Abortion: In Support of Life

"My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you." (John 15:12)

Abortion is an un-reasonable issue, I am told. It is an emotional issue not subject to logical, thoughtful and certainly not prayerful discussion. It is so emotional and un-reasonable that for some it has become a literal religious crusade, an occasion for political vengeance, and a cause for moral condemnation.

"Come now and let us reason together, saith the Lord." (Isaiah 1.18)

That is tough advice to follow. It's the "together" part that is the most difficult. How can we reason together when we come at the abortion question from so many different points of view? As a pastor I must take into account that today, at this very moment, I am speaking to young people who are seeking to form every part of their lives on Christian values. They want to know what the Bible teaches, and I must tell them as clearly as I can what I believe. I am speaking to women and men who have already made decisions and have acted on those decisions, and are hoping that they will not be condemned again. And I am speaking to other women and men who are struggling at this very moment and feel isolated in their pain. They want to know if the church is a safe place to bring their personal encounter with the moral dilemma of abortion. What does the preacher say? Judgment is often free. Support is often no where to be found. Is there a word of the Lord that is both prophetic in its clarity and pastoral in its compassion? Let's us see.

I have been working on this sermon for 16 years. I remember the day it all began. In seminary I had a girlfriend whose name was Pat. Pat was something of a woman's activist. She brought up the subject of abortion in a conversation. We had our first fight. Not that I had much of an opinion at that time in my life--just a sort of soft feeling that abortion was wrong. Gradually Pat talked me out of that soft feeling into a more intense pro-choice conviction. That was only the beginning of listening to and being convinced by other people's opinions. In March of 1981 I wrote my first, and until today only, sermon on abortion. I read everything I could find on the subject. I studied the related Biblical texts and had meetings with church members to listen to literally dozens of opinions. The process wore me out. And the exhaustion didn't stop once I had declared myself. New books and articles kept being written. The political environment and the moral arguments continued to change. I heard new and convincing ideas. But one thing did not change--the Biblical standard of the right and the good. But we must apply that standard in a new day where much has changed, including the fact that the Supreme Court has returned much authority over abortion to the fifty states.

I will attempt to make this application of what I believe to be Biblical truth with a warm heart that cares about life and a cool head that is sensitive to the complexities of life. And, as always, your response is welcome and encouraged.

As I said last week in my sermon, "Morality: How Does a Christian Decide", the decision to follow Jesus obligates us to a lifetime of seeking to understand and follow the Biblical standard of morality. And, as I have said before, I do not believe in a "proof-texting" approach to that seeking. Rather, the Biblical standard of the right and the good must be determined by using the whole Bible as our text, looking for themes and principles that are extensively developed in scripture and that are consistent with the teachings of Jesus and God's action to save God's people. We will look at three such themes today.

1) The creative work of God and the sacredness of life.

2) The prophetic understanding of Mishpat--justice.

3) The unconditional love of God and our response.

1) The Old Testament begins by developing the theme that God is the Creator of life and has called us to be Co-Creators. We are made in God's image, each person unique, special, and infinitely important in the eyes of God. That means you and I, the richest and the poorest, black and white, male and female, young and old, handicapped and social misfit, Jew and Christian, even Criminals, atheists, communists and Nazi's--each life is of infinite value to God. Is that also true of life before birth? I think that the Biblical evidence is clear. Life in utero matters to God. There are too many references to God's awareness of and plans for the unborn to ignore. (Jer.1.45-50; Psalm 139.13-16; Isaiah 44.1; Luke 1.41-44) And it matters little whether you call an unborn child a human person or only a potential human person. We are all only a small part of what we are to be. The point is that life, potential or actual, has value to God. In human terms, of course, an adult has more "value" than a three-week old group of cells that might some day be a person. And sometimes we are forced to make decisions based on such relative values. But in God's eyes both are of infinite value. Life can be sacrificed for love, even for freedom, as Christ gave his life for us, or a soldier gives his life in battle. Sometimes one life is ended to save another. But there is always loss here, pain, deep remorse or regret that such choices were necessary. Life can never be viewed, by the Christian, as cheap, expendable, of value only for what it does for me.

LIFE--OF INFINITE VALUE--IS BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE # 1

2) In last week's sermon, I shared with you the meaning of the Hebrew word, "Mishpat", most often translated as "justice". It is a major Biblical moral concept, developed especially by the Old Testament prophets, and found in Micah 6.6-8:

"God has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you? To do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God."

Mishpat must be considered any time Christians try to discover the Biblical standard of the right and the good because it is, by definition, God's standard of right conduct--what God would do. Mishpat, justice, is often applied to the oppressed, the poor, the afflicted, the needy--to all persons who do not have enough power to act on their own behalf. And where is life, or potential life, more in need of protection, justice, than life in the womb?

I am painfully, tragically, aware that in the complicated world of human affairs, one person's justice can be another person's oppression. But for justice to have a chance, someone must speak for all sides. The scriptures instruct Christians to defend the helpless. It is our job to make sure that the voice of the unborn is heard.

MISHPAT--JUSTICE--IS BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE # 2

3) Again, as I said in my introductory sermon on morality, the final standard the Christian must apply to all moral decisions is "love", specifically defined in the New Testament as sacrificial love", love that keeps the good of the neighbor ahead of one's own welfare. The meaning of "love" is further clarified by Jesus in John 15.12:

"This is my commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you."

Our love for one another is to parallel God's love for us. Let's look at God's love. It is unconditional. We do nothing to earn it or to deserve it. It is not given because we are worthy or productive, but simply because God chose to love us, "While we were yet sinners." One book I read contained the following statement on God's love as it relates to the abortion issue:

"As women increasingly point to the feminine attributes of God, who made both male and female in the Divine image, we are confronted with God as the unconditional lover. God is the One who loves us simply because we are God's children and not because of what we can do for God....If we are in God's image, then ought we not "image" God and be reflectors of a love which views unborn human beings as having intrinsic value beyond being wanted?" (Who Broke the Baby, Garton, pp.32-33

LOVE--SACRIFICIAL LOVE--IS BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE # 3

It has taken me many years to arrive at my conclusion, maybe because I am too much a product of American self-centered culture. I have struggled with this issue, and have witnessed the agonizing struggle of others. From my Biblical Study I can do no other than conclude that abortion is always a moral tragedy. Note, please, I have not said that every abortion is wrong. I have said that they are always a moral tragedy. Every time life, or potential life, is ended, there is "Pain in the heart of God"; which means pain in the heart of every Christian who is connected in love to God. An abortion is not just a personal tragedy affecting mother and fetus. It affects all of us, just as anyone's poverty, anyone's oppression, anyone's hunger, anyone's death, is also my poverty, my oppression, my hunger, and my death. I cannot be truly free and secure until all humanity is free and secure.

As you probably know, I have not yet talked about 101 complexities that exist in the abortion dilemma as it confronts both individuals and our society. What I have done is to begin with the Biblical standard that Christians must consider when faced with the moral issue of abortion. Christians are co-creators of life, not destroyers. We are to be advocates of justice for those who have no power. And, most important of all, we are to love sacrificially.

How do we apply these principles to the moral context in which we find ourselves in the United States of America, in the year of our Lord, 1990? Discovering the Biblical standard is "a piece of cake" compared to figuring out how to apply it. I cannot possibly present all that I have read, felt, thought, considered, weighed, decided and re-decided. But I will try to summarize what I believe to be a moral, necessary and possible course of action for Christians.

I begin the search for a course of action by asking, "Why do we have the abortion problem"? Is abortion the disease or one of the very tragic symptoms of the disease? I believe it is a symptom. The disease is a society that is, as a whole, materialistic, self-centered, violent, oppressive of the powerless, and sexually irresponsible. In far too many circumstances we are a society that is likely to regard life cheaply. Let me develop this diagnosis.

MATERIALISM AND SELF-CENTEREDNESS: What is more important in our culture than getting ahead, possessions, making it to the top, doing my thing? For many women considering an abortion, the moral dilemma is agonizing. But for others, the issue is convenience, letting nothing get in the way of where they are going with their lives. Just last week I read that over half of the abortions performed in America are the result of the failure of other forms of birth control. "I am in control of my life. I did not plan this pregnancy. I will not have this baby", so the logic goes. If one believes that fulfillment comes from the unfettered freedom to pursue one's own lifestyle, no matter what, then abortion makes all kind of good sense. Unborn children are in the way--end them. Already born children are in the way--push them aside.

Any long term change in the abortion picture in the United States must include a reshaping of our values and our lifestyles.

SEXUALITY: When we introduce the subject of human sexuality to the discussion of the abortion dilemma, there is enough guilt to go around to almost everyone. In the not too distant future I hope to focus an entire sermon on this topic. But for now I want to target those of us, often parents and often churches, who are guilty of silence. Quality discussions between parents and their children and excellent sex education programs in churches are two of the most important antidotes to the abortion crisis. In records, movies, television, and magazines, our youth are bombarded with sexual messages that are often dehumanizing. In the face of this evil, what are we doing being silent? Abortion is an inevitable consequence of a society where those who are suppose to raise a moral voice have nothing to say. Churches can not only raise a moral voice, they can also engage in moral action. They can sponsor crisis counseling centers and give hands on support to mothers struggling with a pregnancy decision. Most of all, they, we, I can take a non-judgmental position, struggling with instead of standing over in condemnation. I want to make a promise. And I don't want this to be missed. I pledge, personally as your pastor, here and now, non-judgmental support to any woman or family struggling with an abortion decision. I will counsel you, but I will not judge you. And I will walk with you no matter what you decide. Period.

VIOLENCE: We are, I believe, a violent people. But we are also masters at hiding behind high-sounding rationalizations and obscure language. In 1963, Planned Parenthood--an organization whose work in sex-education I respect--published an article titled, "Plan Your Children for Health and Happiness." The article said, "An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun." Since 1963 however, Planned Parenthood, and our whole society, have undergone a radical change in our terminology such that "baby" is now "fetal tissue", or "uterine contents", or "conceptus". We say, "termination of a fetus" to describe abortion, but since fetus is simply Latin for unborn child and termination means killing, we really mean killing an un-born child, a mental image too painful for most of us to bear.

We are a society that, for the most part, believes in the use of violence to "terminate" our most difficult problems. And then we corrupt our language to hide what we are doing, even from ourselves.

We teach people that it is wrong to kill people by killing people, and call it capital punishment.

We drop burning jellied gasoline on women and children and call it "pacification".

And finally, in the horror to end all horrors, we prepare nuclear weapons to abort the entirety of humanity and call it "deterrence".

If we wish to end abortion, we must become less violent. And we can begin by calling violence and death by their real names. And we each can begin by finding out, and doing something about, the angry and violent parts of ourselves. You cannot advocate violence and death to solve one problem without encouraging their use in solving other problems. If you want to be pro-life, then be pro-life consistently. Wherever life is threatened, choose life that you and the children may live. Be pro-life where it concerns the children who are already alive. I am working on another sermon titled, "What is America Doing to Our Children". For now let me just say that I find it a peculiarly distorted version of a Christian ethic that would enable a person to oppose the abortion of the unborn and at the same time oppose the funding of food stamp programs to feed the already living and the Head Start program to make sure those children have a decent chance for a good life. I believe that Christians are called to be advocates of life, consistently, radically pro-life. We must educate, support, cajole, preach, exhort, persuade, and minister on behalf of life, opposing death no matter how it disguises itself.

We are heading towards the end of this sermon, but we still have what I believe is the most difficult question of all to face. Should Christians in America in 1990 work for laws that will force other citizens to comply with our moral position on abortion. A few years ago, this question focused mostly on an amendment to the United States Constitution. But the Supreme Court has thrown the issue back to the fifty states. Should Christians, among our other pro-life strategies, work to pass laws that enforce what we believe is the Biblical standard of the right and the good upon all other citizens?

I have thought and prayed long and hard about this question. I suspect I am already in the frying pan on the abortion question and am about to jump into the fire. But I believe that what I must say is true. I am immensely distressed that it is true, but I believe it is true none-the-less. To abort or not to abort--who makes the decision? What unit of the society decides?

The United States of America?
The State of Ohio?
The City of Upper Arlington or Columbus?
The Church?
The family?
The mother?

What unit of society decides?

Who has the moral authority--not the legal authority, the moral authority-- to say what, in a given context, is the right and the good? Who has the right to say, "Thou shalt not abort"?

Here is the answer that I believe God has given to me.

THE DECISION TO ABORT OR N0T TO ABORT MUST BE MADE BY THE LARGEST UNIT OF SOCIETY THAT IS WILLING TO BE MEANINGFULLY COMMITTED TO PROTECTING AND NURTURING THE LIFE OF THE CHILD ONCE HE OR SHE IS BORN.

That unit of society ought to be the United States of America. But it is not. Again, we will return to this issue of America and children another day, but the statistics on infant mortality alone are enough to betray the failure of our country to be meaningfully committed to protecting and nurturing the children. I believe that the United States Government is no where near having the moral authority to say, "Thou Shalt Not Abort".

What about the State of Ohio and the City of Columbus? Do they have the moral authority to make the decision to abort or not to abort? I'd rather speak to you about Massachusetts and Boston than Ohio and Columbus, not only because I know more about them, but also because I'd be less likely to get in trouble. But I did attend a seminar two weeks ago that was enlightening. I learned about the infant mortality statistics on Cleveland Avenue. They are horrifying. I learned about how much state and local funding of programs for children has helped to fill in the gaps created by the end of revenue sharing and other federal funding. I learned how much better Columbus is doing than Cleveland and Cincinnati. I learned about what private groups are doing in this city and this state to further meet the needs of children. But I also learned that the gap is still staggering. We, as a state and as a city, will be struggling for a long time to build a truly meaningful commitment to protecting and nurturing the children. I do not believe that either the state nor the city have the moral authority to say, "Thou shalt not abort".

Well, what about the church? Certainly the church can say to its members at least, "Thou shalt not abort"? Remember the measuring stick I set up; a meaningful commitment to protecting and nurturing the child once born. Once the church has encouraged the mother to have the child, will the church be there for that child and family, with financial help, if needed, with support for a weary parent, if needed. Will the church be a foundation of love for, let us say, a single parent who believes she already has too many children to care for adequately? Will the church be there? If so, then the church may say to its members--like the Mormon Church is able to say to its members--"Thou shalt not abort". Such churches are very rare in our society. All too often families are terribly isolated.

It often is the family, and only the family, that is meaningfully committed to protecting and nurturing the child once born. By default, by the failure of the other units of society, the abortion decision often falls to the family. If the family is fortunate, it is a father and a mother deciding together. At least they have each other. Each is committed to the children and so each has the moral authority to help make the decision. Guided by the Biblical standard of the right and the good, they may say to themselves, "We shall not abort". They may say, we don't know how we will do it, but God knows. We are afraid we will not be able to take care of all the children, but God will provide. The mother and father can choose life because they will be there. They are committed to work with God to protect and nurture life.

But often, way too often, it is not even a father and mother together. It is a mother alone. No one else is really there. No one else is meaningfully committed to protecting and nurturing the child once born. By default--and please note clearly how I am saying this--by default of the national and state and city governments, by default of the church, by default of a man, the woman is left alone. She is the only one left to make the decision by default, not by right. It should not be this way. She should be together in this moment of decision, connected to other units of the society who care about children. But she is alone. She is the only one who is truly committed to the child, the only one truly committed to feeding and changing and wiping the nose of that child. The commitment of everyone else is theoretical. They are concerned about the child in utero but not in reality. For everyone else it is out of womb, out of mind. When it is the mother alone who truly will care then it is the mother alone who has the moral authority to decide.

My counsel to Christians, not an order, a counsel--stop trying to change the laws and start trying to change the world one life, one situation, one mother and her unborn child at a time. That is and always has been the call of our Master. Take a personal step to heal the self-centered sickness of our culture. Make a commitment to ending the violence, as you live by the ethics of the Prince of Peace. Make the world a safe and good place for the children, all the children. That is the only way I know of for us to successfully be advocates for life.

So be it. Amen