Western medicine developed as an expression of Christian charity and played a large role in the growth of the early church. Despite its original foundation in Christian moral principles, modern medicine has deviated from its origins. The principles of human dignity, solidarity, and subsidiarity have been subjugated to a materialist and transactional construct that forms the basis of the contemporary medical delivery and financing systems. The dehumanization of both healthcare practitioners and patients by the partnership of governmental and corporate entities, and the use of health care as a political instrument, has debased the original mission of the medical profession and represents an affront to the principles of Catholic social teaching (CST). This essay explores the ways in which the US medical delivery and financing systems violate the principles of CST by means seldom recognized due to the inurement of the public and medical professionals. By examining the prevailing healthcare model through the lens of CST, the author illustrates the ways in which CST principles are systematically violated. This analysis serves as the foundation of a Catholic response to the question of how faithful Christians might live out their calls to holiness through the exercise of their professional vocations. A vision of an invigorated model of medicine as vocation, along with illustrative examples, is presented. By exemplifying the principles of human dignity, solidarity and subsidiarity in health care, Christians can seize a golden opportunity for evangelization by rearticulating the historical spiritual mission of Western medicine.Half of the medical professionals in the United States are experiencing symptoms of burnout. From the perspective of theological anthropology, this dehumanizing aspect of the field is not reducible to ethical failures, for it is rooted in the radically new worldview known as self-creation.  https://www.selleckchem.com/products/lotiglipron.html  As an implicit denial of Christian understanding of creation, self-creation entails a rejection of relationality and dependence-both proper to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. This article proposes that this lost Christian patrimony is intimately connected to the increasingly unhealthy dependence we place upon modern medicine. Relying on theologian Joseph Ratzinger, we will come to see that a recovery of relational dependence is not only necessary for the salvation of man-but the very health of the medical world at large.Although Christian ethics and contemporary utilitarian ethics both employ terms such as "love" and "compassion" in their efforts to deal with human suffering, they are in fact polar opposite ethical views. This fact is not at all easy to discern. One key to perceiving the radical opposition between them lies in clarifying their respective concepts of love and suffering and the relation between the two. In Christian personalism, suffering is always understood as the suffering of individual persons, while in utilitarianism, suffering is primarily understood as a quantifiable entity detached from the individuals who experience it. This detachment of suffering from individuals leads to the depersonalizing and commodifying recommendations of utilitarianism. The dignity of persons as understood in Christian anthropology serves as the foundation of Christian ethics and is the only basis on which ethics can avoid commodifying people. The article begins with an explanation of the utilitarian approach to suffering and its concept of love. It then proceeds to express the view of love and suffering that flows from the Christian perspective. The article concludes by exposing the inherently self-defeating structure of utilitarian ethics and offers the hope-filled, if challenging, approach of Christian personalism. Although Christian anthropology and ethics developed within the historical context of Christianity, and in fact could only have developed there, the arguments here are primarily philosophical elucidations of the differences between the two opposing schools of thought discussed, while here and there including occasional theological points.
  The article examines the difference between Christian ethics and utilitarian ethics, bringing out their stark opposition on the topics of love, suffering and the human person.
 The article examines the difference between Christian ethics and utilitarian ethics, bringing out their stark opposition on the topics of love, suffering and the human person.Because no vaccines or specific treatments are available, governments around the globe have responded to the Coronavirus Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with a variety of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that include sheltering-in-place orders, social distancing, and school and business closures. While the actual and potential harm due to COVID-19 is far more severe than influenza, the harms due to the NPIs-that have clearly reduced mortality due to COVID-19-are also significant. With government-ordered "lockdowns" across the globe, many arguments for and against returning to normal social and economic activity have been reported, and in fact, Americans are divided about how and when to "open up." These arguments seem to fall into two major categories. Utilitarianism suggests that suspension of civil liberties and constitutional rights is a necessary response, while Libertarianism supports individual decision-making and greatly reduced government mandates. Protesters around the country have been vocal about one or the other points of view. First, we consider in detail the potential harms of severe acute respiratory syndrome virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) if left unchecked by NPIs. Second, we look at harms due to restricted social and economic activity on human morbidity and mortality. Finally, we offer a framework based on the four pillars of Catholic Social Teaching and the principle of double effect that offers a more humane solution than Utilitarian or Libertarian principles alone.Burnout is highly prevalent among physicians and is associated with negative patient outcomes. Furthermore, medical training is a particularly vulnerable time as studies show that medical students, residents, and fellows experience burnout and emotional exhaustion at higher rates than both the general population and physicians in practice. Multiple recent studies have demonstrated the practice of religion and spirituality to be protective against burnout in trainees. Can Catholic academic physicians transfer these protective benefits of religion and spirituality to their trainees, who are at the highest risk, and who may or may not share their faith? An ancient Catholic tradition, the Seven Spiritual Works of Mercy, may hold the key. The Spiritual Works of Mercy are listed by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops as Counseling the Doubtful, Instructing the Ignorant, Admonishing the Sinner, Comforting the Sorrowful, Forgiving Injuries, Bearing Wrongs Patiently, and Praying for the Living and the Dead. Using this as a framework, examples of evidenced-based actions from the literature that have been shown to either prevent burnout or to improve the day-to-day experience of medical trainees were discussed.