Walk the walk and talk the talk.

Criticism of facial transplants

Critics such as Peter A. Clark, director of the Institute of Catholic Bioethics at St. Joseph’s University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, said a facial transplant introduces unnecessary risks for a procedure that is not a matter of life and death.

Those comments really hurt.  I think, if there is a possibility of coming out of the dark, and being able to be a part of the society once again, you should. This kind of comment will show no mercy and a sense of stiff practicality that make the priests every time going astray from the reality.

We  are not talking here about boobs, or botox . We are talking here about horrible diseases, like huge facial tumors and people mauled by animals. How is not to have a nose? How is not to feel the smell of all that surrounds you, or  the taste of food?

Is  a complete act of mercy  to  go to   medical school, research and try to help your brothers and sisters to be happy.  To be healthy. This is as cruel as to say that if you are not eating is because God want’s you to be hungry.

And how many other examples can we find with the Mother Church? What will let you  come back when there  is only shadows and cliques. I know that the answer is not in the Cathedral,  the only place when Jesus lost it was in a temple… I do know that all texts has being changed for political reasons, and that what we have right now are just remanents of what was a long time ago… where is the essence, where is the passion?

There is time to read more about John Paul and Marcos Gregorio. I really miss you guys!

So, here is the difference between the priest and the doctor, one will  talk the talk, and the other will walk the walk.

Surgery transplanted most of patient’s face

When the church in Panama made the difference