Vince, please consider that other people may not know what you do.I am still baffled at how you can even ask this question, i.e. whether anyone affected by this crime, this act of violence, totally unexpected and totally wrong, could be thought of as committing suicide.
How do you know that? It seems likely that you are correct, but how could you possibly know?Of course their intent was not to die.
I agree, but likely is not certainly. Also it is unknown when people actually in the towers could know that for sure.Whether they jumped or stayed, the would likely die.
Let me try to clear it up. Suicide is deliberately killing yourself. The people who jumped off the tower may have deliberately performed an action that could reasonably be expected to result in their deaths, and which did in fact result in their deaths. I am myself baffled by what the unexpectedness and violence of the crime has to do with whether it was suicide. Homicide is homicide even when it is justifiable. Suicide is suicide even when it is justifiable. All the violence and unexpectedness has to do with anything is to the justification, not to the fact.I am still baffled at how you can even ask this question, i.e. whether anyone affected by this crime, this act of violence, totally unexpected and totally wrong, could be thought of as committing suicide.
Of course it’s ok to ask a question.Hey Vince, if you don’t think it’s a valid question, stop posting non-answers. People are allowed to ask questions like this–what seems clear to you (that it’s not suicide) is not clear to others.
I wondered this myself. In fact, in the documentary “The Falling Man,” the family of Norberto Hernandez was incredibly upset by the idea that he could have been the one from the famous picture of the man jumping from one of the towers. They are Catholic and were upset because they felt if it was him, if he did jump, that he would be damned, because of Catholic moral teaching on suicide. It make me think about some questions: Does make a difference what a person thought when they jumped? Does it matter when they jumped, or from what floor?
I ultimately came to the conclusion, like many on here have said, that the state of mind of those who jumped could not be considered rational enough for their acts to be considered suicide. That they were trying to live, in some way; reaching out to the only hope, however slight, they had.
But it’s still okay that I asked these questions.
Of course I can’t know. No one can. If the OP requested a response that no one can know, then the point is moot. I’m just asking for any possible rational basis for presuming that anyone involved in this tragedy and crime intended suicide.How do you know that? It seems likely that you are correct, but how could you possibly know?
I am not aware of any Catholic teaching that say suicide is justifiable. Can you clarify or provide a reference? Thanks.Suicide is suicide even when it is justifiable.
You’re right, “justifiable” isn’t really the right word. I suppose “non-culpable” would be more what I meant.I am not aware of any Catholic teaching that say suicide is justifiable. Can you clarify or provide a reference? Thanks.
The reason why the first police helicopter on the scene did not try to land is that there were no people on the roof waving to be picked up.Many of you saw it on television, but I know people who were there when it happened and after it happened. Living through the horror was and still is unimaginable. Let us not forget what our Lord commanded us to do: judge not and you shall not be judged. Let God be the judge and juror in this situation.
I think it is absolutely fine to ask theological questions, and I think that this was an excellent question. It has gotten us all thinking. Ultimately, I think that those poor souls were in a situation so horrific that God knows that their intention was to escape the inhumane heat that ensued. When a match burns our finger, we automatically pull our finger away. I think that is what those poor souls did. They automatically tried to escape the horrific heat and flames.
I saw a comment here about the helipcopters trying to land. The former mayor Rudy Guiliani stated just last week in a documentary aired on the National Geographic Network that he was told that the helicopters could not land because if so much as a spark landed on the helicopter, it would have exploded. There are films of the helicopters trying to find a way to land or get the people out of the building. I pray for the pilots of those helicopters. I can only imagine how helpless they felt.
September 11th is Patriot Day for a reason. Because on that day Americans rose to the occassion, and performed at their absolute best. That’s what this nation is all about.
Thanks. That helps.You’re right, “justifiable” isn’t really the right word. I suppose “non-culpable” would be more what I meant.
–Jen
Perhaps you are right Monte RCMS, but the films and photos of the Twin Towers show damaged roofs and flames and smoke rising out all around the roofs. Mayor Guiliani also cited that as a reason as to why there were no roof rescues, and no one has questioned it publically perhaps because the films and photos of the roofs bear silent witness to what he has stated. After the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the NYPD was able to pry open the doors to the roof, and rescue people. The Wall Street Journal stated in a story that the damage, fire, and heat from the 9/11 attacks prevented such a rescue.The reason why the first police helicopter on the scene did not try to land is that there were no people on the roof waving to be picked up.
The reason there were no people on the roof is that the door to the roof had been double locked and been rebuilt / replaced to be virtually a bank vault door by bureaucrats. The two hundred people trying to get to the roof were unable to get to through the door.
Nothing to do with sparks.
Pilots routinely land on roofs of burning buildings to pick people up.
They will try it and as long as they don’t encounter actual extreme conditions, they will persist.
Do a Google search for helicopter rescues from high rise burning buildings. They have been doing these rescues for decades.
The windows on thge building would not open on their own, someone would have to break it.Still…I disagree that there is any evidence (reasonable or otherwise) that anyone involved in this crime/tragedy intended suicide.
Start reading:Perhaps you are right Monte RCMS, but the films and photos of the Twin Towers show damaged roofs and flames and smoke rising out all around the roofs. Mayor Guiliani also cited that as a reason as to why there were no roof rescues, and no one has questioned it publically perhaps because the films and photos of the roofs bear silent witness to what he has stated. After the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the NYPD was able to pry open the doors to the roof, and rescue people. The Wall Street Journal stated in a story that the damage, fire, and heat from the 9/11 attacks prevented such a rescue.
I had the question myself at the time, and I think it would come automatically to mind for many Catholics especially those who had traditional Catholic moral catechesis. Just in case, out of “sensitivity” if you will, I prayed for the souls of all who died, and I’m sure our Lord judged them with mercy because they were in the worst Catch-22 type of situation.No question is bad. Ask as many questions as you want to! All questions bring about dialogue which is good!
I do not think that these people committed suicide, but tried to pick the best of two awful choices. However, I have talked to people who have said that they do think these people did commit suicide, or rather chose to die differently than God chose for them ( the fire). Did God choose for people to die this way? Of course not. The terrorists chose this way for them to die.
Monte RCMS, it is a good thing that I have faith in God because those who apparently made such a deadly decision will certainly have much to answer when they meet Our Maker. Thank you for the information.Start reading:
fpp.co.uk/online/01/10/WTC_Helicopters.html
There are many other accounts that independently corroborate what was written above.
In my opinion, the people who jumped knew they would die in the extremely hot fires on their floors. They would be burned to death. No one anticipated the buildings would collapse. But if they burned to death, their families would not be able to recover their bodies for burial. So they jumped, figuring that their bodies would be more or less intact after impact, … which was true. There are photographs, not widely circulated, of the bodies of people who jumped … and in many cases, the faces and upper torsos were very much intact. Many people who jumped, were facing up and landed on their backs.Why don’t you just ask God this once in heaven. We can’t sit here judging wether this was a sin or not according to scriptures etc etc… None of us has been in their situation; they were probably running on adrenalin and in a state of shock. You wouldn’t know what to do in that situation. They were just following their natural instincts to get away from burning rubble falling on them. Think of it like this: If somone gets a lighter and starts burning your arm, your going to jump to the side and shout at them. That exists in the same way in this situation, except there wasn’t unlimited floorspace.
Of course. That is a completely different question/consideration than whether suicide was INTENDED.The windows on thge building would not open on their own, someone would have to break it.
Jumping from this window, there is a reasonable expectation of death.
Intent does not change what the act is. It merely alters the culpability of the individuals involved.Of course. That is a completely different question/consideration than whether suicide was INTENDED.
True enough, self defense is allowed.I completely disagree that any actions taken by the victims of this crime were suicidal.
An analogy: self-defense. According to Catholic moral teaching, self-defense is a morally legitimate action even if it results in taking a human life. That does not mean such action is murder. Again, the intent here is paramount.
Avoiding death by jumping out a window that is hundreds of feet above the ground?While the likely outcome of the victims of 9/11 may have been their own death, that is completely inadequate for anyone to claim those victims committed suicide. Their intent (barring any evidence to the contrary which so far no one has shared) was not to commit suicide, their intent was to avoid death.
:sad_yes:Of course. That is a completely different question/consideration than whether suicide was INTENDED.
I completely disagree that any actions taken by the victims of this crime were suicidal.
An analogy: self-defense. According to Catholic moral teaching, self-defense is a morally legitimate action even if it results in taking a human life. That does not mean such action is murder. Again, the intent here is paramount.
While the likely outcome of the victims of 9/11 may have been their own death, that is completely inadequate for anyone to claim those victims committed suicide. Their intent (barring any evidence to the contrary which so far no one has shared) was not to commit suicide, their intent was to avoid death.
Choosing the manner of one’s death is a possibility when the person is rational. When someone is hysterical with fear, they may do or say anything, because they are not thinking, just reacting on autopilot…Intent does not change what the act is. It merely alters the culpability of the individuals involved.
True enough, self defense is allowed.
However, that does not change the fact that a life has been taken. Only that we do not refer to it as murder. Merely self defense.
But if we are to claim these actions were not suicide, what exactly do we call it?
Intent here is paramount, I agree. It mitigates responsibility.
But nevertheless, the act is what it is.
Avoiding death by jumping out a window that is hundreds of feet above the ground?
Sorry, but that just does not wash. Without knowing exactly what was going on in the heads of these people, there is no way to really judge intent, but it is fairly safe to say they were choosing their method of death.
“Do I die from the fire, or do I die from the fall.”