Francis

With Pope Francis in the hospital, he already hopes to know how the respiratory crisis evolves in the midst of his hospitalization for pneumonia, many things have stopped in the Vatican. The Holy City and “Renewable”For example. The Pontiff’s plans to make the small Catholic state more sustainable have remained in Stand By. Controversial issues have also been revived that have always been on the table. Without going any further, Francisco’s possible final. An unavoidable question. I told it a few days ago The New York Times Bringing a topic that the Vatican has preferred to avoid: What happens when a pontiff faces a prolonged deterioration of his health, loses his faculties and approaches at the end of his life? At 88, Francisco has spoken in the past about ethics in medical decision making in terminal cases, but has never revealed its own preferences in this regard. Although He left a letter of resignation in the Vatican in case of disability, its content is unknown and it is not known if you have designated someone to make medical decisions in their name. The silence of the “house.” The Vatican, faithful to his tradition of secrecy, has replied that “It’s too soon” To discuss these issues, despite the growing concern within the Church. Meanwhile, medical bulletins have also been prudent, informing that the Pope’s condition It remains stable And that, after its respiratory crisis, has been able to do without mechanical ventilation (He has even spoken). Be that as it may, uncertainty persists and the lack of a public protocol on how to manage the end of the life of a pontiff is sufficient reason for debate between theologians and ecclesiastical experts. The moral dilemma. The Catholic Church teaches that life must be defended From conception to natural death. However, within the doctrine there is a margin of interpretation When it is legitimate to stop prolonging it artificially. According to the Magisterium of the Church, the Use of “Extraordinary Media” To keep a patient alive, they can be suspended if they suppose disproportionate suffering or do not offer real improvement. The problem is that there is no clear definition of what constitutes an extraordinary medium, which leaves space for various interpretations within the Catholic clergy and bioethics.