Posts
Dear Readers,
Waiting is one of the most difficult characteristics of life. We wait for the bus to come; we wait for class to start; we wait while someone is in the bathroom ahead of us; we wait for the dough to rise. Wait, wait, wait, wait, and wait.
All this waiting requires a great deal of patience. I have heard patience described as, the ability to live peaceably with situations or people we do not like. I can buy that definition. This sort of waiting, with patience, makes all of life so much easier when we can actually achieve it.
This patience needs to be examined, however. Sure, it is a necessary part of most processes. And it is of primary importance when dealing with the sorts of processes surrounding many of the events and conditions encountered in the hospital setting. How could we say otherwise? Decisions that affect our life and death, and the lives of all around us, cannot be taken lightly.
Dilemmas such as experienced in cases of terminal illness tear me apart intellectually. All such moral problems do, as I suppose is the same for many, if not all, people. I try to have a consistent worldview. Sometimes this is easy. For instance, part of my worldview consists of the belief that human life is special, more so than any other life Earth. Being made in the image of God, placed as stewards of this planet and each of its inhabitants, comes with great responsibilities as well as privileges. Thus, it follows that I believe human life is to be protected at all costs and in all cases. Often the decisions to be made following this worldview are no-brainers. Abortion, for instance. Wrong in all cases; a no-brainer. In no instance does abortion not destroy a human life.
Sure, there may be sticky instances such as threats to a mother’s life. These instances are infinitesimal in the grand scheme of things. Most such abortion decisions are made simply for convenience’ sake, which in no instance is a valid reason for taking a human life.
On the other end of the spectrum are the cases of terminal illness and end-of-life decisions. They are not always so clear-cut, waiting becomes a crucial part of the process of decision-making. The differences from the above abortion example are many. The most important difference, though, is that in these cases a human life will be lost, no matter what. The paths that must be taken are not so clearly seen as when we are protecting a life, made in the image of God that in one sense, has yet to be lived.
I believe, now, the emphasis shifts to taking care of a life, still made in the image of God. This life, ending now, must be protected in a different way; one that preserves the human dignity and eliminates suffering.
Patience now can appear to be a refusal to deal with circumstance and make decisions that are unavoidable. Patience now is no virtuous trait. Patience stymies our growth, frustrates our desires, and just generally makes us crazy waiting for something to happen or get done.
Who knows how I would react when actually faced with the decisions that must be made in these terminal cases. I sit here now with as clear a mind as I can have, and believe that part of preserving my dignity and that of those around me would be to see the inevitable and not avoid seeing it. There is no dishonor in laying down your king and surrendering to an opponent who has played a good game. Exit stage right.
I simply hope that I know all the conditions of the game I am playing; that the doctors and nurses and families helping me play this game, will speak frankly and clearly to me of all that I face in the game; that they will support me in the decision to lay down my king; that they will help me see that I have played the game with dignity, and am now ready to go on to the next game.
Your Hospice-Friendly, Neighborhood Apatheist,
~Bill
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Where is the Health Inspector?
Fellow Noshers,
I usually like a corner table here. One that allows an unobstructed view of just what is going on. Some people are just people watchers, and I am one of those. Other nights, though, the most interesting seat is one near the window. Here, you still get a chance to see the circus inside; but often the best show is the one out on the street.
There are the folks who ate at the organic fod place down the street, or maybe those who do their own home cookin'. Doesn't matter. They share a common mission: improve diet and nutritional status, for everyone. They seem to believe the best strategy is to harass the Diners' patrons before they can enter. "Dont' go in there! That stuff is gonna kill you! How can you eat that crap? You people are sickos and perverts for liking that stuff! You should have seen the health inspector's report! He's gonna shut this place down someday, just you wait! And then how are you gonna like starving to death? You people are going to rot from the inside! The surgeon general warned you about places like this!"
What does it mean to have mercy on the Diners' victims? The voices offering solutions to the crisis divide mainly into two camps: those who view the diseases in purely physical terms to be handled with a purely physical approach, and those who understand the spiritual and moral dimension inherent in this pandemic.
Critics of the demonstrators, however, warn that even if they do care, these believers offer the wrong solutions—solutions that jeopardize health and alienate the needy in the process. Critics complain that the demonstrators show "too much morality" and "too little sense" in their fight. The critics, defenders of the Diner, claim that nutritional deficiencies and progressive food-related illnesses affect everybody.
But rather than answer the root causes of the disease, they are in denial of their sickness and insist that to advocate moral changes is to pass judgment. The disease is AIDS, and it usually strikes at fairly discrete groups such as homosexuals, prostitutes, drug addicts. It is no respecter of morals, and will affect the general population, including the innocent.
It is exactly for this reason the demonstrators should discourage risky behavior (unfaithfulness, promiscuity, drug use) that brings it into the rest of society. That is not finger-pointing or judging; that is true compassion. This includes discouraging dehumanizing situations, including prostitution and sex trafficking.
The critics will say that such attitudes will leave the drug addicts, homosexuals and prostitutes in the cold. The real test for the demonstrators' beliefs will be to bring those in to a warmer place. Those who disagree with promoting abstinence and fidelity in the AIDS fight seem to believe proponents are just moralizing—standing in judgment of victims. But Christians realize that AIDS requires more than physical answers. Most of the situations that lead to the contraction of HIV are not merely physical: They begin with a decision (with the exceptions, of course, of rape victims, vulnerable children, etc.).
The AIDS crisis is about evil—"the sanctity of life” (people devalue their own lives and resign themselves to contracting AIDS); “disproportionate suffering” (one bad decision could lead to unimaginable suffering); “and a dozen other things—trust, fear, weakness, traditions, temptation”: intangible realities that cannot be quantified, nor treated with physical solutions.
Those who eschew any moral dimension to AIDS prevention seem to believe humans are good already and don’t need to change—that AIDS is something completely disconnected from human nature that needs only to be wiped away with condoms and drugs.
But this denies truth. Life is not the way it's supposed to be. This is more evidence of the Fall. And because of the Fall, we are not any "good". If we were any good, then what would happen if there were enough clean needles and condoms?
Without internal change, would we still have predatory men, prostitution, drug users in slavery to mind-numbing chemicals? With enough condoms and clean needles, would you be able to say your job is done, their lives are whole?
Every franchise of the Diner needs a good soup kitchen next door.
~Bill
I usually like a corner table here. One that allows an unobstructed view of just what is going on. Some people are just people watchers, and I am one of those. Other nights, though, the most interesting seat is one near the window. Here, you still get a chance to see the circus inside; but often the best show is the one out on the street.
There are the folks who ate at the organic fod place down the street, or maybe those who do their own home cookin'. Doesn't matter. They share a common mission: improve diet and nutritional status, for everyone. They seem to believe the best strategy is to harass the Diners' patrons before they can enter. "Dont' go in there! That stuff is gonna kill you! How can you eat that crap? You people are sickos and perverts for liking that stuff! You should have seen the health inspector's report! He's gonna shut this place down someday, just you wait! And then how are you gonna like starving to death? You people are going to rot from the inside! The surgeon general warned you about places like this!"
What does it mean to have mercy on the Diners' victims? The voices offering solutions to the crisis divide mainly into two camps: those who view the diseases in purely physical terms to be handled with a purely physical approach, and those who understand the spiritual and moral dimension inherent in this pandemic.
Critics of the demonstrators, however, warn that even if they do care, these believers offer the wrong solutions—solutions that jeopardize health and alienate the needy in the process. Critics complain that the demonstrators show "too much morality" and "too little sense" in their fight. The critics, defenders of the Diner, claim that nutritional deficiencies and progressive food-related illnesses affect everybody.
But rather than answer the root causes of the disease, they are in denial of their sickness and insist that to advocate moral changes is to pass judgment. The disease is AIDS, and it usually strikes at fairly discrete groups such as homosexuals, prostitutes, drug addicts. It is no respecter of morals, and will affect the general population, including the innocent.
It is exactly for this reason the demonstrators should discourage risky behavior (unfaithfulness, promiscuity, drug use) that brings it into the rest of society. That is not finger-pointing or judging; that is true compassion. This includes discouraging dehumanizing situations, including prostitution and sex trafficking.
The critics will say that such attitudes will leave the drug addicts, homosexuals and prostitutes in the cold. The real test for the demonstrators' beliefs will be to bring those in to a warmer place. Those who disagree with promoting abstinence and fidelity in the AIDS fight seem to believe proponents are just moralizing—standing in judgment of victims. But Christians realize that AIDS requires more than physical answers. Most of the situations that lead to the contraction of HIV are not merely physical: They begin with a decision (with the exceptions, of course, of rape victims, vulnerable children, etc.).
The AIDS crisis is about evil—"the sanctity of life” (people devalue their own lives and resign themselves to contracting AIDS); “disproportionate suffering” (one bad decision could lead to unimaginable suffering); “and a dozen other things—trust, fear, weakness, traditions, temptation”: intangible realities that cannot be quantified, nor treated with physical solutions.
Those who eschew any moral dimension to AIDS prevention seem to believe humans are good already and don’t need to change—that AIDS is something completely disconnected from human nature that needs only to be wiped away with condoms and drugs.
But this denies truth. Life is not the way it's supposed to be. This is more evidence of the Fall. And because of the Fall, we are not any "good". If we were any good, then what would happen if there were enough clean needles and condoms?
Without internal change, would we still have predatory men, prostitution, drug users in slavery to mind-numbing chemicals? With enough condoms and clean needles, would you be able to say your job is done, their lives are whole?
Every franchise of the Diner needs a good soup kitchen next door.
~Bill
A Hammer With Which to Smash It
"When your judgements are in the earth, the inhabitatants of the world learn righteousness." Isaiah 26:9.
One of the virtues of each visit to the Diner is that it provides a kind of reality check on America's continuing moral decline.
I don’t eat much when I'm here, but enough to notice dining habits and trends, and maybe overhear the talk about hot new TV shows or a movie. This fall, as far as I can tell, we’ll be treated to a series that glorifies the life of “cool crime.” Another series—the continuing story of a group of classmates-turned-near-adults—features a woman who can spell “denial” and has a penchant for falling in love with homosexual men. And, of course, we are promised new and more outrageous “reality programs” that have nothing whatsoever to do with the reality anyone ever lives, but everything to do with such skills as getting the best of someone else at anybody and everybody’s expense, all for the sake of fifteen minutes of fame and a big chunk of money.
Television serves as a mirror of society, in a strange kind of way. It reflects what many people think and feel, but typically keep to themselves. By displaying for public scrutiny what we’re secretly thinking and feeling—but wouldn’t dream of acting on—TV encourages us to go on and let it all hang out. Which, as we do, has the effect of moving the moral boundaries back a little more toward decadence. But before we blame television at the cantina of corruption for our moral slide, we need to consider what, in particular, is responsible for creating this favorable climate for increasing numbers of selections from the dessert menu at your local Diner.
It’s not TV. Rather, it is the Church’s indifference toward, even scorn for, the Law of God as the primary source, that fuels America’s continuing moral slippage. This "Christian nation", if it ever truly was one, has lost its anchor and is drifting. It seems it no longer matters if we're eating at the Cultural Diner, or in the Fellowship Hall.
Active or passive rejection of God’s Law is nothing new, not even among believers in God. Throughout most of her history, Israel in the Old Testament ignored, fudged, and blatantly disobeyed the Law of God. It was for their persistence on this course that God ultimately brought them to judgment. The books of all the prophets are filled with warnings, threats, and denunciations against the rulers and people of Israel for their rebellion against the Law of God.
There are two types of abuse of God's Law. The first, that of the Judaizers, tried to make obedience to the Law a prerequisite of salvation. According to them, one is saved by believing in Jesus and submitting to ritual requirements of Jewish law. Paul rightly identified this teaching as “another gospel.”
The second error, the other extreme of the pendulum swing, wants to do away with the Law altogether. Paul addressed this incipient problem in the book of Romans. The moral corruption, seen so often in Church cafeterias today, takes the latter form. The Food Pyramid is posted, the talk is of Food Groups and healthy eating; but the patrons say they are not bound by the RDA, as though they had to make any effort to follow them. We live in a time of grace, not law. The Spirit is our guide in ethical matters, pouring forth the love of God from within us, so that we do not need to exert ourselves, laboring to understand or keep the Law of God.
While we loudly protest the removal of the Ten Commandments from the public square, we are shamefully silent about their absence from the pulpit, Sunday School classrooms, and church discipline. Instead, in all these places the Beatles' ethic is all that remains: “All you need is love.” You know, just love one another, as Jesus loved us. Don’t try to put anybody under the Law—except, of course, those pagans and secularists who insist on removing the Commandments from court houses and schools.
The result is that, as a community, the ethic we demonstrate is not much different from that of the increasingly decadent society in which we live. Except for our “church activities,” we as a community are not that much different from our neighbors. We are nearly as materialistic, spend as much time watching television and participating in other frivolous diversions, have about the same divorce rate, and in just about every other way demonstrate that we’re just “one of the guys” when it comes to everyday ethical behavior. We actually show favor to unGodliness—greed and lust, anger and gossip, Sabbath-breaking and blasphemy, stealing and murder, lies and hypocrisy, adultery and incivility.
Drifting on the sea of love, untethered by the Law of God, the church is under the shadow of perilous icebergs. Having refused to decisively proclaim the goodnes of the Law, the church has opened the door and welcomed in every form of unrighteousness. The church has encouraged corrupt and decadent dining, and made it increasingly difficult for the world to make healthy choices.
Nutrition-related illnesses are progressive, debilitating, and often go undetected for years. How long has it been since your last check-up?
Cultural Nurse-in-Training,
~Bill
One of the virtues of each visit to the Diner is that it provides a kind of reality check on America's continuing moral decline.
I don’t eat much when I'm here, but enough to notice dining habits and trends, and maybe overhear the talk about hot new TV shows or a movie. This fall, as far as I can tell, we’ll be treated to a series that glorifies the life of “cool crime.” Another series—the continuing story of a group of classmates-turned-near-adults—features a woman who can spell “denial” and has a penchant for falling in love with homosexual men. And, of course, we are promised new and more outrageous “reality programs” that have nothing whatsoever to do with the reality anyone ever lives, but everything to do with such skills as getting the best of someone else at anybody and everybody’s expense, all for the sake of fifteen minutes of fame and a big chunk of money.
Television serves as a mirror of society, in a strange kind of way. It reflects what many people think and feel, but typically keep to themselves. By displaying for public scrutiny what we’re secretly thinking and feeling—but wouldn’t dream of acting on—TV encourages us to go on and let it all hang out. Which, as we do, has the effect of moving the moral boundaries back a little more toward decadence. But before we blame television at the cantina of corruption for our moral slide, we need to consider what, in particular, is responsible for creating this favorable climate for increasing numbers of selections from the dessert menu at your local Diner.
It’s not TV. Rather, it is the Church’s indifference toward, even scorn for, the Law of God as the primary source, that fuels America’s continuing moral slippage. This "Christian nation", if it ever truly was one, has lost its anchor and is drifting. It seems it no longer matters if we're eating at the Cultural Diner, or in the Fellowship Hall.
Active or passive rejection of God’s Law is nothing new, not even among believers in God. Throughout most of her history, Israel in the Old Testament ignored, fudged, and blatantly disobeyed the Law of God. It was for their persistence on this course that God ultimately brought them to judgment. The books of all the prophets are filled with warnings, threats, and denunciations against the rulers and people of Israel for their rebellion against the Law of God.
There are two types of abuse of God's Law. The first, that of the Judaizers, tried to make obedience to the Law a prerequisite of salvation. According to them, one is saved by believing in Jesus and submitting to ritual requirements of Jewish law. Paul rightly identified this teaching as “another gospel.”
The second error, the other extreme of the pendulum swing, wants to do away with the Law altogether. Paul addressed this incipient problem in the book of Romans. The moral corruption, seen so often in Church cafeterias today, takes the latter form. The Food Pyramid is posted, the talk is of Food Groups and healthy eating; but the patrons say they are not bound by the RDA, as though they had to make any effort to follow them. We live in a time of grace, not law. The Spirit is our guide in ethical matters, pouring forth the love of God from within us, so that we do not need to exert ourselves, laboring to understand or keep the Law of God.
While we loudly protest the removal of the Ten Commandments from the public square, we are shamefully silent about their absence from the pulpit, Sunday School classrooms, and church discipline. Instead, in all these places the Beatles' ethic is all that remains: “All you need is love.” You know, just love one another, as Jesus loved us. Don’t try to put anybody under the Law—except, of course, those pagans and secularists who insist on removing the Commandments from court houses and schools.
The result is that, as a community, the ethic we demonstrate is not much different from that of the increasingly decadent society in which we live. Except for our “church activities,” we as a community are not that much different from our neighbors. We are nearly as materialistic, spend as much time watching television and participating in other frivolous diversions, have about the same divorce rate, and in just about every other way demonstrate that we’re just “one of the guys” when it comes to everyday ethical behavior. We actually show favor to unGodliness—greed and lust, anger and gossip, Sabbath-breaking and blasphemy, stealing and murder, lies and hypocrisy, adultery and incivility.
Drifting on the sea of love, untethered by the Law of God, the church is under the shadow of perilous icebergs. Having refused to decisively proclaim the goodnes of the Law, the church has opened the door and welcomed in every form of unrighteousness. The church has encouraged corrupt and decadent dining, and made it increasingly difficult for the world to make healthy choices.
Nutrition-related illnesses are progressive, debilitating, and often go undetected for years. How long has it been since your last check-up?
Cultural Nurse-in-Training,
~Bill
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)