No Surprize, College Professors Misrepresenting Catholic Teaching

& even less surprizing is the fact that the Jesuit magazine America printed articles by these professors with those errors. The Jesuits are supposed to be the strongest defenders of orthodox Catholic faith. Sadly they have become some of the greatest promoters of heterodoxy & heresy out there. & America has been 1 of their tools used to do so.

However, it is heartening that these professors have been challenged by Cardinal Justin Rigali, Archbishop of Philadelphia and chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), and Bishop William E. Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., chairman of the USCCB Committee on Doctrine. Even more heartening is that they made sure their public correction appeared in the very magazine that promoted the misrepresentations in the 1st place.

According to a Cardinal Newman Society (CNS)report: "The bishops write that two previous America articles by John Hardt, assistant professor of bioethics at Loyola University of Chicago’s Stritch School of Medicine, and Thomas Shannon, emeritus professor of religion and social ethics at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, “appear to misunderstand and subsequently misrepresent the substance of Church teaching on these difficult but important ethical questions” about “our moral obligations to patients who exist in what has come to be called a ‘persistent vegetative state.’”"

Hardt's article appeared last January. In it he cites "a 2007 statement by the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), which teaches that artificial nutrition and hydration may be withheld from a patient when “in some rare cases” the treatment “may become excessively burdensome.” Using the example of his father, who has asked not to receive artificial hydration and nutrition should he enter a vegetative state, Hardt writes, “[M]y father has judged that the burden of persisting in a vegetative state far outweighs the benefit of being sustained that way. This, in my view, is a very Catholic way of thinking….”"

Cardinal Rigali and Bishop Lori's response: "Hardt wrongly defines excessive burden as “a simple dislike for survival in a helpless state.” In fact, that claim has no foundation in the text [and] is actually contradicted” by the CDF."

"Furthermore, the bishops write, Hardt ignores the Church’s teaching on euthanasia by “omission”: “The Church insists on the important distinction between validly withdrawing a life-sustaining means because the means itself is burdensome, and wrongly withdrawing it because (in someone’s view) life itself has become burdensome.” The latter action is “always morally wrong,” and providing food and water is almost never a significant burden to the patient.

“By omitting food and fluids, what are we trying to achieve?” ask the bishops. “Whose ‘burden’ are we trying to ease? Assisted feeding is often not difficult or costly to provide in itself, but the housing, nursing care and other basic needs of a helpless patient can be significant. To discontinue assisted feeding in order to be freed from such burdens puts the caregiver’s interests ahead of the patient’s, even if we prefer not to recognize the reality of our choice.”"

As the CNS article points out, this is the type of thinking used to justify Terry Schiavo's being denied food & water. & that the Vatican clearly opposed that course of action.

While I applaud Bishop Lori & Cardinal Rigali's actions, unfortunately they are in the minority. Sadly many more bishops are being silent rather than correcting those at Catholic colleges who's teachings undermine authentic Catholic teaching. The result, Catholics who say they can vote for pro-abortion candidates over pro-life candidates, who see nothing wrong with how Terry Schiavo was treated, etc. I can only hope & pray that Bishop Lori & Cardinal Rigali's actions are a sign of a much needed change starting to take place.

Source: Bishops Say College Professors ‘Misrepresent’ Catholic Teaching on End-of-Life Care