|
 |
Enough, Already, About Third
Millennium
by Christopher A. Ferrara
 It is hardly a
surprise that the Netherlands has just become the first country to legalize
euthanasia. (Washington State in the U.S. did so long ago.) In case anyone
hasn’t noticed, the world is coming to an end.
The Vatican,
however, seems taken aback by this development. Today, Reuters reported that in
an editorial in L'Osservatore Romano the Vatican “blasted the
Netherlands' decision to become the first country to legalize euthanasia,
calling it abhorrent and criminal, and the doctors who perform it
‘butchers.’”
The Vatican
editorialist was Father Gino Concetti, a kind of house theologian for OR. While
it is certainly a good thing that the Vatican has condemned the new
legislation, Concetti’s grounds for doing so are typical of
post-conciliar moral pronouncements: “The Dutch law is worthy of
condemnation and reprobation. Euthanasia is an abhorrent choice and
killing a patient is a criminal gesture . . . It is hard to believe how
a choice which is so macabre can be called 'civil' and 'humanitarian'
...” (my emphasis)
Now, what is all
this about “choice”? Why not simply state the truth that euthanasia
is an abomination which cries out to Heaven for vengeance; a mortal sin which
contravenes the Fifth Commandment and will bring on the wrath of God? The very
use of the word “choice” suggests that euthanasia is a permissible
subject for legislative deliberations in the first place, when in truth it may
not even be debated without committing a grave moral offense. Notice
here the Vatican’s implicit acceptance that the process of debating
euthanasia is not in question, but only the ultimate legislative choice
in favor of it. This is what happens when the ideal of the Social Kingship of
Christ and the Catholic confessional state are abandoned in favor of the
reigning pluralism. The Church finds herself unable to say any
longer—speaking with the authority of the voice of Christ on
earth—that a nation offends God by even considering a violation of His
law.
Concetti goes on to wonder: “Can it really be true that, at the dawn of
the Third Millennium, there can be slaves to desperation and that one can give
up the hope of life?” Oh please! What in Heaven’s name does “the
dawn of the Third Millennium” have to do with anything? Why should the
Dutch legislators, in their manifest depravity, behave any differently in view
of January 1, 2001— a mere date on the calendar? Throughout the year 2000
we had to suffer through the Vatican’s public relations blitz about the
marvelous results which would accrue to the world from the Jubilee
celebrations, including the Jubilee of Young People, the Jubilee of the World
of Entertainment and the Day of Pizza Makers. We were told to expect that at
“the dawn of the Third Millennium” we would witness the first signs
of the long-awaited “civilization of love” and “a new springtime
of humanity.” Instead, we see a civilization of hatred and a
fast-deepening winter of humanity.
One prays that
someday soon the Vatican will free itself from the terminology of the
Zeitgeist and begin speaking to the world of sin and damnation once
again, instead of “abhorrent choices.” One prays that the Vatican
will soon return to telling the world that men must do what is right for the
love of God and to save their souls, not because it is “the dawn of the
Third Millennium.” We have heard quite enough about the Third Millennium.
Let the world hear about eternity for once.
Previous Articles
|
 |
|
|