Brussels, Belgium, Sep 17, 2017 / 06:01 am (Church Pop).- Br. René Stockman says it clearly: the path to euthanasia is not viable for a Catholic hospital.
After a board of trustees decision to allow euthanasia in Belgian hospitals sponsored by the Brothers of Charity, the community’s general superior spoke with CNA about the issues at stake, and the possibility that the Brothers of Charity might discontinue sponsoring hospitals if things do not change.
The Congregation of the Brothers of Charity is a religious community of brothers founded in Belgium in 1807, with the mission to care for the poor, elderly and those affected by psychiatric diseases.
“It was immediately clear to our founder, Fr. Pierre Joseph Triest, that there was the need to combine the contemplative life of religious orders with a professional work on charity. But we are not social workers, though we work in professional ways. Mostly, through our social activity we help people to see how God shine in their lives.”
Pioneers in the field of psychiatric care, the Brothers of Charity are active in many part of the world. In Belgium, they sponsor 15 hospitals and care for about 5,000 patients.
The hospitals are managed by a civil corporation named after the Brothers of Charity, though the board of trustees includes only 3 Brothers of Charity out of 15 members.
This board made the decision to allow Catholic hospitals to permit acts of euthanasia, in certain limited circumstances. The Brothers of Charity protested this decision, appealed to the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, and the Vatican responded by requesting that the corporation stop allowing euthanasia in their hospitals.
The board of trustees defied the Vatican request, and published a long statement in which they reiterated their view.
Br. Stockman explained to CNA that “the next step is a meeting with the authorities of the Vatican during the week of Sep. 25. We will then make our decisions in accordance with the vision of the Vatican.”
Asked if the Brothers of Charity could withdraw their sponsorship from the hospital, Br. Stockam said that “if there no change in the policies, it is a possibility.” If the 3 members of the organization leave the board of the hospital, it will no longer be considered a Catholic hospital.
In their statement, the hospital board of trustees lamented the lack of dialogue and stressed they will “continue with the request of establishing a dialogue,” though they do not want in any way change their decision.
Br. Stockman commented that “there is only a request to dialogue on the way to implement euthanasia, and not on the fact of euthanasia as such. I asked very clearly many times to first dialogue on euthanasia and the vision as such, in the hope coming to a consensus, but they refused to change their initial vision”.
The civil board has claimed that their decision is “consistent” with the doctrine of the Church, since “the text has come about starting from the Christian frame of thought as we apply it within the organization. In this, we always take into account the shifts and evolutions within society. We have considered the following elements: recognition of the exceptional, proportional view of ethics, deontological view and ideologization, and choice of conscience”.
This view is completely rejected by Br. Stockman. “This is totally wrong and against the doctrine of the Church,” he underscored.
He then explained: “The whole issue starts with the refusal to see the respect of life still as absolute. For them, it became fundamental, on the same level as the autonomy of the patient and the relation in the care. Therefore we cannot accept their statement. They take distance of the doctrine of the Church.”
Hermann van Rompuy, a former Belgian prime minister who is a part of the board of trustees, said that “the times when the Pope had the last word are far away.”
Brother Stockman explained to CNA that the Brothers of Charity appealed to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith because the civil board of trustees “refused both our request and also the one of the Belgian bishops” to change their policies, and so “we had to appeal to the Holy See.”
The Holy See, Br. Stockman recounted, “asked the hospitals to conform themselves with the doctrine of the Church about the absolute respect for life and not doing euthanasia to psychiatric patients. After our request as general superior and council and after the statement of the Belgian Bishops, the civil corporation governing our hospitals in Belgium refused to adapt their vision.”
Br. Stockman affirmed that the Brothers of Charity would remain faithful to the Church’s teaching, despite serious civil pressure to the contrary.
“I am sure,” he said, “that the great majority of the brothers, also in Belgium, are against euthanasia, but the pressure on them is very high. We have clear guidelines against euthanasia, that we developed already before this case.”
[…]
Since female “deacons” in the early Church were historically and now are decidedly not equivalent to male deacons (International Theological Commission in 2002, plus the sidelined Gerhard Cardinal Muller’s book: “The Priesthood and the Diaconate”, German 2000/English 2002), it seems the Pope Francis has four options.
He can either (1) invent a contradiction and throw the three-tiered sacrament of Holy Orders into complete chaos, or perhaps,(2) create a “deaconess” subcategory of deacon-like ministry that is no not-quite-an-ordination, or (3) simply reject any misguided advice (the term “inadmissible” comes to mind), or he can (3) remain silent.
Option Two seems to have been unwittingly pre-empted in recent years by the creation Lay Ecclesial Ministers. These ministers, as it was clarified in writing only at the last minute, serve by virtue of their sacramental Baptism and Confirmation, and not by any unspoken, grey-area-sort-of sacrament-ish Holy Orders.
How now to foster a category of service specifically for women and that does not look (speaking theologically) a hell of a lot like clericalism?
Other than Lay Ecclesial Ministers, another unmentioned and long-existing path for the laity is that of the “religious life”–very much in decline for reasons not mentioned. A new insignia and non-sacramental bucket list probably won’t reverse the post-Christian threats now eating away at the perennial Church.
Under the DOA Option One, would we now be tutored to look forward to a new set of amendments to the still-recent Catechism of 1994/97 (for which the same Cardinal Schonborn was the lead editor), that is, paragraphs 886, 896, 1256, 1538, 1554, 1570, 1569-74,1588, 1596?
And what are we to say of the implied marginalization of other ministries: Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (sic Eucharistic Ministers), the ministry of welcoming, the ministry of teaching, the ministry of visitation, the ministry of (fill in the blank). Ministry inflation (like secular grade inflation) cannot be resolved by incrementally dissolving the Sacrament of Holy Orders, nor the Second Vatican Council’s “universal call to holiness.”
I wish someone could explain to me how this “conservative” mind , behind large chunks of the CCC, got to the place where he endorses nonsense after for so long being regarded as solidly reliable.
Probably for the same reason as Cardinal Oullet after he endorsed Amoris Laetitia. He either gave up after realizing that nobody would listen to his orthodox advise, or he is fearful of being put on a bus.
While Female Deacons are not explicitly prohibited, I think they should not be allowed given that in the minds of some it will open the door to women priests.
@Joe M – This Cardinal, for years, has vacillated between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. He has participated or allowed quite a lot of crazy or stupid things in his diocese. He is quite the contradiction and I have never been able to figure him out. He seems content to be blown about whichever way the wind blows.
Schönborn should be drug tested.