Posted on 09/24/2007 3:11:29 PM PDT by presidio9
A new article by an Italian medical professor speculates the death of Pope John Paul the Second was caused by euthanasia. According to "TIME" magazine, an intensive care specialist says the Pope's death would be considered euthanasia by standards set by the Catholic Church. The doctor bases her conclusion on press reports and a book written by the Pope's physician. She says the decision not to insert a feeding tube until just a few days before his death accelerated the death of the ailing pontiff. Plus, the doctor believes the Pope himself made the decision not to insert the tube after consulting with medical professionals. He had been hospitalized twice before his 2005 death. Catholics are told to take any effort to prolong life. The article appears in an Italian magazine critical of the church's stance on medical ethics. The doctor says she decided to revisit the Pope's death after a recent ruling by the Catholic Church on euthanasia.
Only in reply to yours, stating that I wanted no contact with you on any topic.
Who is JP eleven?
A correction is in order here. Catholicism is Bible based; it isn't based on nmh's interepretation of Scripture.
A future Pope? Some folks probably aren't allowed to use ROMAN numerals because that might make them Romanists.
**snort**
I started posting them in the open, on FR, to show what kind of person he was and he finally stopped...
If it really happened, a link should be easy to provide.
“A correction is in order here. Catholicism is Bible based; it isn’t based on nmh’s interepretation of Scripture.”
No, it’s not a matter of “interpretation”.
If only that were so ... but it isn’t.
The Bible is rather CLEAR on teachings ... for those who wish to learn and live them.
I did post them and thankfully you’re
UNWANTED,
UNSOLICITATED
e-mails stopped.
Clearly, you were embarrassed as you should be ... .
“Who is JP eleven?”
Since my typo was over your head ...
I meant JP2.
Hope that clear now!
Some days on FR, my eight year old shows more courtesy and mercy than adults ... so sad ... . Thankfully she knows better than to respond as you did ... Christian teachings serve her well. Obviously she is not Catholic either.
If it happened, you can link it here.
Clearly, you were embarrassed as you should be ...
Actually, I have no recollection they were ever posted publicly, and am doubting they were. And there was nothing particularly vicious, or viscous (?), in any of those messages.
Surely you have a link to the post(s) where they appeared.
And don’t claim the messages were unsolicited, or unsolicitated (?), as it was you who contacted me first.
Indeed. So you believe these CLEAR teachings from the Bible?
How many centipoise is your cutoff?
Frankly, I’ve never monitored the viscosity of my e-mails at all. I’ve never seen the need.
This thread is now on zero tolerance.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do NOT make it personal.
She has made statements about me since your last warning that I believe are false, but when I press her for proof, it is not forthcoming.
Turn the other cheek and get back to the discussion or this thread will be locked.
SuziQ, ITA with your post. It’s basically what I meant but I obviously didn’t get that across well.
mbraynard, I don’t think I was sticking up for anyone. I haven’t read all the posts in this thread and commented on those that caught my attention. I don’t consider the Pope’s death and Terri Schiavo’s death the same at all.
The sniper warfare on this thread is hilarious!
But I’m still left wondering...
One of the majestic things about the RC Church is its immutability. But sometimes, very quietly, it does change, in response to our development of more human approaches to human suffering. Our evolution as a species. (They’ve just abolished “limbo”, right? That always seemed an extraordinarily cruel concept, anyway.)
So my question is, an elderly person decides, no feeding tubes, no drugs, I will gracefully accept death. Ok, that’s clearly right and natural and the will of God.
But a 25 year old with a unspeakable, and always fatal disease cannot make the same decision?
What is the age cutoff thing here? That seems kind of fraudulent to me, especially in light of the “immutability” of Cathlic teaching.
Maybe it’s time for the Church to reconsider the right to die?
Since we humans do not in fact receive regular reports from God about what He wants, we have to make do with applying principles based on reason and Revelation.
Your grandmother was clearly not attempting to commit suicide, and her judgment that the feeding tube was unnecessary turned out to be correct, as shown by the fact that she was able to get nourishment without it. If she had been unable to do so, she would have died of dehydration/starvation without a feeding tube. What the Catholic Church would object to in that case is the hastening of death by the denial of a basic human need, food and water.
The crux of the question is: Is the use of a feeding tube, in itself, a “heroic,” or “extreme” measure. The answer is: No. The conclusion follows that the use of a feeding tube is obligatory unless its use would do no good or will do harm.
The fact that God can, and does, do what He wants is no guide for us humans when it comes to making decisions, because He reveals nothing to us about particular situations. We have only the data of reason and the data of Revelation to enlighten us. It is undoubtedly true that God takes people when He wants. But we have no knowledge of when that is until it happens, and so, obviously, that particular datum cannot possibly figure in the decision-making process.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.