Colorado Abortionist works at Catholic Hospital

[DianeGee]

Disgusting!

 

[Rence]

So, once again, why does this make it ok for him to be performing ELECTIVE, NONEMERGENCY abortions at a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic, and at the same time taking money from a Catholic hospital? Is this the justification that he’s using “I’m Jewish and we have a different moral framework?” I don’t care if he’s an Atheist who believes children until the age of 5 are parasites who can be killed at their parents’ wills (like Peter Singer), he should be fired.

In Christ,

Ellen

Because doctors have privelidges (or permission to doctor patients within a facility) at multiple hospitals and satellites. So it’s not unusual for a doctor to deliver babies and perform other ob-gyn services in a Catholic hospital, and have priviledges at a secular location a few miles away where that same doctor delivers babies, performs other ob-gyn services and performs abortions. Also, it’s not unusual for a doctor to perform urological services at a Catholic hospital, but perform sterilizations at a secular hospital a few miles away. Doctors operate out of various hospitals at the same time. It’s unusual to find a doctor who only has privelidges at one hospital. That usually comes when they’re older and don’t want to travel to several hospitals anymore, or when their practice is so big and centered around one area so that one hospital services all of their patients’ needs.

What you’re saying is that in order for a Catholic hospital to have a particular doctor on staff, they should require that the doctor not perform any abortions anywhere else either. So that doctor would have to compromise the rest of his or her practice in order to practice at the Catholic hospital. And that’s fine, but it would limit the availability of practitioners at the Catholic hospital because then they would only have practicing Catholics on staff. Other denominations and other religions would have to be excluded. And that’s fine, if they want to limit their doctors to only having Catholic ones on staff, they should do just that.

 

[Soutane]

The best thing to do is have Catholic hospitals only hire Catholic doctors and staff. That’s what they should do — instead of trying to make other religions and cultures conform to teachings that are solely Catholic teachings

Catholic teachings are God’s teachings.The Catholic Church is the Body of Christ on earth,She is NOT just another institution or denomination.What you are referring to ultimately is relativism.The same question Poncious Pilate asked Christ,“What is Truth”?To say the least I am surprised to hear a self proclaimed Catholic refer to the Truth as "solely"Catholic teachings.Are you sure you don’t want to reasess your assertion?

 

[Soutane]

I’m sorry that you resent that I have restated that Jews have a different moral framework than Catholics. That has nothing to do with whether or not a Jewish doctor should or should not be performing elective, non-emergency abortions at a Catholic hospital or at a Planned Parenthood facility. I certainly did not mean to conflate these two issues, but indeed you have conflated them (again). No, in Hebrew “kill” is a different verb than “murder.” To you, all killing of unborn life is murder. Not to Jews. Depends on the extenuating circumtances. It is not casually regarded, but the same assumptions and definitions that Catholics have are not true for Jews.

Pure relativism-there is only one Truth not a multitude-I could care less how different cultures view abortion-it is murder period and one does not have to be an ethecist nor a splitter of hairs to realise that.We will ALL answer to the same God,Jew,Gentile,Muslim etc-He will judge us equally.There is no ultimate difference between a camp executioner and a slaughterer of innocents.These kind of distinctions wound Christ and the pro-life struggle.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Catholic teachings are God’s teachings.The Catholic Church is the Body of Christ on earth,She is NOT just another institution or denomination.What you are referring to ultimately is relativism.The same question Poncious Pilate asked Christ,“What is Truth”?To say the least I am surprised to hear a self proclaimed Catholic refer to the Truth as "solely"Catholic teachings.Are you sure you don’t want to reasess your assertion?

She’s saying, and I’m saying, that Catholics accept Catholic teachings as universal, and as God’s teachings, but non-Catholics do not, particulalry those non-Catholics that have a competing faith tradition which in their valid understanding applies to their own decision making on moral issues. They are not bound either morally or legally to Catholic values, no matter how much you scream it, shout it, pound the table, or use smiley/frowny icons.

The Catholic Church is “just another institution or denomination” to those who identify with a different institution, as well as to those with no identification at all.

 

[Soutane]

She’s saying, and I’m saying, that Catholics accept Catholic teachings as universal, and as God’s teachings, but non-Catholics do not, particulalry those non-Catholics that have a competing faith tradition which in their valid understanding applies to their own decision making on moral issues. They are not bound either morally or legally to Catholic values, no matter how much you scream it, shout it, pound the table, or use smiley/frowny icons.

The Catholic Church is “just another institution or denomination” to those who identify with a different institution, as well as to those with no identification at all.

Then they are in for a big unpleasant surprise,aren,t they?The Truth is univeral-catholic.It matters not one whit whether a non-Catholic agrees or disagrees-we should be concerned with their immortal souls not about offending them.There are not many Truths,there is one.By the by,I am not screaming,nor am I foaming at the mouth,or pounding the table.I am answering your mistaken assertion calmly and you don,t like it one bit.Again,I resent your mischaracterisation of my reply and I believe I am owed an apology.The Truth is the Truth.Period.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Then they are in for a big unpleasant surprise,aren,t they?The Truth is univeral-catholic.It matters not one whit whether a non-Catholic agrees or disagrees-we should be concerned with their immortal souls not about offending them.There are not many Truths,there is one.By the by,I am not screaming,nor am I foaming at the mouth,or pounding the table.I am answering your mistaken assertion calmly and you don,t like it one bit.Again,I resent your mischaracterisation of my reply and I believe I am owed an apology.The Truth is the Truth.Period.

No. I don’t owe you an apology. I never said you were “foaming at the mouth.” I note, however, that a very large portion of your 3,000+ posts and authored threads concern the issue of abortion, and your apparent confusion as to why the rest of the world does not get in line with the Catholic Church. I understand that you’re upset about that, but what I’m saying is that repeated postings about it, to a Catholic audience, will not change how the non-Catholic world views the issue, despite your belief. You also often use hyperbole when posting, and recently you used caps as well. It’s not an accusation. It’s an observation that you feel passionately. There’s nothing wrong with feeling passionately. There’s something wrong with getting upset at Catholics who understand why non-Catholics do not share our moral mandates. It doesn’t mean that we don’t have some of the same passions as other posters, about the same or similar things. We’re just perhaps more realistic about the non-Catholic world.

 

[Soutane]

No. I don’t owe you an apology. I never said you were “foaming at the mouth.” I note, however, that a very large portion of your 3,000+ posts and authored threads concern the issue of abortion, and your apparent confusion as to why the rest of the world does not get in line with the Catholic Church. I understand that you’re upset about that, but what I’m saying is that repeated postings about it, to a Catholic audience, will not change how the non-Catholic world views the issue, despite your belief. You also often use hyperbole when posting, and recently you used caps as well. It’s not an accusation. It’s an observation that you feel passionately. There’s nothing wrong with feeling passionately. There’s something wrong with getting upset at Catholics who understand why non-Catholics do not share our moral mandates. It doesn’t mean that we don’t have some of the same passions as other posters, about the same or similar things. We’re just perhaps more realistic about the non-Catholic world.

i’m “certain” that you’ve read ALL 3,000+posts that I’ve made at CA and sure do appreciate the lecture ma’am.You are correct that you did not say I was foaming at the mouth but you said everything else.I wasn’t aware that my personal style was subject to your purview ma’am,thanks for disabusing me of that notion.Now what say we discuss the subject at hand rather than induging in ad hominum attack…hmmmm?Accusation of the use of h yperbole and caps would qualify as personal criticism which is contrary to the rules so I,d be careful if I were you.If you are spoiling for a fight I won,t indulge you…

 

[Soutane]

“Church that tolerates abortionists on staff in its hospitals is not a prophetic Church. It is a Church checkmated by the culture of death.”

 

[Elizabeth502]

i’m “certain” that you’ve read ALL 3,000+posts that I’ve made at CA and sure do appreciate the lecture ma’am

I haven’t “lectured” you. You’re just angry, apparently, that I don’t agree 1000% with your point of view. I have a right to politely disagree, and I have done so. I respectfully indicated that I do understand passion for a cause. Unfortunately, your passion also spills over against innocent Catholics for not sharing your anger about non-Catholics and their practices and what they consider an equally valid morality.

You are correct that you did not say I was foaming at the mouth

Indeed. Therefore, there was no need to bring it up nonresponsively.

but you said everything else.I wasn’t aware that my personal style was subject to your purview ma’am

Again, I made no criticism. Merely an observation about your intensity.

Now what say we discuss the subject at hand rather than induging in ad hominum attack…hmmmm?..

This paragraph reads like just an extended ad hominem attack against me, I’m afraid. You get all worked up about why everyone is not as excitable as you are over particular issues and positions; you are offered some constructive feedback on why that might be true, and you respond in attack mode. I’m sorry for you.

I wish you well. Your interpretation of debate and advice over the issues themselves as being completely against you, personally, is not serving your cause well, i.m.o.

 

[Rence]

Catholic teachings are God’s teachings.The Catholic Church is the Body of Christ on earth,She is NOT just another institution or denomination.What you are referring to ultimately is relativism.The same question Poncious Pilate asked Christ,“What is Truth”?To say the least I am surprised to hear a self proclaimed Catholic refer to the Truth as "solely"Catholic teachings.Are you sure you don’t want to reasess your assertion?

Yes, I am sure I don’t want to reassess my assertion because no where in the CCC does it say that one is compelled to force another to be Catholic. Being Catholic and following Catholic teachings is a matter of choice and free will, not coersion. And no where in the CCC does it say that other religions, such as the Jews, are damned just because they’re not Catholic. They are allowed to live their lives in conformity with their religion. Just like we are.

 

[Elizabeth502]

We will ALL answer to the same God,Jew,Gentile,Muslim etc-He will judge us equally.

Actually, no. He will not judge us by equal standards. He will judge us individually according to the knowledge that each of us had, and had access to, the ability of our minds to grasp those ideas and apply them, the separate opportunities we did and didn’t have to exercise that free will, etc. A Native American or Australian Aborigine, a convinced Jew, a convinced Hindu, a convinced Muslim or Buddhist, will not be judged by the same standards applied to a Catholic who grew up in the faith, had excellent catechesis, had access to the sacraments, who could read, etc. There’s absolutely nothing negatively “relativistic” about this. This is classic, orthodox, traditional Catholic theology. The Catechism, Papal Encyclicals, etc. all support this understanding.

 

[Soutane]

Elizabeth,.You have some nerve telling me what my motivations. are and how I think.This can only end badly.Thank you for calling me in so many words a one-dimensional zealot and fanatic.You are on ignore-you are spoiling for a fight and i,m not going there.Farewell.

 

[catharina]

Actually, no. He will not judge us by equal standards. He will judge us individually according to the knowledge that each of us had, and had access to, the ability of our minds to grasp those ideas and apply them, the separate opportunities we did and didn’t have to exercise that free will, etc. A Native American or Australian Aborigine, a convinced Jew, a convinced Hindu, a convinced Muslim or Buddhist, will not be judged by the same standards applied to a Catholic who grew up in the faith, had excellent catechesis, had access to the sacraments, who could read, etc. There’s absolutely nothing negatively “relativistic” about this. This is classic, orthodox, traditional Catholic theology. The Catechism, Papal Encyclicals, etc. all support this understanding.

Hope you’re willing to quote some of those ‘supportive sources’
since I’ve never heard of your view/understanding until now.

God judges all as God. That is His only standard. He has no other standard.
God is love. God is loving. He is able to dispense justice and mercy to all.
His standard - and what we hope to achieve - is love.

It is love that brings us into union with His Son.
We don’t even need to know the Name of His Son.

We measure up or we don’t measure up
We are loving or we are not loving.
That’s exactly the same for everyone.

God has one standard: love.
Your views describe God’s judgment(s) as relativistic.

 

[Soutane]

I know you’ve placed others on ignore-you’ve intimated as much,so this should come as no great surprise.* think it’s better for all concerned.Consider it a lesson in humility fort yourself and me.*

 

[catharina]

I know you’ve placed others on ignore-you’ve intimated as much,so this should come as no great surprise.* think it’s better for all concerned.Consider it a lesson in humility fort yourself and me.*

Soutane - if you’re not addressing me, please edit your Post!

Thanks.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Elizabeth,.You have some nerve telling me what my motivations. are and how I think.

I never once said anything about your motivations, nor “how you think.” That’s fine that I’m on your ignore list. I would just like others to understand exactly what I responded to: not “motivations,” not “how [someone] thinks,” but precisely what he said.

Thus quoting,

murder is murder,not for some but for all.

What you are referring to ultimately is relativism.The same question Poncious Pilate asked Christ,“What is Truth”?To say the least I am surprised to hear a self proclaimed Catholic refer to the Truth as "solely"Catholic teachings.Are you sure you don’t want to reasess your assertion?

I could care less how different cultures view abortion-it is murder period …There is no ultimate difference between a camp executioner and a slaughterer of innocents.These kind of distinctions wound Christ and the pro-life struggle.

I would not feel comfortable with Dr Mengele delivering my wifes baby Knowing that the next day he’ll turn another woman’s child into .bloody hamburger.Being Jewish does not excuse murder and Jews of ALL people should
understand that it IS murder
There is no difference between gassing a helpless Jewish child and murdering a preborn child.Dr’s who do this are just as culpable as the faceless Nazi who dropped Zyklon B(AN INSECTICID E ),into a room filled with screaming Jewish women and babies.I wouldn’t let the monsters hands touch my wife or my child.

These are all pretty extreme statements. Then you call people names and make insinuations about how morally faithful/true they are (to Catholicism) because they do not agree that for Jews – or for any non-Catholics – the exact same moral framework exists. In some belief systems it is similar, and quite strict. In others, not so much.

What I was referring to, again, were not elective abortions, but ER-circumstance abortions. I agree with Rence that perhaps doctors of any faith (or no faith) might want to consider not working at a Catholic hospital, if their moral code differs from that of the Catholic Church. Because otherwise they might find themselves in situations which cannot reconcile two different belief systems. It wouldn’t necessarily dictate that immoral decisions would be made in that Catholic hospital by that doctor, but it could raise concerns. Rence, however, is referring to the practicalities of mutual medical privileges and the pragmatic difficulties that arise when trying to exclude absolutely anyone who is not fully on board with every aspect of Catholic moral theology. That’s a smaller universe than many posters on CAF imagine, or have convinced themselves.

 

[Soutane]

Mea Culpa,Mea Culpa,Mea MAXIMA culpa.No Catharina the post was not directed at you but others,I suppose one could term them the Usual Suspects who engage in litererary critique,character assassination and a presience that allows them to oracalise one’s true intent.I might just as well let them write my posts for me as they do such a bang up one dimensional job.I certainly was not referring to you an obedient Orthodox Catholic whom I have the utmost respect for,Gordon

 

[Elizabeth502]

Hope you’re willing to quote some of those ‘supportive sources’
since I’ve never heard of your view/understanding until now.

“Supportive sources” = your phrase, not mine. (If you’re addressing me.) Are you referring to the commonly understood, universal knowledge that religions vary widely in their moral assumptions, standards, definitions? I don’t need to provide “sources” for what is common knowledge. And it would get quite lengthy to quote the Talmud, the Mishnah, other sources. I don’t think people would be interesting in reading the obvious.

God judges all as God. That is His only standard. He has no other standard.
God is love. God is loving. He is able to dispense justice and mercy to all.
His standard - and what we hope to achieve - is love.

It is love that brings us into union with His Son.
We don’t even need to know the Name of His Son.

We measure up or we don’t measure up
We are loving or we are not loving.
That’s exactly the same for everyone.

God has one standard: love.

Well said.

Your views describe God’s judgment(s) as relativistic.

Not well said. God is individualistic in his judgments, not relativistic. Big difference. We will each have a personal judgment, not an institutional one.* That judgment will vary according to how we measured up to the gifts we were given or had access to, which would include an institutional framework but not be limited by that. We cannot limit God’s judgment or mercy in either direction.**

• Source = The deposit of faith of the Catholic Church.
  ** Source = Saint Faustina, canonized by the Catholic Church

 

[Soutane]

I know you’ve placed others on ignore-you’ve intimated as much,so this should come as no great surprise.* think it’s better for all concerned.Consider it a lesson in humility fort yourself and me.*

I must apologise to you also Elizabeth,I was confusing you with a very nice woman who had pm’d me to advise me that she had used the ignore button on another obnoxious poster.Whether you yourself have or are going to I couldn’t care less.