Rekindling the debate … perhaps
I was not planning to return to the disappointingly sad statement released by the Cana Movement as a follow up to the pastoral letter of our Bishops on IVF. I changed plans when I noticed that the two main points I mentioned in my original blog - The Cana statement: disappointing and sad – were hardly addressed by those who choose to post comments. Most comments were out of subject, even though, I gladly admit, some raised very good points indeed.
Let me try once more to rekindle the debate.
1. A question of strategy
In the blog in question I criticised the strategy used by the Cana Movement. They released a set of ‘principles’ (for want of a better word) about IVF. I think that after the publication of the draft legislation the Cana Movement were expected to give us a detailed opinion about the law as presented. This they did not do and I believe it is a pity that they did not.
People expect Cana to tell them whether the draft legislation is acceptable to them or not; if yes, how it can be improved; and what is the way forward. They did none of these things. They should also have told the general public whether or not they would find any form of legislation objectionable. I got the feeling that the blogger who asked me to read between the lines has this position. Is this the correct feeling? Does he represent just himself?
At the moment in Malta there is a legal vacuum. Dr Brincat wrote a number of things about IVF. At the present moment all these can happen in Malta without any sanction. The proposed legislation will make illegal the things he objected to. Is this enough? Should more be done? What is his legal position on the law?
A Church which really wants to be a church incarnated as a relevant component of contemporary socio-cultural structures has to be a church which – at least in some of its levels – discusses and enlightens concrete reality, concretely. Just listing general principles instead of going into the nitty-gritty gives one the feeling of a cop-out.
2. A totally incorrect sentence
There was, in my opinion, a highly incorrecte sentence in the Cana statement. "Jaghraf li, kull fejn dahal l-IVF dan wassal ghal hafna abbuzi u fetah it-triq ghall-permissibilita' tal-abort." I will not repeat the criticism I already levelled at this sentence, particularly since no one put up a credible defence for what was uttered. I ask, though, what, according to the Cana Movement, should be the logical conclusion of that position? Is it a definitive no to IVF? Whether the answer is a yes ora no people have a right for an answer.
No quibbling around please. A straight yes or no would be appreciated.
3. In line with Church’s teaching
I will now address quite a chunky red herring that was repeatedly thrown in the discussion pond by those who do not agree with my point of view. There were direct and indirect allegations that what I am writing is not in line with the authentic teachings of the Church.
I invite readers to point out to one paragraph or sentence I wrote (not the guest commentary, but my position) in this blog which goes against the teaching of the Church. I don’t think that a statement by Cana Movement is an infallible declaration of Church teaching, but whatever.
Let me tip the scales against me. Besides this blog I penned two articles for my regular column in The Sunday Times. One commentary presented some reflections of mine on the pastoral letter; while the other was my analysis of the present state of the Church in Malta.
I have no problem with bloggers having a different assessment than mine regarding the content, the style or people’s perception of the pastoral letter or the state of the Church in Malta. That’s not the issue. The issue is the accusation that these two articles present positions which are not in line with the teaching of the Church on the subject.
Please give me a direct quote from what I wrote and not a paraphrase or interpretation. Then give me a quote referring to the definitive teaching of the Church on the matter.
Who will take up the invitation?
There was one blogger who wrote that the declaration I signed with six other priests (including the Dean of the Faculty of Theology, the Director of the Cana Movement and the Pro Vicar of the Archdiocese) at the start of the divorce referendum campaign goes against the teaching of the Church. May I remind this person that that declaration was approved and endorsed by Archbishop Cremona. It is very clear that the target of that attack was the Archbishop and not poor me.
4. Yawn, yawn, rebel, yawn, priests
The accusation of rebellion is not just the biggest red herring thrown in the discussion. It is also a yawning red herring.
I do understand that there could be some confusion in people minds since the catechetical formation of most ended with confirmation, and their religious studies ended with the GCE – ordinary or advanced. Let us try to – the authentic teaching of the Church is not their forte.
But one should never stop trying to learn more. I suggest they read something serious about the role of public opinion and dialogue in the Church before throwing up accusation which make me yawn.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
39 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
CJohn Zammit
Aug 24th 2012, 00:46
Fr. Borg asks: "Then give me a quote referring to the definitive teaching of the Church on the matter."
Among the more than 400,000 webpages popping up on Google, the top-most entry has this to say:
"In summary, the Catholic Church condemns as gravely evil acts, both IVF in and of itself, and stem cell research performed on IVF embryos." -- http://catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml
That seems to translate into a very definitive NO (to IVF); and it might get you a three-month 'vacation', hopefully, in Canada; speaking of which, Dr. Brincat made reference to Canadian law ...
It is to be noted that Canada does not have a law to "protect the embryo" as proposed in Malta.
Canada's "Assisted Human Reproduction Act" -- "An Act respecting assisted human reproduction and related research" is concerned only with the welfare of the children born of IVF; the well-being of the woman; and the limitations to what can be performed by the scientific/medical community.
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-13.4/page-1.html#docCont
In its reference to "embryo" and "foetus", both are defined as "human organism", which is vastly different than the Catholic teaching (dogma?) of "personhood". It is in line with, and complementary to the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada to strike down the (anti-)Abortion law which was deemed unconstitutional: The Chief Justice wrote, "Forcing a woman, by threat of criminal sanction to carry a foetus to term unless she meets certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations, is a profound interference with a woman's body and thus a violation of her security of the person."
"Security of the person" is included in Article 6 of Malta's Constitution . Perhaps a good Maltese lawyer should argue, in the Constitutional Court, to have Articles 241 to 244 of the Criminal Code struck down, as was done in Canada.
Andy Farrugia
Aug 24th 2012, 14:42
In Canada, they also refer to ABORTION as "female reproductive rights/choice" or some other aberration. Such a wonderful place.
CJohn Zammit
Aug 24th 2012, 17:16
Yes, Andy, Canada is, indeed, a wonderful place ... where the Catholic Church flourishes under the protection of our Constitution, on an equal basis with all other religious beliefs.
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 24th 2012, 22:31
As far as I quoted from Canadian Law on the matter, I was taken aback by such provisions : Section 5(1)(b) "create an in vitro embryo for any purpose other than creating a human being or improving or providing instruction in assisted reproduction procedures;" emphasis on the word "create".
As to Article 6 of Our Constitution it refers to the supremacy of the Constitution over any other law. I would sincerely doubt the success of any action which you envisage. We believe in the right to life, which does not concern only the life we perceive with our eyes.
CJohn Zammit
Aug 25th 2012, 07:03
@Dr. Brincat
My apologies for my error ... it should read: Chapter IV Article 32(a).
As for your quote from the Canadian law, that is one of the prohibited procedures. I can't understand why you are so shocked.
Regarding what you believe -- in Canada, guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- is irrelevant. It's the woman's priorities and aspirations that count.
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 25th 2012, 14:20
When I wrote "We believe" was an inclusive expression. Maltese women, in their majority, are also included.
CJohn Zammit
Aug 25th 2012, 19:06
Dr. Brincat, my use of "you" is equally inclusive.
It is not what the majority believes or chooses to practice; it's what the individual woman thinks is best for her.
This is a most private matter. The proposed legislation turns it into a public issue. It's not!
David Seychell
Aug 25th 2012, 19:43
"Security of the person" is included in Article 6 of Malta's Constitution . Perhaps a good Maltese lawyer should argue, in the Constitutional Court, to have Articles 241 to 244 of the Criminal Code struck down, as was done in Canada."
No amount of good lawyers can ever show that from the right of the "Security of the person" it follows logically that a woman has a right to abortion at any stage and for any reason as in Canada. To do that, it's not a good lawyer that you need, but a twisted mind.
And one more thing,
"human organism" and 'Human being' mean the same thing.
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 22nd 2012, 12:51
@ Franco Farrugia. Ghaziz Franco, nizzik hajr tal-kumment li joghgbok il-Malti li nikteb, minkejja li avukat. Kont se nhallih ghaddej, imma ma nkunx qed ingib ruhi sewwa. Gabli tbissima ! Il-Malti tghallimtu minghand ommi u missieri u n-nanniet, u ghall-grazzja t'Alla hadd minnhom ma kien avukat. Meta nikteb, u aktar meta kont nitkellem fil-pubbliku, kont noqghod b'seba' ghajnejn li dak li nghid jifhmu u jasal ghand kulhadd. Il-Malta ghodda tajba, minghajr ma nistmerr l-ebda ilsien iehor. Fil-Qorti niehu gost nitkellem bl-istess mod, u bosta drabi xi espressjoni bil-Latin, ghax tghid hafna fi ftit kliem.
Li jdejjaqni hu li l-website tal-Kunsill Nazzjonali tal-Malti ( u jien niktibha website u mhux websajt) qisha miktuba, fi kliemek, mill-avukati. Ghandna Malta isbah u jifhmu kulhadd.
Biex inzommu mas-suggett, qed ikollna Malti li ghamel IVF, b'ghotja ta' barrani mill-koppja.
Andy Farrugia
Aug 20th 2012, 19:19
@ Ms Jessica Debattista
His name is Prof SEVERINO ANTINORI and he is also into human CLONING.
Andy Farrugia
Aug 20th 2012, 19:17
@ Ms Jessica Debattista
"I question why such a procedure was not nipped in the bud when scientists started experimenting with the idea of IVF or is everything permissible in the name of science?"
To answer your question: yes everything is permissible in the name of science. Didn't you follow , years ago, the case of the Italian professor Antinori and his attempts to impregnate a 74 year old Romanian woman who stated that she desperately need a child? I remember watching his rantings and ravings on Rai 1 in Bruno Vespa's discussion programme. Antinori threatened that if Italian laws precluded him from carrying on with his "plans" he would move to other countries where they would allow such procedures.
Joseph Borg
Aug 20th 2012, 19:01
ippermettili nghidlek sur Borg ghax ghalija Father wiehed biss ghandi nsejhulu Alla. Illum bit teknologiji modernissimi wasalna li kwazi kollox hu possibli ghal dak li ftit taz zmien ilu kien jidher impossibli. Haga ta l-iskatament wahda mill ftit li l-bniedem ghadu ma jistax issib, hi xi teknologija moderna li biha il fqir nistghu nghamluh sinjur ukoll. Hawn hafna li twieldu fqar bhal ma hawn dawk li ma jistghux ikollhom tfal b'mod naturali. Mhux hekk? Mela ghaliex insibu soluzzjoni ghal wahda u ghal l-ohra le? Nahseb li ghandek bizzejjed melh biex taghraf dak li rrid nghid. Kollox isir ghal skop wiehed sur Borg.
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 20th 2012, 16:52
Iltqajt ma' omm li bintha ghaddiet mill-IVF, u baqghet fejn kienet. Ix-xoghol tieghi gabni wkoll ma' koppja li kien ilhom bla tfal u fl-ahhar qatghuha li jaddottaw. F'nofs ix-xoghol waqafna, ghax il-mara harget tqila. U x-xoghol gab wiehed ikellimni fuq kemm kellu nkwiet ghax kien bla tfal u allura biex jimla dar bil-hsejjes, kultant biki, tat-tfal kien igib mill-istituti. U martu harget tqila. U kien hemm persunagg gholi f'Malta, li wara li zzewweg u ghadda z-zmien, il-kelba kienu jghidu li "din it-tifla taghna". Wasal zmien meta l-kelba saret il-kelba, u t-tifla hadet il-post li jixirqiha..
Imma hu bizzejjed li nhares fil-mera, u niftakar. Ghall-ewwel sentejn riedna noqghodu lura mit-tfal. Imma meta bdejna rridu, ma bdewx jigu. Bdew ghaddejjin ix-xhur. Kien ghal habta ta' Frar tal-1973, meta morna btala Parigi, u mieghi hadt lill-ommi armla. Konna Rue Des Capuccines f'ristorant, meta ommi daret fuqi u qalti : "Rose tqila". It-tnejn hsibna li kien sforz ix-xewqa taghha li jkollna tfal. Gejna lura u l-ebda sinjal. Kont fil-kampanja l-Hadd wara nofsinhar f'Mejju, u f'idejja gie il-ktieb fid-dramm ta; Francis Ebejer "Hdud fuq il-Bejt".. Ghal min ma qrahx, jitkellem fuq il-dieqa ta' min jisma' t-tfal jilghabu u hu m'ghandux. Kemm kien laqat il-musmar fuq rasu, jew fuq rasi u l-hsebijiet li kelli.
Ghaddew ftit jiem, u hadt kampjun tal-mara ghand laboratorju. U giet l-ahbar. Ommi kellha ragun. L-anqas biss konna nafu li kien ilha tqila minn Frar. Imma meta nhares lura nghid li fil-btala, mohhna kien kwiet.
U ftit taz-zmien wara, konna Vienna, fl-1975. Bl-istess mod, mistrieh u l-hsebijiet hallejniehom warajna Malta. Meta gejna lura, sibna li morna tlieta u gejna erba'. It-tifel issawwar fi Vienna. Ghalhekk semmejnieh Stephan, ghal qaddis tal-Kattidral, u twieled fl-istess jum ta' gheluq snini.
Dan kollu jwettaqni fil-fehma li kultant nehhi t-tahbil tal-mohh, u n-natura taf tiehu hsieb taghha nfisha. Semmejt li qrajt fuq l-infertilita` fil-website tal-Mayo Clinic. Ma hasditnix li jghidu li l-istress jista' jkun ostaklu ta' tqala.
Qrajt li kien hemm min ghamel l-IVF u wara kellu tieghu b'mod normali. Hawn nistaqsi: kif u ghala ? Ghagglu ? Kellhom kollox sew, hlief sabar li jistennew ? Ghax jekk il-persuni jkollhom nuqqas li jistghu xi darba jkollhom tfal, kemm ir-ragel u kemm il-mara, l-IVF ma jkollha qatt rizultat, hlief jekk ikun hemm l-ghotja minn barrani jew barranija. Jekk, b'ezempju, mara ma taghmilx bajd (agonadism) x'bajd tista' tigbor minghandha ?
Din mhix kwestjoni ta' twemmin. Din kwestjoni ta' fatti maghrufa. Huwa ghajb twebbel lil min ikun mghobbi .
Andy Farrugia
Aug 20th 2012, 18:27
Il-kummenti tieghek huma importanti, validissmi, u frott ta stharrig u esperjenza kbira, Dr Brincat, izda b'kull rispett nahseb li hemm affarijiet li ma tantx huma cari f'din it-tilwima tal-"kleru". Hemm min irid Knisja differenti......x'jigifieri din, ma nafx, ghax Knisja Kattolika wahda hemm, dik immexxija mill_Vatican fil-rapprezentant taghha l-Papa Benedittu XVI. Aqra ftit, fuq medja ohra l-intervista "esklussiva " li ta dissident/riformist iehor. Hemm affarijiet li naseb qed juzaw l-kontroversja tal-IVF ghal skopijiet ulterjuri. Forsi zbaljat jien, imma.....
Andy Farrugia
Aug 20th 2012, 18:45
Ma tantx nemmen fil-"conspiracy theories", jien, Dr Brincat, hafna xettiku fuqhom. Imma ghandi fellus go mohhi li mhux qed ihallini b'kwieti. Tghid Hans Kung, l-akoliti tieghu, and the signatories of Church 2011 ghandu/ghandhom xi nofs denb x'imkien go din il -kontroversja? Ma nafx!
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 20th 2012, 19:11
@ Andy Farrugia. Nifhem il-preokkupazzjoni tieghek, imma ma narax agenda mohbija. Id-dibattiti fi hdan il-Knisja minn dejjem kienu, imma bl-iskop tal-gharfien tal-verita`. Kultant tkun ukoll il-personalita` tal-individwu. Ma rridx ninstema' qares, imma kellna kazi fejn il-medja wkoll ghamlu qassis jew soru protagonista. Bhalissa wiehed mill-kotba l-aktar mibjugha huwa ta' Sister Margaret Hartley, Just Love, li l-Kongregazzjoni tal-Fidi ddikjarat li fih dikjarazzjonijiet li jmorru kontra r-religjon. Imma saret protagonista.
Kien hemm il-Kardinal Tonini li kien dejjem mistieden fuq it-television taljan. U ohrajn, f'oqsma li m'ghandhomx x'jaqsmu mar-religjon.
Il-medja tfittex dak li jaghmel hoss. Insomma il-medja taf tkun petrol station. Mhux taghtik il-petrol b'xejn, imma jkollha rokna fejn timlik bl-arja.....sakemm tinfaqa'. Dan jigri f'kull qasam.
Ghalhekk tfittixt aktar milli hemm.
L-IVF huwa suggett delikat, imiss il-qlub, jidher sabih u uman, imma mbagad ma tridx tara biss il-qoxra. Konsulenta fl-Ingilterra, f'St George's Hospital, ricentement gie kwotata fl-Independent ingliza fuq il-hsara li ssir lin-nisa minhabba l-medicini qawwija li jiehdu ghall-IVF.
Ghalhekk jien nifli l-fatti u l-argumenti, u ninsa l-persuni.
Mary Mills
Aug 20th 2012, 15:30
J.Brincat LLD
Please don't just go by impressions.
I'm not interested in criticising Churches, only certain glib, dogmatic opinions made about the subject. Nittama li ftehemna
Mary Mills
Aug 20th 2012, 13:30
I have been a silent bystander and absorbed some of the pain of persons going through more than one cycle of the IVF procedure.
Generally, on this blog, I find nothing but some quite opinionated comments, a little shallow, at times, prevaricating, super prescriptive and re-iterative of RC teaching on this matter of human intimacy; I can say that the only touchstone is RC teaching, in an attempt to argue the wrongs of IVF.
But not everybody accepts unquestioningly that the RC Church holds monopoly rights in matters of morality – acting with integrity, Conscience. I mean even the learned lawyer states that, when it comes to legislating, the buck has to stop with that big intangible: Conscience.
Much has been made about life being ‘created’ ( read wrongness’ plus put-down, which is what’s meant) in a dish, in a laboratory, to which we of the less-than-divine- aspiring league ask: So what? Haven’t you ever heard of ‘the stuff of life’ even as the Church extols and highlights the primacy and myth of the matrimonial bed? Using the so-called argument from Nature along with ‘Morality’?
But let’s not bother with DNA , genes… but with the integrity of intention of two people (and yes, the scientific knowledge of the one in the white coat) - how could we know about that, much less sit in judgement? Judgementalism, that claim of moral high ground sounds like a bit of a pastime ches quelques uns if you ask me!
And why should those involved be called victims (another put-down?) so out of hand? Don’t you think that they’d only be too aware of what they’re in for and its consequences?
And the embryo: no, neither is an embryo (or embryos) necessarily a victim, destroyed along with other medical waste. No. Not with proper IVF legislation.
The reasons: if one fails to attach itself and start developing, then subsequently another is implanted. And where pregnancy follows to full term, women would tend to want to have another implant especially if there’s still another ‘white baby’ (frozen embryo) left.
As for the health of babies born (millions by now throughout the world) born by IVF, reference to medical findings needs to be balanced; merely quoting sources to back a seemingly one-sided opinion isn’t good enough.
Briefly, let’s give it a rest – first just be human before climbing the heights – attempting, in a high faluting way, to be divine, says me.
And ask legislators to take account of that!
I
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 20th 2012, 14:02
The impression that you give is that IVF is forbidden or frowned upon by the Roman Catholic Church. Several other Christian Churches hold similar though not identical views.
Kindly see : http://www.ivf-worldwide.com/Education/christianity.html
P Pace Balzan
Aug 20th 2012, 11:59
An interesting insight to the future of IVF :
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9480372/Genetically-engineering-ethical-babies-is-a-moral-obligation-says-Oxford-professor.html
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 20th 2012, 10:48
@ Ms Debattista and Gabriel Gauci.
Ladies first. Your comment that you really doubt the implantation of only two embryos is pertinent, and the fruit of female intuition. Science ? Science discovers, but after that there is the business side. This is "justified" by who finances the research. Science is not always ethical. Your comment about concern for people who are passing through such a delicate situation is amply shared.
@ Gabriel Gauci. Tirraguna u b'mod car. Ligi ma tistax tkun ghall-kattolici biss, u jidher li naqblu. Imma hemm principji li ma tilghabx bihom. Ghalhekk ktibt li l-ligi, li wara t-titlu sabih, tkompli titkellem fuq "prokreazzjoni assistita" ma taghmilx fl-ewwel lok l-enfasi fuq l-assistenza lejn il-fertitilita` naturali. Jien nemmen li jekk wiehed jehel fl-ezami, ma tistenniex li ma jaghmel xejn, umbaghad tlett xhur wara johrog bl-unuri fir-reparatorju !!! Jekk taqra www.mayoclinic.com fuq "infertility" tiskanta x'hemm x'isir. Meta kollox ifalli, l-unika soluzzjoni tkun "sperm donation". Ghalhekk l-ewwel attakk kellu jkun fuq il-fertilita`. Fuq is-suggett darba rajt film spanjol. L-omm zebghet xagharha isfar halli tixbah lit-tifla. Ir-ragel kuntent ghax fuq ic-certifikat tidher tieghu !
Issa jekk verament irid ikun hemm kontroll, inutli li taghmel Aworita` b'vizti regolari. Din tkun l-istess bhal tat-traffic wardens fuq il-parking. Fi Sptar tal-Gvern jista' jkun hemm. Imma fil-klinici privati, kemm verament ? Hawn ghandha ragun Ms Debattista. Il-ligi taghmel il-pieni, imma kemm hu facli li wiehed jinsihom. Jekk koppja tkun trid a kwalunkwe kost, u t-tabib jaf x'jirnexxi, jkunu komplici ta' xulxin, u jekk kollox jirnexxi, kulhadd jaghlaq halqu. Imma wara kollox kif tista' koppja tikkontrolla ? Umbaghad hemm il-kwestjoni tal-kompetizzjoni u l-fama. Jekk tmur u tinqeda ahjar, tiftahar bil-klinika.
Hemm ukoll kontradizzjoni fil-principji li suppost ssalva. Ara l-Artiklu 4, u ssib li jekk il-mara li minnha titiehed bajda u tkun fertilizzata, il-bajda taghha tista' tinghata lill-mara ohra !!!! Din ma tkunx surrogate mother ?
L-argument li l-ligi tajba ghax jigu frizati l-bajd. Ahseb ftit mieghi. Mela freezer specjali se jkun hemm. Min se jmur jiccekkja jekk il-bajda hix fertilizzata jew le ? L-Awtorita` ? Se ddewweb biex tezaminaha ? U jekk mara tkun taf li l-bajd taghha ma jistax jigi fertilizzat, u titlob li tinghata wahda tajba anke jekk tithallat mal-isperma ta' zewgha, x'kontroll hemm ? Mhux hi se tidher tqila ?
Il-ligi ppruvat taghmel faccata sabiha, ibda mit-titlu.
Mela darba, Alla jahfirlu, Anton Buttigieg meta kien Ministru u xorta baqa' poeta, kien qal li se jaghmel ligi iebsa li toqtol il-korruzzjoni fil-football. Kellu l-intenzjonijiet tajba kollha u kellu entuzjazmu poetiku dwarha. Ma nafx x'xkien jghid kieku ghadu haj illum ? Ftehimna.
Franco Farrugia
Aug 20th 2012, 13:36
Lil Dr Brincat: Ippermettili (bla kondixxendenza ta' xejn!) nifrahlek tal-Malti sabieh u mirqum li tuza. Qas tinduna li int bniedem tal-ligi - taf int, l-avukati ghandhom seher li juzaw Malti-Taljanizzat (jew bil-kontra, hudha kif trid). Verament prosit!
Jean-Pierre Farrugia
Aug 20th 2012, 09:18
Fr thanks for being there. You ability to see things differently had struck me back in 2008 when you had defined loyal dissent so clearly that it served me as a compass.
As soon as I was entrusted by the PM to deal with this delicate issue late in 2009, a priest I know ( in his eighties) advised me to read Cardinal Martini's thoughts. He handed me a hard copy of this interview on l'espresso parts of which I eventually reproduced in the final report. Here it is:
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/51790?eng=y
This other priest too helped me as Martini's outlook was such an eye opener when reading Donum Vitae and Dignitas Personae.
As a family doctor I meet priests and nuns regularly and giving them a service is so fulfilling as through them I see Jesus.
Let good sense prevail. Poisoning the chalice is not an option. (http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com: a poisoned chalice = something that harms the person it is given to although it seemed very good when they first got it ).
Gabriel Gauci
Aug 19th 2012, 16:45
Imma possibli ghadek m'indunajtx li l-istqarrija tal-Moviment ta' Kana hija ispirata kollha kemm hi mid-dokumenti tal-Magisteru tal-Knisja, u li din l-istqarrija qed tghid fi kliem semplici dak li qalu d-"Donum Vitae" u d-"Dignitas Persona"?
Hawn huma zewg kwotazzjonijiet zghar mid-Donum Vitae, illi forsi ghalik jistghu ikunu ferm iktar "disappointing and sad" minn din il-famuza stqarrija:
"The connection between in vitro fertilization and the voluntary destruction of human embryos occurs too often. This is significant: through these procedures, with apparently contrary purposes, life and death are subjected to the decision of man, who thus sets himself up as the giver of life and death by decree. This dynamic of violence and domination may remain unnoticed by those very individuals who, in wishing to utilize this procedure, become subject to it themselves. The facts recorded and the cold logic which links them must be taken into consideration for a moral judgment on IVF and ET (in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer): the abortion-mentality which has made this procedure possible thus leads, whether one wants it or not, to man's domination over the life and death of his fellow human beings and can lead to a system of radical eugenics." (par.
"For this reason the very nature of homologous IVF and ET also must be taken into account, even abstracting from the link with procured abortion. Homologous IVF and ET is brought about outside the bodies of the couple through actions of third parties whose competence and technical activity determine the success of the procedure. Such fertilization entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children."
Issa x'se taghmel Fr Joe? Tibghat lil tal-Kongregazzjoni tal-Fidi tghidilhom li qed tistenna kjarifika minghandhom?
Come on...
Franco Farrugia
Aug 19th 2012, 18:27
Insiha, sur Gauci. Tinsiex, x'qal: 'Debate ... perhaps'. U enfasi fuq il-'perhaps' ghax ahna m'ahniex ta' livell (aqra 'kukkanja') tieghu! U oqghod attent ghax se ggieghlu jerga' jittewweb!
Quote: 'I do understand that there could be some confusion in people minds since the catechetical formation of most ended with confirmation, and their religious studies ended with the GCE – ordinary or advanced. Let us try to – the authentic teaching of the Church is not their forte.'
It is not the 'authentic teaching of the Church' that I am interested in - never was.
It's the fact of whether certain priests are gentlemen or not! And that, indeed, is my 'forte', if not yours.
Gabriel Gauci
Aug 19th 2012, 18:38
U x'inhu "the authentic teaching of the Church" jekk mhux li tkun kapaci taqra dak li tghallem il-Knisja b'mod car u jkollok l-umilta tbaxxi rasek ghalih, indipendentament mil-livell ta' edukazzjoni li ghandek?
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 19th 2012, 18:48
Jixraq li nwiegeb lilek fuq kif nahsibha fuq il-ligi presentata. Nibda biex nghid li abbozz ta' ligi presentat minn gvern jew minn membru privat mhux tavla ohra ta' Mose`. Jista' jigi rtirat minn min ikun ressqu. Mela hadd mhu taht kmandament li jara kif jaghmel dik il-ligi ahjar, jekk ma jkunx qed jaqbel mal-principju taghha. Jista' jinsisti li tigi rtirata.
Il-fehma tieghi, bhala bniedem ordinarju, hija li l-ligi tkun tajba meta tibda biex l-ewwel ghan taghha jkun li verament tipprotegi lil min ikun l-aktar dghajjef. Imbilli taghtiha isem, l-anqas legalment ma jfisser xejn. Wara zmien l-isem jinbidel f'numru tal-Ligijiet ta' Malta.
Din il-ligi hija hazina ghax indirettament tirrikonoxxi li l-embrijone huwa xi bidu ta' hajja li tinholoq mill-Professur ! Mhux fl-ghaqda ta' zewg persuni, imma f'disk tal-laboratorju. L-att konjugali jsir fid-dish. Dawk in-nies li suppost qed nghinuhom, fil-fatt qed isiru passivi fl-istorja. Imma fuq kollox, l-aktar dghajjef huwa l-embrijone. Liema wiehed ? Ikun hemm min jghidlek li dak li jintaghzel ikun privileggjat. U l-ohrajn ? Ejja ma nitmejlux bina nfusna li zewg bajdiet biss ikun mghammra ! Jekk irid ikun hemm success, meta r-rata ta' falliment hija kbira, wiehed jahseb ghall-aktar opportunitajiet.
Huma vittmi wkoll dawk li jitwebblu li din hi soluzzjoni certa. Isiru vittmi ta' tenzjoni psikologika u anke finanzjarjament. L-ispejjez huma enormi. U jekk ma jirnexxux ? Is-sitwazzjoni tkun aghar.
Il-ligi tahseb li jkun hemm licenzji fejn dawn il-proceduri jistghu jsiru. Xi hadd kiteb fuq 'Il-business tal-IVF". Tiskantaw ? Meta l-aktar oqsma fjorenti li hawn fil-qasam tal-medicina, u min jidhol ma jqisx spejjez, huwa fuq kif wiehed jidher, kemm jidher sabih, irqieq, imniehru dritt, insomma...... Dan barra li jkun hemm kompetizzjoni fuq ir-rata ta' success, u qatt u qatt ma jista' jkun hemm kontrolli ta' dak li xxandar il-ligi. Jekk wiehed jistenna fil-queue twil tal-isptar tal-Gvern, malajr tigi t-tentazzjoni li tmur privat. Nafuhom l-istejjer.
Imma din il-ligi flok taqbad il-barri minn qrunu, u tindirizza bis-serjeta` l-infertilita` kemm maskili u kemm feminili, b'metodi u xjenza moderna, tippermetti s-soluzzjoni li tidher facli. Issa n-natura holqot l-gharbiel taghha biex taghzel liema spermatozoon jasal. Fid-dish jista' ma jkunx l-aqwa. Studju ricenti ta' tobba Awstraljani li kien ilu sejjer snin sab li trabi li jitwieldu bl-IVF ikunu aktar esposti li jkollhom difetti, anke f'qalbhom. Ahjar ma jkollokx tfal milli jkollok umbaghad tarahom imutu qasir il-ghomor.
Umbaghad din il-ligi partikolari l-pieni li taghmel huma principalment multi !!!! U kif fil-fatt se tikkontrolla. Ghax tista\ taghmel l-ahjar ligi taht ix-xemx, imma jekk ma jkunx hemm kif taqbad, min jiksirha jaf li ghandu l-impunita`.
L-argument li kien hawn vacuum fil-ligi ma jwasslek la 'l hawn u l-anqas 'l hemm. In-nies kien ilhom jiehdu d-drogi zmien. Kien ferm wara li l-ligi pprojpiethom. U jivvintaw ohrajn, u l-ligi jkollhom tipprojbihom ukoll.
F'dawn il-granet, peress li l-Qorti jkun maghluq, sibt hin infittex u ngharrex fuq is-suggett. Rajt il-ligi Kanadiza, u tara l-kuncett wara l-IVF. It-tabib "creates the embryo". Johloq !! Tista' tuza kliem iehor aktar sottili, u kif taghmel helu l-messagg, imma dur fejn iddur, hekk hu.
Fuq it-trattament tal-infertilita` rajt website serjissima. Mayoclinic.com. Hemm soluzzjonijiet naturali u effettivi u possibbli. Jekk ma jirnexxux, mhux necessarjament se nirnexxu dawk tal-IVF.
Ghazilt li nwiegeb lilek. Aktar il-hsieb tieghek jaqbel ma' tieghi. Forsi l-ligi tinteressak ftit. Lili jinteressawni t-tnejn, kemm il-ligi u kemm l-aspett morali. Imma quddiem il-misteru tal-hajja, ma nafx nikteb ligi u ma nafx liema ligi tista' tigi perfezzjonata.
Gabriel Gauci
Aug 19th 2012, 22:16
Dr. Brincat, naqbel mieghek perfettament. U bhala kontinwazzjoni tal-hsibijiet tieghek, ma nafx jekk qrajtx l-artiklu ta' Fr Richard Nazzareno Farrugia dwar il-fallacji prezenti fil-ligi dwar l-hekk imsejjah 'embryo protection'. Ghal min hu Nisrani, kif anki hareg car mill-ittra pastorali tal-isqfijiet taghna (li wara kolox tirrifletti t-taghlim tal-knisja dwar din il-materja), ghan-Nisrani mhuwiex moralment permissibli li jirrikorri għall-ivf. Dan ghaliex, fit-teknika tal-ivf zgur se jinkiser almenu wiehed mit-tlett prinċipji fundamentali li huma semmew. Dan kien importanti li l-isqfijiet jerggħu jgħiduh biex l-Insara ma jaħsbux li issa l-liġi tkun tippermetti l-ivf, għalihom se jkun 'ok' li jirrikorru għal din it-teknika.
Min-naħa l-oħra, naħseb li l-liġi preżenti, minkejja li fiha wkoll il-fallaċji tagħha, hija waħda kumplessivament pożittiva, għaliex tirrispetta almenu l-iktar żewġ prinċipji importanti mit-tlieta: l-integrità fiżika tal-embrijun u li ma jiġix iffirżat, u li dawk li jagtħu l-isperma u l-bajda jkunu l-koppja prospettiva fejn it-tifel se jitwieled u jgħix. Ma' dan inżid l-għażla pożittiva tal-investiment fuq l-iffirżar tal-bajd flok tal-embrijuni.
Insemmi wkoll l-istand li kienet ħadet il-Knisja fl-Italja meta fl-2005 kienu qed jiddiskutu l-liġi tal-ivf fl-Italja, li hija liġi iktar liberali minn dik Maltija (inkwanti tippermetti l-implantazzjoni ta' tlett embrijuni f'salt; f'Malta il-liġi tippermetti tnejn). Il-Kardinal Ruini u l-Isqfijiet Taljani kienu għażlu li jiddefendu din il-liġi f'konfront mal-"far west" li kien hemm meta ma kienx hemm liġi. U meta r-radikali kienu ħadmu għal referendum biex titneħħa l-liġi u jerġa jiġi l-istat li kien hemm qabel fejn kulħadd jagħmel li jrid, l-Isqfijiet kienu stiednu lill-Kattoliċi biex ma joħorġux jivvutaw biex b'hekk ma jintlaħaqx il-quorum meħtieġ, ir-referendum jitħassar, u l-liġi tibqa' dik li tkun.
L-Isqfijiet, fil-pastorali tagħhom, ukoll tkellmu dwar il-bżonn li jkun hemm liġi li tirregola s-settur, liġi li għalkemm tirregola, mhijiex xorta waħda se tneħħi d-dilemmi morali kemm għas-soċjetà, kif ukoll b'mod partikulari għan-Nisrani. L-ivf, bħalma kont qed tgħid int, anki meta hija regulata tibqa xi ħaġa ħażina, b'effetti negattivi fuq kif il-bniedem iħares lejn il-ħajja. Imma hawnhekk jintuża l-prinċipju tal-"lesser evil"...
Il-pastorali tal-Isqfijiet hija linja gwida ċara għall-Kattoliċi kif ukoll għal kull min għandu ċerta sensittività dwar is-suġġett, din l-ittra toħroġ (għall-kuntrarju ta' dak li qalu xi wħud) it-tagħlim awtentiku tal-Knisja.
Jessica Debattista
Aug 20th 2012, 01:03
@ Dr. Joe Brincat: “Ejja ma nitmejlux bina nfusna li zewg bajdiet biss ikun mghammra ! Jekk irid ikun hemm success, meta r-rata ta' falliment hija kbira, wiehed jahseb ghall-aktar opportunitajiet.”
I particularly enjoyed reading your contribution and I admit that it is highly unlikely that only two eggs would be fertilized. Who would want to go through so much hassle where the percentage of success would be next to nil? It stands to reason, of course, that the more eggs the better chance of success.
I have so far tried to see this problem from a secular point of view because I maintain that this issue is primarily an ethical one for the simple reason that if the destruction of embryos is considered as abortion, it is generally understood to be illegal. Nevertheless it is being practised by doctors who KNOW that it is an unethical procedure and, therefore, dare I say illegal, notwithstanding that there is no law against it as things stand?
I question why such a procedure was not nipped in the bud when scientists started experimenting with the idea of IVF or is everything permissable in the name of science?
As an aside, I can understand how the couples who had, or are going through, the process would be feeling now that IVF is being discussed so openly. Some consideration is due them I would say.
Franco Farrugia
Aug 20th 2012, 13:32
@ Jessica Debattista: 'Some consideration should be due to them.' Again, focussing on the adults. What about 'consideration' on the embryos.
As far as I know, only one doctor in Malta was involved in IVF and the doctor always implanted all embryos and did not allow any to die. Again: as far as I know.
Jessica Debattista
Aug 20th 2012, 20:03
@ Franco Farrugia: “As far as I know, only one doctor in Malta was involved in IVF and the doctor always implanted all embryos and did not allow any to die. Again: as far as I know.”
As far as I know freezing of embryos is not practised in Malta, instead I was told that all extracted eggs which survive are fertilized.
Of the ones which actually survive the fertilization process and are on the way to the embryonic stages, a maximum of three are implanted in the womb.
Once again this is far as I know.
I ask what happens to the remaining if they are not frozen?
Jessica Debattista
Aug 22nd 2012, 01:00
@ Franco Farrugia: “'Some consideration should be due to them.' Again, focussing on the adults. What about 'consideration' on the embryos.”
Franco why do you pick and choose statements from my comments and bother to comment (always negatively) when it is glaringly obvious that the previous sentence is proof that I am considering the embryos? Or isn’t the following: “I question why such a procedure was not nipped in the bud when scientists started experimenting with the idea of IVF or is everything permissable in the name of science?” not proof enough?
Mr Paul Borg
Aug 19th 2012, 13:57
IVF opens way to abortion. How? Wherever in the world that IVF procedures have been implemented, the documentation porvesd that the procedures have involved.
1) Creation of multiple IVF embryos. Before any implantation in the womb, the relevant embryo(s) are checked for any abnormalities. Any found defective are discarded and thrown away. They die: i.e. their life is aborted.
2) After the required number of embryos are implanted in the womb, any other embryos that are/may be left over are discarded and allowed to die. i.e. their life is aborted. Alternatively they are "frozen". After a period of time. long or short, or whenever the "parents" no longer want them, they are either discarded altogether and left to die or used as biological specimens for experimentation to destruction. In either case their lives are aborted.
3) After implantation in the womb, the progress of the embryo(s)/feotus(es) in the womb is closely monitored. It is in the interest of the IVF industry, the IVF medical practitioners and, the last but not least, the parents, who are making huge sacrifices physically, psychologically and financially, that a healthy baby is produced.Any embryos/foetuses found to be defective at any time during gestation in the womb are therefore aborted.
4) The next stage is that the entire process is re-started again,either ab initio or one of the left over "frozen" embryos is implanted to start a new gestatation.At all the same stages as already indicated the life of the embryo/foetus is aborted if it is unlikely to lead to the birth of a healthy baby.
These comments based in the documented experience wherever IVF has been implemented.It is surprising that Father Borg is si uniformed that he still asks his question and feels entitled to criticise others who appear to have a sound and valid foundation for their claim.
Joe Brincat-LL.D
Aug 19th 2012, 13:07
I now firmly believe that Cana Movement, for whom I hold no brief, could not but make that statement. If their statement was "disappointing and sad", what would be the judgment about this statement : "This sad reality, which often goes unmentioned, is truly deplorable: the “various techniques of artificial reproduction, which would seem to be at the service of life and which are frequently used with this intention, actually open the door to new threats against life”. (John Paul ll Evangelium Vitae. This was quoted again in An Instruction of the Congregation of the Faith on Dignity of the Person, of the 8th September, 2008.
On the other hand, while the State has every right to legislate for those who do not belong to the Church, it is out of place to ask Cana Movement to endorse the principle and make suggestions for "improvement". Otherwise they are sad and disappointing.
For those who care to read that recent document of the Vatican, to which Cana Movement is loyal : www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html.
With reference to the challenge about the law, I will make my comments, although I have already written elsewhere that, had I been still in Parliament, I would have asked for a vote of conscience. In legislation, one has to accept the principle involved and then go into details. First things first.
Andy Farrugia
Aug 19th 2012, 13:34
Forsi ma qrajnihiex dik l-enciklika, Dott; taf int, gieli l-anqas il-pastorali tal-Isqfijiet ma naqraw, imma nhalluha f'idejn id-Djaknu? Mhux hekk, jew!
Franco Farrugia
Aug 19th 2012, 13:45
Let me point out that I, too, 'hold no brief', neither for the Movement and nor the hierarchy of the Church - much less for the Bishop of Gozo. In fact, I don't even hold a brief for the Church.
However, I still recognise a gentleman when I see one. Or when I don't, as in this case.
Franco Farrugia
Aug 19th 2012, 12:06
Well, admittedly, an arrogant priest would, indeed, 'yawn' at the accusations levelled at him. Reminds me of another blogger, worthy of the same characteristic.
You still miss the main thrust of the argument - as I see it, at least.
You betrayed your Bishop, you did not 'protect' him, you did not help him.
You have caused scandal.
And confusion.
You and your ilk, as priests, should support him in every way, in public.
Especially at a time when he was far from well.
I simply have no idea how you can look at him straight in the face again.
Andy Farrugia
Aug 19th 2012, 10:40
"The role of public opinion and dialogue"......it would be interesting and enlightening to conduct a survey (should be a piece of cake for media savvy gurus) to discover who is causing most confusion among the faithful: Bishop Grech or "the dissidents-cum-reformists"?
Andy Farrugia
Aug 19th 2012, 10:31
In a hole, doesn't even realise it, and continues to dig. But he's a spin master, so all this is par for the course. The issue is that "being a priest and not a puppet", he should have realised that there are appropriate ways and channels for him and others to voice their reasonable misgivings about any number of issues. But he is clever and erudite, and who are we to disabuse him of his hubris? (350 and rising? Indeed) Kompli, kompli, il-paci mieghek!
Please choose the reason of your report below: