Coco took a vacation

 

Português

Français

I will tell you a real cute story, but the ending, I warn you right now, is heartbreaking. This serves to sensitize our carnivorous nature a little. Even though a die-hard meat eater, I am getting more and more sentimental towards animals and even plants, though still too voracious... soul paradoxes.

The story takes place in the early 1950s, on a small dairy farm, with chickens and other small animals as well. The owners were a young couple and five young children.

The two older boys, from an early age, were already helping their father with the work when they returned from school. In the course of their daily chores, they saw the birth of Coco, a gentle calf, irremediably docile, due to the circumstances of his breeding for butchery purposes, that is to say, castrated shortly after his birth and well fed, for fulfill its mission. Even if they knew what would be his fate, it was out of love, without premeditation, that the boys offered him, full hands, abundant quantities of hay.

They used to play with him and Coco had become attached to them as well. In his bovine way of being, he pushed them gently and slowly, with his innocent and cheerful head. The boys climbed on the little ox and wandered around, along the paths that Coco chose as he liked. After a while, Coco got so big and fat that the little boys' legs no longer even hung on either side of the animal's body mass, they sprawled out on this platter, as if they were in a movement of a ballet flight.

One day, when they came home from school, Coco was not there.

- Where's Coco? - They asked their father. - He took a vacation.

The children did not dare to ask more questions. A few days passed and they noticed that there was delicious and succulent meat in their meals. It was Coco who fed them now, they later learned.

I admit that I could not hold back my tears while listening to this story. Told as something natural, by one of the protagonists, we could see, imprinted in his eyes and in his smile, the nostalgia for this feeling of childhood, of yesteryear.

Despite being the type who likes to eat everything, I'm ruminating on the idea that we must seriously think about changing our habits. Could we lessen our predatory instincts? How? What if we created laboratories to synthesize food, assemble atoms, molecules, to manufacture what we like and according to our health – "tailor-made".

Would it be feasible? But we can't do that overnight, of course. Everything must be very well planned, so as not to harm anyone's livelihood or to unbalance the entire ecosystem, it must be done gradually redirecting and reusing spaces and functions. It would take centuries.

I have written about this before [1], but with scientists developping innovative vaccine techniques in the pandemic that we are going through, by dealing with key components of matter, I hope that one day science will lean towards the "culinary", let's say.😄

Anyone who's watched the Star Trek TV series knows what I'm talking about. The spaceship had a fantastic food synthesizer [2]. Maybe we can do the same?

~~~~~~~

Related links:

[1] The same but differently

[2] Food synthesizer

Coco a pris des vacances

 

Português

English

Je vais raconter une histoire vraie, mignonne, mais la fin, je vous préviens tout de suite, brise le cœur. Cela sert à sensibiliser un peu notre nature carnivore. Même moi, une mangeuse invétérée de viande, je deviens de plus en plus sentimental envers les animaux et même envers les plantes, bien que je sois encore trop vorace... paradoxes de l'âme.

L'histoire se déroule au début des années 1950, dans une petite ferme de bétail laitier, avec aussi des poulets et d'autres petits animaux. Les propriétaires étaient un jeune couple et cinq jeunes enfants.

Les deux garçons plus âgés, dès leur plus jeune âge, aidaient déjà leur père dans les travaux, à leur retour de l'école. Au cours de leurs tâches quotidiennes, ils ont vu naître Coco, un veau sympathique, irrémédiablement docile, en raison des circonstances de son élevage à des fins de boucherie, c'est-à-dire castré peu après sa naissance et bien nourri, pour remplir sa mission. Même s'ils savaient quel serait son sort, c'était par amour, sans préméditation, que les garçons lui offraient, à pleines mains, d'abondantes quantités de touffes de foin.

Ils jouaient avec lui et il s'était également attaché à eux. Dans sa manière bovine d'être, il les poussait doucement et lentement, avec sa tête innocente et gaie. Les garçons montaient sur le petit bœuf et se promenaient dans les environs, le long des chemins que Coco choisissait à sa guise. Au bout d'un temps, il est devenu si grand et gros que les jambes des petits garçons ne pendaient même plus de chaque côté de la masse corporelle de l'animal, elles s'étalaient sur ce plateau, comme s'ils faisaient un mouvement d'un vol de ballet.

Un jour, en rentrant de l'école, Coco n'était pas là.

- Où est Coco ? – ont-ils demandé à leur père. – Il a pris des vacances.

Les enfants n'ont pas osé poser plus de questions. Quelques jours passèrent et ils remarquèrent qu'il y avait de la viande délicieuse et succulente dans leurs repas. C'était Coco qui les nourrissait maintenant, apprirent-ils plus tard.

J'avoue que je n'ai pas pu retenir mes larmes en écoutant cette histoire. Racontée comme de quoi de naturel, par l'un des protagonistes, on pouvait voir, imprimée dans ses yeux et dans son sourire, la nostalgie de ce sentiment d'enfance, d'autrefois.

Malgré ma gourmandise, du genre qui aime manger de tout, je rumine l'idée qu'il faut sérieusement réfléchir à changer nos habitudes. Pourrions-nous amoindrir nos instincts prédateurs ? Comment ? Et si on créait des laboratoires pour synthétiser des aliments, assembler des atomes, des molécules, pour fabriquer ce que l'on aime et selon notre santé - « sur mesure ».

Serait-ce faisable ? Mais on ne peut pas faire ça du jour au lendemain, évidemment. Tout doit être très bien planifié, afin de ne nuire au gagne-pain de personne ni de déséquilibrer l'ensemble de l'écosystème, en redirigeant et réutilisant progressivement les espaces et les fonctions. Cela prendrait des siècles.

J'ai déjà écrit à ce sujet [1], mais en voyant les scientifiques développer des techniques vaccinales innovatrices dans la pandémie que nous traversons, en traitant des composantes clés de la matière, j'espère qu'un jour la science se penchera vers la « culinaire », disons.😄

Ceux qui ont regardé la série télévisée Star Trek savent de quoi je parle. Le vaisseau spatial avait un fantastique synthétiseur de nourriture [2]. Peut-être peut-on faire la même chose ?

~~~~~~

Liens connexes :

[1] La même chose mais différemment

[2] Le réplicateur

L'Immaculée Conception

 

Image URL

Que explicação maravilhosa!!!!!!!

Segue um trecho de texto em francês. Não quis traduzir para não deturpá-lo de modo algum. É perfeito (vou tentar, com calma).

O link abaixo – (2) -, também em francês, foi de onde tirei este trecho.

"L'Immaculée Conception de la Vierge a-t-elle un indice dans l’Écriture ?

Ordinairement, à ce sujet, les auteurs citent la parole de l'ange, déclarant Marie « pleine de grâce ». Mais ils ne vont pas assez loin.

Dans la récitation de la prière du « Je vous salue, Marie », le nom de Marie a été ajouté. L'ange ne l'a pas prononcé. Dans l'évangile selon saint Luc, en grec, il la désigne par un mot, littéralement intraduisible et que le latin et le français ont édulcoré en « pleine de grâce », comme si, en Marie, la personne et la grâce faisaient deux. Le mot qui sert de nom propre à Marie est le participe parfait passif d'un verbe dérivé du mot « grâce », charis en grec. Il est au passif parce que l'auteur, c'est Dieu ; il est au parfait, pour traduire une action dont le résultat demeure. Marie n'est pas la grâce. Mais, en elle, il n'y a que grâce.

Cette manière de s'exprimer est absolument unique dans l’Écriture.

Dans le même évangile, quand l'ange s'est adressé à Zacharie, il l'appelle « Zacharie ». Marie, elle, a pour nom propre d'être le « chef d'œuvre de la grâce » : cette périphrase a l'avantage de mettre en valeur, à la fois, l'Artiste qui est Dieu, et la réussite de son art, qui est Marie.

Comme ce nom est rigoureusement propre à Marie, on s'explique pourquoi, à Lourdes, la Vierge a fini par déclarer : « Je suis l'Immaculée Conception »"

~~~~~~~~

"Jesus, Maria, José, meu coração vosso é."

~~~~~~~~

Links relacionados :

1. Image URL

2. Qu’a voulu dire l’Église en déclarant que Marie a été conçue sans péché?

3. Religion (en français)

4. Religião

Délires pour Totoche

 

Português

English

Le dicton dit : "Du fou et du médecin, on a tous un petit brin". En tant que médecin, je dis que cela me rapproche un peu plus de la folie. Et ce n'est pas peu.

J'ai déjà écrit à propos de mon "délire" en disant que le Péché Originel se serait produit avant le "Big Bang" (1, 2). Autrement dit, avant le Big Bang, tout allait à merveille, jusqu'à ce que ce fameux péché soit commis (qui peut savoir quelle catastrophe était cela) et a causé la chute de l'Homme et de l'univers entier, culminant dans ce point dense (singularité) qui a « explosé », c'est-à-dire a commencé à s'étendre. Cela peut être grossièrement comparé au « redémarrage » d'un ordinateur après un dysfonctionnement ; il revient un peu de la même manière qu'avant l'événement, mais avec des problèmes. L'homme est réapparu après une douloureuse évolution de la matière et, lorsqu'il a atteint la capacité de penser, comme aujourd'hui, il n'avait plus les « dons surnaturels » (dona praeternaturalia) que Dieu avait ajoutés à sa nature, par exemple. Ces dons ne sont pas dans notre contexte, ils ne peuvent avoir existé que dans des circonstances dont nous ne connaissons pas. Ça va bien si c'était avant le Big Bang, n'est-ce pas.

Délire pour délire, s'il vous plaît, laissez-moi tranquille avec les miens. Au moins ils ne blessent pas les doctrines, ni celles de la foi, ni celles de notre science.

Le cercle vicieux de la naissance et de la mort de tous les éléments s'est établi dans le « reboot » de l'univers. Le "pool" d'énergie est devenu limité, les êtres dépendant de la mort les uns des autres pour survivre. Dans ce scénario prédateur, l'évolution des espèces est inévitable, avec sa sélection naturelle, c'est-à-dire le plus adapté aux circonstances hostiles de l'environnement, le plus apte à échapper à la mort, prévaudra.

Mais tout ce délire ne provoque plus de "frisson" dans mes synapses. J'ai eu tellement de réponses personnelles à ma foi que je n'y pense même plus. Je deviens une personne vraiment « pieuse », une de celles qui ont les mains jointes en prière et la tête baissée... et ce n'est pas encore grand-chose, croyez-moi.

Alors pourquoi répéter tout ce blabla du Big Bang ? Étonnamment, c'était à cause de Totoche, notre chat. Dans ces discussions sur les réseaux sociaux, quelqu'un m'a demandé où elle était. Ensuite, j'ai commencé à me demander si les animaux allaient aussi au « Ciel ». Totoche a fait partie de notre bonheur. Elle était très importante dans notre vie. Elle mérite une réflexion, sans aucun doute.

J'ai déjà demandé et essayé de lire à ce sujet avant. Les experts de l'Église catholique disent non, parce que les animaux n'ont pas d'âme, ils ne vont pas au « Ciel ».

Pourquoi pas? Si avant le Big Bang (il me semble que le délire persiste), dans cet état de choses si parfait, il y avait des animaux en harmonie avec l'homme, et que Dieu a accordé à l'homme d'être « le maître des poissons de la mer, des oiseaux du ciel, et de tous les animaux qui vont et viennent sur la terre » (Genèse 1 : 26-28), pourquoi pas après le sauvetage à la Vie Éternelle ? Bon, maintenant je suis hors-jeu.

Je termine par un texte qui évoque les déclarations du Père Zezinho qui tombent bien pour tout cela (voir 3 – en portugais). Il y a une qui dit ceci (en citation de Saint Paul, 1 Corinthiens) : « Un jour nous saurons sans les voiles qui nous empêchent de tout voir tel que c'est réellement. »

~~~~~~~~

Liens connexes:

(1) Extraits

(2) À se tordre les neurones

(3) Pe. Zezinho

(4) Sobre o Pecado Original, segundo Santo Agostinho

(5) Religion

2008

Delusions for Totoche

 

Português

Français

The saying goes: "We are all a bit crazy, ‘and doctors’ in something." Being a doctor, I say that it leads me one step closer to be crazy. And it's not little.

I've already written about my "delusion" saying that the Original Sin would have happened before the "Big Bang" (1, 2), that is, before the Big Bang, everything went wonderfully, until that famous sin was committed (who knows what catastrophe was that) and caused the fall of Man and of the entire universe, culminating in that dense point (singularity) that “exploded”, i.e., it began to expand. This can be roughly compared to “rebooting” a computer after it has malfunctioned; it returns to work a bit similarly the way before the event, but with glitches. The man appeared again after a painful evolution of the matter and, when he reached the thinking state, as today, he no longer had those “preternatural gifts”, for example. Those gifts are not within our context, they can only have existed in circumstances that we are not aware of. It fits well if it was before the Big Bang, doesn't it?

Delusion vs. delusion, please, leave me alone with mine. At least mine does not hurt doctrines, neither those of faith, nor those of our science.

The vicious circle of birth and death of all elements was established in the "reboot" of the universe. The pool of energy has become limited, beings depending on the death of each other to survive. In this predatory scenario, the evolution of species is inevitable, with its natural selection, that is, the one most adapted to the hostile circumstances of the environment, the most suitable to escape being killed, will prevail.

But all this delirium no longer causes any "frisson" in my synapses. I've had so many personal answers to my faith that I don't even think about it anymore. I'm turning into a real “pious” person, one of those very churchy ones, with folded hands and bowed head... and it's still not much, believe me.

So why repeat that whole Big Bang blabbering? Amazingly, it was because of Totoche, our kitten. In those social networking chats, someone asked me where she was. Then I started wondering if the animals also go to “Heaven”. Totoche was part of our happiness. She was very important in our life. She is worth some thought, no doubt.

I've already asked and tried to read about it before. Experts in the Catholic Church say no, because animals don't have souls, they don't go to “Heaven”.

Why not? If before the Big Bang (it seems that the delusion persists), in that state of things so perfect, there were animals in harmony with man, and God granted mankind "to have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and every living thing that moves on the earth" (Genesis 1: 26-28), why not after the rescue to Eternal Life? Okay, now I'm offside.

I'll end with a text that mentions Father Zezinho's statements that come in handy for all of this (see 3 - in Portuguese). One of them goes like this (explaining Saint Paul 1 Corinthians) : "One day we will know without the veils that keep us from seeing everything as it really is."

~~~~~~~~

Related links:

(1) Excerpts

(2) Scratching the head

(3) Pe. Zezinho

(4) Sobre o Pecado Original, segundo Santo Agostinho

(5) About religion

2008

Delírios por Totoche

 

English

Français

Diz o ditado: “De médico e louco, todo mundo tem um pouco.” Sou médica, este quinhão já tenho e ele já me põe a um passo do outro. E não é pouco.

Já escrevi a respeito do meu “delírio” de que o Pecado Original teria acontecido antes do “Big Bang” (1, 2), ou seja, antes do Big Bang, tudo ia às mil maravilhas, até que o tal pecado cometido (sabe-se lá que catástrofe foi essa) ocasionou a queda do Homem e de todo o universo, culminando naquele ponto denso que “explodiu”, isto é, entrou em expansão. Seria, grosso modo, como o “reboot” de um computador, após ter apresentado um defeito; ele volta a funcionar de modo semelhante ao que era antes do evento, mas com falhas. O homem foi aparecer de novo depois de dolorosa evolução da matéria e, quando chegou ao estado pensante, como hoje, já não tinha aqueles tais “dons preternaturais”, por exemplo. Estes dons não estão dentro do nosso contexto, só podem ter existido em circunstâncias que desconhecemos. Calha bem ter sido antes do Big Bang, não?

Delírio por delírio, deixem-me com os meus. Pelo menos, os meus não ferem doutrinas, nem as da fé nem as da nossa ciência.

O círculo vicioso de nascimento e morte de todos os elementos se estabeleceu no “reboot” do universo. O “pool” de energia se tornou limitado, uns dependendo da morte dos outros para sobreviver. Nesse cenário predatório, é inevitável a evolução das espécies, com sua seleção natural, isto é, o mais adaptado às circunstâncias hostis do ambiente, mais adequado a escapar de ser morto, vai prevalecendo.

Mas todo esse delírio não causa mais nenhum “frisson” nas minhas sinapses. Já tive tantas respostas pessoais para a minha fé, que nem penso mais nisso. Estou virando uma verdadeira “beata”, daquelas bem igrejeiras, mesmo, de mãos postas e cabeça baixa... e ainda é pouco, creiam.

Então, por que repetir esse blablablá todo de Big Bang? Pasmem, foi por causa da Totoche, nossa gatinha. Naquelas conversas fiadas de rede social, alguém me perguntou onde ela estava. Aí me deu de ficar matutando se os animais também vão para o “Céu”. Totoche foi parte da nossa felicidade, meu marido e eu. Ela foi muito importante na nossa vida. Ela vale alguma reflexão, sem dúvida.

Já perguntei e já procurei ler sobre o assunto, anteriormente. Os entendidos da Igreja Católica dizem que não, que os animais não têm alma, não vão para o “Céu”.

Por que não? Se antes do Big Bang (parece que o delírio persiste), naquele estado de coisas tão perfeito, existiam animais em harmonia com o homem (Gênesis 1: 26-28), e que Deus concedeu ao homem  a responsabilidade de "dominar os peixes do mar, as aves do céu e todos os animais que se movem pela terra", por que não após o resgate para a Vida Eterna? Pronto, agora eu saí da linha.

Vou finalizar com um texto que menciona afirmações do Pe. Zezinho que vêm a calhar para tudo isso (vejam em 3). Uma delas é assim, citando São Paulo, em 1 Coríntios: "Um dia saberemos sem os véus que nos impedem de ver tudo como tudo realmente é."

~~~~~~~

Links relacionados:

(1) Excertos

(2) Contorcendo neurônios

(3) Pe. Zezinho

(4) Sobre o Pecado Original, segundo Santo Agostinho

(5) Religião

2008

Sentimentality

 

Saint-Hyacinthe - QC-Canada

Português

Français

“No emaranhado eu vejo
que alguma saída existe
e que, ao primeiro ensejo,
se dissipa o que for triste…

(a propósito de que, só na aceitação do que emaranhado estiver, será possível ver além )”

• @jbeldroegas (José Carlos)

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Regarding the quatrain in epigraph... it reminds me of those "synchronicities"; I saw the photo of my cousin, on Instagram, a few days after having taken a very similar one. His explanation of accepting the entanglement to be able to see beyond, in my interpretation (although it may have nothing to do with the reason that inspired him), came in handy for questions and interpretations we have about the mystery of faith.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My reflection today comes from a way of thinking that leads many people to disbelieve in God. They say: - If God existed, being good, he would not let humanity suffer.

I have heard this statement many times and not long ago I watched an interview with a priest (yes, a PRIEST) who presented this same reasoning. I will write in simple words what I have read of authors who have expertise on the subject, to put my mind in order ... and to record so that I do not forget.

1. We don't know what it is to be good. Only God is (Mark 10: 18). We have no experience of this. Our parameters of goodness even change from era to era. We have acquired degrees of goodness. To be good is another thing, we do not know this completeness. So, this judgment ("If God existed, being...") is not within our reach.

2. An intense suffering for us certainly has a very different assessment by God. Of course, the parameters are very different, if we are talking about Great, Almighty God, etc. God has no sentimentality. God, nor the angels (who are spirits), they do not have a nervous system like ours, this matter of ours which makes us have sufferings, joys, etc. Difficult to understand, isn't it? But, there is a but...

3. But God is merciful and often helps us. The purpose of these helps is not relief or earthly pleasure, although these may occur as potentiating side effects. The function of this merciful support is to lead to a conversion to the mystery of the faith or to a transformation of the intelligence to go towards a deeper relationship with God, that is to say to go towards holiness. This transformation of intelligence has nothing to do here with studies or knowledge of theories, letters, mathematics, etc. It should also be understood that holiness does not have a sentimental nature; it is a soul state of faith (which, of course, should bear fruit and also lead to behavioral effects in the environment in which we live).

4. The great intervention of God concerning human suffering has been the incarnation of the divine Word and the resurrection of Jesus. This concretely reveals the Love of God for us. Having become a Man, He humbled himself so that we could access Him through our sensory and… metabolic capacities. He suffered like us and He died like us. It is in our measures that we have experienced Him and, engaging in Him and with Him, eating and drinking His Body and Blood - the food of eternal life - we are saved by Him from our mysterious mortal condition, from this vicious circle.

Finally, for people who have been evangelized, like us, the question of free will is crucial. We are called to want to grow in faith. Our responsibility is much greater. People who have not been catechized, evangelized, obviously, cannot want what they do not know, but they are loved by God in the same way and God will demand less of them.

Luke 12: 47-48 (excerpt from a parable told by Jesus): "And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating. But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more."

No wonder the Virgin Mary asks us to pray for the priests and for the Pope... they have received a lot. Their responsibility is immense! Let's go praying for them?

P.S.: Regarding the quatrain in the epigraph, see the related link below (Emaranhado).

~~~~~~

Related links:

About religion

Emaranhado (@jbeldroegas)