BODIES...The Exhibition?

[HeWillProvide]

I’m trying to decide if Jesus would go if they had this back in his day, or what he would say about it. …

 

[HeWillProvide]

Also, does the fact that something is “educational” automatically make it okay? I still don’t know - I can just picture people coming up with a lot of weird “stuff” for exhibits and then just saying it is all educational…

 

[TC2]

Jeremy,

When this exhibit came to Houston a while back, I was absolutely horrified. All other sub-issues aside, there was a major issue that I absolutely could not ignore: the Church expressly forbids what is being done to these human bodies. How these people died remains a mystery, but from the time of death, the remains should have been treated with all the respect and dignity we give to our closest and dearest loved ones.

This outrageous display, regardless of whatever positive ends it may have achieved, is the ultimate example of human objectification. They have made man an object, and put him on display, without his consent and against the teachings of God. Can this be justified for any reason? No.

I ask all of you voting in favor of the display: What if it were** your wife and baby**, dead and naked and split into pieces behind a glass casing, creating wealth for someone? What if it were **your mother and father? **

Not to offend, but this is how I see it…
If my husband/father/mother/child(grown) wanted to donate their body for this, I’d honor their wishes, and pray that God uses it to His glory.
I fail to see how dignity is given to someone after death by draining their blood, filling them with chemicals, putty, cotton, and various other ‘restoratives’ and then placing them in a sealed box to either rot to sludge or turn to soap (adiposcere).
Dignity? Natural?
Try no embalming, with a plain wooden box. About a year or so, and you truly get ‘ashes to ashes’. Not so with modern burial.
I myself, am leaning toward cremation, as it is cheaper, and uses less land mass and materials. But that’s just me.

 

[KathleenElsie]

We opted not to go. The exhibitors could not prove where the bodies came from or if they had permission to use them from the person prior to death.

People IMHO deserve a burial and not a traveling freak show.

 

[surfinpure]

Also, does the fact that something is “educational” automatically make it okay? I still don’t know - I can just picture people coming up with a lot of weird “stuff” for exhibits and then just saying it is all educational…

I picked up on that, too. There are certain types of “education” that I’m definitely not “okay” with!

Also, we must take into consideration the format of the display. This is not traveling around medical schools or even universities, but rather museums. I don’t buy the “education” argument here. You’re exactly right: anybody could put anything we don’t normally see in public into a glass casing and call it “art” or "education."

 

[jemfinch]

“But this is an entertainment exhibit, not an educational one”

I don’t agree. I think it’s an educational exhibit.

Does that justify the indefinite delay in the interment of the bodies, though?

I guess I wasn’t clear enough in my post, but I do not see anything immoral about it. It treats the human body with respect.

While the Church insists that cremated remains be buried, it seems to hard to deem the way bodies are treated at this exhibition as “with respect,” since they’re indefinitely left unburied. I’m looking for an actual argument to the contrary, not just an opinion

Jeremy

 

[tee_eff_em]

Does that justify the indefinite delay in the interment of the bodies, though?

While the Church insists that cremated remains be buried, it seems to hard to deem the way bodies are treated at this exhibition as “with respect,” since they’re indefinitely left unburied. I’m looking for an actual argument to the contrary, not just an opinion

Jeremy

Did you click through the link I [post=2981060]posted[/post]?

tee

 

[pnewton]

I guess all things being equal I would rather err on the side of caution and bypass supporting such an endeavor. Educational or not, the bodies are not interred and they do charge for admission to look at the dead bodies. It strikes me as being against the Church teaching on the dignity of the body.

Even though it is against the letter of the Church’s teaching, I can understand why some of you disagree with me. I think this is a case where technology has out-paced traditional teaching. My opinion is based more on the spirit of the law than the letter.

 

[jemfinch]

Did you click through the link I [post=2981060]posted[/post]?

tee

Actually, I’d missed it. I’ve read it now, and if the things reported to the Diocese of Pittsburgh are true (and the Diocese of Pittsburgh is genuinely upholding Catholic doctrine) then I would submit to their authority.

(Btw, is “tee eff emm” the last three letters of “RTFM”, a common abbreviation in computer geek circles? It would be appropriate in this case! )

Jeremy

 

[catharina]

I think this exhibition is a real tragedy.

That anyone would support it in the name of “education?”
Just as tragic.

 

[surfinpure]

I guess all things being equal I would rather err on the side of caution and bypass supporting such an endeavor. Educational or not, the bodies are not interred and they do charge for admission to look at the dead bodies. It strikes me as being against the Church teaching on the dignity of the body.

Even though it is against the letter of the Church’s teaching, I can understand why some of you disagree with me. I think this is a case where technology has out-paced traditional teaching. My opinion is based more on the spirit of the law than the letter.

I think this is very well stated.

 

[Newbie2]

Just another view.

My precious but confused daughter in law, who was fence sitting on the abortion issue, was pushed to the pro-life camp after viewing this exhibit. She was unequivocally convinced by the display of the 8 week old fetus in the womb.

I think this exhibition is a real tragedy.

That anyone would support it in the name of “education?”
Just as tragic.

Could it depend on the kind of education? One life saved that we know about. Could there be more?

This is a great thread.

I’ve had my doubts about this exhibit, both in terms of the morality and the fact that I don’t find it particularly interesting, any more so than an anatomy textbook. Our family hasn’t seen it, and probably won’t, but not just because of the morality question.

I wonder if it would make a difference of opinion if we knew for certain that, for example, the people displayed gave their permission freely and willingly and the fetuses were spontaneously miscarried?

It makes me uncomfortable that this exhibit is billed as entertainment, “art” perhaps, rather than as strictly for educational purposes. Maybe they think they’ll get a bigger draw that way?

I dunno…maybe some kid seeing it will be motivated to go to medical school someday, and find a cure for cancer…maybe God will lead another young mom sitting on the fence of abortion to keep her baby. Maybe the Almighty can make good come out of a questionable or unquestionably immoral exhibit…

Again, this is a great thread.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I see something odd here – we have had bitter debates about pro life demonstrations showing pictures of aborted children.

Yet this display doesn’t raise that kind of bitterness. And it isn’t as though “little children aren’t exposed to the images” – when I was in New York, the busses had ads for the exhibits with 20-foot long posters showing the dead and partially dissected bodies.

Hmmm.

 

[mapleoak]

I wonder if it would make a difference of opinion if we knew for certain that, for example, the people displayed gave their permission freely and willingly and the fetuses were spontaneously miscarried?

I’m sure we can know for certain whether the ‘fetuses’ gave their permission or not.

I see something odd here – we have had bitter debates about pro life demonstrations showing pictures of aborted children.

Yet this display doesn’t raise that kind of bitterness. And it isn’t as though “little children aren’t exposed to the images” – when I was in New York, the busses had ads for the exhibits with 20-foot long posters showing the dead and partially dissected bodies.

Hmmm.

It’s 'cause it’s not so much about children being harmed by the pro-life demonstrations as it is about censoring them.

 

[Newbie2]

I’m sure we can know for certain whether the ‘fetuses’ gave their permission or not.

/ about QUOTE]



The concern, methinks, if if they were purposely aborted or not. Either way they didn’t give permission.

 

[mapleoak]

The concern, methinks, if if they were purposely aborted or not. Either way they didn’t give permission.

Precisely.

 

[kentuckyliz]

Apparently there’s other Catholics in Pittsburgh who are thinking a little more critically than the diocese. From the Catholic newspaper there:

pittsburghcatholic.org/newsarticles_more.phtml?id=1968

Some money quotes:

The bodies were obtained, “plastinated” and exhibited without the previous permission of the deceased or family members. While the church has long supported the donation of bodies for scientific advancement, it is always understood that morally and ethically such donations must be donated with valid and informed consent.

Even if the cadavers were not victims of political repression, they would more than likely be from China’s poor. The right to dignity in the treatment of a deceased body is not waived because of poverty.

So this may well be an issue of oppressing the poor. I don’t think informed consent exists if they are taking bodies that no one has claimed for four years. The informed consent would make that unnecessary! They’re picking off the poor. Here, that does not happen. The poor deceased ones get a proper burial in a pauper’s cemetery.

If I donate my body to science, I want medical students carving on it, not gawkers at a museum exhibition. That has no real usefulness that isn’t already satisfied by shows on the Discovery channel and Dr. Oz taking things to show on Oprah.

Please note that the newspaper article said that Premier Exhibitions is a FOR PROFIT company.

I’m really amazed at the utilitarian morality here and the lack of compassion toward the dead. Seems like there has been a loss of respect towards the physical body.

So, the ends justify the means? Woot woot! I gotta get busy. There’s a bunch of stuff I’ve been wanting to do and thought was wrong. Silly moi!

Amazing level of trust in the Chinese government. They are so respectful towards human persons! I’m sure they give a rip about our concerns.

The bodies are probably tainted with lead!

 

[kentuckyliz]

Do Christians think only Christians’ bodies deserve respect? These Chinese people aren’t Christian so anything goes?

 

[catharina]

kentuckyliz, your posts?
I agree
and I agree again.

The notion (fantasy) that China as a government that has persecuted those in the RC Church for the past 60 years, would in any way and at any time reverence all life as sacred is absurd.

That people would pay one cent to support the idea that such an exhibition is allowable in the name of education is too frightful for words. Would the viewer be gazing upon the carefully carved up remains of young deacons, old nuns, babies/feutuses taken through governmentally enforced abortions? How chillling. If as you suggest the remains are those of the abandoned poor, then the fact of the exhibition is just as chilling since we, in the Church should be willing to affirm the sacredness of life at all times.

Thanks for your posts.

 

[tee_eff_em]

[sanitized of snark, for your protection – tee] From the Catholic newspaper there:

pittsburghcatholic.org/newsarticles_more.phtml?id=1968

Some money quotes:

The bodies were obtained, “plastinated” and exhibited without the previous permission of the deceased or family members. While the church has long supported the donation of bodies for scientific advancement, it is always understood that morally and ethically such donations must be donated with valid and informed consent.

Even if the cadavers were not victims of political repression, they would more than likely be from China’s poor. The right to dignity in the treatment of a deceased body is not waived because of poverty.

Yes, that article dates from last July, when the questions began to be raised. A “money quote” you overlooked:
It does not necessarily violate church teaching when the Bodies exhibit planned for the Carnegie center uses corpses for public display and education. For centuries, the church has supported the concept of using bodies of the deceased for medical science. Many religious communities today encourage their members to donate their bodies for scientific research.

In any case, and to repeat, the quoted article precedes the diocese’s determination, which says, in part:
Our concern remained the source of the bodies, particularly when noting China’s record on human rights and mandatory abortion policies. The Carnegie Science Center supplied documentation and affidavits assuring that the bodies were of those who had died from natural causes and had been deceased and unclaimed for no less than four years. In addition, the bodies will be returned to China at the proper time for cremation or interment. Finally, we were assured that the fetuses had died naturally in utero and were not the result of abortions.
…
With the assurances that the affidavits provide over the source of the bodies and fetuses, and the understanding that it is morally ethical that bodies unclaimed over a definitive period of time can be used for medical study and education, the Diocese of Pittsburgh concludes the following…

tee