Before getting to the heart of this posting, I want to be specific about my audience. This posting was written with those of like faith in mind. If you do not share the same foundation of spiritual belief that I embrace, this posting will not be relevant to your heart as it is the foundation from which I will share my thoughts.
Yesterday Tanner and I were sitting on the couch and he said, “Mommy? What you and daddy talkin?”
“What do you mean? You want to know what Daddy and I were talking about? When?” I replied.
“In da kitchen.” he said.
Hmmmm….that’s interesting. My three old was listening to the passionate discussion Jim and I were having over Terri Schiavo and wanted to understand what the root of our conversation was. Have to be careful about what we say in front of our little man.
Here is basically what I explained to my three year old son:
Daddy and Mommy are very sad right now. Do you remember when Ty was a tiny baby and he had the yellow tube down his nose that we had to feed him with? He was not getting enough milk in his bottle and wasn’t quite ready to eat yet so we had to force milk into his tummy by feeding him over a pump. Remember that? (He did). What would have happened to our baby if mommy and daddy would have pulled his feeding tube and not fed him? He would have died. There are some people that pulled a feeding tube out of a lady because she is hurt and now she is starving and very thirsty and is going to die and Daddy and I are angry that people are doing that to her.
I found it was very simple explaining this to a child. A child would never question the fact that starving someone is wrong. That is an obvious point.
As my audience knows, the issues that I feel passionate about, I pay attention to. I read articles, listen to radio, watch CNN, do web research etc. Partly because I want to understand and partly because I care.
In doing these things it is becoming very clear to me (and many others) that this controversary goes way beyond Terri’s fight. It is about the right to life and the right to die.
Often, I discuss these topics from a humanitarian, scientific, and general ethics standpoint and don’t dive too deeply into the spiritual side. The spiritual side of these debates is often quite obvious so there is no need to explain it to those of like faith. To those of unlike faith, Christian beliefs are irrelevant. HOWEVER, when discussing “right to die”, I am finding that many of my own circle of loved one’s who SHARE my faith have a split in the camp and I know this is nation wide. For this reason, I am going to center in on the spiritual nature of this argument.
Often, we as Christians, are so inundated with secular philosophy that we don’t even realize that we have embraced ideologies that run very contrary to God’s laws. From a spiritual perspective, when is it okay to “allow” someone to die? There are two portions of this question I want to address.
First, there is an enormous difference between allowing someone to die and causing their death. In the Terri Schiavo case it is PARAMOUNT to direct attention to this point. Terri WAS NOT dying! NOR were there extraordinary means taken to keep her alive. In fact, quite the opposite. I believe we would call it abusive to keep a patient in a room, limit visitation, and ensure that NO therapies are given for FIFTEEN YEARS!!!! What kind of condition would any disabled person be in without rehabilitation? Terri was in a state of living. Her journey towards death began last Friday when our nation’s legal system upheld decisions to starve her. Additionally, a feeding tube is not an extradordinary and heroic level of medical intervention. It in no way constitutes life support. Ty on the other hand WAS on full life support. Nearly every aspect of Ty’s system was kept alive by intervention. He couldn’t regulate his own body temperature, his skin was so thin you could barely touch it so it had to be protected, he couldn’t breathe on his own, his blood pressure was controlled his sodium and potassium levels were controlled his iron levels were controlled, he required many blood transfusions. To be honest, feeding was a rather insignificant point in all of this. I asked the Dr.s to teach me how to insert his NG tube just so that we could take him home last April. We used a feeding pump at home for his first month and realized the possibility that feeding Ty by tube could be permanent. Their are many micro preemies who end up on G-Tubes. (NG is temporary tube down the nose – G Tube is more permanent through the stomach).
In this country, Physician Assistant Suicide is illegal in most states (though I think Oregon may allow a form of it…not sure there). Why do most states not support it? Because it CAUSES a person’s death. Removing the feeding tube from Terri is absolutely and unquestionably the CAUSE of her death. Why then, was this allowed? Very fuzzy law attempting to define feeding tube as full life support. While this may have confused many in this country, it did NOT confuse those of us who have fed our children over pumps!
This leads to my second point of emphasis. The issue is not really about “allowing someone to die gracefully” because, again, Terri was not dying. The issue is value of life and if anyone (including the affected individual) has a right to death. Here is where things get sticky and we have to approach these discussions with GREAT care and concern. The issue of “quality of life” and “life of value” and “right of life” all have a common root. Is the life of a human individual created by God EVER of little to no value? Ever????? Do we even have to guess at God’s answer folks?
The next argument of course is “If we are taking extraordinary means to intervene with life, are we interrupting God’s plan?”. This question has many levels.
On a broad level, most of us would answer no. If my child had terminal cancer and I refused treatment for him when treatment was available, in all likelihood, I would be forced by the state to submit my child to treatment. This is because the vast majority of us believe that God has given the benefit of medicine to us as a gift.
Let’s discuss the individual who is indeed in a state of death and dying and is on absolute and FULL life support. There are many questions to be asked here. Is there ANY consciousness? Any? Any whatsoever? Second, is there ANY hope of improvement? Improvement defined of person not remaining in a state of death and dying not improvement defined as quality of life as that is too subjective. Is everyone in agreement that everything that could have medically been done has been done and the individual has no fight left? Are we in constant battle to keep them alive when God has put them in a state of dying?
In Ty’s case here were the facts that we had to evaluate:
1. He was on full life support and was having death and dying episodes
2. There were HUGE questions about his future quality of life due to his bilateral hemorrhages
Would we have had a “legal” case to defend ending his life support? Technically yes.
Would we have had a “moral” case to defend this? I strongly believe NO.
Here is what Ty had going for him. He was a fighter. Yes he had death and dying episodes but he did NOT die. He lived. Irregardless of our medical intervention it is not possible to thwart God’s plan’s. If He would have called Ty home, that would have been the end of it and no amount of life support would have made a difference. As I have stated before, I saw this scenario up close and personal and there were a few moments when I thought God was going to take our baby despite our best human efforts to save him.
Ty did have GREAT potential for disability. The range was broad from mild to incredibly severe. PVL alone gives him a 60% chance of CP. CP can be devastating and the end result can be a PVS state (as Dr.s “claim” Terri is in). Ty also had potential to have a healthy and full life. There was not ever a Dr. (nor would there have been) who could have told us what Ty’s future looked like. No one knew. No one knows now though Ty is telling us he is going to get through this beyond anyone’s expectations.
Imagine if we would have fought a legal battle believing Ty would end up in the severest of all situations? What do you think our son would say to that? And he most definitely WILL be able to respond to this question because Ty is QUITE cognizant.
Now we step up another level.
What if we knew beyond shadow of doubt that Ty WOULD live in a state of PVS. Does that then give us the right to terminate. Would Ty have the right to die had he signed consent?
A few years ago I knew a family that experienced a horrible tragedy. Their son was critically injured as a teenager and was rendered a quadriplegic on life support. Eventually he was able to leave the hospital and live at home with his family. He was in a wheel chair and could not breathe on his own or speak. He was totally cognizant though. Very much like Christopher Reeves. This young teenager, battling depression decided to end his suffering and he had state support to do that. With his family gathered around him, they removed his life support and watched as he suffocated. This was a TERRIBLE situation for all involved. My heart grieved for them. My heart also grieved for him. HE had decided his life had no value. HE decided he was unwilling to live life disabled irregardless of his conscious state.
While I strongly oppose the embryonic stem cell battle that Christopher Reeves chose to support, I do applaud Christopher Reeves for realizing his value and continuing to contribute to society and his family despite a severe disability.
When it comes down to it though, the significance and value we place on ourselves is not what is of key relevance. The value that God puts on each of our lives is supremely significant. I find no where in scripture that God allows us to end our lives prematurely based on our own opinion of our value and worth, nor the amount of suffering we are willing to endure. I can imagine many scenarios in my own life where it would be tempting to say “No I would not want to live like that”. Joni Erickson Tada did. She begged her sister in the hospital to help her commit suicide. She didn’t want to live a quadriplegic and be a burden on her family and society. Thankfully, her sister would not support her in this. The result? Joni is a profound spokeswoman for the disabled but more so an awesome testimony to the sovereignty of God and she gives all glory to Him. I can’t wait to meet her in heaven someday and to see her walk but I personally will thank the Lord for “diminishing” her quality of life because she has made a difference in my life and countless others and we will be different throughout eternity because of things we learned from her. That counts! That counts huge!
And what if a person is in a persistent vegetative state (PVS)? What if they are not dying but they are not conscious either? If you have to CAUSE their death in order to “release” them, than you have to question who gave you the authority to do so. If God wanted to take the individual he would have.
Here is where the question of compassion comes in. I get many ugly labels for my stance on this subject. My first priority is to honor God though and causing the death of the innocent does not honor God. Ever. It is not my choice to make. Do I feel compassionate on those who are living in this state? Of course I do. I don’t know what God’s reasons are for allowing it though so who am I to intercede? Occasionally God does give little glimpses of the “why’s” even when we don’t have full knowledge. On this subject I can think of a list of possibilities. To name a few:
1. Medical professionals often get it wrong. Case in point. Nurse told me she did not have expectations of a good potential outcome for Ty. She was wrong. How many stories like this could we list? Countless.
2. Sometimes when people suffer it makes PROFOUND significance in the life of someone else. I have known families to care for severely disabled children. Those children may not have been aware of the impact upon their families but their families were irrevocably changed because of them. Some of the most loving caring and most compassionate people you would ever want to meet came by these traits through suffering…and often watching someone they love suffer.
3. Miracles do happen.
4. As a sub point to my first one, Heidi has told me about a situation of someone she knew that was in a state believed to be (or similar to) PVS. All involved believed the individual was not cognizant and could not respond. Heidi’s aunt intervened and began to sit with this individual, read to him, pray with him , and sing to him. After a lengthy period of time, this individual began to communicate with her using his hands. He would squeeze her hands to answer questions. Before he died, he accepted Christ as his savior through non verbal conversation. IF THAT ISN’T A REASON TO GIVE SOMEONE EVERY LAST CHANCE I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS???!!!
If you claim to be a follower of Christ and you read this and you think I am way off base, I would encourage you to study what other trusted leaders of our faith say to these matters. Billy Graham? James Dobson? Pat Roberts? Charles Stanley? John MacCarther? John Piper? Randy Alcorn? Rick Warren? My list would be lengthy. I will tell you that from what I have read, the large majority of Christian leaders support all that I have just written. In regards tot he Terri S. case, I have not yet seen any fundamental Christian leaders support this execution. I also thought it was interesting to read that Joni Erickson (on Larry King last night), sited 26 different US disabilities organizations ALL backing Terri. That alone say’s something.
My purpose in writing this to you is to challenge you. If you have embraced pop culture philosophy when it comes to embracing the truth of right to life and right to die issues, I would encourage you to dig deeper. First, ask the Lord! Ask Him to lead you to His truth on this subject. Study what known and respected leaders believe and how they biblically support their beliefs. I’ll do more research and provide links to reputable Christian sites that discuss these issues to help you form your own opinion.
This is an incredibly important topic. If we say that preborn babies have no value and we allow them to be executed, and then we say those that are sick have the right to die, if husbands can abandon their wives – ensure they get no rehabilitation and then remove their feeding tubes, if parents can remove the feeding tubes of down syndrome babies (yes that has happened many times) and then we attempt to determine what quality of life is and what value of life is, we will start a blood bath like we have never seen. You think I am being dramatic? Wonder what our fore fathers would think of what we have already done? Determining value of life is only the next step and it is an easy step to take once we are killing off people who WERE NOT DYING. Ultimately, no group will be left untouched. America has enough blood of the innocent on her hands – what will it take for us to embrace a culture of life?
17 responses to “Beyond Terri”
Hey Doni,
I’m with you for the most part. I have to tell you that I’ve done alot more reading since my initial horror and I’m no longer carrying some of the beliefs I had about this situation (that doesn’t mean I agree with it btw, just that alot of what you are reading about Terri is untrue).
What they want you to see: four minutes of video plucked from fifteen years is good for appeals to raw emotion, but this thing has been litigated for at least half that time, and the facts speak otherwise.
Read some of the medical opinions from people who’ve actually examined her, as opposed to the armchair diagnostics and faith-based practitioners.
(And ask yourself why those snatches of video are from 2001 or 2002: why nothing more recent?)
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html
This woman’s cerebral cortex http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/CT%20scan.png is gone; it has atrophied; her head is full of spinal fluid. She’s living on lizard-brain — on the autonomous nervous system — and that alone.
The political appropriation of personal tragedy is very very sad.
Personally I cannot get past the ‘I am a mother and could not see my child die’ part of this, and I hope that you can understand that the only point I’m attempting to make is that there’s alot of stuff that we’re not reading in the media, which doesn’t explain the actual facts of the situation. The husband is being smeared by the right to die campaigners (all this guff about him not giving her therapy, etc) in attempt to discredit him – and it’s doing a good job of that. He claims her parents have rarely been there, that her father wanted the money from the lawsuit, that her brother only visited recently.
Plus he has a new girlfriend, also makes his case a little questionable. But he has been there for her, and is there for her now, whether we agree with his wish for her to die or not.
Which I don’t. But I do think the politics are making this monstrous mess out of this dreadful situation which must be appalling for all involved.
Take a look at a couple of those pages I just posted, there’s one very unbiased commentary on the legalities of the situation which makes interesting reading, much of which you’re not being shown in the heart-wrenching stuff that CNN etc are showing.
Katie – looked a little at the links and will more as time allows. I agree, the spin Dr.s are always at work and it is difficult to dissect fact from fiction. All this aside though, in regards to this particular issue it doesn’t change my opinion. EVEN IF Terri is in PVS and EVEN if there were clear information that she did not want life sustaining intervention, I still hold to the fact that (a) she was not in a natural state of dying (b) starving her would be the CAUSE of her death and (c) to my knowledge, CA does not allow assisted suicide yet this was not a case of letting the dying – die. It is a case of killing a person that much of society deems to have too diminished of a quality of life to save. THAT frightens me. Once people start litigating quality of life there will be no end to the horrors. Remember a Dr. looked me in the eye and told me that if Ty had a bilateral bleed (which, once again, he did), he may not run and play like the other children and may have a diminished quality of life and we may consider letting him go. I was HORRIFIED! A neonataologist just summarized quality of life by my child’s ability to run and play with other children. This was not passing conversation. This was a serious discussion between parents and a Dr. while facing the possible consequence of a child on life support. For these reasons, I have been well educated on how our culture may choose to define quality of life. The degrees of disability a person may have are incredibly vast. I certainely concede that Terri’s disabilities are incredibly severe but if the only way to “let her go” is to force her death, I feel accountable to God for that and I will err on the side of life.
I hear you and I’m completely with you on that. It’s exactly how I feel and I just cannot find it in me to think that she should be killed =- because that is what we’re talking about – killing her.
It’s all the other bits surrounding this dreadful situation that I was just hoping to touch upon. All the rumours surrounding it, designed to garner or remove sympathy by the two sides involved.
What I was trying to say is that much of what we read (how the husband theoretically tried to kill her with insulin, for example, or how he didn’t attend her bedside or allow her therapy) is put out there by the one side, in an attempt to discredit him and gain public sympathy. It’s all bs and can be proven otherwise, apparently. And he’s an easy target, let’s face it, he’s got another girlfriend and child so he’s clearly got something to gain from her death.
On the flipside though, he’s been offered many times large amounts of money to walk away from this. He could have been granted a divorce very easily. He is under an enormous amount of pressure from all sides, and probably in some physical danger too because of the stand he is taking. It would be easier to walk away and allow the parents to get on with it, which is why I’m inclined to believe that his motives (whether I agree with them or not, and I don’t) are genuine in that he believes Terri would not want to live in this way and that’s why he’s pursuing this.
Which makes it hard to believe all the negative propoganda put out there about him and given some of the shady characters the parents are dealing with (Randall Terry, for one) I think it is clear that alot of this is a smear campaign which distracts from the only issue at hand.
Which is what is the shame part. The issue here is whether she should be allowed to live or die. For me, there is no question, and I shudder every time I think of her having to die in this way.
Interesting that even though our bottom line conclusion is the same, we have each taken different perspectives on who we believe. From the information presented on both sides, I am far from being persuaded into the assumption that Michael is a loving husband and his motives are pure. Again though, at this time beside the point.
Further you sited Randall Terry as being a shady character. As you know, I am passionate about my pro life stance. Society’s issue with Randall Terry is rooted in his stance on civil disobedience. I have studied his Operation Rescue beliefs in the past (like a decade ago) but haven’t followed him real recently to know what you may consider “shady”. What I am about to say is not an attempt to defend Randall Terry because I haven’t followed him closely for a few years to feel comfortable doing that. I will say this though…I do support levels of civil disobedience in some cases. Randy Alcorn has written the most compelling articles on this. His words are very well thought out and scripturally supported. Here is a small portion from an article that I will provide a link to: “Jesus said that there was one law above all others, and upon which all others were based–love God with all you are, and “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 22:37-40). Jesus extends this law in the form of the golden rule: “In everything, do for others as you would have them do for you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 7:12). We should ask ourselves the question, if we were being taken to a brutal death, what would we like someone to do for us at that moment? Take all the arguments against civil disobedience to save the unborn, and imagine yourself stating them before an audience of slaves, Jews or unborn children about to die.
In cases where helping victims is illegal, there are two conflicting ethical demands, one of which will be met and one unmet no matter what we do. One demand is to love your neighbor by saving his life. The other demand is to obey civil law. One of these ethical demands must be placed over the other. The question, then, is not should we disobey an authority, but which authority should we disobey–man’s or God’s? ”
You may have issues with Randall Terry outside of the civil disobedience issue…but I thought I would weigh in on this point as I can’t argue Randy’s article. Here it is:
http://www.epm.org/articles/rescue6.html
Thanks Katie for your thoughts. I gain much from the thoughts of others and even though I don’t write my blogs for purpose of debate (enjoy it actually but don’t have time:), I definitely appreciate clarification of facts. I never want to post something innaccurate and I agree that people should not reinvent history to prove a point. As to whether that HAS actually happened though…jury is still out for me. I hear what you are saying but still it all comes down to heresay to degrees – BOTH sides. The insulin issue for example I heard directly from an auditory clip of the nurse speaking. Was she lying? I don’t know. Did she misrepresent? I don’t know. I think there is a real mixture of truth out there though and I very seriously doubt that Judge Greer was very fair about this from the little that does appear to be factual.
Doni
P.S. I am weighing in with Randy Alcorn – not Randall Terry. Haven’t read Terry’s stuff for years. Just wanted to make that clear since they share the same name:)
All very interesting and very thought provoking 🙂
Here’s one thing I read re: Randall Terry
http://mediamatters.org/items/200503220001 which contributed to my feelings about him.
Oh, and when I said ‘Shady’ (perhaps not the best choice of words but I’m tired and it’s late, lol) I was referring to his approach and methods rather than his core beliefs, which I think have been questionable?
ps, that’s how tired I am, the last paragraph implies I find his beliefs questionable, which is not what I meant to imply….. rather that I find his methods questionable 🙂
I’ll check that link out because after watching him on FOX, I would be curious to see if I find his methods questionable as well. While on the subject though, let me give an example of my thoughts on civil disobedience in THIS case. Yesterday the nation saw two children arrested for attempting to bring water to Terri. While I appreciate the passion of this family, I think it was the wrong people and the wrong method. Was a pointless endeavor that would never have been effective. One can’t bring merely a cup of water to a starving woman. Fluid must be slowly reintroduced into her system and it must be done by a medical professional. Those children could not have saved her life or solved this problem. HOWEVER, if Jeb Bush were to decide that he would not allow one of his Florida residents to be executed via starvation and violated the court order and moved her to a facility where she could be adequately cared for, I would be one of the first to wear “Jeb for President” buttons!!! He has the means to intervene effectively and actually do something that could save her. He, of course, would be held in contempt of court but my estimation of him would rise exponentially and I would consider him a national hero for placing the life of a woman over his political career AND civil law when the life of an innocent woman was on the line. Does this push me over the edge of the right wing? LOL.
I feel like I am making a redundant statement, of which all has been stated that can be stated, but I can’t sit in silence regarding this matter because it has touched my heart.
I also hurt for Terri Shiavo and her case. I want to tell the world that I think her husband is a baboon. He is committing murder, whether he wants to face it or not. She wasn’t on life support of any kind, no ventilation tubes, no heart equipment, just a tube inserted through her stomach three times a day to provide nourishment and water to her body. I knew a boy down the block from my grandparents who had to be spoon fed through his stomach. Other than that, he was normal. Betchya they didn’t try to “pull his feeding tube.” I don’t care about all the other stuff that happened before, however a very appealing list of facts do imply certain instabilities in the Shiavo home. What I care about is present time. He is in fact killing her. Short and sweet? Yes. Truthful? YES!!! I am not going to judge him, because 1.) I am not God and 2.) Maybe his heart is in the right place and he believes with all his might that this is what Terri wanted. All I can do is say (or write) that I think he is doing a very wrongful, painful and torturous thing to his “wife.” And that he really should seek guidance from a person who is well versed in the scriptures.
Is this somewhat mean-spirited? Probably. But I will own up to that. I don’t want to offend anybody. I just wanted to get this off my chest.
You know, I read in USAToday that the Shindler’s said that Terri attempted to speak when the removed the tube. This may be common knowledge to you, so bear with me. Anyway. They said that she attempted to say that she wanted to live. When asked to show exactly what she “said” it went something like, “Awwww Waaaaaa…” Michael Shiavo’s attorney said that… Well here. I posted the exact quote from USAToday.
‘George Felos, the attorney for her husband Michael Schiavo, said the belief Terri Schiavo can speak was “crossing the line” into an abuse of the legal system.”
HE wants to talk about an ABUSE OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM??!!!??
Maybe I should leave that hanging, but I just can’t get past this. A person that wants to support a man that is commiting murder, no matter how you slice it, wants to talk about and abuse of the legal system. Maybe I’m reading too much in to this. I have been known to do that. And maybe I want to read into it a little bit more than normal given the circumstances. But this guy’s words have me chomping at the bit. Any sign that she is responding to interaction with another being is dire at this point in time. And of course the Shindler’s are going to point out any significant activities in their appeals – especially an attempt to speak, regardless of what the words are/were. But to go and say that they CROSSED THE LINE????
I’d better go because I could go on all night.
I hope that my words didn’t offend. They may be harsh, but I have a way of “gutting the fish” in a non-delicate-wear-a-raincoat kind of way.
Love your last line Candice! 🙂 and you are right about this… what happened before really is not as significant as the fact that stealing food is wrong… and from a hungry person may be even more wrong if there were a scale… stealing the only option a person will ever have to eat is murder. Period.
How thankful we can be that we are NOT God! (But don’t you wish you could be a mouse in His pocket as He knows the truth to this situation!!!) Doni, your Uncle and I stand 100%behind you on every point. Taking away every “hearsay” and really everything else surrounding this person’s life, we are left with a vulnerable young woman who is at the mercy of her loved ones. Hearing her mother say that even if she had indeed asked to not be put on life support, she would still definetely not ask to be starved to death. And isn’t that the bottom line? The question that we as Christians have to ask ourselves due to evidence that we are embarking on “selective” reduction of a human being, is are we going to sit back and watch something to this magnitude get legal precedense??? That’s what is frightening. If this doesn’t get stopped, they have already jumped way ahead of the legal balance by allowing this starvation to occur. Interesting that my 16 year old daughter said, “Isn’t that why we send aide to foreign countries, so the people won’t starve?” Simple but accurate thought. As Doni said, who is granted to make the decision of when a life is ended? God, and God alone. Speaking of heavy decisions, are we as Christians prepared to make a stand against our government should they cross the line on God’s laws? How we need to continue to pray for godly leaders to continue influencing our “system” for Christ. Let’s together cling to God’s promise from 2 Chron. 7:14 “if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” Amen!
oh aunt beck – that scripture sums it up so well. sooo well.
I can’t help but add a couple cents. This story is sad and complex. My heart is heavy this weekend. Not simply because of the obvious tragedy of this loss of life, but the context makes it more unsettling. On Easter weekend, we should be reminded that through God anything is possible. This woman might seem to us to have a slim chance of recovery, but who are we to make that determination?
Today family and many of Terri’s unknown American (and world-wide) friends mourn her passing. I pray that each of us, especially her family, find peace in God’s grace today. It’s hard to believe we actually got to this place, isn’t it? Cut away all the facts, family strife, discussions, husband stories, etc. and you are left with one thing – who gives and takes life and who has the right to do so? God does. There is nothing in His word to justify what has been done to Terry. God says to protect the innocent and yet we have starved her. Jesus said, “If you have done it to the least of these you have done it to me.” And to put hat in context, Jesus is talking about how we visited Him in prison, fed Him when He was hungry, clothed Him, sheltered Him – showed Him the simplest and greatest of kindnesses. When did I ever do that for Him? When I did it for “the least of these.” How many people in the world today considered Terry “the least of these” I wonder… too many. And what we do for her we’ve done for Christ. It’s a shame that we did not feed Him and ultimately, because of that, caused His death. Oh how many of the “powers that be” will someday grieve when they realize they’ve done this to Christ… that they had the opportunity to honor Him and did not. May they come to know Him and His grace in days to come – but may they not take lightly what they have just allowed. May they never take it lightly and may they never allow it again.
Good words Heidi.
Someone said this morning to me that we wouldn’t even starve the most vile criminal to death in this country. So sad that we saw fit to starve a perfectly innocent woman 🙁
All I can muster at this moment is…
Amen.
Bless you Heidi. Wonderfully said. What I struggle with now is why did God allow this? I don’t mean to open a new book of worms…just something I’m confused about. So many of our personal friends are fighting serious health battles right now, one of them being a darling 3 year old, & then Terri’s case…I just have to wonder…….???? My husband is about to beat me over the head with the Bible – I just can’t understand why all this is happening. Why this is allowed to happen!?!? 🙁