To me, as a graduate in the study of Human
Biology, life and its processes have always been a source of
fascination, especially in noting the organization and goodness of
the Creator in the vast variety of organisms. Studying the most
detailed organization and activity within the cell, the smallest
unit of life, to the extensive analysis of complexly designed
creatures, one is able to see the Master and Author of Life
clearly with the eye and the intellect, knowing that even the most
intelligent of men cannot create a simple cell that will thrive,
replicate, gain nourishment, grow, reproduce and eventually suffer
death. These processes of nourishment, growth, reproduction and
death are the markers of life, the defining principles learned in
basic biology courses.
Why then is life, its beginning and its end,
such a mystery to much of mankind? The most educated scientists
are unable to identify these events in God’s creatures,
particularly in man, because they do not understand life, its
value or its purpose. To these men who seek to become authors of
life themselves, God has denied them the understanding and light
to comprehend that which is basic to men of faith.
To know, to love and to serve God in this world
are the activities that give us the purpose of our lives and make
us aware of our life’s value, dedicated to God, while it is the
eternal soul that gives life’s essence. It is this knowledge of
purpose and value of life that confers upon us perseverance
through the joys and trials that life presents, in order to gain
that eternal happiness with God in heaven one day, for the day of
days, eternity.
It is because man does not understand his
reason for being that he does not understand what he is meant to
do and what he is to become.
Because of the opportunity to strive towards
sanctity and salvation, life is important to us. In fact, because
death ends the struggles of life, life is our only opportunity to
gain eternal beatitude by making proper use of the temporal
happiness, prosperity, progress and failures met with in life
(Beck, 1953).
It may seem strange to discuss a man by the
name of Jack Kevorkian in this issue on Life. He is a man who is
deemed "doctor" by many, yet, under the guise of compassion and
liberality of being, he is a doctor who does not work to restore
health to the individual but rather advocates "assisted suicide,"
working to help "right to die" groups who take individual freedom
to the utmost extreme. He is like-minded with the modern
philosophers who explain their view on suicide as the following:
Suicide is a liberty right and
assistance is morally legitimate...should be legally permitted
whenever requested by competent persons exercising that right.
They consider their lives as their own and that
they can choose and arrange their own deaths (Walzer, 1997).
The fact is, fellow Catholics, this man, and
those who share his philosophy of life [death] will affect us all
and the medical care that will be available in the future.
Consequently, a need exists for every person to know the Catholic
viewpoint of life in regards to the duties Catholics have towards
themselves and others. Through this understanding of the purpose
of life, beyond the basic concept learned in elementary catechism,
one will be able to protect himself, his family and society from
these attacks on the sacredness of life.
Examining the "mental illness" of society
caused by its obsessive materialism, compulsive self-satisfaction
and disordered spirit [soul], the view and value of life, and
therefore death, is macabre to the average person. Life is seen as
an opportunity to excel in temporal euphoria, intellectually,
financially, emotionally, sensually and physically. When this
"euphoria" ends through tragedy, or an event perceived as such,
the purpose of life exists no more and suicide, direct or
indirect, appears as an agreeable solution to what was once known
and recognized as "suffering."
In Sheed’s A Map of Life, it is stated
that ordinary observation of lives shows that suffering may work
in two ways: 1) it may be good for the sufferer by aiding
character development and maturity, and 2) it may be a test.
Suffering that comes with life is either curable or incurable.
Suffering that is incurable must be endured. Knowing that not
every man must endure the same suffering, no man is allowed by God
to be afflicted with more than he can withstand, with God’s grace.
The relief of suffering is one of the noblest expressions of the
Christian law of love of neighbor; however, it must be within the
limits of God’s law (Sheed, 1994).
Misinterpretations of the law of love of
neighbor have been used by Kevorkian and 19 others as explanations
of and reasons for helping one to enter death by human designs. In
many cases, Kevorkian offered to release patients from terminal
pain ...gratis (The Economist, 1997). Kevorkian’s
"humanitarian concerns" have been bizarre since the early days
of his medical instruction. He has had a fascination with death
and spent much time photographing the eyes of dying patients–to
determine the moment of death. He described his studies as
interesting. He considers the list of possible candidates for his
patients not just those who are "terminally ill," but people who
have had "severe trauma" or "intense anxiety." In fact, the only
necessary factor to qualify one for his "treatment" is that the
life quality has to be nil (Betzold, 1997). Kevorkian champions a
"global system of death on demand" run by doctors who can operate
without governmental or ethical supervision or intervention (Betzold,
1997).
Journalists are facilitating and legitimizing
his cause by referring to him as "doctor" and omitting the fact
that his Michigan medical license was withdrawn in 1991. They fail
to mention that his only "prescriptions" are poisons. Of course,
his customers have no complaints, even though they are never
cured. Rather, these "patients" are remedied as they are brought
to their home, six feet under (Betzold, 1997).
Anyone who is employed in the medical
profession contracts a special relationship and duty with the
patient. In fact, no doctor has any jurisdiction whatsoever over
the life of his patient, but instead has the very serious
obligation to help his patient regain health, if possible. It is
the sole purpose of the employment contract between the physician
and the patient. Not only is he supposed to help the patient to
health, he is obliged to do so actively, with as little danger,
pain and discomfort to the patient as possible (Beck, 1953). The
ancient Hippocratic Oath taken by physicians binds them likewise
in that it states that a physician must:
...neither give a deadly drug to anybody, if
asked for it, nor make a suggestion to this effect (Emanuel,
1997).
Studies, too, have shown that those for whom
the "right to die" cause has been developed, are the least likely
to want to "take advantage" of the benefits. A recent study of
cancer patients conducted in Boston revealed that those with pain
are more likely than others to oppose physician-assisted suicide
and euthanasia. They are also more likely to prefer and to request
a change in doctors if their attending physician indicated that he
or she had performed physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia
(Emanuel, 1997). Pain has not been a primary motivator in those
who have sought their solution to life’s problems through such
means as promoted and practiced by Kevorkian. Leading factors have
been perceived loss of dignity, fear of loss of control, the
thought of being a burden to someone else, depression, and
hopelessness (Emanuel, 1997). This "medicide" is a camouflage for
violence.
Catholics distinguish between killing and
letting die. It is morally forbidden to initiate deliberately a
new lethal process consciously intended to precipitate death,
whether done by patients themselves or with the help from a
physician or by a physician at the request of a patient (Bresnahan,
1997). It is permissible to allow one to die naturally. Life, even
in its final stages and perhaps spent in intense suffering, must
be accompanied by nourishment, as possible, water, and, if
necessary, relief from pain, as much as possible. (See article by
Fr. Iscara, To Live and Let Die, p.4.)
Every sin brings its own suffering, and the
social sin that one day our courts may commit by legal endorsement
of "medicide" will bring a plethora of complications to every
individual. Legal endorsement that presents assisted suicide as an
optional treatment for the suffering and the dying is a threat to
the Catholic, faith-inspired moral practices in caring for the
dying. Such endorsement will only open the door to more formidable
consequences, as if the acceptance and promotion of assisted
suicide were not enough.
Consider the following possible consequences.
Patients will need to be informed about their "choices" by every
doctor; the doctors must be free to recommend to their patients or
the families urged to consider such an option to pain and
suffering. Assisted suicide will transform the hospital and places
of care into houses of threatened violence and moral danger.
Nurses and doctors will be exposed to the dangers of guilty
cooperation, counsel or participation (Bresnahan, 1997).
Assisted suicide and its proposal must date far
back because St. Augustine emphatically stated:
It is never licit to kill another: Even if he
should wish it, indeed if he request it because, hanging between
life and death, he begs for help in freeing the soul struggling
against the bonds of the body and longing to be released- nor is
it licit even when a sick person is no longer able to live
(Bates and O’Keefe, 1997).
Life is the gift of God, and it is the work of
God, whereas sin is the work of man. Through sin, man has rejected
God’s gift of life in exchange for death. This exchange was made
with Original Sin, and all mankind bears its mark and must suffer
its consequences; pain and death being two of them.
We are instructed to love God above all things
and are commanded to love ourselves. In loving ourselves, we are
likewise commanded to love our neighbors —as we love ourselves
—for the image in which we were made is that of God, and our
redemption and that of our neighbor’s is in the same blood of
Christ.
By the fifth Commandment almighty God forbids
the destruction of life, be it our own, or that of our neighbor.
Respect towards life is even seen and emphasized in the
administration and the reception of the sacraments. Many of the
ceremonies of the sacraments are performed upon the body, full of
meaning, inspiring all with the respect owed to the body, the
temple of the Holy Ghost. Life and health of the body are of great
importance for the life of the soul, and therefore our own eternal
salvation; we are bound to take the precautions necessary for the
preservation of our health and of our own life. We are reminded in
Ecclesiates (30:16), that health is worth more to us than
vast riches and this is explained by the fact that the longer we
keep our health and our life, the more treasures we can lay up for
eternity (Clarke and Spirago, 1899).
We know, too, that health endures not forever,
for anyone, for in Genesis (6:3) we read:
The Spirit of God does not remain in a man
forever, because he is flesh.
This knowledge that life must end one day for
each one of us imposes upon us a special obligation to do nothing
that tends to destroy the health or life of ourselves or others.
A great danger indeed will be the result of
philosophies that adopt views such as the "right to die" or
"assisted suicides" as humanitarian because of the lives that will
be lost by such philosophy. The greatest danger has yet to be
discussed. Under the guise of good, many will be deceived to
believe in this humanitarian option to sickness and pain,
especially when dealing with loved ones afflicted in this manner.
This great deception will be the occasion of deaths for
innumerable souls because of the scandal that will result through
the temptation to accept this evil as a good, holy, option to
suffering (p.386).
St. Pachomius posed the same questions we have
today and unity with the Cross is still the answer:
How can you wish to be freed from your
sufferings? Do you not yet know that no mortification is so
pleasing to God as the joyful, or at least patient acceptance of
the crosses He imposes?...but suffering in union with our
suffering Lord and Savior is incomparably better (Johnston,
1986).