Important one. Yet, he does ignore, very crucial aspect in handling that pandemic. The pope, argues, that, I quote:
With some exceptions, governments have made great efforts to put the well-being of their people first, acting decisively to protect health and to save lives. The exceptions have been some governments that shrugged off the painful evidence of mounting deaths, with inevitable, grievous consequences. But most governments acted responsibly, imposing strict measures to contain the outbreak.
Yet some groups protested, refusing to keep their distance, marching against travel restrictions — as if measures that governments must impose for the good of their people constitute some kind of political assault on autonomy or personal freedom! Looking to the common good is much more than the sum of what is good for individuals. It means having a regard for all citizens and seeking to respond effectively to the needs of the least fortunate.
End of quotation:
At the same token, he writes about: solidarity, reciprocity, as crucial human features. He writes, I quote:
“….it is better to live a shorter life serving others than a longer one resisting that call”
Ignoring so, the desperate call, of so many people and groups, that have lost their human face under such restrictions ( like: lock down, social distancing, closure or shutting off business, places of work, etc…notwithstanding the medical or public justification for it). People, have become dehumanized due to it. Not too many governments, have come out, with creative solutions. But, taking the utmost, brutal, efficient, immediate solutions, without too much considering: measurement, proportionality, compassion etc….
Also ignoring, the long term consequences. Much more people, would die in time, would become severely sick, because of such restrictions.
So, if having shorter life, but with moral and social quality, he had to oppose, imposition of such misery, upon so many people. He could at least call, for far greater creative solutions.
For that is the nature of humans: they have limit. They wouldn’t live but for living per se. Breathing and that’s it. So many during history, preferred to die over living in disgrace and oppression.
This is not selfishness. This is the human nature. Balancing it, wouldn’t harm him with all due respect.
Missouri State of Mind 
Important one. Yet, he does ignore, very crucial aspect in handling that pandemic. The pope, argues, that, I quote:
With some exceptions, governments have made great efforts to put the well-being of their people first, acting decisively to protect health and to save lives. The exceptions have been some governments that shrugged off the painful evidence of mounting deaths, with inevitable, grievous consequences. But most governments acted responsibly, imposing strict measures to contain the outbreak.
Yet some groups protested, refusing to keep their distance, marching against travel restrictions — as if measures that governments must impose for the good of their people constitute some kind of political assault on autonomy or personal freedom! Looking to the common good is much more than the sum of what is good for individuals. It means having a regard for all citizens and seeking to respond effectively to the needs of the least fortunate.
End of quotation:
At the same token, he writes about: solidarity, reciprocity, as crucial human features. He writes, I quote:
“….it is better to live a shorter life serving others than a longer one resisting that call”
Ignoring so, the desperate call, of so many people and groups, that have lost their human face under such restrictions ( like: lock down, social distancing, closure or shutting off business, places of work, etc…notwithstanding the medical or public justification for it). People, have become dehumanized due to it. Not too many governments, have come out, with creative solutions. But, taking the utmost, brutal, efficient, immediate solutions, without too much considering: measurement, proportionality, compassion etc….
Also ignoring, the long term consequences. Much more people, would die in time, would become severely sick, because of such restrictions.
So, if having shorter life, but with moral and social quality, he had to oppose, imposition of such misery, upon so many people. He could at least call, for far greater creative solutions.
For that is the nature of humans: they have limit. They wouldn’t live but for living per se. Breathing and that’s it. So many during history, preferred to die over living in disgrace and oppression.
This is not selfishness. This is the human nature. Balancing it, wouldn’t harm him with all due respect.
Thanks
LikeLike