OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 17, 2014, 11:43:38 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Catholic Church Meet Angelique. ("Dying with Dignity")  (Read 4493 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« on: September 15, 2008, 12:03:41 PM »



What measures will it take to influence Cardinals to address in Papal Magisteriums the view that human life in terms of succumbing to a life-deteriorating disease must end with medical intervention on the patients terms? I'm not criticizing the Catholic Church I'm asking what would it take for the conservative American Catholic majority to change their position on euthanasia if the Vatican OK'd it in all circumstance including suicide?


Or is euthanasia seen as a gateway in which suicide is applied as euthanasia in every circumstance?

Quote
This is Angelique. She wanted to die with dignity
Sherrill Nixon
September 13, 2008

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/this-is-angelique-she-wanted-to-die-with-dignity-20080913-4fqi.html?page=-1

Just a month shy of her 31st birthday and half a lifetime since she was diagnosed with the debilitating Crohn's disease at 15, Angelique Flowers was told she had colon cancer. It was so advanced and so aggressive, she was given only months to live.....

Frightened of a slow, painful death from a total bowel obstruction, this softly spoken Melbourne writer wanted her life to end peacefully and on her own terms.

It wasn't to be. She regretfully turned away from her loved ones and spent her final weeks searching for information about euthanasia and a dose of the lethal drug Nembutal. Her final hours were robbed of the dignity she had wanted as she died vomiting the content of her bowels.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 12:05:58 PM by alexp4uni » Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2008, 12:08:50 PM »

The Orthodox Church would be in agreement with the Catholic Church on this issue.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2008, 12:32:10 PM »

Is life inherently of value? I recently read some of Clark Carlton's The Truth and The Faith and he seemed to speak on the inherent value of life irrespective of our state. Is this something Orthodox agree on?
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2008, 12:38:49 PM »

Friul please don't severely moderate this I did bring this in an Orthodox-Catholic to ask if American Catholics (and I'll include Orthodox) to accept the non-Orthodox opinion that the patient has a concsious decision on their own to commit suicide in agonizing pain coming from the patient. 

Hopefully this doesn't go into Politics (fingers crossed) even though this subject will easy get moved. I originally thought the Orthodox position was leniancy on a person who wants to die when a slowly debilitating cancer succumbs all of the persons well-being to the point of Terry Schiavos vegetative state. In Angeliques case medical intervention could not relieve her from her symptons and she had to go through the humiliating effect of her Chromes Disease without her family by her side. In this circumstance does the priest need to  be with the patient to give Unction and listen to here confession as an act of allowing her to pass on.  Wouldn't that be an Orthodox understanding?
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2008, 12:42:01 PM »

I saw Million Dollar Baby last night. It made me sick to my stomach.

We are FALLEN human beings. None of us should be trusted to decide when life is no longer worthy of life and must be ended (i.e. killed). It is very dangerous to cross that line.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 12:42:37 PM by lubeltri » Logged
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2008, 12:45:47 PM »

Is life inherently of value? I recently read some of Clark Carlton's The Truth and The Faith and he seemed to speak on the inherent value of life irrespective of our state. Is this something Orthodox agree on?
The human state as it is comes from the consequence of the Fall. So for the human state to be in a paralyzed or broken state then the body has to find ways of healing this would come from the Church.
Logged
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2008, 01:01:45 PM »

I saw Million Dollar Baby last night. It made me sick to my stomach.

We are FALLEN human beings. None of us should be trusted to decide when life is no longer worthy of life and must be ended (i.e. killed). It is very dangerous to cross that line.

The value of human life is not forced into the diseases she was given inherintantly from her family. She chose an excellent life to lead she was at the top of her class her Senior year in school and graduated College as a writer when she struggled on with this disease. She chooses to pass on in hopes that her Cancer would not force anyone else to go through the same humilation she went through.  Im sorry but when you say that crossing that line means wasting the life this wouldn't mean that Angeliques life was stop shortly selfishly instead she lived her life as shortly but courageously as possible. By the way no one on this board wants to suffer what she went through since it's inevitable of what the disease would do to her.

Your understanding of human life is different from mine unfortunately.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 01:02:19 PM by alexp4uni » Logged
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2008, 01:07:08 PM »

Ok but the question from the OP still stands, which "liberal" Catholics are influencing the Cardinals in America to change American Catholic opinion on Euthanasia?

Legitimately though no one can claim victory over defeating death but it seems Euthanasia is a way to find out if patients can overcome the pain involved in their disease.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 01:14:16 PM by alexp4uni » Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2008, 01:26:25 PM »

Ok but the question from the OP still stands, which "liberal" Catholics are influencing the Cardinals in America to change American Catholic opinion on Euthanasia?

No cardinal can change Catholic teaching on euthanasia. Even the Pope himself does not have the authority to change Catholic teaching on euthanasia. It is de fide. Any "liberal" Catholics who lobby for changing this are placing themselves outside communion with the Church.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 01:26:51 PM by lubeltri » Logged
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2008, 02:33:14 PM »

We are FALLEN human beings. None of us should be trusted to decide when life is no longer worthy of life and must be ended (i.e. killed). It is very dangerous to cross that line.

You know what as Christians your absolute statement as a first reply was not blanketting any judgement on the patient's suffering I apologize for that.  But considering the Pro-Life politics that shot out of the Cardinal/DNC thread, I would expect the same here. The Catholic view is pretty much linear by not helping the situation. Its crucial for the Orthodox and Catholics to understand knowing where the boundaries of when life ends and what are the neccessary steps to continue that life by reducing that pain. Though Medical science has not found ways to pro-long Cancer patients this drury path requires "Guinea Pigs" to steadily slow and find the causes. Medical research finds out what is occuring in a tumor in a conscious state but what happens when the brain succumbs to the tumor? Does the tumor stop growing because their is no Life to support it but that is where Medicine can step in to stop it in its tracks unfortuanetly that human life has to end but it would not be populus that was eliminated out of vain.
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,413


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2008, 02:45:57 PM »

We are taught to try to avoid the use of euthanasia simply because you are actually directly killing the patient (if not aiding in suicide).  Instead, what physicians are advised to give are pain-killers like morphine to ease their way into death.  But even I would feel very uneasy to use euthanasia even if it were legal.

Dr. Kevorkian after all did not just help patients who were in painful debilitation, but simply the thought of suicide was enough to help them.  Legalizing euthanasia would not be a good idea if considering perhaps a liberal use.

But upping the dosage of morphine for terminal patients is an option, and an option that is encouraged to be given, especially for terminal cancer patients.  The job of a physician is not extending the quantity of life, but improving the quality of life.  Never was the job for a physician to end it.

God bless.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 02:48:16 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2008, 03:14:58 PM »

We are taught to try to avoid the use of euthanasia simply because you are actually directly killing the patient (if not aiding in suicide).  Instead, what physicians are advised to give are pain-killers like morphine to ease their way into death.  But even I would feel very uneasy to use euthanasia even if it were legal.

Dr. Kevorkian after all did not just help patients who were in painful debilitation, but simply the thought of suicide was enough to help them.  Legalizing euthanasia would not be a good idea if considering perhaps a liberal use.

But upping the dosage of morphine for terminal patients is an option, and an option that is encouraged to be given, especially for terminal cancer patients.  The job of a physician is not extending the quantity of life, but improving the quality of life.  Never was the job for a physician to end it.

God bless.



Then the ethical dilemna for a doctor knowing that he prolonged the patients life is somehow slowing the inevitable he would actually be timing the patients life after the dosage 'on the patients terms'. He can liberally give as much to extend it into weeks and months but Doctors that prescribed it is accountable in knowing that he is responsible in not prolonging the life. That it turn leads patient to go to Euthanasian clinics.

Lubeltri gave a vague answer on what would it take for Catholics in America to accept non-Catholic, non-Christian conscious decision for them to shorten their life by suicidal means. But it seems both Churches are not open for discussion on a how patient is to endure that painful journey.

To my thoughts on suicidal euthanasia is that it's a sadly abysmal choice. But why would American Catholics feel that non-Christians are going to enforces Catholics the same option on them.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 03:16:35 PM by alexp4uni » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,171


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2008, 04:24:01 PM »

Lubeltri gave a vague answer on what would it take for Catholics in America to accept non-Catholic, non-Christian conscious decision for them to shorten their life by suicidal means. But it seems both Churches are not open for discussion on a how patient is to endure that painful journey.
I think the real question we need to ask is this:  What can we as Christians do to help someone die as peacefully and comfortably as possible while still recognizing human life as a sacred gift from God, a gift not to be terminated according to the whimsical values of fallen humans?  It's not just about saying, "euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide must be opposed," even though that is part of our faith as Orthodox and Roman Catholics.  What are we willing to do to help someone remain at peace and proceed through every stage of the natural process of dying in a manner that gives glory to God?
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 04:31:38 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2008, 04:58:50 PM »


To my thoughts on suicidal euthanasia is that it's a sadly abysmal choice. But why would American Catholics feel that non-Christians are going to enforces Catholics the same option on them.


Perhaps the recent California court decision requiring Catholic doctors to not object to artificially inseminating a homosexual woman has something to do with it?  When a doctor is all but forced to provide a non-emergency medical procedure that he finds morally objectionable, what is around the corner?
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #14 on: September 15, 2008, 05:12:53 PM »

It's not just about saying, "euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide must be opposed," even though that is part of our faith as Orthodox and Roman Catholics.  What are we willing to do to help someone remain at peace and proceed through every stage of the natural process of dying in a manner that gives glory to God?


This dogma(or lack there of in the Orthodox view?) is not understood in the general populus because of it being an inconsequential nature of Sin in our society. But I wouldn't be the one outrightly saying that the Christian position is seen by outsiders that the Church shows that patients deserved it while undergoing such pain and doing nothing to alleviate. But also on the flipside Christ's Victory over the cross isn't viably applicable without some tangible real Love into the equation. But it does give a back handed slap on a patient who wanted a way out by asking assistance from the priest and the advances of pro-long medical help.

I would like to know what are the boundaries of stepping away from suicide and knowing how to succumb to an illness without losing sight of the Christian faith in making those steps towards that struggle?




To my thoughts on suicidal euthanasia is that it's a sadly abysmal choice. But why would American Catholics feel that non-Christians are going to enforces Catholics the same option on them.


Perhaps the recent California court decision requiring Catholic doctors to not object to artificially inseminating a homosexual woman has something to do with it?  When a doctor is all but forced to provide a non-emergency medical procedure that he finds morally objectionable, what is around the corner?

That decision should have had that gay women to ask a change of doctors.  The Catholic doctor took an oath to assist patients equally as for Civil Unions they will be defined by US Law as a secular marriage so it isn't a matter objecting to the homosexual  agenda  but as need for a patient to have a child
that straight couples ask for. But how can religious impedence try to influence the Supreme Court?
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2008, 06:45:24 PM »

The doctors weren't Catholics. The doctors (described in news reports as "Christian"---probably Evangelicals) claimed they would only do artificial inseminations for married couples, while the plaintiffs claimed they would not do it for them because they were lesbians.

Catholic teaching rules out artificial insemination altogether. So a Catholic doctor would not be performing AI on anyone, thus no discrimination against the lesbians.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 06:46:07 PM by lubeltri » Logged
GreekChef
Prez
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America: Metropolis of Atlanta
Posts: 884



« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2008, 06:49:11 PM »

I wouldn't say that there is a lack of dogma in the Orthodox Church regarding euthanasia.  I think it's pretty clear that the Orthodox Church does not approve of the practice.  Of course we try to alleviate the suffering of those suffering from these types of illnesses, but it is God's choice when to call His servants home.  It is not ours.  Furthermore, I have personally seen people suffering from end stage cancer who used their pain to glorify God, and in one particular case, chanting and praying until she couldn't anymore, with her family and priest by her side, who continued quietly chanting and praying until she fell asleep.  This is a beautiful blessing that we have no right to take away.  It's hard to say that suffering is a blessing to bring us closer to God, as I am not suffering from a terminal illness.  But, as are all types of suffering, terminal illnesses are an opportunity to give glory to God and to finish the race the way Christ would have wanted.  Our job as Christians is to love and care for those who are given this opportunity, to alleviate their pain where we can, and to encourage them in their faith and support them in their struggle.

I know this is a painful, difficult, and controversial issue.  I offer my thoughts humbly, and with no intent to offend.  I ask forgiveness from anyone I may offend with my words.

In Christ,
Presbytera Mari
Logged

Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.
Matthew 18:5
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,413


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2008, 07:43:05 PM »

We are taught to try to avoid the use of euthanasia simply because you are actually directly killing the patient (if not aiding in suicide).  Instead, what physicians are advised to give are pain-killers like morphine to ease their way into death.  But even I would feel very uneasy to use euthanasia even if it were legal.

Dr. Kevorkian after all did not just help patients who were in painful debilitation, but simply the thought of suicide was enough to help them.  Legalizing euthanasia would not be a good idea if considering perhaps a liberal use.

But upping the dosage of morphine for terminal patients is an option, and an option that is encouraged to be given, especially for terminal cancer patients.  The job of a physician is not extending the quantity of life, but improving the quality of life.  Never was the job for a physician to end it.

God bless.



Then the ethical dilemna for a doctor knowing that he prolonged the patients life is somehow slowing the inevitable he would actually be timing the patients life after the dosage 'on the patients terms'. He can liberally give as much to extend it into weeks and months but Doctors that prescribed it is accountable in knowing that he is responsible in not prolonging the life. That it turn leads patient to go to Euthanasian clinics.

Lubeltri gave a vague answer on what would it take for Catholics in America to accept non-Catholic, non-Christian conscious decision for them to shorten their life by suicidal means. But it seems both Churches are not open for discussion on a how patient is to endure that painful journey.

To my thoughts on suicidal euthanasia is that it's a sadly abysmal choice. But why would American Catholics feel that non-Christians are going to enforces Catholics the same option on them.

I hope you didn't misunderstand me.  Under medical ethics, a physician does not end the life, but can allow the life to be ended with comfortable means without as much pain as possible.  For example, there's a difference between DNR (do not resuscitate) and euthanasia (kill me now).  Plus, I'm not sure what you're debating.  Are you debating freedom of choice for terminal patients to choose death?  Are you debating whether Christian doctors should do so?  Frankly, I wouldn't want to be involved in euthanasia, even if it's legal.  I personally would feel sinful in doing so.

God bless.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,598



« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2008, 07:51:37 PM »

Friul please don't severely moderate this I did bring this in an Orthodox-Catholic to ask if American Catholics (and I'll include Orthodox) to accept the non-Orthodox opinion that the patient has a concsious decision on their own to commit suicide in agonizing pain coming from the patient. 

Yes, the Orthodox and the Vatican are fully in agreement with this, against the world.

My parish were all enthralled by the witness of JP II in his last days.  Thank God he did not retire, as was reportedly contemplated in 2000.

Conscious decision?  Who decides?  By what criteria?

Why not let the teenager who is firmly convinced that the world has come to an end because they don't have a date for prom, committ suicide.  Absurd you say.  But that's out opinion, not the patients.

Our first khouriyyah has suffered with Crone's etc. for at least three decades.  She has practically no bowels left, and is not only breathing through a tracheostomy tube.  She is getting pain medication that will inevitably cause her death, but that's life.

Quote
Hopefully this doesn't go into Politics (fingers crossed) even though this subject will easy get moved. I originally thought the Orthodox position was leniancy on a person who wants to die when a slowly debilitating cancer succumbs all of the persons well-being to the point of Terry Schiavos vegetative state.

I'd answer, but I don't want to be the one to push this into politics, although I don't think what I have to say is political.

Quote
In Angeliques case medical intervention could not relieve her from her symptons and she had to go through the humiliating effect of her Chromes Disease without her family by her side. In this circumstance does the priest need to  be with the patient to give Unction and listen to here confession as an act of allowing her to pass on.  Wouldn't that be an Orthodox understanding?
Are you asking him to comfort the afflicted or bless their suicide?
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 07:52:45 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,598



« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2008, 08:02:22 PM »

I saw Million Dollar Baby last night. It made me sick to my stomach.

We are FALLEN human beings. None of us should be trusted to decide when life is no longer worthy of life and must be ended (i.e. killed). It is very dangerous to cross that line.

The value of human life is not forced into the diseases she was given inherintantly from her family. She chose an excellent life to lead she was at the top of her class her Senior year in school and graduated College as a writer when she struggled on with this disease. She chooses to pass on in hopes that her Cancer would not force anyone else to go through the same humilation she went through.  Im sorry but when you say that crossing that line means wasting the life this wouldn't mean that Angeliques life was stop shortly selfishly instead she lived her life as shortly but courageously as possible. By the way no one on this board wants to suffer what she went through since it's inevitable of what the disease would do to her.

Your understanding of human life is different from mine unfortunately.


I guess mine is different too.

I used to think that abortion in cases of fetal deformity and genetic defects.

Then I saw a downs syndrome teenager in a wheel chair with a sign "The Nazis chose who were fit to live too."  I took the hint. This was long before I came across Holy Orthodoxy.

Now I have a son with a fatal degenerative, congenital kidney disease, which causes deafness (he has no normal hearing), blindness before kidney failure.  I can't imagine not having him even if I knew beforehand.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,598



« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2008, 08:03:21 PM »

Ok but the question from the OP still stands, which "liberal" Catholics are influencing the Cardinals in America to change American Catholic opinion on Euthanasia?

Legitimately though no one can claim victory over defeating death but it seems Euthanasia is a way to find out if patients can overcome the pain involved in their disease.

That's death, not overcoming anything.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,598



« Reply #21 on: September 15, 2008, 08:14:47 PM »

We are taught to try to avoid the use of euthanasia simply because you are actually directly killing the patient (if not aiding in suicide).  Instead, what physicians are advised to give are pain-killers like morphine to ease their way into death.  But even I would feel very uneasy to use euthanasia even if it were legal.

Dr. Kevorkian after all did not just help patients who were in painful debilitation, but simply the thought of suicide was enough to help them.  Legalizing euthanasia would not be a good idea if considering perhaps a liberal use.

But upping the dosage of morphine for terminal patients is an option, and an option that is encouraged to be given, especially for terminal cancer patients.  The job of a physician is not extending the quantity of life, but improving the quality of life.  Never was the job for a physician to end it.

God bless.



Then the ethical dilemna for a doctor knowing that he prolonged the patients life is somehow slowing the inevitable he would actually be timing the patients life after the dosage 'on the patients terms'. He can liberally give as much to extend it into weeks and months but Doctors that prescribed it is accountable in knowing that he is responsible in not prolonging the life. That it turn leads patient to go to Euthanasian clinics.

Lubeltri gave a vague answer on what would it take for Catholics in America to accept non-Catholic, non-Christian conscious decision for them to shorten their life by suicidal means. But it seems both Churches are not open for discussion on a how patient is to endure that painful journey.

To my thoughts on suicidal euthanasia is that it's a sadly abysmal choice. But why would American Catholics feel that non-Christians are going to enforces Catholics the same option on them.
Archbishop Rummel, the Archbishop of New Orleans, threatened with excommunication any who stood in the way of desegregation.  He was worried about non-Christians, but he wasn't going to let that stop him.  Btw, Archbishop Iakovos was also in the front of the Civil Rights Movement.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #22 on: September 15, 2008, 09:11:26 PM »


Are you debating freedom of choice for terminal patients to choose death?  Are you debating whether Christian doctors should do so? 

Yes I was wondering if Catholics being the majority would change their position then ergo the Orthodox in America having to deal with the same issue. But I was more curioys to know if the patient has the decision to do so in front of a priest?


Catholic teaching rules out artificial insemination altogether. So a Catholic doctor would not be performing AI on anyone, thus no discrimination against the lesbians.


Quote
In Angeliques case medical intervention could not relieve her from her symptons and she had to go through the humiliating effect of her Chromes Disease without her family by her side. In this circumstance does the priest need to  be with the patient to give Unction and listen to here confession as an act of allowing her to pass on.  Wouldn't that be an Orthodox understanding?


Are you asking him to comfort the afflicted or bless their suicide?
The role of a Catholic doctor opting out of performing AI and the means to have an priest carry out a patients will with the families compliance to do so treads on murkey water but are the same.

The Catholic chooses to not perform for a gay/straight/unmarried/divorced couple who seeks to have a child but incapable to impregnate. It only take a Catholic doctor to want to do this and asks himself if the good outweighs the bad when ending the life of a 200 cell embryo that didn't fertilize in the womb as well as discarding the rest. The fertilization process just furthers along the process that sex could not achieve while going into the 9 months. He chooses to pick the best embryo that has less complications.

Concerning the foregoing patients pain in what technicality would opt suicide out and ending the life if an Orthodox in good standing could have the possibility of brain deterioration caused by a tumor and thus becoming unconscious in the process? How is that Orthodox, to prolong the life that continues like a robot that has yet have an upgrade(medical advances) and is kept frozen until the batteries are sapped.
Logged
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #23 on: September 15, 2008, 10:13:06 PM »

Ok but the question from the OP still stands, which "liberal" Catholics are influencing the Cardinals in America to change American Catholic opinion on Euthanasia?

No cardinal can change Catholic teaching on euthanasia. Even the Pope himself does not have the authority to change Catholic teaching on euthanasia. It is de fide. Any "liberal" Catholics who lobby for changing this are placing themselves outside communion with the Church.

Ok  Im starting to respect the ex Cathedra statement the Pope makes on abortion and euthanasia.  Artificial Insemination is also tricky because we have to find a way to find the greatest chance that the fertilized egg is the perfect match but it doesn't give any less responsibility in the Lab to discard the embryos. Also I will concede that I now understand that suicide is directly seen as contravening the faith and the work that Christ did on the cross. I thought there would be some technicality to help patients but it turns out not to be. Thanks.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #24 on: September 15, 2008, 10:28:38 PM »



The Catholic chooses to not perform for a gay/straight/unmarried/divorced couple who seeks to have a child but incapable to impregnate. It only take a Catholic doctor to want to do this and asks himself if the good outweighs the bad when ending the life of a 200 cell embryo that didn't fertilize in the womb as well as discarding the rest. The fertilization process just furthers along the process that sex could not achieve while going into the 9 months. He chooses to pick the best embryo that has less complications.


You do realize you are talking about a human being, right?  A human being with the same dignity as Angelique? 

As for "good outweighing the bad", I was always under the impression that Orthodoxy taught that there is no such paradigm.  While I certainly don't have quotations handy, I remember reading numerous desert fathers say that we should flee from evil no matter what good may come of an objectively evil action.

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what the purpose of your post was in the first place and what you're trying to convey to us.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: September 15, 2008, 10:30:49 PM »

The doctors weren't Catholics. The doctors (described in news reports as "Christian"---probably Evangelicals) claimed they would only do artificial inseminations for married couples, while the plaintiffs claimed they would not do it for them because they were lesbians.

Catholic teaching rules out artificial insemination altogether. So a Catholic doctor would not be performing AI on anyone, thus no discrimination against the lesbians.

Ah, yes, good point.

Regardless of my mistake in the details, my overall point still stands.  The court decision shows that the government is not afraid to attempt to force medical professionals to perform non-emergency medical procedures that are against the conscience of said professional.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #26 on: September 15, 2008, 10:50:47 PM »

My purpose of the OP is whether or not respective laws that legalized Euthanasia would lead to another Pro-Life agenda that politicizes a patients viable option to choose to end their life on their own terms. It happened with Terry Schiavo whats to stop it if Local states legalized Euthanasian clinics.

And also to understand the changing attitude of Catholics on patients care.  I just wanted to see were all the technical points of life support were settled.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2008, 01:07:13 AM »


Ok  Im starting to respect the ex Cathedra statement the Pope makes on abortion and euthanasia.

They are wrong not because the Pope says so, but because the constant tradition of the Church says so. The Pope is only the caretaker of tradition.

As I said to you before:
Even the Pope himself does not have the authority to change Catholic teaching on euthanasia.

The Church has always stood against this, and it would be quite a power grab for any Pope to suddenly change it.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,171


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #28 on: September 16, 2008, 01:34:51 AM »

Concerning the foregoing patients pain in what technicality would opt suicide out and ending the life if an Orthodox in good standing could have the possibility of brain deterioration caused by a tumor and thus becoming unconscious in the process? How is that Orthodox, to prolong the life that continues like a robot that has yet have an upgrade(medical advances) and is kept frozen until the batteries are sapped.
To my knowledge, Orthodox bioethical principles do recognize that there is a time when the most compassionate thing to do is withdraw life support and allow a person to die naturally, on God's time, when all hope of recovery outside of divine miracle is absolutely gone.  This is not the same thing as suicide or euthanasia, in that the withholding of life support does not hasten one's death through artificial means, but, rather, merely permits a person to die naturally.

To my knowledge--since you brought up the Terry Schiavo controversy--the issue that made her case so controversial is that she was merely in a persistent vegetative state, and it was quite clear that she was NOT in the last throes of dying.  She was still able to breathe on her own, iirc.  In Mrs. Schiavo's situation, the withholding of her life support was what actually caused her death, quite the opposite of allowing the dying process to complete its course.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 01:43:57 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Heracleides
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #29 on: September 16, 2008, 01:38:27 AM »

"The Church accompanies its faithful from even before birth, through all the steps of life to death and beyond, with its prayers, rites, sacraments, preaching, teaching, and its love, faith and hope. All of life, and even death itself, are drawn into the realm of the life of the Church. Death is seen as evil in itself, and symbolic of all those forces which oppose God-given life and its fulfillment. Salvation and redemption are normally understood in Eastern Christianity in terms of sharing in Jesus Christ's victory over death, sin and evil through His crucifixion and His resurrection. The Orthodox Church has a very strong pro-life stand which in part expresses itself in opposition to doctrinaire advocacy of euthanasia."

"The Stand of the Orthodox Church on Controversial Issues" by Fr. Stanley Harakas, Th.D., Holy Cross School of Theology


Complete article: http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7101.asp

« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 01:39:07 AM by Heracleides » Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
Heracleides
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #30 on: September 16, 2008, 01:43:51 AM »

Concerning the foregoing patients pain in what technicality would opt suicide out and ending the life if an Orthodox in good standing could have the possibility of brain deterioration caused by a tumor and thus becoming unconscious in the process? How is that Orthodox, to prolong the life that continues like a robot that has yet have an upgrade(medical advances) and is kept frozen until the batteries are sapped.
To my knowledge, Orthodox bioethical principles do recognize that there is a time when the most compassionate thing to do is withdraw life support and allow a person to die naturally, on God's time.  This is not the same thing as suicide or euthanasia, in that the withholding of life support does not hasten one's death through artificial means, but, rather, merely permits a person to die naturally.

PtA - from the same article quoted above:

"The Church distinguishes between euthanasia and the withholding of extraordinary means to prolong life. It affirms the sanctity of human life and man's God-given responsibility to preserve life. But it rejects an attitude which disregards the inevitability of physical death."
« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 01:45:00 AM by Heracleides » Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,171


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2008, 01:45:50 AM »

PtA - from the same article quoted above:

"The Church distinguishes between euthanasia and the withholding of extraordinary means to prolong life. It affirms the sanctity of human life and man's God-given responsibility to preserve life. But it rejects an attitude which disregards the inevitability of physical death."
Thank you for confirming what I had attempted to communicate. Smiley
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,413


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2008, 03:00:22 AM »

I think one of the important things is how one defines life.  When it comes to abortion, the controversy rests on when life begins.  When it came to Terri Schiavo, the controversy rested on brain function as a definition of life.  It seems to me, when it comes to euthanasia, it's not so much as the definition of life is questioned, but whether whatever life the person has is worth taking away.  For this last one, you can't say the same about abortion or Terri Schiavo, because initially it had to do with a definition of life, whereas in euthanasia, it has to do with a definition of worth or purpose.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Heracleides
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #33 on: September 16, 2008, 11:39:21 AM »

I think one of the important things is how one defines life.  When it comes to abortion, the controversy rests on when life begins.  When it came to Terri Schiavo, the controversy rested on brain function as a definition of life.  It seems to me, when it comes to euthanasia, it's not so much as the definition of life is questioned, but whether whatever life the person has is worth taking away.  For this last one, you can't say the same about abortion or Terri Schiavo, because initially it had to do with a definition of life, whereas in euthanasia, it has to do with a definition of worth or purpose.

I understand (and agree with) the distinction you're making above.  I do however feel that the distinctions you point out are often confused and/or argued jointly when the two issues are discussed.

As for when life begins, I think St. Basil the Great summed it up quite nicely: “The woman who purposely destroys her unborn child is guilty of murder. The hair-splitting difference between formed and unformed makes no difference to us.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 11:43:45 AM by Heracleides » Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #34 on: September 16, 2008, 12:24:09 PM »

alexp4uni,
I wonder how much the "death-denial" of the modern, western health care system is to blame for contributing to this dilemma.
Our health care system is designed to preserve life, and death is seen as a failure. In fact, morbidity (death rate) is used as a measure of the quality of a country's health care system. But the reality is that death is an inevitable part of life.
Palliation (symptom control) is only recently being researched, and there are many misunderstandings about it. For example, contrary to what most people believe, in proper doses, opiates actually extend life in the end stages of terminal illness rather than shorten it by lowering the metabolic rate. Also, recent research has shown that dehydration actually reduces pain and is a natural part of the dying process, making the administration of parenteral (intravenous) fluids in the last few days of life actually harmful rather than helpful. Also, contrary to common belief, palliation can also include surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, gastric lavage, gastric drainage as well as medication.
I used to work as a counselor at a Catholic Hospice in Sydney, and I can tell you that the dedication of the staff, the excellence of the research and the mission of the Hospice were impeccable. Yes, occassionally, death was "unnattractive", but it was never "undignified". I once saw a nurse throw her arms around a derelict, alcoholic patient who started bleeding from their oesohagus, and she held him and gently rocked him as he vomited so much blood that he died within minutes from blood loss. This was not attractive, but it was one of the most dignified deaths I ever saw.
Remember, we have the Church to thank, not only for our hospitals (the first one was started by St. Basil the Great btw- a little known fact) but also for the Hospice movement and care of the dying.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,413


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #35 on: September 16, 2008, 01:26:25 PM »

I also want to add that one has to ask himself that if physicality is enough for a reason of euthanasia, who is to say we shouldn't cross the line from there.  What type of "physical ailments" are worthy of euthanasia?  What about congenital diseases or syndromes that one is born with?  What about psychologically, such as schizophrenia or extreme depression?

I think it's necessary that in this case, we stick to our guns and oppose euthanasia.  It's consistent thing to do.

God bless.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #36 on: September 17, 2008, 11:57:17 AM »

To quote from an episode of House, M.D.:

"One cannot die with dignity; one can only live with dignity. There is never any dignity in death."
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,171


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #37 on: September 17, 2008, 12:06:56 PM »

To quote from an episode of House, M.D.:

"One cannot die with dignity; one can only live with dignity. There is never any dignity in death."
IOW, "Death is a terrible way to die."?
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #38 on: September 17, 2008, 12:16:20 PM »

To quote from an episode of House, M.D.:

"One cannot die with dignity; one can only live with dignity. There is never any dignity in death."
IOW, "Death is a terrible way to die."?
Indeed. We try so much to cover up death, to say of a doped-up corpse, "It's not so bad; she looks beautiful"--and we miss the reality of death entirely. Euthanasia is based on a misunderstanding of the human condition.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek by desire; Antiochian by necessity
Posts: 5,991



« Reply #39 on: September 17, 2008, 12:17:31 PM »

To quote from an episode of House, M.D.:

"One cannot die with dignity; one can only live with dignity. There is never any dignity in death."

There is much wisdom in that show!
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
Tags: euthanasia bioethics medicine death and dying 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.141 seconds with 67 queries.