03.27.08
Madeline Neumann’s Death–Now the State wants to determine how her parents exercise their faith.
Police are conducting interviews Thursday in an effort to determine whether charges will be filed against a couple who prayed rather than seeking medical help for their 11-year-old daughter, who died Sunday from a treatable diabetic condition.
Leilani Neumann, Madeline’s mother, told the Associated Press that she never expected her daughter to die.”We just noticed a tiredness within the past two weeks,” Neumann said. “And then just the day before and that day [she died], it suddenly just went to a more serious situation. We stayed fast in prayer then. We believed that she would recover. We saw signs that to us, it looked like she was recovering.” (From Fox–Associated Press March 27, 2008).
The social workers showed up and took the other sibs away for examination. It appears that the state feels that they are healthy and it is not necessarily safe to send them back home, but they haven’t created a law to justify keeping them in foster care.
Yes, what happened to Madeline is unfortunate and sad. No, what the parents did or did not do is not able to be condoned. I’m sure that they are grieving and upset, to understate a fact. Adding insult to injury, the cocktail of their faith and their love had proven fatal. The deepest of their convictions are melted into one with the illness of their beloved Madeline. As irate as anyone wants to be at them, this cannot be denied. They believed in healing, and their faith has been mistaken for criminal neglect.
I don’t think that they were correct in their thinking. Which of us are? I don’t believe that they interpret their faith correctly, when insulin and means of health are a phone call away, and they are on their knees at their daughter’s bedside instead of bringing her to a medical facility.
All of that being said, “Bug off. They made a mistake. And the state is not fit to be a parent to the Neumann’s other children. Go rescue children who are in need.”
We seriously need to remember the sacred division between that which is public and that which is sacred. The state cannot determine how I live out my faith. (see Homeschooling and California decision discussion here.)
I’m aware that certain militants justify violence under the umbrella of faith. Shoot them, before they shoot you. I’m not writing about terrorists. I’m writing about people who believe in the power of prayer–even if the answer we get sucks.
[disclaimer: I'm sure that poor decisions grieve God all the time. I just want to clarify to most with weak faith that God's plans are not frustrated because we do stupid crap. There is no doubt that we cannot merely pray, but that we must ourselves be active. There is no question that the Neumann's made a serious mistake. That issue is being discussed ad nausea. My initial rant is the blurring of the sacred line between the private and public sector of our faith as it is played out in front of a hostile and mostly faithless society.
Peace,
Stephen C. Allen ]
tysdaddy said,
March 28, 2008 at 10:25 am
Exactly what answer did God send them in response to their prayers? Prayers without feet are just words bouncing off the ceiling. I don’t deny their pain and grief. But for them to claim that God is making them stronger through this is denial in a most insane manifestation. *One* visit to the doctor and they’d still have Madeline to raise and spend time with. Now, she’s dead . . . and their ok with that? Makes no sense.
breadandsham said,
March 28, 2008 at 11:13 am
Nothing you ask comes with a popular answer, but I respect that you wish to hear a reply, not merely make a point.
Firstly, you are asking me to explain to you the way God works. I am only one half qualified to do this. One half of me says that He is going to win. What He does is offer rescue and relief from the pain of sin to those who acknowledge it–namely His method of Redemption–the Christ whom He has sent to reveal Himself to us. Ultimately this will be completed in all of us who are His.
The other half of me says that although He is constructing a marvelous kingdom that I cannot understand and have never seen before, why should I, a mere creation of His, be constantly questioning His methods.
Let me mention here, however, that the choices the Neumann’s make are ultimately their choices and they (like us) will always bear the consequences of them. God is in full control, yet God is not the cause of sin and it’s effects: pain, suffering, and tragedy. That’s what the Neumann case is ultimately about. And that, my friend, it difficult to reconcile, but that does not make it illogical.
tysdaddy said,
March 28, 2008 at 11:39 am
You wrote:
“What He does is offer rescue and relief from the pain of sin to those who acknowledge it”
That’s the problem I am having with the parents in this situation. They don’t seem to be acknowledging the fact that they denied their daughter health care that would have saved her life. To take a very strong position, they murdered their own daughter. The impression I get from the article I linked to is that they prayed right up until the point when she died, and then called 911 and began administering CPR. At what point do you say, “This is crazy?! We need to get help NOW!” They reached that point, prayed through it, and Madeline died.
I still don’t get it.
You’re right. They have the right as parents to raise and treat their kids as they wish. But they crossed a line and a little girl is dead. May be logical to them, but it still makes no sense.
breadandsham said,
March 28, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Well said.
Deno said,
April 1, 2008 at 3:02 am
This situation were Madeline Neumann died is premeditated cultish insanity followed by lack of remorse.
Why couldnt they pray on the way to the hospital like normal christians do or while she is being treated and relieved of her situation like most christians do. But no they want all out miracle on damand. Only a couple of weeks ago I warned a Eells follower here, of this type of thing happening as I had read “We let our son die” and I told him of it but he was cherpily indifferent, and when we were discussing this situation concerning Madeline he said “I cant see what all the fuss is about” I could not believe my ears. They are ulimatly blind amazing it is amazing how they dont see any reason. I am so sad. Not to mention how us normal bible believing christians feel, this is not our way, Eells is using the bible to his advantage it is terrible indeed.
Deno
breadandsham said,
April 1, 2008 at 1:57 pm
James 5:14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
This is a passage that we can trust. It does not mean that when I trust it, and I don’t get the outcome that I was expecting, then I must have been using the Bible to my advantage, against what is allowable by Christian doctrine, and therefore, I am a criminal when my loved one dies. Again, I would pray on my way toward the insulin.
Once again. The Neumann’s made a bad decision and this is being discuss elsewhere ad nausea. I’m stating that this decision does not make them guilty of criminal neglect, such that the state should find more loving families for the other children.
By the way, who wrote that the Neumanns are not remorseful?
ken said,
April 2, 2008 at 7:08 pm
“We seriously need to remember the sacred division between that which is public and that which is sacred. The state cannot determine how I live out my faith. ”
Yet parents can decide to let their child die for their “faith” in a fanasy being. The scary thing about all this is those who defend the parents and call it a “mistake” and not what it really is…child neglect.
breadandsham said,
April 3, 2008 at 4:11 pm
But regardless of what we feel is right or not right, what does Scripture say? I believe that Scripture is true.
Let’s say an 11-year-old is killed by a drunk driver while coming home from a school function. One of us could have prevented it.
All sickness and pain, even death, are the result of sin–whether it is their own or that of someone else. Secondly, everyone sins. In this case, then, the girl dies directly for the sin of another, but herself is still guilty and will therefore be subject to pain, and ultimately death.
Madeline, will suffer sometimes for the sin of her parents, sometimes her own. This happens everyplace. Even people we call “good” will suffer and eventually die.
The Neumanns did not give their daughter her illness, nor did they do anything to aid her situation except pray. This is true. I don’t defend them.
But to answer your question more directly, yes, a parent should still be allowed to “let” their child die. For example, God allows His Son Christ to die for sin, even though He could have prevented it.
The other point that I want to make is that God is not forced to save her, nor is He forced to heal her based on how someone does or does not do anything. To these matters, they are sacred and not to be handled or invaded by the secular state.
(Again, refer to James 5:14.)
JoJoZilla said,
April 3, 2008 at 8:27 pm
I think what is going without notice here is that atheists have been telling christians for decades that their faith is misplaced and the christians have defended their faith through, essentially, political and social coddling or enabling or tolerance or call it what you will. Then the predictable happens and someone actually relies on God and He doesn’t help them and people are all ‘oh what a tragedy’ but it’s the predictable out come of faith. The parents substituted prayer for responsibility which is what happens when people are taught God is real. Christianity and faith in deities is, itself, the culprit here. The Neumanns are no more responsible for this than a Mooney is responsible for selling flowers.I look forward to seeing how christianity comes out of this w/o a scratch but I’m sure it will b/c of money and influence.
breadandsham said,
April 4, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Hey Jojo, Thanks for your comment. I’m curious however:
What are predictable outcomes for one who does not place their faith in God? Let’s name a few alternatives:
There’s the option to place faith in our government. But doesn’t this let us down in miserable and unfair ways–ways in which the powerful exploit the weak?
There’s the option to place faith in society. But society is rapidly morphing and in flux. Yesterday’s values are obsolete today. Today’s will be tomorrow. Any faith that we place in society will have to be a complete surrender of my individual rationality and rights. I become a slave to what others say is good and right. This leads to another form of control.
Let’s consider putting faith in myself alone. This makes me the autonomous and ultimate deciding factor for what is true and good. This too is absurd if we have any understanding of past and present context. Philosophy of the autonomous rational thinking human being is random, subjective, and always leads to chaos and meaninglessness–notice deconstruction and Sartre and French writer, Camus. This is yet the worst form of control. That of being controlled by one’s own unbridled passions and lust existing within a society where other’s are likewise rampant and unchecked.
Why do you suppose that Theism is impossible?
Secondly, what is wrong with accountability to something outside of yourself? We do it with our money, why not our behavior?
If you’re a rationalist, read Plantinga. I’m guessing that he’s much smarter than either of us.
Dvora said,
April 15, 2008 at 12:43 am
“But to answer your question more directly, yes, a parent should still be allowed to “let” their child die.”
Do you have children?
breadandsham said,
April 15, 2008 at 11:09 am
I’m thinking lately that this discussion shares a border with the right to life discussion. For example, the Pro-life camp believe that mothers who abort their pregnancies are essentially choosing to kill their unborn, yet fully alive, and fully human children. To be consistent, I guess you could say that I am Pro-Life with regard to all life, but pro-choice when it comes to exercising my faith. Said another way, my issue with socialism or secularized legalization about how to raise, punish, educate, or treat my children, it is a necessarily private matter — the same argument that the pro-choice camp employs toward abortion.
No, I don’t have children, yet. However, I would have prayed for Madeline on my way to the doctor’s office.