Did Billy Graham's Wife Die Naturally Or Commit Suicide?

[Katholikos]

[url="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070614/ap_on_re_us/obit_ruth_graham"]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070614/ap_on_...bit_ruth_graham[/url]

Ruth Graham had been bedridden for months with degenerative osteoarthritis of the back and neck — the result of a serious fall from a tree in 1974 while fixing a swing for grandchildren — and underwent treatment for pneumonia two weeks ago. At her request, and in consultation with her family, she had stopped receiving nutrients through a feeding tube for the last few days, Ross said.

[N/A Gone]

Only God can judge...it is not our job or responsability. All we can do is prayer for the family.


I hate threads like this likos.

[Kirisutodo333]

Hopefully God will judge her faith and works throughout her life. We'll keep her in our prayers.

[Paddington]

I'm one of the many (everybody here?) who wants an idea but won't judge her soul either way.

I have a very personal reason for wanting to know too. Not that it will help that situation because it is over. But I want to know.

[cappie]

In a statement released on Thursday, Billy Graham said: "Ruth was my life partner, and we were called by God as a team. No one else could have borne the load that she carried. ... My work through the years would have been impossible without her encouragement and support.

"I am so grateful to the Lord that He gave me Ruth, and especially for these last few years we've had in the mountains together. We've rekindled the romance of our youth, and my love for her continued to grow deeper every day. I will miss her terribly, and look forward even more to the day I can join her in heaven."

Ruth Graham was born in Jiangsu Province in China on June 10, 1920, the daughter of Presbyterian missionary and surgeon, Nelson Bell.

It was in 1940 that she met Billy Graham when the two were students at Wheaton College in Illinois. While her husband would go on to take centre stage in global evangelism, Mrs Graham always shied away from the limelight in pursuit of a much more private ministry. She was also an accomplished poet and is often credited with raising the pair’s five children single-handedly while Mr Graham was away on crusades.

Following news of her death, President George W Bush praised Mrs Graham as a “remarkable woman of faith whose life was defined by her belief in a personal, loving and gracious God”.

[Katholikos]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1296184' date='Jun 15 2007, 04:32 PM']Only God can judge...it is not our job or responsability. All we can do is prayer for the family.
I hate threads like this likos.[/quote]

The Church teaches that it is immoral to deliberately withhold water or nourishment from a patient in any circumstance. These are regarded as ordinary elements to which we are all entitled. Priests for Life, Human Life International, and others said Terry Shivo was murdered by the removal of her feeding tube. On the other hand, the Church teaches that patients and families are not required to employ extraordinary means to sustain life. But what if the patient himself or herself refuses food and water? That's my question.

Actually, the question is personal. In my own last days, may I deliberately refuse food and water as a means of hastening my death without incurring sin? My death would be then be due to dehydration or starvation. Is this suicide? What does the Church teach in such cases?

I'm sorry if my question distrubs you, Rev. I'm not asking you -- or anyone -- to judge Mrs. Graham. That's God's job. My question is about the objective morality of refusing food or water from the Catholic POV. The news article about Mrs. Graham just happened to provide an illustration in which I could frame my question. I thought there might be debate about it, so I posted it in the debate forum.

Likos

[KnightofChrist]

I read somewhere that St. Catherine of Siena died after she refused food and water for many days.

[Mercy me]

I don't want in any way to sound like I am judging her because I am not. She was a remarkable woman. I have no idea what happened to her in the end nor do I feel it is any of my business. She will be judged by our merciful Lord whom she knows well.

However, inregard to Likos' question, I would be inclined to think that refusing food and water would be wrong. However, I would think that refusing a feeding tube, which I think is an extraordinary measure, would be alright. I would like to know as well.

[Era Might]

It doesn't say what the cause of death was. Her refusing food doesn't necessarily mean she caused her own death. She may have known she was going to die within a few days by her illness, and let the process take its course. This would be different from Terri Shiavo who was starved and dehydrated to death. The article doesn't say she stopped receiving food and water, it says nutrients (which may not be the same thing). I'm pretty sure the Church teaches it is wrong to actively cause your death by refusing food and drink, because these are considered normal care (even with a feeding tube). But that may not be the case with Mrs. Graham. I do not speak for the Church, so check what she teaches for yourselves.

[jckinsman]

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14326b.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14326b.htm[/url]

[RezaMikhaeil]

I'm quite surprised to see someone use her particular situation in this particular method. I never thought anyone would stoop to this level... wow... I'm in shock

[Budge]

Many people when death comes, stop eating, if you have never known anyone to die of cancer, they will stop eating before the end. this is people who do not have the feeding tube.

I do not think it is sucidie. I believe refusing medical care is not suicide, such as someone with stage 4 cancer deciding against chemotherapy.

[1337 k4th0l1x0r]

One thing I've heard is that it becomes mentally and physically painful for some people to eat when they're nearing death. When the dying process just becomes protracted by eating it doesn't seem wrong to refuse food.

[Proud2BCatholic139]

Why do we want to be judging if one commited suicide or not? It is not right...

[Paddington]

[quote name='Proud2BCatholic139' post='1296773' date='Jun 16 2007, 04:37 PM']Why do we want to be judging if one commited suicide or not? It is not right...[/quote]

We can't judge her conscience one bit, IMO.

But, we will all die someday and we will watch the people we love die. Being prepared for that is what I want to get out of this thread.

[Proud2BCatholic139]

Be prepared by loving our Lord, Jesus, every second of the day, and never let Him out of your thoughts. Be prepared by recieving the Sacraments daily. Be prepared by praying the Rosary.

Don't worry about tomorrow, it may never come. Live day by day with God. Because with God, there is no human time, only on His time.

May God bless you.

[Katholikos]

Death raises ethical questions. One is whether doctors or family members have the right to withdraw food and water being administered to a patient through a feeding tube. The patient then may die from dehydration or starvation rather than from the condition or illness with which they are afflicted. This question has been clearly answered by the Church. Another is whether a patient himself/herself can deliberately refuse food or water being administered through a feeding tube [i][b]in order to hasten his/her death[/b][/i] without incurring sin. I'm looking for the Church's teaching on this question. Patients who cannot eat or drink are obviosly excluded. The question concerns [u]voluntary, knowing refusal.[/u],

Perhaps those who are critical of this thread have never had to face these situations. They raise real ethical questions. Obviously, this was the wrong discussion group in which to pose the question. I should have addressed it to a more mature audience. I am asking what does the Church teach in this situation? Most of what I've gotten so far (except from Paddington, thanks Paddington) is heat for asking the question!

The action Mrs. Graham took is only an illustration of my question. As Catholics, it goes without saying that we cannot judge her conscience or her soul. We can't know all the circumstances, but the action seems to have been deliberate, after consultation with the family, according to the news release. The media often gets it wrong. Nevertheless, the question remains.

Likos

[Proud2BCatholic139]

I don't recall reading a question.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1296303' date='Jun 15 2007, 08:59 PM']I read somewhere that St. Catherine of Siena died after she refused food and water for many days.[/quote]


From the Catholic encyclopedia:
After a prolonged and mysterious agony of three months, endured by her with supreme exultation and delight, from Sexagesima Sunday until the Sunday before the Ascension, she died


There is no mention of what you say anywhere. It may be that she was fasting and died during the fast or that she was unable to eat. Perhaps she could not keep them down in her illness. JP II said that it is immoral to not take normal nutrition and so one cannot morally die in this manner. I will leave it to God to judge Mr. Graham's wife.

Edited June 16, 2007 by thessalonian

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Katholikos' post='1296806' date='Jun 16 2007, 01:22 PM']Perhaps those who are critical of this thread have never had to face these situations. They raise real ethical questions. Obviously, this was the wrong discussion group in which to pose the question. I should have addressed it to a more mature audience. I am asking what does the Church teach in this situation? Most of what I've gotten so far (except from Paddington, thanks Paddington) is heat for asking the question!

The action Mrs. Graham took is only an illustration of my question. As Catholics, it goes without saying that we cannot judge her conscience or her soul. We can't know all the circumstances, but the action seems to have been deliberate, after consultation with the family, according to the news release. The media often gets it wrong. Nevertheless, the question remains.

Likos[/quote]

It's pretty clear that this thread was designed to slander Mrs. Graham, not to discuss her particular case that applies to the masses.