A priest stands by one of the coffins stored at the
church of San Giuseppe in Seriate, near the hard-hit city of Bergamo in
the Lombardy region of Italy on Thursday. (Piero Cruciatti/AFP/Getty
Images)
There's a lot of focus on the numbers as people try to rationalise for and against measures that restrict their 'freedom'.
So let's add a little clarity.
First the fatality rate is a result of sampling a population. If the sample only includes those symptomatic, then the statistic reflects the fatality of those in that cohort.
In other words, it is a sample of the 15 and 5 percenters that are really sick. No one knows COVID-19's actual fatality rate because of the skewed data. What they do know is that if a person falls in the 20% level, it is bad.
While that may sound like a small percentage (hey 80% was a 'B' in school eh?) it still represents a huge portion of a population. The population of Canada is 37.59M, the states is 327.5M. This translates into 7.5M Canadians and 65.5M Americans being hospitalized. Of this population, based on the Chinese fatality data I posted earlier, the upper fatality would be ~28%. This is based on a 100% infection rate of the population. I don't know how to estimate / validate any smaller number.
So, the data shows a worse case scenario of 2.1M Canadians and 91.7M American deaths. The key factor in this stat is the level of care provided early in the disease. If the healthcare system is overwhelmed (ie Italy), then things get really bad. If the population is older (immune systems diminish with age), then the impact will also be greater.
Hence the need to slow its progression through the population.
That said, I feel that the concerns over the restrictions on personal freedoms are, in large part, misplaced.
If there is a disease passing through a country, the leaders have an obligation to protect society.
If left unchecked, it could create a societal upheaval and breakdown of what societal norms remain in the wasteland of the post-Vatican 2 world.
So, take this time to reflect on your lives repent of your sins, pray for forgiveness and make this your best lent ever.
Because the coffin over which a priest is praying may be your own.
Can the SSPX be right about the Novus Ordo? Revision: Feb 11, 2013 On another web forum, I was engaged in a rather heated discussion about the documents of Vatican II.
+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3
+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX. This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu
+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment. Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid. No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein. Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse? The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin. Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service. It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R
Comments
Post a Comment