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

From Newsmax.com
____________

"Passion of Christ" producer-director Mel Gibson is blasting St. Petersburg, Florida Bishop Robert Lynch for "being quite indifferent" to the plight of Terri Schiavo.

Not only was Lynch silent while Terri Schiavo was forcibly starved to death -- he issued a statement directly at odds with Church teaching that food and water is basic sustenance and can not be withheld by private choice.

The Bishop conveniently left the country on a trip just days before she died Thursday.
"I think there will be repercussions from this," Gibson told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity on Wednesday.

"For a start, I mean, there's a faith community down there in Florida and they have that Bishop Lynch who is being quite indifferent to the whole thing."

"He should be sticking up for this woman's rights and her family's rights," Gibson said. "I think he's left the country at the moment so he doesn't have to deal with it."

Bishop Lynch is currently in Indonesia surveying damage from December's tsunami.

But in a statement posted to the web site of his St. Petersburg diocese before Easter, he didn't sound particularly upset over Schiavo's death sentence.

"At the end of the day the decision to remove Terri�s artificial feeding tube will be that of her husband, Michael," he explained. "It is he who will give the order, not the courts or certainly the governor or legislature or the medical personnel surrounding and caring for Terri. In other words, as I have said from the beginning of this sad situation, the decision will be made within a family."

Bishop Lynch called for "mediation" between Michael Schiavo and Terri's parents, saying that the 41-year-old woman's plight is a "complex and tragic situation."

The Vatican's position on Schiavo's starvation death was far stronger.

Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace in Rome, blasted the decision to kill her in a March 7th statement:

"Without the tube, which is providing life-giving hydration and nutrition, Terri Schiavo will die. But it is not that simple. She will die a horrible and cruel death. She will not simply die; she will have death inflicted upon her over a number of terrible days, even weeks. How can anyone who claims to speak of the promotion and protection of human rights - of human life - remain silent?"

Hours after Schiavo's death was announced on Thursday, Cardinal Martino called it "murder."

"When you deprive somebody of food and water, what else is it? Nothing else but murder."

He was speaking on the case "according to the teaching of the pope."

The Pope has written that food and water is not extraordinary support for life and that it can not morally be withheld from a dying or incapacitated person.

Many Church politicians down through the centuries have had more to do with politics than with the Church. What is complex about the Schiavo situation? A murder was committed. A martyr for the cause of Christ was killed. That is very straghtforward.

Dan L

I find it intesting that the Pope gets really bad on the say she dies.

Since when has Mel Gibson become a spokesman for the Catholic Church?? Has anyone asked the bishop himself???

I don't think Mel Gibson was presuming to be a spokesman for the Catholic Church. (Nor are you, I would assume, though your concern for our just representation is touching.) I will say that, whatever his ecclesiastical situation, he was far more representative of Catholic belief than was his Grace, Bishop Lynch. As a layman, it is certainly his right to speak, and he has done so very eloquently on behalf of Terri's life - one of the first public figures to do so after Jeb Bush.

As to your question regarding asking the bishop, apparently he was unavailable for comment, since the needs of the Tsunami victims (who have received GA-BILLIONS in aid from all over the world to help restore the pristine beachfronts for rich tourists and hollywood types) apparently outweighed any concern he should have for the judicially mandated murder of one of the innocent and disabled members of his flock and the absolute disregard shown to her desparate parents by the courts. One wonders if he genuinely thought his presence in Asia would alleviate the suffering of the "world" even more. I suppose it is far easier to care for those who are thousands of miles away than to regard one who is on your doorstep. He left his post when Christians needed his leadership the most, and I agree with Mel - there should be consequences.

No, it was up to the courageous and generous priests and brothers from OTHER DIOCESES to both minister to and help shepherd both Terri and the Schindler family through this ordeal, as the clergy of St. Petersburg were forbidden to speak about this case by his Grace. He took the courageous stand of silencing his clergy.

Bishop Lynch's statements can be found on the St. Petersburg website, although his main contention is that the real tragedy of the situation is the division between Michael Schiavo and Bob and Mary Schindler. While I would grant that such a division is sad, it quite misses the whole point of the issue - I would say fatally misses the point.

May God have mercy!

Gordo

I would like the meaning of "to both minister to and help shepherd both Terri and the Schindler family through this ordeal" to exclude the media circus?

No cell phones there? Nice rant, btw.

Please read the guardian ad litam report, which gives a nice summary of what happened in the courts, and correct your errors of fact. Error will not be corrected if the error is falsely described.

Where does this odd court bashing come from? The political reponsibility for what happened lies squarely with the FL legislature (and executive), not the courts, who made the judgments prescribed by law, according to the law. If you don't like the law, don't blame the judge - unless you really wish, ironically, for judges to substitute their own thoughts in place of the law.

The parents were given great latitude by the courts. They and many others - including some that are actually familiar with the case - felt the judgments were wrong. So, btw, does most every death row inmate including, not surprisingly, the wrongly convicted innocents. The is no constituional guarantee of an accurate finding in a trial. We seem, as a nation, to live with this problem in the judicial death penalty - even though it the problem there is beyond dispute. (Maybe because it is faceless wrong until after the fact.) Scalia argues in fact that good order demands "finality" in the judicial process even at the risk that innocents are executed. I find this assesment regrettable, but, regrettably, agree with it.

So is Mel's. You needn't assume btw; there is absolutely nothing in Brian's post - questions - that could be construed as presuming to be a spokeman.

From Gordo in regard to Bishop Lynch
I can say for a fact that one priest in the diocese spoke out quite forcefully on behalf of the Schiavo family on both Passion Sunday and the Sunday before that. He is the priest who celebrates the Tridentine Mass held at the chapel adjoining the Cathedral of St. Jude. He read Pope John Paul's statement in regard to the case, and also quoted Terri's brother's pleas on behalf of his sister. He didn't mention the issue at all on Palm Sunday, however, which I found very strange as it was just days after her feeding tube had been removed. So what you say might indeed be true.

I hadn't heard that the Bishop took the above mentioned action, where did you hear of it?

There was another unusual occurance on Palm Sunday. As we were beginning our procession between the blessing of the palms and the Mass, I noticed a priest standing at the back of the chapel (As we processed out). He was wearing a Roman collar and a windbreaker, standing behind the last pew and resting both hands on it. He seemed to be observing the proceedings closely and with a look of complete displeasure. I have no idea what his purpose was, he didn't join the procession and was gone when we returned. He may well have been checking that the rubrics used were those of 1962 and not those from prior to the 1955 changes. Or perhaps he was just curious.

Bishop Lynch has been in Indonesia, mostly touring Aceh province. There aren't any beachfront resorts there, just some Indonesian villages. The death toll was enormous. Inconceivable comes to mind. Bishop Lynch actually stayed on the other side of the island, from what I can tell, in Medan. Although it does have resort hotels, I don't think there was anywhere closer to Aceh he could've stayed. And the Bishop is currently in India, which is most definately not a resort spot.

There were resorts in Phuket, Thailand, but even there the death toll approached 3,000. The families of both vacationers (mostly European) and locals in Phuket suffered losses, children without parents, parents whose children were washed out of their arms. The only industry the locals in Phuket have is tourism.

I doubt much of the aid is being spent to build new resorts in Phuket, the bulk is going to Indonesia and Sri Lanka where most of the death and destruction occured, and where it is needed most.

I'm not trying to be harsh Gordo, but I've spent some time in Asia, and have flown over that part of Indonesia (Sumatra) on numerous occasions. I had a hard time seeing a paved road on that side of the island. Apparently Bishop Lynch is Chairman of Catholic Relief Services board of directors which is why he was involved in this trip. I don't know how long the trip was planned but I would have to think it wasn't on short notice. Here is a link to a journal on the trip

Lynch CRS Trip [crs.org]

On a positive note, the record for Easter Sunday talks about a choir that traveled 13 hours to to sing at Easter Mass. They sang Handel's Messiah and also sang in Latin! Perhaps the Bishop can bring some of that back to St. Pete with him!

Good morning.

Before criticizing Bishop Lynch for being away from his diocese, one should get the facts. Bishop Lynch is the chairman of the board of Catholic Relief Services (CRS) and he was on a pre-planned assessment trip to the Tsunami-effected region, along with the CRS president and a board member. His trip was appropriate and the Terri Schiavo case was not a reason for him to cancel his plans. As much as we all cared for Terri, Bishop Lynch`s physical presence in the diocese would have had no effect on the sad outcome. Given the legislative and judicial proceedings and the previous ups and downs of Terri`s legal proceedings, it is not fair, IMHO, to expect him to have suspended or changed his agenda which, as with most bishops, is planned weeks and months in advance to have been physicially present in the diocese at that time. He made certain that he was present to celebrate the Chrism Mass and left afterwards for this trip. He has a full schedule of diocesan and parish events, including confirmations, and to have delayed his trip would have effected many other important ecclesial celebrations.

As is the case with many other bishops, he has extra-diocesan obligations which do cause him to be absent from the diocese at times.

To impute cynical reasons for his absence is terribly uncharitable and Mel Gibson, and others, should get the facts before they shoot from the lip.

Peace,

Charles

djs,

I don't know who to blame. Certainly there is a culture of death and I certainly don't understand why Michael was given custody given his gross adultery. Nevertheless, you suggest that the real rememdy lies with the legislative and executive branches.

"Where does this odd court bashing come from? The political reponsibility for what happened lies squarely with the FL legislature (and executive), not the courts, who made the judgments prescribed by law, according to the law. If you don't like the law, don't blame the judge - unless you really wish, ironically, for judges to substitute their own thoughts in place of the law."

So that we may all begin to think and pray into the future would you please offer us some further insight. What laws in Fla. forced the judges to decide the way they did? What laws need to be changed and in what ways? What do you believe the executive branch in Florida should have done in the present legan climate? What powers should they be given so that there isn't a repeat of this travesty?

Dan L

djs,

Perhaps I do know more who to blame for Terri's death than I thought or admitted to. This editorial reflects the opinion that the Judiciary bears a great deal of blame.


http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | The law and justice often take
divergent paths. This was the theme of Stanley Kramer's 1961
masterpiece,
"Judgment at Nuremberg."


Spencer Tracy plays Dan Haywood, an American judge presiding over the
trial of four German judges accused of war crimes. Three are Nazi
functionaries. The fourth is Ernst Janning (Burt Lancaster), a
distinguished jurist who despised Hitler.


Janning is convicted for having sentenced an elderly Jew, Feldenstein,
to
death for having sex with a young "Aryan" woman. There was evidence
presented at trial that Feldenstein did indeed have sex with Irene
Hoffman
(Judy Garland), and this was a violation of Hitler's Law for the
Protection of German Blood and German Honor. But Janning is convicted
because the law he enforced was unjust. A judge's responsibility,
Haywood
said, is to stand for justice when standing for something is most
difficult.


When U.S. District Judge James Whittemore authorized the killing of
Terri
Schiavo, he could claim he was following the law. But no one will
accuse
him of standing for justice.


The state trial judge, George Greer, determined as a matter of fact
that
Terri was in a persistent vegetative state from which she could never
recover, and that she had expressed the desire to have her life ended
if
she ever were in that condition.


If it were clear this were so, there would be little controversy. But
four
dozen neurologists think Terri was misdiagnosed. And Greer's finding
that
she would want to die is based solely on the testimony of her husband,
who
is living with another woman by whom he has fathered two children, and
who
stands to inherit her estate.


Greer did not appoint a guardian for Terri, even though it was clear
her
interests diverged from those of her husband. He never ordered an MRI
or a
PET scan, the only way to determine the actual extent of her brain
damage.
This is equivalent to ignoring DNA evidence in a murder trial.


Those who would have us believe in Greer's finding of fact also want us
to
believe that starving someone to death is "withdrawal of life support,"
and that death by starvation is painless.


Specious as his fact finding was, Greer dotted his i's and crossed his
t's
with regard to legal procedure. All subsequent legal reviews have been
of
the law, not of the facts. It was to get a fresh look at the facts that
Congress passed legislation to permit review of the case in federal
court.


Hugh Hewitt, among other things a law professor, notes that it is
common
practice for federal courts to issue injunctions when it is endangered
bugs or plants that are at risk. But Judge Whittemore found the
narrowest
grounds he could to refuse to order reinstatement of Terri's feeding
tube.
In doing so, he stuck his thumb in Congress' eye, as Greer had done
earlier when he ignored a congressional subpoena.


The disdain judges exhibit for the people's elected representatives is
leading to a confrontation that will reverberate long after Terri
Schiavo's bones have moldered. We've been here before.


"This man sticks to a decision which forbids the people of a Territory
from excluding slavery, and he does not because he says it is right in
itself � he does not give any opinion on that � but because it has been
decided by the court," said Abraham Lincoln of Stephen Douglas' support
for the Dred Scott decision. Lincoln believed moral law and the will of
the people should prevail over the diktats of the judiciary.


"We are no longer a nation of laws," said a reader of Hewitt's blog.
"We
are a nation of lawyers. It doesn't matter how carefully we frame a
law.
It doesn't matter what sort of initiative the voters pass. The elite
judges do whatever they want."


No public interest is advanced by Terri Schiavo's death. No harm would
have been done by permitting her parents to care for her. If the law
demands Terri's death by this cruel means because her existence became
inconvenient for her husband, then, as the Charles Dickens character
Bumble said, "the law is a ass."


As Terri Schiavo was starving to death, Austria's justice minister
announced that a doctor who worked at a clinic where the Nazis killed
thousands of disabled children will not be put on trial because he
suffers
from severe dementia. I'm sure the irony is lost on Judges Greer and
Whittemore.

CDL

Mel Gibson is only mirroring the passionate sermon I heard from a young 'Right to Life' priest on EWTN. He condemned the Bishop too.

Whatever the reason for the bishop's absence, clearly he should have regarded the situation in his own diocese as a greater priority (ordo amores), given the fact that he was appointed Bishop of St. Petersburg and not of Catholic Relief Services. I would see it along the similar vein of a father's obligation to his family versus working at the local food shelf. If my daughter was being starved to death by the state, I would hardly see it as appropriate for me to travel to Sharing and Caring Hands in downtown Minneapolis - as worthy a cause as it may be - to distribute food to the poor and needy, especially since others could do that in my stead. The poor we will always have with us - my sacramental obligations as a married man and father would lie with my daughter who was being murdered.

The attention of the world - and the battlefront of the euthanasia movement - was in his diocese these past few weeks. There is an inherent social dimension to a bishop's pastoral ministry, and the obligation to advocate for, articulate and offer a clear witness to the culture of life. Trips can be postponed. I have had to do that several times in my own career, due to extenuating circumstances.

As to the role of the clergy in the "media circus", I believe that the press were right to take an interest in this case. Also, someone needed to articulate a Christian point of view, which was reflective of the family's own perspective. Maybe I don't understand your point on this, djs. Could you clarify?

As to the role of the judiciary, do you then take the stand that "Terri's Law" was in fact unconstitutional as was ruled by the Florida State Supreme Court? Should that be blamed on the legislature and the executive, or is it reflective of the court's inherent bias in this case? I would argue the latter.

As to the role of Judge Greer, are you really arguing that he was an unbiased enforcer of the law in this case? The more recent issue with the DCF should give one pause re: Judge Greer's objectivity in the matter. Jeb Bush and this state agency were within their legal and constitutional rights to seize Terri, as a disabled citizen who was being abused. Greer opposed them, claiming that such an act would be illegal. It seems that his judgement was designed to circumvent the powers granted to the executive and to protect his own exercise of judicial power in this matter.

Many parallels come to mind with the Nuremburg trials of the German judges. Greer was as much an accomplice to state-sponsored murder as were those judges. A woman is dead and he is the one who ordered her death. If his hand was forced, as you seem to be arguing, then a man of conscience would have stepped down, rather than follow the logic of legal madness to its furthest end.

No argument seemed to change his judgement in this case - despite the advancements of medical technology, his own historical innacuracies re: Terri's state of mind and the issue of the dates in the Quinlan case (foundational to the argument that Terri wanted to be starved to death), constitutional powers granted to the executive, the power of congress which regulates the judicial branch and issued a federal subpoena (courts should be answerable to the people, would you not agree?), the testimony of medical professionals, allegations of abuse that surfaced long before the recent events, etc etc etc.

Finally, returning to Bishop Lynch, statements from a diocesan office hardly substitute for personal pastoral presence in a moment of personal (and national) crisis. And the bottom line is that his own positions contradict those of Rome in this matter. Could anyone regard him as brave defender of Terri's human and religious rights? I would argue no. Again, he cites division in the family as the real tragedy here. Not state-sponsored murder of an innocent woman.

As to Charles' charge of cynical reasons for his absence, I would only agree that my quip about the beach resorts was a bit off scale. My cynicism was directed more at the Hollywood types than the bishop. I do find it ironic that you charge Mel Gibson with a lack of charity. I think any reasonable assessment would view the bishop's absence as profoundly uncharitable to the family, despite his busy calendar.

Gordo

I join with Gordo in being greatly disappointed in the lack of Godly leadership shown by Bishop Lynch. I believe I'm being extremely restrained in my statement.

Dan L

I've looked over what I could find on the Diocese of St. Petersburg's website about Bishop Lynch's statements regarding Terri Schiavo and one could find reason to accuse him of being indifferent in this case. Although I didn't find that he ignored or neglected Church teaching, he didn't seem to bother to uphold it with any real conviction either. Seeing that this was happening in his own diocese I would think he would have been more forceful.

Bishop Wuerl here in Pittsburgh issued much stronger statements, linked below for anyone who might wish to read them.

www.diopitt.org/pastoralletters/nutritionandhydration.htm [diopitt.org]

www.pittsburghcatholic.org/columnists_storys.phtml?id=678 [pittsburghcatholic.org]

The first one above appeared in the diocesan newspaper and was printed as an insert and distributed in our church bulletin on Easter.

Bill

Good morning Gordo,

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

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.

I absolutely disagree with you that "any reasonable assessment would view the bishop's absence as profoundly uncharitable to the family, despite his busy calendar."

My reasonable assessment was stated in a previous post. Your assessment may also be reasonable and I respect that.

I wish you a blessed day.

Peace,

Charles