The Englaro case
 In an article published by the weekly newspaper Riforma of the Waldensian, Methodist and Baptist Churches in Italy, Ermanno Genre, professor of practical theology at the Waldensian Faculty of Theology in Rome and a member of the bioethic Commission of the Tavola Valdese, expressed the following opinion:
“The sentence of the Court on the Englaro case has closed, finally, one of the saddest pages in the life of the Italian Republic. It was possible to fear that the judges might be intimidated by the vile pressure of the media, but such was not the case and with this clear sentence justice was repeated in our democracy. It is a breath of fresh air for the lay character of the State, very precious for the freedom of all its citizens and in particular for the Englaro family that has carried this cross for over 16 years; a very heavy cross in itself, made heavier by the unheard-of and ignoble invectives pronounced by irresponsible and cynical people of both the political and religious world. Dear Family Englaro, now we can only express this wish: that the love you knew how to give your daughter continues to live within you and be a strength in your life, over and beyond all the words without mercy that have been thrown against you and that you can finally work out your sorrow.
The Court's sentence has not closed the debate on how human life is looked upon; on the contrary, it has kept it open. From the moment in which medical technology applied to the human body, it has definitely exploded the dividing line between nature and life, it has modified bruskly and brutally the scene of how we die, and the way we see medicine and doctors. Doctors can be friends, but can also become potential enemies. And if it should happen to me that which happened to Eluana and many others who are kept alive by machines? Is it still a human society, a society that forces me to continue to live in conditions of total unconsciousness, without any relation with those near me? A state of permanent vegetation (this is what we're dealing with) is still life? What meaning can the insistence on an abstract (and ideological) principle have of a life that is not available when that very life is not available for those who live it?
What meaning can the principle of the inviolability of life have when that life has been violated and destroyed by evil? The position of the Vatican State and of the Roman Catholic hierarchy truely constitutes a “foreign moral” unacceptable for an evangelical comprehension of life as it is witnessed to in the Scriptures. Here there is no “gospel of life” but the need to make room for the life of the gospel, its message of freedom and of promise. Is there still room for pronouncing judgement? The invitation of the Gospel of “not to judge” asks rather our conversion; to know how to listen to the suffering and the pain that cries to heaven and seeks human faces to share them”. Domenico Maselli, President of the Federation of Protestant Churches in Italy stated: “The decision of the Court on the Eluana Englaro case goes in the direction of safeguarding the personal will of each and every individual: it is an act of justice and civility that finally responds also to the love of the parents for their own daughter. This makes it all the more urgent and necessary a law governing living wills. We are struck by the fact that for 16 years it was possible to insist on ignoring the will clearly expressed by Eluana, and how some Christians can put trust more willingly into a machine than into the work of the Lord, who is always ready to welcome his children. As Christians we are convinced that the length of life is not decided by us and, above all, that we must realize the promise of Jesus: to have life in abundance. Do we think that our heavenly Father offers a life after death worse than what a machine can give us? We want to be close to the Englaro family and renew our prayers in this exceptionally difficult and painful time they face”, concluded Maselli.
From press service NEV - Notizie evangeliche, 30 November 2008 |
