www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Mel Gibson: Florida Bishop Lynch Deserted Terri

Dan,

Two things to begin with.

The FL law defines feeding/hydration tubes as extraordinary measures that can be removed at the request of the patient. This definition should be reconsidered.

What happens in the absence of a written declaration? The level of "clear and convincing" evidence of the patient's intention is used in FL. IMO, the higher level of "beyond a reasonable doubt should be used instead.

The coverage was gross. The facts relvant to whether or not there was due process or not were obscured by rumor, gossip, innuendo, and just plainly false statements. And I guess we also need a psychic.

You make a serious charge of bias. Back it up.
As to the legilatures culpability: in spades.
What a neat political trick of having your cake and eating it too. You pass a law that makes it look like you are trying to do something, and claim to shocked, shocked, when it is overturned. How about a law that defines tube feeding, when required, as standard care removal of which is patient abuse? How about a law that raises the evidentiary threshold in the absence fo a written will? Either of these would have save Terri.

It's a moot point, because Jeb didn't act. I think, however, that since the FL law unambiguoulsy indicates that clamping the tube is permissible, Jeb was on thin ice. Maybe that is why he didn't act.

Perhaps. But then we wind up wth a judiciary populated by those with less developed conscience. A better idea needs to be found.


So you didn't read the guardian ad litam report.

Good morning, Charles. I appreciate the opportunity converse on this important topic.

I do not share your views. Bishop Lynch has an obligation to the whole diocese, not just one person or one family.[/QUOTE]

I would agree with your point about the bishop's obligation to the entire diocese. But remember: the diocese is more than an institution...it is the concrete realization of the "temple made of living stones". A bishop is not a pastor of churches or institutions, but of people. Terri and her family fit that description, as they (at least in the case of Terri) are under his pastoral care and jurisdiction.

[/qb][/QUOTE] No, there is no irony in my stating my view that Mel Gibson was uncharitable in his comments. I also believe that, based on what you wrote, the priest on EWTN also evidenced a lack of charity, and since these comments were made in a public forum, they are all the more grievious breaches of charity. Certainly that would not be the first time that uncharitable utterances came from a person on EWTN.[/QUOTE]

I fail to see the failure of charity when speaking the truth in this case. Veritas et caritas, no? This is a public event. The bishop is a public leader, not above public criticism for mishandling it. Criticism of his neglect is not uncharitable, but our obligation as laity - especially as it pertains to weighty matters such as the state-sponsored starvation of a woman rendered disabled under suspicious circumstances by her estranged husband.

I bear the bishop no ill will, but as someone who consults with leaders on a regular basis, I recognize the value of honest confrontation and accountability to followers. Leaders, especially at the most senior levels of organizations, can tend to become very insulated from the constructive feedback they need to hear to lead effectively. Mel Gibson and the priest on EWTN are providing such feedback, as are many to the bishop personally through his office.

Bear in mind - niceness is not charity. Love became flesh and cleansed the temple. Some might prefer us to be so nice as to be unkind when it comes to letting the bishop know that his absence was noticed - both physical and pastoral. He needs to know he was missed.

Many years!

Gordo

I would agree with your point about the bishop's obligation to the entire diocese. But remember: the diocese is more than an institution...it is the concrete realization of the "temple made of living stones". A bishop is not a pastor of churches or institutions, but of people. Terri and her family fit that description, as they (at least in the case of Terri) are under his pastoral care and jurisdiction.

[/qb][/QUOTE] No, there is no irony in my stating my view that Mel Gibson was uncharitable in his comments. I also believe that, based on what you wrote, the priest on EWTN also evidenced a lack of charity, and since these comments were made in a public forum, they are all the more grievious breaches of charity. Certainly that would not be the first time that uncharitable utterances came from a person on EWTN.[/QUOTE]

I fail to see the failure of charity when speaking the truth in this case. Veritas et caritas, no? This is a public event. The bishop is a public leader, not above public criticism for mishandling it. Criticism of his neglect is not uncharitable, but our obligation as laity - especially as it pertains to weighty matters such as the state-sponsored starvation of a woman rendered disabled under suspicious circumstances by her estranged husband.

I bear the bishop no ill will, but as someone who consults with leaders on a regular basis, I recognize the value of honest confrontation and accountability to followers. Leaders, especially at the most senior levels of organizations, can tend to become very insulated from the constructive feedback they need to hear to lead effectively. Mel Gibson and the priest on EWTN are providing such feedback, as are many to the bishop personally through his office.

Bear in mind - niceness is not charity. Love became flesh and cleansed the temple. Some might prefer us to be so nice as to be unkind when it comes to letting the bishop know that his absence was noticed - both physical and pastoral. He needs to know he was missed.

Many years!

Gordo [/QB][/QUOTE]

Good afternoon Gordo,

Yes, the diocese is, both theologically and in reality, "the temple made of living stones." Each one of us is important, valuable beyond all worth, and so is Terri, who is now with the Father, and so are the members of her family. If Bishop Lynch had gone to the hospice, IMHO there would have been just one more episode of the terrible media circus which we had to endure, and those of us who live here have gone through this for a much longer time than the rest of the country, who only became aware of Terri Schiavo over the last month. People here have sufferd with Terri and her family - all of her family - for years.

Please remember that there is a history here and Terri`s long and sad journey has been in and out of courts and that courts had issued stays before. I do not think that it is reasonable - and I fully understand that you and others may differ, reasonably - that the spiritual father of this particular portion of the Lord`s vineyard should put plans on hold each time the courts or legistlative bodies make decisions. If the Florida Legislature had acted differently, Terri might - might - be alive now. If Congress had done something differently, she might - might - be alive now. If one or another court, state or federal, had done something different ....

It is easy for Mel Gibson and the priest on EWTN to criticize in hindsight. I just think that it is unfair to make uncharitable statements - and Mel Gibson`s statement was cleary, downright uncharitable: "...The Bishop conveniently left the country on a trip just days before she died Thursday...I think he's left the country at the moment so he doesn't have to deal with it." That is patently unfair and untrue. Bishop Lynch, as I stated previously, made sure that he presided at the Chrism Mass, one of his most important liturgical obligations, before he left. Does anyone really think that he wanted to be away from his diocese for the Triduum? I, for one, do not. I know Bishop Lynch, albeit not well, but I know him well enough to know that being away for Easter was not in his plans prior to the tsunami disaster. He loves to celebrate the great feasts of the Church with the people entrusted to him. I have resided in this diocese from well before he became bishop and thus I have been here throughout his episcopate. He is a good and caring bishop and he has demonstrated that time and time again. Is he above being criticized? Absolutely not. But when criticism is given, it should be constructive and charitable.

I wish you God`s peace, my brother.

Charles

djs,

Two quick points.

Judge Greer made the unprecented (and illegal) step of appointing himself Terri's guardian ad litam, after that clown Wolfson. This was a clear conflict of interest - and a violation of Florida law, but again, demonstrative of his bias in this case. Whatever you are reading has little credibility with me or anyone who tries to be objective in this matter.

Judge Greer was also known to treat facts as hearsay and hearsay as facts throughout the proceedings. To lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of the legislature is pure nonsense. This man had an agenda and, to the great sadness of us all, he accomplished it.

Gordo

The legislature could have acted to limit his action and declined to do so. The executives could have spent some of their political capital to move the legislature to act, but failed to do so.

Greer was not overturned in many, many appeals.
Would you also suggest that the FL appelate courts, supreme court, the US 11th circuit, and the SCOTUS all have this agenda. Like the bias charge back it up or retract the slander.


You are in no position to say what "has little credibility with ... anyone who tries to be objective in this matter."