Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Pause Switch to Standard View No one's talking about this one!
Show More
Loading...
Flag Lovey-Dovey May 20, 2010 10:26 PM EDT

www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?st...


What do you think?


I think this is just one more example of men trying to control women (and women's bodies!) to further their own agendas/propaganda!  So......the hospital should have let the pregnant mother die?  There was no other alternative!  Scary stuff!  (Anyone ever read The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood?)


Many blessings all, 

Flag mountain_man May 20, 2010 10:38 PM EDT

May 20, 2010 -- 10:26PM, Lovey-Dovey wrote:

...I think this is just one more example of men trying to control women (and women's bodies!) ....



Please. Do not include ALL men with that too broad of a brush. SOME men, almost exclusively religious fundamentalists, try to control women in that way. The rest of us support women and the right of women to control their own bodies.

Flag LeahOne May 20, 2010 10:48 PM EDT

I might develop some respect for the Church if they'd excommunicate that idiot bigot Olmstead jerk.


I wonder what that sleaze Olmstead would've told that woman's grieving widower and their four children.....

Flag jane2 May 20, 2010 11:01 PM EDT

May 20, 2010 -- 10:26PM, Lovey-Dovey wrote:


www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?st...


What do you think?


I think this is just one more example of men trying to control women (and women's bodies!) to further their own agendas/propaganda!  So......the hospital should have let the pregnant mother die?  There was no other alternative!  Scary stuff!  (Anyone ever read The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood?)


Many blessings all, 




The story itself is not new and the hospital did not let the mother die. The hoopla now is over Bishop Olmstead's actions against one of the administrator's, a Religious Sister of Mercy. Olmstead is a reactionary. His ex-communication applies only his diocese. The ban preludes Sister Mc Bride from receiving Catholic sacraments in his diocese. The right-wing Catholic bishops and probably some others need day jobs. This was a joint decision by those who were in place in this Catholic hospital during a crisis and most of us know this: most Catholics that are not right-wing applaud the decision by the hospital admin.


In actuality the bishop does not control the hospital. I worked inthe office of a Catholic hospital started and run by the Sisters of Mercy in a city in the northeast, college summers in the late fifties. I knew the RSM administrator and those who ran the office. When they said jump, bishops asked how high.


The active orders of Catholic women religious in the US are being investigated by a Cardinal Rode of Slovenia and some in the Vatican right now. My college was founded and run by the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, some of the most talented, mostly highly educated women I have ever known. Bishops were ceremonial only and had no say in how the college was run. Many of us think Rode should go back to Slovenia.


Some Catholic bishops have a strange need to control, others not so much. Olmstead needs to do some real work for a change, like driving his own car and having it serviced, shop for groceries and cook his own meals, yada, yada.


Jane




Flag Larosser May 20, 2010 11:36 PM EDT

What do I think of it? I think it's dispicable.


I think the Ethical and Religious Directives on which the bishop based his decision are intentionally inconsistent and hypocritical, in order to allow the leaders of the church to wash their hands of responsibility for gut wrenching decisions like the one made by Sister Margaret McBride.


Bishop Olmstead no doubt based his decision to excommunicate the sister on Directive 45 which states that abortion (defined as any procedure whose sole immediate effect is the termination of pregnacy before viability) is never permitted.


However, Directive 47 states that "operations, treatments and medications" required to cure a serious condition in a pregnant woman may be administered even if they result in the death of the child.


Had the bishop chosen to, he could have determined that the procedure had another effect - the saving of the mother's life - and was therefore permitted. Had Sister Margaret been more wily and hypocritical, she could have chosen to have the pregnancy terminated by some "operation, treatment or medication" that had a stated purpose of curing the mother.


Instead, the bishop stuck with the wheezy old rule that says the child cannot be done to death to save the mother and the mother cannot be done to death to save the child -  which makes no more sense to me than saying that if you can't save both a mother and child from a burning building, don't save either one.


Sister Margaret made a sad but medically sound decision, and rather than supporting her, he chose to add to her sorrows by separating her from her church. Bah on him.


 

Flag jane2 May 20, 2010 11:53 PM EDT

May 20, 2010 -- 11:36PM, Larosser wrote:


What do I think of it? I think it's dispicable.


I think the Ethical and Religious Directives on which the bishop based his decision are intentionally inconsistent and hypocritical, in order to allow the leaders of the church to wash their hands of responsibility for gut wrenching decisions like the one made by Sister Margaret McBride.


Bishop Olmstead no doubt based his decision to excommunicate the sister on Directive 45 which states that abortion (defined as any procedure whose sole immediate effect is the termination of pregnacy before viability) is never permitted.


However, Directive 47 states that "operations, treatments and medications" required to cure a serious condition in a pregnant woman may be administered even if they result in the death of the child.


Had the bishop chosen to, he could have determined that the procedure had another effect - the saving of the mother's life - and was therefore permitted. Had Sister Margaret been more wily and hypocritical, she could have chosen to have the pregnancy terminated by some "operation, treatment or medication" that had a stated purpose of curing the mother.


Instead, the bishop stuck with the wheezy old rule that says the child cannot be done to death to save the mother and the mother cannot be done to death to save the child -  which makes no more sense to me than saying that if you can't save both a mother and child from a burning building, don't save either one.


Sister Margaret made a sad but medically sound decision, and rather than supporting her, he chose to add to her sorrows by separating her from her church. Bah on him.


 




LR


Discussion is a good thing but you do love to get on your high horse about internal Catholic matters.


Why?


The Catholic hospital made the right decision--basically end of story.




Flag Larosser May 21, 2010 12:18 AM EDT

May 20, 2010 -- 11:53PM, jane2 wrote:


LR


Discussion is a good thing but you do love to get on your high horse about internal Catholic matters.


Why?


The Catholic hospital made the right decision--basically end of story.








Jane, this is an open discussion board, specifically called "hot topics". Lovey Dovey posted a link to an article and asked "what do you think?".  I responded  with my opinion, which seems the proper thing to do.



To my recollection, I've started one thread about the Catholic Church, and posted on this one.  I've also participated in threads about Jimmy Carter, National Day of Prayer,  banning the burqa, evangelical christian affairs, and other issues on which I have an option.


 


I don't have  a particular vendetta against the catholic church, there just happen to have been two issues in the news recently on which I disagree with the behavior of at least some catholics, and I said so. I believe that's appropriate. I haven't universally condemned Catholics,  or gone to the Catholic discussion boards and trolled, or started personal arguments with individual Catholics, or anything else that I consider uncivil or inappropriate.


 


It's become rather clear to me that I irritate you, and I am sad that's the case. I have found your posts to be interesting and thought provoking, and I'm sorry you don't find mine the same. I'd suggest that since you don't find value in my opinions you ignore them.


 


Best regards


La

Flag Lovey-Dovey May 21, 2010 7:17 AM EDT

I appreciate all your knowlegeable and thoughtful responses to my query.  It's sooooo refreshing to find some thinking people (and especially Christians!) out there who don't just knuckle under to whatever the hierarchy dictates.  And thanks also, Mountain Man, for your reminder, of course you are right.  It's just that....you'd think the church would be the one place where women are no longer beaten down.....or anyone else for that matter.  Blessings all, 

Flag dblad May 21, 2010 12:40 PM EDT

May 21, 2010 -- 7:17AM, Lovey-Dovey wrote:


....you'd think the church would be the one place where women are no longer beaten down.....or anyone else for that matter.  Blessings all,




From the OP


"In the case of priests who are credibly accused and known to be guilty of sexually abusing children, they are in a sense let off the hook," Doyle says.


Doyle says no pedophile priests have been excommunicated. When priests have been caught, he says, their bishops have protected them, and it has taken years or decades to defrock them, if ever.


"Yet in this instance we have a sister who was trying to save the life of a woman, and what happens to her? The bishop swoops down [and] declares her excommunicated before he even looks at all the facts of the case," Doyle says.



The official position of the Catholic Church on homosexuality;


  Sexual activity between persons of the same sex. It is not a normal condition, the acts being against nature are objectively wrong." The Catholic Encyclopedia. 2


 
 "Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, [140] tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered'." Catechism of the Catholic Church. §2357.


 


So, Yes, it is more than just women being beaten down. When do you think the Catholic Church will catch up with modern times?


 

Flag REteach May 21, 2010 1:02 PM EDT

Good for Sr. McBride!  Catholic sisters are often a lot more in touch with reality than some of their priestly counterparts, probably because they live more in the real world--which is why the Vatican is auditing them. 

Flag teilhard May 21, 2010 1:21 PM EDT

I think part of the Issue is that The Procedure was done in a CATHOLIC Hospital ...

Flag mytmouse57 May 21, 2010 10:39 PM EDT

The response is baffling. It's my understanding that although the RCC -- like many major religions -- opposes abortion, they still recognize exceptions, such as when the mother's life is clearly in danger. And in this case, Mom's life was clearly in danger. Nothing was done outside of Church rules. So, why the ex-communication?

Flag Lovey-Dovey May 21, 2010 10:52 PM EDT

I think it must have something to do with the hierarchy's fear of loosing control....therefore rules become more entrenched and ironclad, and those in authority tend to clamp down even harder on those below them. 

Flag mountain_man May 21, 2010 11:17 PM EDT

May 21, 2010 -- 7:17AM, Lovey-Dovey wrote:

I appreciate all your knowlegeable and thoughtful responses to my query.  It's sooooo refreshing to find some thinking people (and especially Christians!) out there who don't just knuckle under to whatever the hierarchy dictates.  And thanks also, Mountain Man, for your reminder, of course you are right.  It's just that....you'd think the church would be the one place where women are no longer beaten down.....or anyone else for that matter.  Blessings all,



Many men are guilty of what you've said. That pisses off the rest of us.


Not just the various versions of the Christian religion, but others as well do  not treat women with much respect. The more liberal versions, they do alright, but I cannot think of one fundamentalist version of any religion (except maybe some Earth religions) that treat women very well. We have seen proof that at least one bishop believes it is more important for women to give birth than to live.

Flag jane2 May 22, 2010 12:08 AM EDT

May 21, 2010 -- 10:52PM, Lovey-Dovey wrote:


I think it must have something to do with the hierarchy's fear of loosing control....therefore rules become more entrenched and ironclad, and those in authority tend to clamp down even harder on those below them. 




LD


This is the essence for me and I have said exactly this.


Under our Pope John XXIII and a Council of world-wide bishops the RCC was to emerge into the world today. John Paul II could not abide this and he despised almost everything American--including the Church here with so many well-edeucated people--no more serfs here.


The Church in America is under great rigidity right now with bishops like Olmstead appointed by John Paul II. Many American Catholics are not buying it. We don't quite have a schism but it is a very divided Church here right now.


Good point.




Flag jane2 May 22, 2010 12:11 AM EDT

May 21, 2010 -- 1:02PM, REteach wrote:


Good for Sr. McBride!  Catholic sisters are often a lot more in touch with reality than some of their priestly counterparts, probably because they live more in the real world--which is why the Vatican is auditing them. 




Amen, RE............

Flag Mlyons619 May 22, 2010 4:03 PM EDT

The issue in question of the OP is NOT a current "hot topic.  Please refer to the Local Guidelines for the HOT TOPICS ZONE."


this thread appears to be a more appropriate topic for the ABORTION DEBATE board.


Thanks,


mlyons619
Beliefnet Community Co-Host, HOT TOPICS ZONE

Flag Mlyons619 May 22, 2010 5:31 PM EDT

May 22, 2010 -- 4:59PM, Lovey-Dovey wrote:


... I will review your guidelines to see what is considered to be 'hot' or not...




I believe that is something you should've done BEFORE creating your thread.  That's why those Local Guidelines were put there in the first place.  The move stands.

Flag Justme333 May 22, 2010 10:14 PM EDT

This thread is now locked because while it is sort of about abortion, it is more about the Catholic Church.  It cannot go to the Catholic boards because it has to do with abortions, and the Catholic Church cannot be discussed on the abortion board.


Justme333
Beliefnet Community Host
Abortion Debate Board

Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook