www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Q&A from US Bishops on Health Care Reform

Back to the moral question.

I raised the moral question in this discussion because I think it is important. Let me summarize my perspective and maybe others can comment to agree or disagree and tell us why.

Do we, as Christians, have a responsibility to care for the poor among us? Absolutely.

Do we, as Christians, have a responsibility to pay for the ordinary health care needs of our neighbors? No. In fact, given the fraud, waste and abuse and rationing that comes with government run programs one could possibly argue that Christians should stand against such government programs. [I'm not arguing that here, but just saying that one could make such a case, and that it would make for a good discussion.]

Do we, as Christians, knowing that we have to care for the poor, need to support government run health care for the poor? No. The Lord gave the task to the Church and not to the government. One may, I think, legitimately argue for 1) tax funding to care for those in need and 2) government run care for the poor but there is no Christian moral imperative that demands one do so (one may legitimately argue that 1) all funding should be private or 2) tax funding might be used to care for the poor but keep the government out of managing health care).

I don't see any Christian moral imperative for government run health care for everyone. I actually see it as rather cruel since it (more and more government programs) trains people that they cannot manage their own lives. Mr. Sowell (whom I referenced earlier) and many others speak to this with great evidence.

It seems to me that if society wishes to subsidize health insurance (for those who choose to purchase it) the very best way is to open the doors to private competition and to subsidize the purchase of health insurance through tax deductions, and possibly grants to purchase health insurance for those who cannot afford it.

I would also think that no matter where one stands on these issues as Christians we need to express our opinions to our elected representatives, and especially on the life issues. The plans currently provide for abortion (President Obama promised a pro-death woman's group he visited recently that "reproductive choice" would definitely be part of the "public option") and they provide for rationing (even if one decided to do real major reform of Medicare/Medicaid one cannot ration care to those on it as the President has said - our elderly need real care and not just pain medication until they die).

Pro-death? Really? Nobody is pro-death, but we've beaten that dead horse enough.

Christ is in our midst!!

I just returned from a wedding of a niece in California. While in the airport in Phoenix, I scanned an article by Evan Thomas in this week's Newsweek concerning the "fact" that we ought to allow the elderly to die. It seems to me that the tone suggests that we ought to find our healthcare savings precisely in this area because the bulk of healthcare expenditures are made for people in the last year of their lives.

I'm also plowing through two books that have shed much light for me on the mindset of those on the other side of this and other issues in the culture wars: The Revolt of the Elites and Liberal Fascism. Fascinating reading, both.

BOB

Lasch (a self-described "Marxist of traditional tendencies") is brilliant, even when one doesn't entirely agree with him. Goldberg's book will be required reading in political science classes a couple of decades from now.

Sure there are. Planned Parenthood makes a half billion dollars a year killing babies in the womb. They want women to have abortions. It's how they earn their livings. Not sure they run radio commercials where you live but they sometimes do here in the nation's capitol. Utterly disgusting. Very Pro-Death. They know exactly what they are doing and consider it moral. Your denial of it does not make the babies less dead.

President Obama voted against laws restricting partial birth abortions, saying that the women came in to have abortion an the last thing she wanted to do was go home with a baby. That is pro-death.

President Obama spoke directly to this in his "infomerical" on ABC back earlier in the summer. This is when the woman asked if under his reformed Medicare if her 100 year old mom would get her new pacemaker. He said "no" and that care for the elderly should focus on pain control and they should not expect things to be fixed. While I would have structured health for those in need much differently then it is now, I believe it immoral for anyone to advocate the taking away of care from the elderly. Any change should be for those enrolling in Medicare & Medicare for the first time.

What kind of statement is that? Did I ever say that support Planned Parenthood or abortion?! What have I denied? I think a taking of any life is unacceptable and must be repented for. I just cannot accept that anybody is pro-death, it is illogical.

How many people have your harsh, condemning attitude won for the Pro-Life cause? Maybe, my friend, you are pro-death, you have shown your support for this War on Iraq in which many innocent people have died. From the tenor of your posts, I would presume that you are for the death pentaly, does that make you pro-death because many innocent people have been executed and it has not done much to deter crime?

There is a vast difference between those killed in a just war or the execution of criminals and the slaughter of the Innocents. Use your head!

Alexandr

There is no difference, I did not see any caveats in the commandment "You shall not kill." Orthodoxy, from my understanding, makes no difference, the taking of a life is the taking of a life and requires the same repentance.

Alexandr, Isn't the Just War Theory foreign to Orthodoxy?

It is not Thou shall not kill, but thou shall not murder. When Christ was on the Cross, the good Thief stated that they were receiving their "just reward".

There is no Just war theory in Orthodoxy, but if you read of the battle of Kullikovo, 2 Schema monks, Alexandr and Andrei took up arms and Andrei actually slew the leader of the Tatars.

Alexandr

If I remember correctly from my scripture classes the word used for kill/murder is "רצח" (ratsach) which can be translated as "to murder, to slay or to kill."

Orthodox Christians do indeed undertake warfare in certain situations, but purely as a “necessary evil.” It is necessary because the innocent and good must be protected; it is evil because such protection involves the taking of human life, which by most accounts, is among the most terrible of crimes.

The Orthodox Church therefore is not pacifistic, although it in practices encourages governments always to pursue the “preferential option for peace.” Nonetheless, the Church recognizes that this world is fallen and is not yet equivalent to the kingdom of God. For this reason, governments in general cannot be held to the strict requirements of the gospel. Although under God’s authority, they belong to the fallen world. At times statesmanship fails, and Christians are called by their governments to defend their commonwealth by means of war, for to fail to do so would result in an increase in the measure of evil in the world.

This does not mean that war can be “just.” It may serve a just cause, but war itself is unjust by nature. The Orthodox Church therefore has never elaborated a theory of “just war.” For Orthodox Christians, “just war” is a contradiction in terms.

Alexandr

This term for killing in Hebrew that is used in the Ten Commandments is never used in Hebrew Scripture to refer to the type of killing that takes place in a war. Thus, a better translation would be "murder".

Alexandr

The canons would have required them to be released from their monastic vows. It is interesting that Anna Commnena relates in The Alexiad how deeply shocked and offended the Greeks were at the sight of Frankish monks and priests bearing arms, and of their fighting in battle in the front ranks of the Crusaders. The generally accepted understanding of the Orthodox position is ordained ministers and monastics may not, under any circumstances, spill blood and remain in their clerical state.

On the contrary, the 2 monks were sent by St Sergius Radonezhski, and even wore special great schemas with crosses embroidered on them to distinguish themselves as God's warriors.

From the life of St Sergius
"As he blessed Dmitry, Father Sergius said the following: "Go without fear! God will help you and you'll come back victorious." Father Sergius gave Prince Dmitry two warrior monks, brothers Alexander Peresvet and Andrei Oslyabya, whose courage could serve a good example for his army. Prince Dmitry led his army to the Don, where it clashed with Tatars on September 8th 1380.
As it were, two warriors came over to a strip of land separating the armies - Russian warrior monk Peresvet and Tatar warrior Chelubei. Peresvet was rushing forward, spear in hand, with his black monastic robe embroidered with white crosses billowing behind him. He was not wearing any armor under his robe, only a heavy iron cross. To the loud sounds of encouragement from their fellow fighters both warriors struck each other with heavy spears and dropped dead on the spot. The end of a one-to-one fight signaled the beginning of the battle."

Alexandr