|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Pope Francis' Extraordinary Synod Oct 2014
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
(ETA The dreaded page turn strikes again)
Isn't conviction of sin the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit? I never limit the way that Person may choose to work. I seem to recall a quote (C S Lewis?) about bottling moonbeams when it comes to the work of the Holy Spirit.
Scripture is amusing about leadership; little children may lead and a donkey may speak for God. Prophets may challenge the authority of Kings. Jesus' sheep hear his voice. All of us are subject to governing authorities. And should submit to elders. Go figure an overarching stereotype out of that lot - and plenty of others.
[ 07. December 2014, 11:46: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
... I guess I don't count archbishops as church leaders - they're middle management. With the difficult job of trying to reconcile the situation as the front-life staff report it with the directives from HQ. ...
That's very much an RC perspective. I don't think many other ecclesial communities work like that.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Planeta Plicata
Shipmate
# 17543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
Do you believe that the main influence for his action came from the Vatican ? Or from listening to contemporary lay voices - progressive and conservative - and forming a judgment as to where the right course of action lay in this particular case ?
...
I guess I don't count archbishops as church leaders - they're middle management. With the difficult job of trying to reconcile the situation as the front-life staff report it with the directives from HQ.
I think people unfamiliar with Church governance tend to underestimate the amount of power bishops have vis-à-vis Rome. But they have quite a lot, for both theological reasons (the "supreme power in the universal Church" is exercised by the college of bishops) and practical ones (the Roman Curia is far too small compared to the Church as a whole to do much micromanaging, the few well-publicized counterexamples notwithstanding [1]).
In this particular case, though, the Vatican did weigh in: quote:
Other segregationist Catholics formed the Association of Catholic Laymen of New Orleans which "asked the Pope (Pius XII) to stop Rummel from taking further steps to integrate white and Negro Catholics and to decree that racial segregation is not 'morally wrong and sinful'" ("Morals" 36). The Vatican's response was to remind all that "the Pope had condemned racism as a major evil, asserting 'that those who enter the Church... have rights as children in the House of the Lord'" (McCulla 68).
[1] "The Catholic Church is about the most decentralized institution in the world," said the Rev. Thomas Williams, dean of theology at Regina Apostolarum Pontifical University in Rome. "There are 1.1 billion Catholics and 2,600 employees at the Vatican. The proportion would be like to run the federal government of the United States with 500 people. You couldn't do it."
[ 07. December 2014, 23:45: Message edited by: Planeta Plicata ]
Posts: 53 | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Planeta Plicata
Shipmate
# 17543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
You're quite right to remind us that some lay people can be more conservative than the hierarchy.
I should also point out that this doesn't just apply to situations where the hierarchy is more "liberal" than the laity. (Even if it's possible to give terms like that meanings that are consistent across history.) For example, plenty of progressive intellectuals in America and Europe in the early 20th century supported forms of eugenics (including a lot of liberal Protestants), but the RCC hierarchy adamantly opposed it.
Posts: 53 | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Planeta Plicata:
... For example, plenty of progressive intellectuals in America and Europe in the early 20th century supported forms of eugenics. ...
It is quite a good idea to remind oneself of this when people are saying either you, or the church as a whole, should unthinkingly align with where society seems to be going or where the state or the chattering classes are trying to take it.
Eugenics were very respectable until May 1945. Many states were routinely sterilising some of their less fortunate citizens without their consent until long after that.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
posted by Enoch quote:
Many states were routinely sterilising some of their less fortunate citizens without their consent until long after that.
But does that necessarily equal eugenics? Always?
For example, what about a female with an IQ so low (c that of a 3 year old child) she can't cope with her own periods, doesn't understand how she becomes pregnant, can't cope with the process of delivery, yet is capable of bearing a child?
So far she's had 2 children - fathered by ??? - and is still only 20 years of age. She has a social worker who speaks brightly of her 'rights' but doesn't have to cope with her distress and bewilderment when pregnancy causes discomfort and pain. When a health worker mentioned the possibility of sterilisation the social worker went straight to 'you-are-a-nazi' mode which isn't either helpful or hopeful.
What would YOU do?
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Contraceptive implant or coil, subject to proper capacity assessment and best interest meeting. But most importantly, if she genuninely has the understanding of a three year old, I be concerned to stop people raping her - as that seems to have been happening repeatedly.
[ 09. December 2014, 07:14: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
And how do you explain menstruation and personal hygiene to one with the mind of a 3 year old?
Some time ago, I wrote of the daughter of friends. S has even less ability than the one of whom L'Organist writes; she cannot speak, her language being confined to squeaks, grunts and so forth. She also has very poor motor skills. When S was about 12, her parents made an application to the relevant and superior Court which deals with such matters. A person was appointed to represent S's interests, paid for not by the parents but from government funds. After a contested hearing, with substantial medical evidence, the judge ordered that the parents could arrange for S have a full hysterectomy with oophorectomy, as the doctors to perform it were satisfied that the procedure was clinically appropriate. S could have had no concept of menstruation and would probably have been terrified by it.
Such applications are not common here, and I assume that there is a similar procedure in other jurisdictions. I know that there certainly is in England. I would be surprised if the Catholic Church drew issue with it.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Generally, with pre-verbal clients, if they are distressed by their menstruation, it is managed with contraception. If they are not distressed by it, they would have regular assistence with their personal care - as they would with continence issues.
The reason for wanting to avoid surgery in these women, is due to the long term effects of the disruption to the hormone system, the risks of surgery itself and the difficulties posed by surgical recovery.
For example, someone with severe pica may pull out and eat surgical stiches, there maybe difficulty keeping post-operative wound clean and infection free etc.
I had a relative, sadly now deceased at the age of 32, who was thought to be getting detached retinas. If it had happened, he would have been blind without surgery. Nonetheless family and clinical team agreed it was not in his best interests to have surgery as he would have had to be physically restrained or kept unconcious for the entire healing period if there was to be any chance of a successful surgical outcome.
[ 09. December 2014, 23:35: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Also, menstruation is not inherently frightening. To be frightened of blood, you need some concept of blood and why it matters. We don't castrate males because we fear they will be frightened by semen, confused by wet dreams or have poor personal hygiene. For most women menstruation is not especially painful either.
(Actually, managing menstruation with someone as able as a three year old would not be that difficult, they would have fluent language and could be taught a system. They would remain extremely vulnerable to sexual exploitation though.)
[ 09. December 2014, 23:43: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Also, menstruation is not inherently frightening. To be frightened of blood, you need some concept of blood and why it matters. We don't castrate males because we fear they will be frightened by semen, confused by wet dreams or have poor personal hygiene. For most women menstruation is not especially painful either.
(Actually, managing menstruation with someone as able as a three year old would not be that difficult, they would have fluent language and could be taught a system. They would remain extremely vulnerable to sexual exploitation though.)
Menstruation is not inherently frightening for someone who knows what is going on. But for someone whose experience of blood is that it goes with injury and pain, it may very well be very frightening. And while I am no expert in assessing mental age, I'd say that S is below 3. She is now in her early 20s and still has no verbal language; she has squeeks, squeals and grunts, cries and tears. Teaching her a system would be an impossibility.
I agree with your first post that there are risks in operations. I'd be surprised if all of these matters were not canvassed before the court. What I would like to hear from you on is the procedure I have referred to - the appointment of a representative for the child, the retention of legal representation and qualification of expert witnesses to assist a court reach a decision. All of course at the expense of the state both to ensure a proper level of representation and to keep clear independence from the parents.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
All terribly wise, evolving compassion.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
I don't think that the concept of "the sterilisation of the feebleminded" prior to World War 2 was exclusively directed at mentally handicapped young women. (Although as Doublethink points out, stopping such women from being raped might be an alternative to sterilisation.)
There are quite a lot of harsh things that can be said about the teaching of the Catholic Church prior to the Second World War but its implacable hostility to eugenics is not one of them which was, as Enoch indicates, the sort of thing supported by the enlightened and the progressive until it became fashionable in Germany after 1933.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Also, menstruation is not inherently frightening. To be frightened of blood, you need some concept of blood and why it matters. We don't castrate males because we fear they will be frightened by semen, confused by wet dreams or have poor personal hygiene. For most women menstruation is not especially painful either.
(Actually, managing menstruation with someone as able as a three year old would not be that difficult, they would have fluent language and could be taught a system. They would remain extremely vulnerable to sexual exploitation though.)
Menstruation is not inherently frightening for someone who knows what is going on. But for someone whose experience of blood is that it goes with injury and pain, it may very well be very frightening. And while I am no expert in assessing mental age, I'd say that S is below 3. She is now in her early 20s and still has no verbal language; she has squeeks, squeals and grunts, cries and tears. Teaching her a system would be an impossibility.
I agree with your first post that there are risks in operations. I'd be surprised if all of these matters were not canvassed before the court. What I would like to hear from you on is the procedure I have referred to - the appointment of a representative for the child, the retention of legal representation and qualification of expert witnesses to assist a court reach a decision. All of course at the expense of the state both to ensure a proper level of representation and to keep clear independence from the parents.
In adulthood, such issues are dealt with in the UK by the court of protection under the mental capacity act - not entirely sure of the process for children but I thnk they get a guardian ad litem in the legal process to advocate for them (appointed by the court).
I work with adults with LD including pre-verbal individuals, it is not my experience most of them are terrified by their menstruation. Personal hygiene is usually more of an issue; often people with severe developmental delay engage mostly sensory play - and may play with bodily waste / secretions as they feel/smell interesting - and this can be challenging for carers to manage. It is usually the case that people with this degree of developmental delay do not attain full continence. Menstruation is not uniquely more difficult in this respect than urine and faeces - and management tactics are similar. (Good pads regularly changed, lots of more interesting sensory activities offered instead - ideally after a proper sensory assessment.)
What I don't understand is how you justify full hysterectmy and ovary removal in a twelve year old on the prediction the individual will struggle with menstruation. As opposed to using medication to manage.
Pre-puberty this intervention would stunt bodily development, massively increase the risk of osteoparosis and a number of other conditions that could adversely effect the child's life. It sounds not unlike the debate over so-called "pillow angels" - seriously doubt you would get a UK court to agree such an intervention.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Reference re pillow angel - look up Ashley treatment on wiki if you want more info on this.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
I don't justify full hysterectomy. Quite frankly, I do not have the knowledge to argue for or against it. What I do justify is the procedure which ultimately led a judge, having heard all the evidence abut S, to conclude that that was the appropriate course in her case.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Just to return to the original subject, the Lineamenta or preparatory document for the 2015 Ordinary Synod has been issued. In spite of the fact that certain subjects failed to get the necessary two thirds majority of votes at the Extraordinary Synod in October, I notice that none of them is off the agenda for 2015. So it looks to be just as explosive!
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
I don't justify full hysterectomy. Quite frankly, I do not have the knowledge to argue for or against it. What I do justify is the procedure which ultimately led a judge, having heard all the evidence abut S, to conclude that that was the appropriate course in her case.
I think a court process is probably the only option in contested cases - though it is unfortunate, I wouldn't want a doctor doing my conveyancing or a solicitor deciding how to rewire my house. I suspect the outcome may have less to do with the quality of the evidence and more to do with the quality of the barristers.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Obviously, the decision is reached on the basis of the evidence presented; I would not be surprised if the evidence offered on behalf of the plaintiffs (usually the parents) commonly agreed with that by the child's representative.
I really do doubt the validity of the analogy you seek to draw. The role of a barrister in many cases is to draw out the evidence of experts and then make submissions based on that evidence, whether the case is an industrial accident, a complex case of financial management, a building and construction dispute, or what is in the best interests of a child or protected person. The barristers and judges do not need to be able to carry out the procedures themselves, but to understand what the expert is saying and assess that against the non-expert matters in evidence. In other words, an expert's opinion can only be valid if the facts upon which that opinion is based are proven.
The cases in NSW are dealt with in the Protective List of the Supreme Court's Equity Division - the equivalent to the English High Court's Chancery Division. There are very few a year - a previous judge in charge of the list told me around a half dozen years ago that there were usually under 5 a year. The cases are heard in closed court, with a suitably anonymised judgment being delivered and published in open court. Routine treatment decisions are made either by the guardian of the person or a lower level specialist tribunal.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Doublethink.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Doublethink., Not sure why you referred to "contested cases". The practice here is that for such serious surgery, a court order must be obtained. An order from the relevant Tribunal is not sufficient, not is the consent of those entrusted with the normal care of the protected person.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
