has been used to justify persecution, killing or just plain hate against all of those groups, by members of all of those groups. Hence, out of respect for those who were persecuted in the past, and to avoid hatred in the present, the word "heretic" is generally not used here.
Be well.
-- John [/QB] John, I'm sorry if you or anyone else is offended, but my use of the H word is legitimate. I can't help it if people have been persecuted, killed , etc in the past. I'm sorry those things happened and still happen, however, just because awful events have occured, doesn't mean that we stop recognizing that which is true or stop using a word. I'm not persecuting anyone, I'm pointing out something that is disturbing. Now, I would hope that you would understand that I would be concerned by Catholics that deny their professed faith by denying papal infallibility. The ramifications of that must be pointed out. I would expect members of any faith (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, Mormon, etc) to do the same in a similiar situation. I would not expect the Orthodox members of this forum to adhere to a belief that I'm sure that they find offensive (or however they view it) and I am not offended that they don't accept it. I am offended by people who claim the same faith as I do, but then deny a required belief (dogmatically defined doctrine). I would be just as upset and I would have had to point the same issue if it were apparent from the numbers that a large numbers of Catholics denied the divinity of Christ, or the virginity of Mary, or had stated that the Eucharist were not the actual Body and Blood of Christ. Heretic is not an offensive word; it is a descriptive word to describe people and their relationship to an institution, faith, etc. One last point, I joined this site because I have an interest and questions about the Eastern/Byzantine Catholic Churches. Getting into discussions of this nature was not my desire, but what we desire is sometimes secondary to what we must do. I am not particulary interested in writing anymore on this subject either as I would hope that I have made my point by now. God Bless, Bruno
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342 |
Shlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
I found the poll interesting since it assumed that all of us Eastern Catholics have Orthodox Church counterparts. I also, found the race question interesting since as a Middle Easterner, I am considered "white", but to most of my fellow Americans they think I am African-American.
Poosh BaShlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
Yuhannon
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 |
Originally posted by Deacon John Montalvo:
[ Alexandr: the situation you have described would not be an abortion as understood in Catholic moral theology. Abortion, in Catholic moral theology, is the willful termination of the unborn child. The medical procedure seeks to treat the ectopic pregancy. The child will certainly die as a result of this treatment, but the intent of the treatment was not to kill the child. [/QUOTE] Dear Deacon John, Please understand, it is not my intention to appear snide, but this is, in the East, what would be termed Latin legalism. In a Clintonesque sort of Philadelphia lawyer manner, technically you are correct, but remember, in this instance, the fallopian tube is not the problem, it is the fetus growing on the outside surface which is the medical issue. A simile can be drawn that it is wrong to shoot Bill, but if I burn down Bills house, and Bill dies, my intent was not to kill Bill, but to burn down the house. There is nothing wrong with the fallopian tube, as there is nothing wrong with the house. Both were destroyed, with the consequence that both Bill and the unborn child died as a result. When this issue came up, I counceled her in the manner as outlined by the Diocese, as I restrict myself to working within the parameters of the patients beliefs. However, I did more research later, and even spoke to the Startsi at Pechesky about it. The concensus was, that everything should be done to see to it that the child was given every opportunity to be term. However, if the child dies in utero, or if the tube ruptures and the pt is at risk of death due to hemmorhage, the attempt to save at least one life should be made. This, to my mind at least, made more sense. I realize that this is a difficult moral dilemma, and my prayer is that no one should ever have to face this. My instincts tell me that a dose of Methotrexate, so that the child is reabsorbed, would have been safer for the mother, less traumatic, just as effective, and not sterilize her, so that she could have more children in the future. At least one catholic medical ethicist agrees with me. http://www.geocities.com/seapadre_1999/ectopicpregnancy.html Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 |
Originally posted by RomanRedneck: The baby cannot live and develop under such conditions, and will die in inside of her. If she does not miscarry, she will most likely die. How do you council her?
Jason Yes Jason, you are correct. A little less than 1% do make it to term, or nearly so. Which is why I am in agreement with the Startsi, who council watching, and waiting, giving the child every opportunity, and aborting only if the mother is in imminent danger of death. Tough subject! Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 |
Originally posted by Memo Rodriguez:
I refuse to answer a poll asking for my race.
Sorry.
Shalom,
Memo Actually, that is too bad. I was recently looking over some of the demographics of our South American parishes, and I found it quite interesting that 57% designate themselves to be non-European. I don't think that the question had any intent of denigrating ones race. It is odd that race is such an issue in the west. I have never even heard it mentioned in Europe. Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
