It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SCI/TECH: Vatican Decries 'Religion Of Health' In Affluent Nations

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   
The Vatican today spoke out against the "Religion of Health" that consumes many in the affluent countries of the world. The health problems which have plagued Pope John Paul II were mentioned while pointing out that some of the most valuable lessons in life are to be learned during health crises and the process of dying and death. The unattainable pursuit of perfect health is said to have made medicine impossible to manage.
 



www1.wsvn.com
Vatican officials Thursday decried what they called a "religion of health" in affluent societies and held out Pope John Paul II's stoic suffering as an antidote to the mentality that modern medicine must cure all.

"While millions of people in the world struggle to survive hunger and disease, lacking even minimal health care, in rich countries the concept of health as well-being figures in creating unrealistic expectations about the possibility of medicine to respond to all needs and desires," said the Rev. Maurizio Faggioni, a theologian and morality expert on the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life.

"The medicine of desires, egged on by the health care market, increases the request for pharmaceutical and medical-surgical services, soaks up public resources beyond all reasonableness," Faggioni said.

The theologian spoke at a news conference in advance of a debate in the academy next week on politically hot issues such as the right to life and medical care.




Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I have to agree with this up to a certain point. The quest for perfect health is such an obsession with some that it is a disorder unto itself. I can myself attest to the fact that serious illness and injuries can challenge the body and soul to the extent that one is ultimately enriched by the experience. My sister has had rheumatoid arthritis since the age of fourteen and my brother has been blind since birth. Both have suffered immeasurably by their conditions, but both can appreciate the perspective on life that they have gained as a result.

But, understanding these matters and having the respect that I have for Pope John Paul, I still feel that the papacy is not fulfilled by having a man as ill as he is filling that office. I am not Catholic and have serious problems with many aspects of Catholicism and this issue goes to the heart of some of those concerns.

Should any man hold an office of any kind in which he is held to be infallible? Should any servant of God be revered to the extreme levels Catholics render their Popes? Can the Church be expected to be properly managed when its "monarch" is ailing so intensely? Is this pronouncement intended to counter those who feel that Pope John Paul should step down? Regardless of any other factor the Pope is an elected official. Should there be conditions under which a Pope can be voted out of office?

Related News Links:
www.signonsandiego.com

[edit on 05/2/17 by GradyPhilpott]




posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 11:47 AM
link   
I agree also but again only to a certain point. I think the "religion of health" that the vatican is worried about is the fact that people think that medications are quick fixes for everything, any issue that plagues you, there's a medicine being sold for it. When treatment isn't as successful as we would like it to be, we demand more from the doctor's, we want the next new drug, the next new miracle pill. I totally understand where the Vatican is coming from with this, but then like you mentioned about your siblings, I think we all relate and probably all know someone who's life has become easier and more fulfilling due to some of these wonder drugs.

As for your questions:

Should any man hold an office of any kind in which he is held to be infallible? Should any servant of God be revered to the extreme levels Catholics render their Popes? Can the Church be expected to be properly managed when its "monarch" is ailing so intensely?

No to all of the above.


Is this pronouncement intended to counter those who feel that Pope John Paul should step down?

Probably and most likely the case


Regardless of any other factor the Pope is an elected official. Should there be conditions under which a Pope can be voted out of office?

Absolutely. Personally I no longer can even understand the Pope when he speaks. It's also rather sad to see this old man having to endure long hours of sitting around performing duties in the condition he is in. He should be allowed to enjoy the remaining of his days in comfort without stress and obligations.



[edit on 2-17-2005 by worldwatcher]



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Actually if your are wealthy you can buy the best treatment in the world.

If you are poor you have to struggle and become dependent on miracle pills.

If you are in third world countries you don't even have that luxury of a miracle pill.

Perhaps what the pope is trying to bring up is how wealthier nations depend so much on the pharmaceutical business for everyday afflictions, while other people in the less rich country depend on prayer and faith.

Good point though.

I guess we all will interpret different due to our own understanding of faith and believes.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Should any man hold an office of any kind in which he is held to be infallible? Should any servant of God be revered to the extreme levels Catholics render their Popes? Can the Church be expected to be properly managed when its "monarch" is ailing so intensely?

Sure, because its not the pope himself thats infalliable and all that. The RCC is the church of god with god at its head, who speaks to the administration and thru it to the entire body of the church. Therefor for the pope to be wrong god must be wrong, at least on matters of theological importance.

The catholic usage of an administration and the office of the pope is not really any different than the baptist or protestants usage of the bible itself, both are meaningless things that the 'divine urge' acts thru. The catholic and orthodox churchs tend to not take the bible as a literal document, because, well, those churches were around when the bible wasn't even completely formulated yet. So the authority that baptists and protestants give to god comes thru the bible and for the catholics and orthodox it comes thru their religious leaders, whom god speaks to.

I agree its irrational, but, its religion, its supposed to be irrational.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Should any man hold an office of any kind in which
he is held to be infallible?

Grady, Grady, Grady.
The pope isn't infallible.
He is a sinner and he goes to confession. When the church
says 'infallible' they are speaking of when the Pope makes
a declaration from the Chair of Peter on matters of Theology -
'ex cathreda'. This has nothing to do with the pope as a
man. It has to do with theology within the church.

You can disagree with what the Church declares ex-cathreda
all you want, but don't say that we think the pope is infallible
and that he doesn't make mistakes because that's not what the
church believes at all.

I find it comical that non-catholics, and catholics who don't understand
the church, are so quick to jump on the 'infalible' teaching of the church
when they don't even understand what it means.

For those of you who actually want to understand what the Catholic
church teaches and why, go here to read -
www.catholic.com...


[edit on 2/17/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 12:08 PM
link   
I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous.

Does the pope advocate people not getting the medical help they need just so they can experience the positive side effects of illness?

Would he like us to go back to whipping ourselves and wearing rough undergarments like the monks in the middle ages to subdue their sinful selves? (As the monk in the Da vinchi code book did)

Its a bit like saying everyone should give up their cars and go back to walking to experience the feelings people had in passed centuries.

Now needless cosmetic surgery can be something to complain about, but a healthy lifestle, is fundamental to the health of an individual.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott


"While millions of people in the world struggle to survive hunger and disease, lacking even minimal health care, in rich countries the concept of health as well-being figures in creating unrealistic expectations about the possibility of medicine to respond to all needs and desires," said the Rev. Maurizio Faggioni, a theologian and morality expert on the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life.

"The medicine of desires, egged on by the health care market, increases the request for pharmaceutical and medical-surgical services, soaks up public resources beyond all reasonableness," Faggioni said.





IMO - This is political positioning and a policy statement. The key issue is that the extent and scope of prion-related diseases is breaking news world wide. People are about to learn that they they don't "just have a headache" and it's not "just aching joints" but most likely, these are early symptoms of a slowly incubating prion disease like Mad Cow - that takes decades to progress and move to the brain.

The political problem is that diagnosis and treatment needs to be individualized - now called "personalized medicine." Insurance doesn't cover it - and it costs a fortune.

The Vatican is helping get people in line, and moving to block the outrage.

It's true that everyone dies - and good health is not guaranteed in the Constitution - but people are going to be angry anyway. Many will demand solutions, and access to care.



.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   
It's a wonder the pope hasn't been dead from inactivity long ago. Yeah yeah I know he's sick and no longer speaks a real languagebut how much better health would he be in right now if he and all those fat Cardinals could just give-up a little bit of that opulecense they demand for each other. The Pope probably doesn't remember how to dress himself. Talk about gluttony. Whens the last time you ever saw a top Roman official that could still see his dick? And they opt for the huge robes to keep their bellies hidden. You can almost set your watch by how long it takes for a priest to go obese once the promotions start and they go from simple black pants to the riduculous pointy hats and gowns.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
wearing rough undergarments like the monks in the middle ages

Those were called 'hair shirts'. Coarse. Heavy. Hot in the summer.
Itchy. Probably stank to high heaven as well. You were supposed
to learn patience by wearing them. I would have 'lost it' in 5 minutes,
let alone wearing them for decades like those guys did. But them...
I'm not called to religious life.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Should any man hold an office of any kind in which
he is held to be infallible?

Grady, Grady, Grady.
The pope isn't infallible.
He is a sinner and he goes to confession. When the church
says 'infallible' they are speaking of when the Pope makes
a declaration from the Chair of Peter on matters of Theology -
'ex cathreda'. This has nothing to do with the pope as a
man. It has to do with theology within the church.

You can disagree with what the Church declares ex-cathreda
all you want, but don't say that we think the pope is infallible
and that he doesn't make mistakes because that's not what the
church believes at all.

I find it comical that non-catholics, and catholics who don't understand
the church, are so quick to jump on the 'infallible' teaching of the church
when they don't even understand what it means.

For those of you who actually want to understand what the Catholic
church teaches and why, go here to read -
www.catholic.com...


[edit on 2/17/2005 by FlyersFan]


This post by FlyersFan is probably the only post worth reading on this topic. It explains the Catholic position on "infallible" correctly.

I believe that the Pope goes to confession once a day. It seems to me that the more good that you are the more often that you go to confession. You see, you can realize what your sins are and be sorry for them and want to correct yourself.

The Church has often tried to teach that the physical body isn't the only part of us that needs tending. Unfortunately most of us concentrate on this and ignore our spiritual well being and growth. Some of the other countries in this world are full of poverty and disease. Here is where we need medicine not in the west for another face lift or worse.

The other posts dealing with the good that come spiritually from physical suffering are well worth reading. And this doesn't mean that we should seek out suffering, only that if it comes to us to use it wisely.

And about the Pope retiring and resting easy....God inspired men to put Pope John Paul II in as Pope, or leader of our Church on earth. When God decides that he is ready to retire he will take him home. The prayers of Pope John Paul II may have already served us in so many ways.

This is mainly my Catholic point of view. And Pope John Paul II is my Pope.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Sounds like the pretext to the future Bioconservative attacks on Human Enhancement...



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Sounds like the pretext to the future Bioconservative attacks on Human Enhancement...




Sardion, sardion. You just don't get it! The Bioconservative attacks are just a front. Things like Human Enhancement, personalized medicine and stem cell therapy are reserved for the chosen elite.






posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
No Sofi, you do not get it. These "Bioconservatives" may be pawns of one elite faction or the next, but what they want is what the people who fear the proliferation of enhancement technology into the general population want. The Biocons want there to be a moratoriam on research like this, even the labratory research. They say no research should be done until we know what the adverse side effects are, but how are we supposed to do that if we aren't allowed to do research in the open legally? The Moratorium being advocated by such groups as diverse as ETC group and the Vatican would create an environment PERFECT for pulling the wool over all of our collective eyes by allowing it to be developed in secret, black research projects while all progress in the Open is halted. You see where I am coming from now?


[edit on 17-2-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Okay, folks, I know the pope is considered infallible only in matters of the church and I should have clarified that statement. My Catholic friends set me straight on that matter years ago.

The point was made in the larger context that I chose to interpret the article and the importance of one man to one office, such that he cannot be "forced" to step down, even when it is in the best interest of all, as it would seem in this case.

We face a similar case in the Supreme Court with Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, albeit his seat is somewhat less exalted, so the clumsy expression of the fallible, not fully indoctrinated should not detract from the rhetorical questions posed or the discussion.

Perhaps a better question would have been, Is any institution best served when "lifetime" appointments are taken so literally that a person has to die before they can be succeeded? After all, this is a debate that rages within the church, not the society-at-large, which hasn't seemed to be overly concerned with the matter.


[edit on 05/2/17 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 04:28 PM
link   
I always find it fascinating to see how so many people can have so many perspectives on the same issue, or article.

My take on the statement about the 'religion of health' tends to not be popular with those around me.

My incredibly unpopular opinion is that with all the people who are dying because of lack of clean drinking water, sanitation and access to health care we have had for years ie: malaria pills, it is disgusting the amount of money that is spent on things such as cancer research and things such as AIDS. When we can bring the world up to a basic standard of care, then we can start looking for cures.

Like I said, unpopular, especially with those who have family members suffering from these illnesses. The body was not made to last forever, and with all the crap we put in them, it's not surprising we have these health problems. These are serious problems, but the body was made to last a finite amount of time and to strive to extend our lives at the cost of those less fortunate is not a thing I like.

The Pope stepping down, hmmm. I wonder if there aren't some internal politics at work in the church. He has been considered liberal by some standards, and perhaps he does not want to see a 'back-sliding' and is waiting for what he feels is an appropriate replacement for him. Of course, I'm not Catholic, so it's not a subject I have ever really given much thought to. He seems like a perfectly nice man, just irrelevant to my day-to-day life.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Theologically, the pope can't step down.

Technically under the rules he was ordained by God for the role, he has to stay to death, you can't "unordain" him. Otherwise you would have 2 popes

Thats what the problem is....


[edit on 17-2-2005 by Netchicken]



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
No Sofi, you do not get it. ...The Biocons want there to be a moratoriam on research like this, even the labratory research. They say no research should be done until we know what the adverse side effects are, but how are we supposed to do that if we aren't allowed to do research in the open legally? The Moratorium being advocated by such groups as diverse as ETC group and the Vatican would create an environment PERFECT for pulling the wool over all of our collective eyes by allowing it to be developed in secret, black research projects while all progress in the Open is halted. You see where I am coming from now?





sardion All of the research is now perfectly legal - pretty much everywhere, and we still know diddlysquat about what's being done. Why not, you ask? ...Because all of the research is privately owned and protected as copyright and intellectual property rights. Even when tax dollars pay for it.

...So we have no transparency, no open access and no regulation.

And you're defending this situation?



.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

We face a similar case in the Supreme Court with Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, albeit his seat is somewhat less exalted, so the clumsy expression of the fallible, not fully indoctrinated should not detract from the rhetorical questions posed or the discussion.

Perhaps a better question would have been, Is any institution best served when "lifetime" appointments are taken so literally that a person has to die before they can be succeeded? After all, this is a debate that rages within the church, not the society, at large, which hasn't seemed to be overly concerned with the matter.


Grady, I don't believe the two examples are similar.

The Pope has been appointed, "chosen" by God. Even if he were not able to do any thing physical except pray that would be powerful and necessary for our world. This is a Catholic belief so I don't expect others to believe. I know that some Catholics would disagree, that is their option. But then again, if you are not Catholic it can't make any difference to you, can it?

The Supreme Court justice is another matter. For one thing his work affects all of us in the United States. I believe there should be some age limit involved for this job.



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Both have suffered immeasurably by their conditions, but both can appreciate the perspective on life that they have gained as a result.


Very true, but think of all the things your brother and sister could have achieved if they weren't born with/developed those disease.

Lies within the obsession of perfect heath, the advancement of the human society. Think about all the Einsteins who never made it past their teens, and think about all the Einsteins that reach past their teens because of our obession of perfect health.

Advancement is only possible through the obession of what you are trying to advance.

Surf



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mahree

The Pope has been appointed, "chosen" by God. Even if he were not able to do any thing physical except pray that would be powerful and necessary for our world. This is a Catholic belief so I don't expect others to believe. I know that some Catholics would disagree, that is their option. But then again, if you are not Catholic it can't make any difference to you, can it?


I hope people understand that I don't have a direct stake in this matter and that my observations are not intended to express expertise, but to encourage discussion. I have heard that some in the Church have called for the Pope to step down. Perhaps, I am wrong. Many feel that the image of a debilitated man is not in the best interest of the Church, which could be interpreted as shallow. Some have pointed to the pedophilia scandal in America as a sign that Rome is not proactive enough in some matters. The Catholic Church may very well be the largest bureaucracy in the world and the ethos of bureaucracy is that no one person is indispensable.

I would say to you that if the Pope is chosen by God and if he has the power which you ascribe to him, then he is important to all of mankind.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join