Reed Mueller

This week we continued CRCC’s ‘Neglected’ series with a message on the contentious issue of abortion. As I said at the beginning of the message (posted here soon) I know that there are those in our church who hold to what our society deems a pro-life position. I also know that there are others in our congregation who strongly support what our society deems to be a pro-choice position. But most importantly, I was aware as I entered into this topic that there were women in our midst for whom this was anything but theoretical; that is, I knew there were women in attendance who had faced this issue in their own lives and opted either to carry the child to term or elect to have an abortion. All this, the raw experiences and emotions in the room together with the varying opinions on the subject, made it all the more important in my mind to do my best to present a thoughtful, biblical position that would offer a chance to reframe the debate as it stands in our society.

As it stands in our society the debate is really about personal rights. The two key words there are “personal” and “rights.” That is, persons are deemed to have rights under our constitution. The abortion debate, in taking up this concept, focuses on two main issues in response:

• When does a person become a person (people vary in their answers) because only persons have rights?
• When two person’s rights conflict, who’s rights trump the other’s?

These are the questions – as I understand it – that Roe v. Wade deals with. And they are fine, I suppose, from a secular perspective. But they don’t reflect the foundational biblical lens through which I believe we should be looking as we seek to navigate this issue faithfully.

In the first place, the question of when a person becomes a person has been answered differently by faithful Christians down through history. This is not because some people are shying away from the bible while others are holding to it, but rather because the biblical evidence on the issue of when exactly “personhood” begins is open to several valid lines of interpretation. Pillars like St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas all thought that “ensoulment,” or what we might today call ‘personhood,’ began at varying points after conception (here’s an adequate and readily accessible overview). We will never, this side of heaven, come to unanimity on when personhood begins. Besides, whether or not a wombed child is a person isn’t the most basic question, here, from a Christian’s viewpoint. I don’t believe that abortion is wrong on the basis that it is the killing of a person. Yep, you read that correctly (reread it carefully and notice that I don’t say that it is right to kill a person at any stage of development; rather, I said that there is another more foundational reason that abortion is called a sin down through church history). More on that in a moment.

But first, my second point is that as Christians we should really reconsider whether we really have ‘rights’ to do anything we want or not. While our government grants rights to us as its citizens the case can be made that Christians have willingly given up their own rights and instead have committed to following Jesus’ lead in every aspect of our life, which includes how they use their bodies (e.g., see 1 Corinthians 6:13 with regard to sexuality and Philippians 1:20 with regard to life and death and everything in between). More radically, a case has been made by Stanley Hauerwas that as Christians it is not only Christ who has a say with what we do with our bodies, but other Christians as well (note: while I bristle at his language about the non-sacredness of life, I recommend this though-provoking article based upon a talk Hauerwas gave to his denominational leaders about abortion… it challenged, and shaped, my thinking on this issue).

In light of this, I am pro-choice: every Christian has choice as to whether or not they will give to Christ his choice over how they use their body. Do we always? Certainly not, but this is the ideal.  Which gets us closer to the foundational reason why I believe abortion to be wrong.

So what is wrong with abortion? Two things, I think.

Foundationally, I believe abortion to be wrong because we are not, by making that choice, acting in faith: we are not trusting that God is at work in every pregnancy (not that he caused every pregnancy, but rather that he is soveriegnly at work in shaping every wombed child; see Psalm 139, which first about God and his handiwork and only second about when we might think life begins). So, in a sense, it is wrong because it is lacking faith, which is what every person is called to in relation to God.

Tangentially, abortion points to the wrongness of how the church has been the church. We haven’t even approached the call to radically love the other, to bear the burdens of the other, in the form of any woman facing this choice. The truth is that women with an adequate social, economic, and education foundation make the choice of an abortion far less frequently than those without such support (compare the projected decline in abortions using legislative vs/or economic means). I am convinced that we must as a church do a much better job supporting those who need our help: this includes not only the unborn but the women who carry them. We must stand for, not against, women in difficult circumstance. We must lobby for better support from our government on their behalf. But most importantly, we must be ready to offer 100% support, in the form of love, financial assistance, education, or housing, to any woman who has need in this area.

More on this tomorrow when I begin to deal with the questions given to me after service… the first of which is this: “I understand that abortion is wrong for birth control methods, but what about in cases of rape or incest… is it really wrong then?”