Category: Articles & papers

Dear Dr. Moore,

I know you don’t believe in in vitro fertilization, but my wife and I found it was a good solution to our infertility problem. We created multiple embryos, and carried two to term. We cannot afford any other children, so another round of pregnancies is not an option. Our quiver’s full. My conscience is bothering me a little, though, since we banked a number of other fertilized embryos, just in case the first round didn’t take. Do we have any responsibility for these embryos?

Sincerely, A Stressed Dad

Dear Stressed Dad,

Your quiver’s fuller than you think.

You’re right that there are complex ethical questions regarding IVF, and I’d be happy to have that discussion later. Once IVF has been done, though, the issues are simple, even if the consequences are complex.

In a Christian vision of reality there is no such thing as an “almost person,” which is what we think with the abstraction of “fertilized embryos.” Someone is either a human person, and therefore my neighbor, or not. You do not have “frozen embryos.” You have children, frozen in this cruelly clinical world of suspended animation.

It is one thing to decide you can’t afford to have children, before you conceive children, just as it is one thing to decide you can’t afford to marry, before you marry. You’re married though, and you’ve conceived children. You have an obligation to them. The one who does not care for his own household is, the Apostle Paul says, “worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim. 5:8).

This doesn’t mean your game-plan is easy. There’s a cross to take up here. The path from frozen storage to birth is difficult, whether through bearing those children or making an adoption plan for them into loving families. But these are not things; these are persons, worthy of love and respect and sacrifice.

I’d advise you to meet with some respected spiritual advisers, to look at your situation and come up with a map to take responsibility for your children. The first step is to start thinking of them that way, not as your “embryos” or a project to be managed, but as your children, your neighbors, and the “least of these,” who bear the image of our Lord Jesus.

Your conscience might seem to be a nuisance to you; it does to all of us sometimes. But a nagging conscience can be a sign of grace. It might be that what you are hearing is a happy foretaste of obedience to Christ, as you hear his voice saying, “I was frozen and you remembered me.”

Reprinted with permission from the author; originally posted on Moore to the Point.

Birth control is a contentious issue, and one which seems to be open to interpretation. However, there are several forms of birth control which directly violate other commands of the Bible, specifically the sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.”

We believe that human life is sacred, and that all humans are created in the image of God. This begins with life, that is, at conception. The Bible clearly confirms this by underlining the value of our lives before birth (e.g. Isaiah 46:3-5, Jeremiah 1:5, Psalm 119:73, Psalm 139:13-14, etc.), even tracing them back to the moment of conception on multiple occasions (e.g. Genesis 4:1, Ruth 4:13, Psalm 51:5, Song of Solomon 3:4, etc.) Therefore, anything that destroys this human life is a direct violation of the sixth commandment.

There are many different types of contraception (“birth control”) available today. There are some we dismiss outright as being morally wrong—abortion (which destroys a baby that has implanted into his/her mother’s womb) and intra-uterine devices (which prevents an embryo from implanting into the womb). What many people are not aware of is that all hormonal contraception (e.g. “the pill”) may work by preventing implantation as well.

Most of us wouldn’t think of taking the morning-after pill, but this is the same combination of medications that is found in birth control pills and uses the exact same three ways of action to prevent pregnancy that the pill does. In fact, in many cases, the morning after pill is literally punched out of a birth control pill package and dispensed in a vial with different directions, but it remains the same medication women all over the world use to prevent pregnancy on a month-to-month basis, albeit at a higher dose.

Most hormonal contraceptives contain the two female hormones estrogen and progestin in various forms and combinations. Some contain only progestin (mini pills) and are often prescribed to women who are breastfeeding or experiencing difficulties with side-effects of the estrogen component of most other hormonal contraceptives. Regardless of which type and brand of hormonal contraception used, all prevent pregnancy by the same three ways, which can be viewed as a series of hurdles that one must pass in order to become pregnant. In more detail, hormonal contraception:

1. Prevents ovulation from occurring so no egg can be fertilized;
2. Prevents conception by thickening the cervical mucus to prevent sperm from reaching the egg in case ovulation does take place;
3. Thins the lining of the uterus so that a newly conceived human embryo (often referred to as a “fertilized egg”) will be unable to implant.

Thus, if ovulation occurs, chances are the sperm will not be available to fertilize the egg, but if fertilization occurs, the embryo will not survive because the uterine environment cannot sustain the pregnancy. While the first mechanism of action is the predominant means by which hormonal contraception works and the one that we are most familiar with, the other two are important mechanisms for preventing pregnancy. The prevention of ovulation and sperm passage is contraceptive—that is, it prevents the act of conceiving, the fertilization of an egg—so that a human life is not formed. But it is this third mechanism of action that acts in an intraceptive, life-interrupting way.

How is this possible? Ovulation can take place while using hormonal contraception. Any time ovulation takes place there is the possibility of conception, and pregnancy. We know birth control pills “fail” (a women gets pregnant while taking them) at a rate of 3 out of every 100 women per year. Some of these pregnancies are due to “human error”, that is, not taking the pill exactly as prescribed, for example, by missing a dose, taking the pill late, or taking other medications or herbal products that interfere with the pill. However, in women taking the pill perfectly, pregnancy can still happen. This means that all three mechanisms of action for the pill failed… the baby passed all the hurdles!

What is unknown is how often do the first two mechanisms fail and it is the last mechanism, the prevention of implantation that is responsible for the prevention of pregnancy? How then can pro-life women in good conscience be taking a medication to prevent pregnancy that can also terminate life?

While science clearly proves that human life begins at fertilization, some medical textbooks argue that human life begins at implantation, and many health care professionals do not view human life as innately sacred. This vast difference in world view and definition of life has profound effects and often leads to the provision of confusing and misleading information from most health care professionals when members of our community ask about birth control methods.

For example, if a woman asks whether the birth control pill can terminate life, and the doctor believes human life does not begin until implantation, his/her answer will be no, putting the woman’s mind at ease with misinformation. Yet others, knowing that fertilization is the starting point of each of our lives, do not consider this life to be valuable yet, and also inform patients that the pill can do no harm. It is therefore incredibly important that we are aware of this information.

Finally, if you have been using birth control pills or other forms of hormonal contraception, prayerfully consider other methods that are known not to disrupt life. Children are always a blessing from the Lord, but there may be times when pregnancy is to be avoided. There are other means of avoiding pregnancy that are as effective as hormonal contraception, perhaps without the convenience factor, but also without the fear of unknowingly losing a child.

Hormonal contraception can be used to treat or control a variety of medical conditions. As with any medication, please discuss this with your physician prior to making any changes if you are considering discontinuing your hormonal contraception. Consider that taking this, while being sexually intimate with your spouse, can put the lives of your pre-born children at risk. Above all, while making well-informed decisions that are consistent with Biblical, pro-life views, pray for guidance to do so in a way that glorifies God.

Michelle Van Maanen, BSP, Accredited Canadian Pharmacy Resident (ACPR)
Danielle Van Maanen, BScN, Registered Nurse (RN)

For further information, see also:

Birth Control Pill: Abortifacient and Contraceptive by the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions? by Randy Alcorn

FertilityCare

The Pill—How it Works and Fails by Pharmacists for Life International

Things your Doctor May not Have Told You about Your Birth Control by My Feminine Mind

WOOMB Canada

A woman walked into my study a few days ago. She was nearly naked, wearing only a bra and panties.

There is just one woman in the world who, while dressed like this, can be around me: my wife. But the woman who walked into my study a few days ago was not my wife. I was very embarrassed.

She, however, was not embarrassed at all. Let’s call her: “Shameless.”

The reason Shameless was not embarrassed was because she had swallowed the lie of our modern society. This lie says the following: if the bra and panties are the same color and made of a fabric that can be used in water, then walking around in them is completely different than walking around in underwear because they are, after all, swimwear.

Shameless is a professing Christian, yet, because she has bought into this lie, she has no problem exposing her body to the whole world. I imagine she might be embarrassed to walk in the mall, or visit her grandparents, dressed only in her bra and panties. But for some reason, she does not see any problem in choosing a photo of herself dressed this way as her Facebook profile photo.
That’s how she came into my office: by my computer screen.

I have hundreds of “friends” on Facebook that I hardly know. I accept friend requests from anyone who professes to be Christian, because I want to expand my network of contacts so I can promote the work of the various Reformed organizations and institutions I work with.

However, when a contact posts things on Facebook that promote indecent thoughts, or attitudes or actions that are not Christian, I delete them immediately.

Three reasons

Let me share with you the reasons why I deleted Shameless.

1. Her body belongs to her husband

If she is not married, she must keep her body for her future husband (1 Cor 7:4). Her body is not to be exposed for the world to see, much less is to be displayed on my computer screen.

2. My passion belongs to my wife

Seeing the body of another woman does not promote my sanctification or edify my marriage (Prov. 5:15-20; Job 31:1). God created man so that he experiences a very strong reaction when he sees the body of a woman. This reaction within marriage is beautiful and promotes true love. Outside of marriage it is shameful and brings destruction and sorrow.

In this world, mired as it is in immorality and sexual perversion, vigilance is necessary for a man to keep his sexual purity. When other women present themselves almost naked to him, that surely does not help in his fight against sin.

3. Public nakedness is a denial of Christ’s work

When man fell into sin, his nakedness was exposed. God then gave clothes to cover the shame of Adam and Eve. An animal had to die so that their nakedness was covered. This was a foreshadowing of Christ’s work, in which He was exposed and naked on the cross, taking upon Himself our shame, and shedding his blood for us so we could be covered with the white robes of His righteousness.
The way we dress reflects something about our understanding of the Gospel. When Christian men and women expose their bodies in public, they are obscuring the manifestation of the power of Christ’s work in their lives – instead of dressing in decent apparel, with modesty and good sense, they mimic the world, which glories in its shame.

Conclusion

Sadly many readers will find this article too radical. Christian women can’t wear bikinis? Men should vigilantly avoid looking at such exposed women?

There’s a reason this seems radical: we’re so mired in worldliness that we don’t even notice it. Today’s worldly, superficial Christianity produces worldly, superficial Christians. However Christianity as taught by Christ and his apostles is a total transformation of life in all respects, accompanied by a radical commitment to holiness. The change in us is not meant to be a slight one – we are to be transformed into something else entirely: “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come” (2 Cor 5:17a). Now that’s radical! And that is Christianity!

This article first appeared in Portuguese, and was first published in English in Reformed Perspective (www.ReformedPerspective.ca). It is reprinted here with permission.

Yesterday I was typing the name “Kermit Gosnell,” and my phone auto-corrected the name to “gospel.” I shuddered momentarily. After all, what could be more contradictory than the name of a notorious abortionist on trial for child murder, and the good news of the mercies of God in Christ. My smartphone, it turns out, was smarter than I was.

The Gosnell case is stomach-turning. Testimonies in court point to a sadistic man who would sever the spines of babies, in and out of the womb. They tell of a man so cold-blooded that he would keep the feet of unborn children as trophies of his evil. They speak of a man who would prey upon the poorest and most vulnerable women in his community in order to destroy their lives and those of their children. It’s hard to think of the gospel in the midst of all that evil.

But that’s just the point.

In the crucifixion narrative of Jesus, the gospel writers tell us that he was not hanged alone. On either side were thieves. That word thief” has, I fear, taken the edge off of this scene for many contemporary Westerners. When we think “thief” we tend to imagine a shoplifter at Wal-Mart or a burglar cracking a safe. In this context, though, “thief” communicated a murderous terrorist, feared and reviled by all. Jesus in his crucifixion identified himself with the worst and most violent of sinners, even in terms of the geography of his death.

The one criminal responded the way most of us, left to ourselves, would. He didn’t want repentance but deliverance. He taunted Jesus to rescue him, not from his sin itself but from the consequences of it. This is what Gosnell is seeking, to defend himself in court and escape prosecution. The one we have come to know as “the thief on the cross”, acknowledged the justice of his sentence, and pleaded for mercy. He identified himself with Jesus as King: “Remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.”

The gospel isn’t a mere matter of God exempting people from consequences. We could understand such pardons, handed out for cosmic misdemeanors or victimless crimes. The gospel comes to those who are the horrible, the damned.

How could this murderous doctor walk in every day to a chamber of horrors and do what he did? How could his nurses and assistants suppress the screams of these children, the spattering of blood? They do so by suppressing the conscience and walling over the embedded revelation of the justice of God. They pretend as though there will be no reckoning, no Judgment Seat, that somehow all of this can be kept secret, that they can take these secrets with them to the grave.

The gospel, though, reveals the justice of God. Sin cannot be hidden, and judgment cannot be escaped. The cries of the oppressed, the orphaned, the murdered, are heard, and their Redeemer is strong. Justification isn’t a matter of waving away consequences. It’s a matter of self-crucifixion, of embracing the judgement of God and agreeing with his verdict. And, in Christ, it’s a matter of being joined to another, one against whom no accusation can stand.

The Gosnell case is horrific. It ought to revolt us and to turn our stomachs and to shock our consciences. But Kermit Gosnell’s criminality is one of degree, not of kind. Left to ourselves, we would all be given over the kind of cruelty and rage he displayed. Our hope, and his, cannot be in simply evading consequences. After all, the worst consequence facing Kermit Gosnell is not that he be executed or imprisoned. The worst consequence facing Kermit Gosnell is that he be handed over to being Kermit Gosnell.

If we minimize God’s justice, and ignore the evil here, we eclipse the gospel. But there’s another danger too. Many Christians are rightly upset that the media have ignored the Gosnell trial. Our internal media do the same thing, with our own cosmic crimes against God. Our hope isn’t in indulgence but in the kind of mercy that crucifies and resurrects.

The Kermit Gosnell story is one of severed spines and seared consciences. A gospel of justification without justice cannot picture a holy God. A gospel of justice without justification ultimately leaves us all without hope before the tribunal of God. The gospel of Jesus Christ speaks of both justice and justification, and brings them together in a Man drowning in his own blood at the Place of the Skull.

And on either side of him, there were thieves.

Reprinted with permission from the author; originally posted on Moore to the Point.

Part 3 of 3 of the Abortion Series, originally published in the NRC youth magazine Insight Into in 2008-2009. Reprinted with permission from the authors.

In the first article of this series, Sarah described abortion as the “silent holocaust” and explained what it does to pre-born babies. In the second article, Bruce gave biblical reasons for respecting all life and asked what we do to protect the pre-born. This time, we will take a practical look at how women and men are touched by abortion, and what we are to do about it.

“It hurt my heart so bad. My heart and my body and my spirit were broken in a matter of minutes. I regret what I did so much. I have not smiled truthfully since then.”

Pain
These are the words of a young woman who thought an abortion would be better than a baby. As most people in our society, she was made to believe that her pre-born child was not yet human, but soon after the abortion, she intuitively knew that it had been. Another woman explained, “They told us it would be better since we didn’t have money for yet another baby but instead, my husband and I are troubled daily by feelings of guilt and thoughts of the child we could’ve had.” Abortion clearly has negative physical consequences, but also leaves countless women and men with profound pain, guilt and regret.

Sadly, research shows that Christians also have abortions, including some from our churches. A young woman who became pregnant because of a sinful lifestyle wrote, “I had always believed that I was pro-life until the day I was faced with the decision myself. I grew up in a very strict religious family and was truly afraid that telling my parents that I was pregnant would get me disowned. I’m 27, it’s now almost nine years later, and I still cry about it.” In addition, a young man explained that he was so worried about disappointing his parents that he pressured his girlfriend into having an abortion.

These examples show us that abortions happen because we do not follow the Lord and His commandments. When a pregnancy results from premarital intercourse, abortion can be used to cover up sin. When we do not accept that children are a blessing, we may use abortion as an illegitimate way to plan, instead of trust God’s design for our lives. Or when we altogether ignore what God has to say to us, or that He even exists, we will do whatever we think is right. In other words, there is so much pain because we do not let the Lord’s wise decrees be our guide.

Prevention
Do you wonder what can be done to stop this evil? It is not enough to refrain from having an abortion! James 1 verse 27 tells us that “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” That is a combination of doing and being.

First of all, get up. Get out. Do something about the suffering in the lives of those around you. That also applies to all the pain and suffering resulting from abortion. People need to know what abortion does to pre-born babies and their parents and why it is wrong. The second part says be sanctified and keep yourself unstained from the world. In other words, it isn’t enough to just help those in need. Your life needs to be to God’s honour. We need to know Him personally for time and eternity. What a wonder it would be if the Lord would bind that upon our hearts and work true conversion within us.

Healing
But what about those who have had an abortion? Our nation is in desperate need of repentance, restoration, and healing. Maybe you know someone who has had an abortion, or maybe you have had one yourself. A young woman wrote, “I couldn’t forgive myself. If not for the forgiveness of Christ, I would still be suffering from alcoholism, depression and undefeatable guilt and mourning.”

Since God cannot leave sin unpunished, we are condemned to these feelings of guilt but especially are condemned to eternal death. There is only one path to true restoration. Not by forgiving yourself, but by the gracious forgiveness of God through Christ, who was the only One to pay the death we owe. And that is the only true foundation of doing and being, of meeting needs and walking in purity.

Reaching Out
Finally, we are to show compassion to those who have had abortions and are now struggling with feelings of guilt and depression. Of course, that is not an easy task. It needs much love and wisdom. It needs, above all, the Lord’s help. Without Him we can do nothing. But He is able to bless a simple word, a cup of cold water, or even an arm around the shoulder.

Part 2 of 3 of the Abortion Series, originally published in the NRC youth magazine Insight Into in 2008-2009. Reprinted with permission from the authors.

In the first article of this series, Sarah Maljaars introduced abortion as the “silent holocaust.” This article will address what the Christian response to abortion should be. For many involved in abortion apologetics, or the defence of the pre-born, arguments are made in terms of science and philosophy, but for Christians, these arguments and the underlying beliefs are based on the Bible.

Any response to abortion by a Christian is based on the Bible, which is very clear about life. One of the central arguments regarding abortion in our secular world is based on legal terms including the word human” and “person.” ”

In the past, groups have been recognized as “human,” but not as “persons” under the law, which allowed genocide to occur. This definition is not one we can find in the Bible. In fact, the Bible does not mention the word “human.” The bible refers to man, women, child, son, daughter, and babe.

God does not distinguish between born and pre-born life as can be seen in several places. Elizabeth is recorded in Luke 1 where in verse 36 she “conceived a son” and in verse 57 where “she brought forth a son.” God did not distinguish between the child before and after birth, but called Elizabeth’s child a son beginning at conception. Another example is from Job 3:3, where Job refers to “a man child conceived,” showing again that God provides no distinction after the moment of conception.

One of the common reasons provided for abortion is that the recipient is “not ready for children yet.” This flies in the face of the blessing provided by God, especially because our lives were ordained by God from before our conception. The Bible makes references to prophets (Jeremiah, John the Baptist) and preachers (Paul) who were appointed, called and set apart in the womb.

When we consider the number of abortions that take place daily around the world, especially in Western countries that were founded with Christian principles, it is clear how far society has moved. Even during the period known as the dark ages in Europe, when daily life was coarse and uncivilized (in our eyes), expectant mothers were treated with great respect. They were provided with the best possible food, rest, and the care they needed. Maltreatment of any expectant mother was met with stiff punishment because people recognized how fragile the developing child was.

Fast forward to our modern Western society, and we notice a remarkable change. Our “enlightened” society has come to despise the blessing of children with many couples opting to not have any children, or only have one. In some cases, expecting mothers are ridiculed, especially young women who have opted not to abort. Along with this transformation there is a different attitude towards life. Instead of respecting life in the womb, as God’s Word does, our society only protects pre-born life when individuals decide that the life is wanted. Parents who are happy to be expecting a baby celebrate as though life has already begun. If their child is born prematurely they would obviously want the state to recognize their child as a legal “person”, so that she or he could receive the necessary health care. However, parents who do not welcome a pregnancy argue that life does not begin until the baby is actually born, so that they can justify having an abortion.

Even though many parents believe that they are only aborting a lifeless, unwanted piece of tissue, we know that they are actually killing a helpless human being. The Bible makes clear references to the deliberate killing of innocent human beings. In Deuteronomy 27:25 we read, “Cursed be he that taketh reward to slay an innocent person.” This very statement applies to every abortion clinic and hospital where doctors and nurses are paid to perform abortions. But can it also apply to others?

In Canada, our tax dollars pay for abortions performed under the guise of “healthcare,” in spite of abortion not being a medically necessary procedure. We might defend ourselves from any involvement in this system where we cannot choose how our tax money is spent, but are we concerned about it? Do we bring our concerns to those in government who do make the decisions? Are we involved in the fight to end abortion? As Christians we have the scriptural knowledge that all life, especially that of the pre-born, is precious. With that knowledge we have the responsibility to protect the innocent and helpless lives of the unborn through any means we can use.

Next: Abortion: A Practical Outlook by Maaike Rosendal

Part 1 of 3 of the Abortion Series, originally published in the NRC youth magazine Insight Into in 2008-2009. Reprinted with permission from the authors.

Henry was surrounded by an angry gang of Polish boys. The biggest boy leered and snarled into Henry’s frightened face. “Ty podły Żydzie,” he spat, “You rotten Jews… you’d better run!”

Gangs and bullies were only the beginning of the nightmare Henry and the rest of his Jewish family were about to experience. After the Nazis invaded Poland, Henry’s father was taken away by the Gestapo, tortured, and killed. Henry’s sister was first forced into the Warsaw ghetto, and eventually died in Treblinka. The rest of the family were taken to Auschwitz. Henry and his brother survived the war making machinery and munitions for the Nazis in Auschwitz. His mother died in a gas chamber.

Dr. Henry Morgentaler is not so well known in Canada for his experiences as a Polish Jew who survived the Holocaust. However, on October 10, 2008, Morgentaler was awarded the Order of Canada for his role in leading a holocaust of another kind: only this time, the victims are pre-born children, and the method of extermination is abortion.

Abortion is a holocaust that occurs every day in North America and around the world. But instead of suffocating in gas chambers, the victims of this holocaust are murdered within the sterile, white-washed walls of hospital rooms. Abortion is a procedure that ends a woman’s pregnancy. In 1988, Morgentaler challenged the law in Canada that restricted abortion. The Supreme Court ruled in his favour, and since then, there has been no law limiting access to abortions in Canada. During this time, Morgentaler alone has performed more than 100,000 abortions.

Most abortions are done on women who are still in their first three months of pregnancy. To perform an abortion, a doctor will open a woman’s cervix and insert a powerful suction tube with a sharp cutting edge. The suction pulls apart the body of the developing baby and sucks placenta, blood, amniotic fluid, and foetal body parts into a collection container.

Some abortions are done later on in pregnancy. To carry out a “partial-birth” abortion, a doctor reaches into the uterus, takes hold of the pre-born baby’s leg with forceps, and pulls the baby by its legs into the birth canal. At this point the baby is alive, but just the head is inside the womb. Then the doctor forces scissors into the back of the baby’s skull and spreads the tips of the scissors apart to make the wound bigger. Next, the doctor replaces the scissors with a suction tube that sucks the baby’s brains out. The head collapses and is removed from the uterus.

These procedures are both completely legal in Canada. In fact, most abortions are even paid for by Canadian taxpayers through the publicly funded health care system. Since 1969, when abortion first became legal, over three million pre-born babies have died from abortion in Canada. In the United States abortion has been legal since 1973. Since then, there have been over 48 million abortions in the US, and the numbers of abortions increase every day.

How do so many people justify killing defenceless babies? Basically, people who think abortion is okay do not believe that pre-born babies are people. When they talk about the pre-born, they use technical words like “fetus” or “embryo”. Using these words makes it easier to think of pre-born babies as mere “blobs of tissue”. If the doctor is just getting rid of a chunk of flesh growing in the mother’s uterus, then there is nothing wrong with having an abortion, right?

Wrong. The pre-born are much more than a clump of cells. Science shows that from the moment of conception, when the sperm and the egg unite, the pre-born child is a distinct, living, whole human being. At this moment, the pre-born child has all the genetic information that it needs to develop into a unique individual with his or her own hair color, body shape, and personality. All it must do now is grow and develop—just like a newborn, toddler or teenager!

Just as Jews were denied legal status as persons under the Third Reich, pre-born children are dismissed as less than human in our society today. Jews living in Nazi Germany were unprepared and outnumbered. Pre-born children are vulnerable and voiceless. Millions have been robbed of their dignity and being. That is what happens when we fail to protect the weakest people in our society: they wind up in mass graves near Auschwitz, or garbage bins outside hospital doors.

Unfortunately, Morgentaler did not learn from the last Holocaust.

Next: Abortion: A Christian Response by Bruce Aleman

 

The nation is watching, with horror and disgust, news reports out of Connecticut of a horrific act of violence against an elementary school filled with defenseless children. While every act of murder ought to provoke outrage, there’s something especially condemnable about the murder of children. I think there’s a reason for that.

In the hours after the shooting, Jewish political and cultural commentator John Podhoretz called attention to a concept most Americans don’t like to think about at Christmastime, if ever: hell. Podhoretz noted the heightened iniquity of child sacrifice in the Hebrew Scriptures’ denunciation of the god Moloch. Moloch, of course, was a blood-thirsty deity who demanded his followers to pour out the lives of their children. The valley of this atrocity was called Gehenna. Jesus pointed to Gehenna when he told us about hell.

Throughout the history of the universe, evil has manifested a dark form of violence specifically toward children. Not only did the Canaanite nations demand the blood of babies, but the Bible shows where at points of redemptive crisis, the powers of evil have lashed out at children. Pharaoh saw God’s blessing of Israelite children as a curse and demanded they be snuffed out by the power of his armed thugs. And, of course, the Christmas narrative we read together this time of year is overshadowed by an act of horrific mass murder of children. King Herod, seeing his throne threatened, demands the slaughter of innocent children.

Jesus was not born into a gauzy, sentimental winter wonderland of sweetly-singing angels and cute reindeer nuzzling one another at the side of his manger. He was born into a war-zone. And at the very rumor of his coming, Herod vowed to see him dead, right along with thousands of his brothers. History in Bethlehem, as before and as now, is riddled with the bodies of murdered children.

Why?

There are more factors at work here than just impersonal psychology and sociology. “The course of this world,” we’re told, is driven along by “the prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2:2). And behind all of that is a bloody skirmish. Satan is, Jesus tells us, a “murderer from the beginning” because he hates life itself. And he hates the life of children, particularly, because they picture something true about Jesus of Nazareth.

Jesus showed his disciple John that behind the particulars of history there’s another, darker, story going on. Jesus showed the picture of a woman giving birth to a child, with a dragon crouching before her to devour the baby (Rev. 12:4). When the woman and her child escaped, the dragon “became furious with the woman and went out to make war on the rest of her offspring” (Rev. 12:17), and has done so ever since.

Satan hates children because he hates Jesus. When evil destroys “the least of these” (Matt. 25:40, 45), the most vulnerable among us, it destroys a picture of Jesus himself, of the child delivered by the woman who crushes the head of our reptilian overlord (Gen. 3:15). The demonic powers know that the human race is saved, and they’re vanquished, by a child born of woman (Gal. 4:4; 1 Tim. 2:15). And so they hate the children who bear his nature.

Violence against children is also peculiarly satanic because it destroys the very picture of newness of life and dependent trust that characterizes life in the kingdom of God (Matt. 18:4). Children are a blessing, and that enrages the horrifying nature of those who seek only to kill and to destroy (Jn. 10:10).

The satanic powers want the kingdoms of the universe, and a child uproots their reign.

Let’s not offer pat, easy answers to the grieving parents and communities in Connecticut. We don’t fully understand the mystery of iniquity. We don’t know why God didn’t stop this from happening. But we do know what this act is: it’s satanic, and we should say so.

Let’s grieve for the innocent. Let’s demand justice for the guilty. And let’s rage against the Reptile behind it all.

As we do so, let’s remember that Bethlehem was an act of war. Let’s remember that the One born there is a prince of peace who will crush the skull of the ancient murderer of Eden. Let’s pray for the Second Coming of Mary’s son. And, as we sing our Christmas carols, let’s look into the slitted eyes of Satan as we promise him the threat of his coming crushed skull.

The mystery of evil is a declaration of war on the peace of God’s creation. The war goes on, but not for long. And sometimes the most warlike thing we can say, in an inhuman murderous age like this one, is “It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas.”

Reprinted with permission from the author; originally posted on Moore to the Point.

In 2010 the Synod of the Netherlands Reformed Congregations in North America approved a report on In Vitro Fertilization, which was a 75-page, scientific and Biblical analysis of this so-called reproductive technology. The Reformed Pro-Lifer has asked one of the co-authors of this report to summarize the document. While much more could be said about this topic, please keep in mind the following is a summary of the original report. We are grateful for Rev. Sonnevelt’s willingness to provide this to us, and for the opportunity to make it available to our readers.

INTRODUCTION

Due to increasing medical and technological advances, as individuals, office-bearers, and as a church family we are also confronted with more difficult decisions. This is especially true when married couples are unable to naturally conceive a child, and some are considering In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) as an option while others have already made use of this technology.
Technically speaking, it is possible to use IVF in such a way that there is no loss of life involved. Some couples choose to have only one egg cell (or two) harvested from the woman and to have this fertilized by the sperm of the husband in a laboratory setting. They refrain from quality control and have all zygotes implanted into the uterus of the woman, hoping that this may lead to further gestation and the birth of a healthy child. As no extra embryos are engendered or frozen, the sixth commandment is not violated. And as there is no third party (donating ova or sperm), the seventh commandment is not transgressed. Some of these couples explain that they follow this method in dependency upon the Lord. They defend their stance by saying that the abuse of a method does not discard a proper use of it.

Thus, we need to consider whether it is right, from a Biblical and moral perspective:

1. To make use of this method even when it is strictly confined to the two marriage partners;
2. To use IVF when no embryos are lost in the process due to generally practiced “quality control”;
3. To let some of the newly conceived embryos be frozen even when the couple says they want to implant these in the future?

Some underlying questions and points for further reflection:

1. Is the beginning of a human being not something that takes place, under God’s blessing, as a result of the intimate union between a man and his wife? Is IVF not a crossing of boundaries marked by the Creator and a violation of the dignity of the human life? Can the (natural and understandable) desire for children co-exist with the application of a method like IVF?
2. Is it legitimate to make use of a method that could only be established after many experiments and with the loss of much human life, a method that leads many today to choose the best embryos they want and to reject those of an “inferior quality”?
3. Is it acceptable to freeze tiny human beings in such a way? What are the implications of the fact that some of them may not survive this process? What to do with such embryos when the parents change their mind about using all of them or pass away as a result of an accident, etc.?

1. IN VITRO FERTILIZATION – WHAT IS IT?

A. A New Technique

In Vitro Fertilization is a medical procedure in which mature egg cells are removed from a woman’s ovary after she has taken fertility drugs to cause a number of eggs to mature at the same time. Semen is collected from the man, which is joined with the egg in a glass dish where conception then takes place. New life is allowed to develop for some days, and either inserted into the uterus of the same or another woman for normal gestation and birth, or frozen and stored for later use.

Infertility is a growing problem and there has been a corresponding growth in reproductive technologies to provide a solution. An entire “industry” has emerged with little or no regulations to protect the interests of the men, women or children involved. The many techniques used to overcome infertility have profound moral implications that we should be aware of. For example, children produced through technical processes are generally subjected to “quality control” and eliminated if found “defective,” resulting in the death of countless newly conceived human beings. Yet, some find it unnecessary to examine the morality of IVF if it is practiced in the way the introduction describes it, involving a husband and wife who use means to overcome a medical problem: infertility. But the question must be asked: Does the procedure violate human dignity and the marriage act and should it be avoided? Is IVF moral or immoral?

Obviously, IVF eliminates the marriage act as the means of achieving pregnancy. New life is not created through an act of love in the closest union possible between husband and wife but by a laboratory procedure. Husband and wife are merely sources for the “raw materials” which are manipulated by a technician to cause the sperm to fertilize the egg. Not infrequently, “donor” eggs or sperm are used. Thus, the genetic father or mother of the child could be someone from outside the marriage, causing much confusion for the child. The identity of the “donor” may never be known, which purposely deprives the child of an awareness of his or her own lineage.

Nevertheless, even if the egg and sperm come from husband and wife, are there not other moral issues that arise? Routinely, several embryos are brought into existence but only those with the most potential are implanted in the womb. The others are discarded or used for experiments. This is a terrible offense against human life. While a little baby may be born because of IVF, many other lives are usually snuffed out in the process.

IVF is also very expensive, often costing at least $10,000 per attempt, while over 75% of the embryos created perish at some point in the process. In order to reduce costs and increase success rates, doctors may implant five or more embryos in the mother’s womb. This may result in more babies than a couple wants. To avoid carrying and giving birth to “too many” babies, doctors engage in what is called fetal or selective “reduction,” which means babies in utero are monitored to see which are to be eliminated. Then the “less desirable” babies are killed by filling a syringe with potassium chloride and thrusting the needle into the selected baby’s heart. The potassium chloride kills the baby within minutes, and he or she is expelled as a miscarriage. Again we see the unspeakable diminishing of the value of human life which can arise from this procedure.

Not everyone who has had a child through IVF has used donor eggs or sperm or killed unwanted babies in the course of the pregnancy. Yet there is still a moral problem with the procedure itself. The dehumanizing aspects of this procedure are even evident in the very language associated with it, such as reproductive technology industry, products of conception, and reduction. Inherent in IVF is the treatment of children, in their very coming into being, as less than human beings.

B. Designer Babies

Sperm and eggs are being bought and sold, and wombs are being rented. Typical prices for sperm are $1,800, for ova $6,500, and for surrogate motherhood $45,000. Couples from around the world come to the US to choose not only the sex of their child but also “cosmetic” features, such as hair and eye color. Incredibly expensive genetic testing also “helps” to identify defects so that children of inferior quality can be aborted. All of these are the first steps toward the “designer baby.”

Many of these technologies border on the quality of human life ethic, while the Bible’s eternal perspective teaches us that human life itself is of higher value. In Exodus 4:11 God speaks to Moses: “Who hath made man’s mouth? Or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing or the blind? Have not I, the LORD?” The fact that God creates human beings in His image establishes value, not our height, or sight, or hearing.

We must realize that values like unpredictability, diversity, and uniqueness are central to God’s creation. Some genetic technologies violate these values. Does man know how to exercise wisely the power and control that these procedures bring? With the reality of sin ever before us, it is difficult to answer in the affirmative. That is why the prudent, biblical stance is that if a procedure will likely and eventually violate biblical guidelines, it is imperative to turn around and not to proceed at all.

C. Immoral Madness

In July 2009, British scientists reported having coaxed the first human sperm cells from embryonic stem cells. They used days-old human embryos, leftovers from IVF treatment, and isolated stem cells out of them. After being treated chemically, the stem cells developed into full-grown sperm cells within a couple of weeks. This research triggered criticism, not only because of the low quality of the developed sperm cells, but also because of ethical objections to this method. Interviewed by the BBC, Josephine Quintaville declared, “This is an example of immoral madness. Perfectly viable embryos have been destroyed in order to create sperm over which there will be huge questions of their healthiness and viability. It’s taking one life in order to perhaps create another. I’m very much in favour of curing infertility, but I don’t think you can do whatever you like.”

Current legislation in the United Kingdom forbids use of this sperm for the creation of children but in most countries public policies lag behind the pace in which technology advances. While the researchers denied having the intention of “producing human life in a dish,” others have already questioned whether women will still need a man to create a child in the future, thereby further eroding God’s institutions.

D. Frozen Embryos

In Vitro Fertilization has also produced another significant side effect, which is the presence of over 400,000 frozen embryos in the United States alone. This number grows each year when people utilizing IVF no longer want the embryos, leaving clinics with the dilemma of whether to sustain them in the frozen state or discard them. Embryos can remain viable for a decade or more if they are properly frozen, but not all survive when thawed. Some couples and clinics donate frozen embryos to scientific research, but this raises profound ethical questions due to the nature of the research and the loss of human life involved.

The frozen embryos press our society with the question of how to view them: Are they of value and worth? Most couples are not happy with destroying the embryos they created through IVF. This dilemma has meanwhile created the opportunity for people to even adopt frozen embryos. During congressional hearings concerning stem-cell research, John Borden stood before the panel with both his sons in his arms and asked, “Which one of my children would you kill?” John and his wife, Lucinda, unable to have children of their own, adopted frozen embryos that were “left over” from In Vitro Fertilization. Their striking testimony demonstrated that embryos are human beings in an early stage of development and therefore should not be sacrificed for embryonic stem-cell research.

If life begins at conception (as the Bible teaches us), reproductive technology has produced a gut-wrenching dilemma, in particular because there is no ethical consensus in the culture. Sadly, by disregarding God’s clear directives (e.g., Psalm 139:16), we are now left to deal with this consequence of In Vitro Fertilization, and the large majority of these small human beings will die when used for research or by being left in the freezer for too long.

2. WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS

A. God – the Creator of Life

Many texts in God’s Word shed light on the beginning of life. The act of creation uniquely belongs to a Triune God alone, as evident from some of the very first words spoken in Scripture, “Let Us make man” (Gen. 1:26). Moreover, in Isaiah 44:24 we read, “Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, and He that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by Myself.”

Consider also Job 10:10-12 and 31:15, Ecclesiastes 11:5, and Isaiah 44:2 and 46:3. These passages show that God’s eye is upon everything that has been made, in a special sense upon living creatures, and in a very special sense upon human beings. His eye is also upon the children (Jonah 4:11), upon the unborn child (Ps. 139:14-16), and even upon the seed out of which children come into existence (Gen. 39:8-10).

B. Man – A Unity of Body and Soul

Basic biology shows us that conception is the beginning of a new individual so even at the first, single-cell stage of existence it is fully a human being. It is human, alive, and genetically distinct from the mother, and breathes and consumes nutrients as a whole, separate being. It only needs to grow and develop in the right environment to become an embryo and then a fetus, just like it will become an infant, toddler, child, adolescent, and finally an adult. This, by itself, should be enough to reject abortion and all IVF practices which lead to the death of the unborn child.

Another question is whether an unborn child already has a soul. The Bible instructs us that man consists of two essential elements: body and soul, as can be seen in the following verses.

• “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Gen. 2:7).
• “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt. 10:28).

God made our bodies in a wondrous manner, about which the poet of Psalm 139 cried out, “I will praise Thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are Thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well” (vs. 14). God also gave man a never-dying soul. This soul, the principle of life in a physical, moral, and spiritual sense, is a very precious gift. “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? And what shall a man give in exchange for his soul” (Matt. 16:26).

The debate about when the soul enters the body of a human being has gained a new dimension in light of the abortion movement. Many regard an unborn baby as a cluster of human cells without personhood, which has far-reaching consequences. According to God’s Word, a human being consists of body and soul. Denying the unborn child a soul is the equivalent of saying that he or she is not fully a human person yet.

The Scriptures give a strong indication that every person has a soul from the time of conception. We read that Jeremiah was already sanctified and ordained as a prophet while in the womb (Jer. 1:4-5), and that John the Baptist leapt for joy in his mother’s womb when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, who was pregnant with the Lord Jesus (Luke 1:41, 44). Other significant texts show that man is considered a sinner by God from the time of his conception, which implies the existence of a soul.

• “Behold I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Ps. 51:5).
• “Among whom also we had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh and of the mind; and were by nature children of wrath, even as others” (Eph. 2:3).

Although Rev. G.H. Kersten says in his Reformed Dogmatics that it cannot be known with certainty when the soul enters the body, he writes in his explanation of the Heidelberg Catechism, “From the hour of our conception until we draw our last breath, our sins cry out for the just penalty of death” (page 5). Additionally, the Heidelberg Catechism, when speaking about the profit of “Christ’s holy conception and nativity” says “That He is our Mediator, and with His innocence and perfect holiness, covers in the sight of God, my sins, wherein I was conceived and brought forth” (Lord’s Day 14, Question and Answer 36).

While it is hard to prove the soul’s presence at conception, this is true at any time. We know that all genetic material is present at conception; nothing is added later. And Scripture passages overwhelmingly suggest that human beings have a soul from the very moment of conception. The implications regarding the issue of IVF is that every time an embryo is killed in the process, either intentionally or unintentionally, and every time that a frozen embryo does not survive the procedure to which it is subjected, not only human life is lost, but a precious soul also enters eternity.

C. Children – a Gift of God

God alone is the Author of life and children are an inheritance from Him, as we can see in Psalm 127:3: “Lo children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is His reward.” Couples who are without children often experience this as a heavy cross. It is important that office-bearers have an eye for this sorrow and approach childless couples with compassion.

In biblical times, childlessness was a double cross, not only because of the natural desire inherent to all human beings, but also since God’s blessing was seen in outward prosperity more than in the New Testament. Furthermore, since God had promised the Savior’s birth in due time, having no children meant that the Messiah could not be born from or greeted by one’s no descendants, nor could they receive His blessings in the future.

The Bible tells us about several barren women, some of whom were later blessed with children. We read about Sarah in Genesis 16:1-5, which shows that childlessness has been an issue almost from the dawn of history. We read about Rebekah in Genesis 25:21. It is remarkable that the wives of the first two patriarchs were unable to conceive until God opened their wombs, which makes the birth of Israel as a nation and even greater wonder of sovereign grace and supernatural power. Genesis 29 and 30 speaks about Rachel, for whom receiving a child had become an obsession, throwing even the favor of the Lord into the background. Even when she gave birth to Joseph, she was not satisfied, which ultimately became her ruin as she died while giving birth to Benjamin.

This history contains a solemn warning. How much reason there is for childless couples to watch against crossing the boundaries and becoming inordinate in their desire! God’s Word says, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matt. 6:33). Besides, it is the task of office-bearers to speak about these things in a pastoral way. What is the motive in seeking parenthood? Are there other desires, more important desires, in their lives? In seeking to receive a child and in asking for a child, is there something of Hannah’s desire and submission? For Hannah, childlessness was a cause of much grief, as we can read in 1 Samuel 1:6-11. She may have even wondered whether the Lord had rejected her, which was the greatest grief for her God-fearing soul. The outcome of this history shows that the Lord undertook for her. Indeed, children are a gift of the Lord.

D. God’s Sovereignty and Man’s Responsibility

When thinking about childlessness and the issue of IVF, we should also take into account what the Bible says about God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility. In Genesis 1:26 and following, God created humans––both male and female––in His image and then gave them the charge to “be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (1:28). Verse 29 extends this dominion to plants, trees, and seeds. Although colored by the reality of human sin, this dominion status is repeated for Noah in Genesis 9:1-2. Reproductive and genetic technologies fall under the stewardship responsibility of humans as well.

This has powerful implications. While these technologies give humans power never realized before, we must remember that God is the Creator and we are only creatures. He is sovereign; we are stewards. And due to sin we have an inborn inclination to take matters into our own hands. Our will being totally depraved, we are prone to raise our fist against the Lord and to question His wisdom and goodness concerning His ways. We want to be our own master, and it is only by grace when we may learn to bow under God’s sovereign will.

E. The Providence of the Lord

Another biblical truth, closely connected with those mentioned in the previous paragraph, is that of God’s providence. Let us quote from our confession, The Heidelberg Catechism, Lord’s Day 10.

Q. 27. What dost thou mean by the providence of God?
A. The almighty and everywhere present power of God; whereby, as it were by His hand, He upholds and governs heaven, earth, and all creatures; so that herbs and grass, rain and drought, fruitful and barren years, meat and drink, health and sickness, riches and poverty, yea, and all things come, not by chance, but by His fatherly hand.

Q. 28. What advantage is it to us to know that God has created, and by His providence doth still uphold all things?
A. That we may be patient in adversity thankful in prosperity; and that in all things, which may hereafter befall us, we place our firm trust in our faithful God and Father, that nothing shall separate us from His love; since all creatures are so in His hand, that without His will they cannot so much as move.

3. CONSIDERATIONS

A. Reflections – Biblical and Pastoral

We feel much empathy for married couples who struggle with infertility and yearn to have children. Yet we should not forget that God is free and sovereign in all His dealings. We ought to realize that all human plans fail when He does not add His blessing. As well, we should be careful not to cross the boundaries of what is permitted in light of God’s Word.

The examples of Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Hannah show that God is a surprising God. “Is anything too hard for the LORD?” (Gen. 18:14). “Behold, I am the God of all flesh: is there anything too hard for Me?” (Jer. 32:27). “For with God nothing shall be impossible” (Luke 1:37). It would be to God’s honor if children are received in the way of a wonder, just as it would to God’s honor if He grants submission to His will, even in withholding what is dearest to us. There is sweetness in such submission to Him (1 Sam. 1:8).

Since man is the crown of God’s creation, humans may never be used as a means to an end, not even to overcome infertility. In IVF, children are produced through a technical process and in their very coming into existence they are subjected to the arbitrary choices of those bringing them into being, rather than brought about by the providence of the Author of creation Himself. Bringing the sperm and egg together in a glass dish to bring about fertilization is a highly technological procedure in which procreation and marital intercourse are disconnected (see the article of Prof. Dr. W.H. Velema under Appendix 3 of the original report). It is therefore our conviction that in following this procedure a man and woman, even when it concerns a married couple, transgress the God-given boundaries.

Moreover, this procedure has been established at the expense of many lives of unborn children and continues to do so. It has also opened the way to a host of other problems, as discussed previously. Even if a couple uses IVF by only using one or two eggs, having all embryos implanted, and refraining from freezing them, this way of using the procedure is only possible due to years of experimentation which has costs hundreds of thousands of embryos their lives.

Finally, IVF has also opened the door to a host of other horrible sins. Use of donor eggs and sperm, also by gay and lesbian couples, clearly infringes upon the marriage union and breaks the seventh commandment of God’s holy law. The very children who must gratify the desires of their genetic, biological, or social parents have to pay the price, many of whom have much higher rates of sustaining genetic or birth defects. Can we close our eyes to all these side effects of this technology in our apocalyptic culture? Is it fair and realistic to highlight a so-called proper use of this technology when there is so much abuse of it? Should we not even hate the garment spotted by the flesh (Jude:23)?

B. How to Overcome Fertility – Lawful and Unlawful Means

The Bible is not against using means, provided that those means are legitimate and are sought in dependency upon the Lord. Any number of morally acceptable interventions may be used to take away infertility. For instance, surgery can overcome tubal blockages in the male or female reproductive system; fertility drugs may be used, with the caution that multiple pregnancies may put mother and infants at risk; and ways to track natural reproductive cycles may enhance the chances for achieving pregnancy.

The church has great compassion for those who suffer from infertility. Out of love for all human life and respect for the integrity of marital relations, however, the church teaches that some means of trying to achieve pregnancy are illicit. Some of these means and methods actually involve the taking of innocent human life, or treating human life as a means toward the end of “manufacturing a product.” Methods such as these do violence to the dignity of the human person.

In our modern Western world, we have a tendency to think that we can solve all our problems with the right “technology” but children were never intended to be engendered by technology or produced by an industry. For that reason, we reject IVF as a God-dishonoring and dehumanizing practice, not acceptable in any form or under any circumstances. In seeking the blessing of children, we must only use methods of which we can expect that God’s blessing and favor may rest upon them.

4. CONCLUSION

Our conclusions regarding In Vitro Fertilization are not rooted in one single motive but founded upon several arguments, each of which is sufficient to denounce the method of “producing babies” outside the mother’s womb and disconnected from the physical union between a man and his wife. Taken together, these arguments are all the more compelling to reject IVF as a way of alleviating the problem of infertility.

Let us take a firm stance in these troublesome times in which God’s Word is being undermined and in which the very foundations of life are shaking. Life is life, right from conception. From a scriptural as well as scientific viewpoint, there is no doubt about this fact. What is conceived in a Petri dish is not potential life either, but a very small human being with a soul for eternity.
Finally, when we see the developments in our world today, we must hang our heads in shame. When we notice the general declension in our culture, we should weep. How has it come so far? Did all these things go on in our nations and in our midst, while we were fast asleep? Instructed in the truth, we can no longer claim ignorance.

May the Lord grant unto us a heartfelt repentance and a turning from the paths of evil! May our ways be directed according to His Word, of which David said, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path” (Ps. 119:105).

Can you imagine your 17 year old daughter having an abortion? Or the girl who sits behind you in Gr.12 home-room? This may or may not come as a shock but it is happening among our Christian friends and in our Reformed families. The sad and distressing reality is: abortion is happening right in God’s family.

Secrecy

Of course, this has been a well-kept secret – at least from parents and those who “must never know.” And yet there is talk. The burden of guilt is felt and a friend is told. Or a counsellor. I’ve encountered it personally. Others who have contact with young Reformed sisters in different areas of the country have confirmed to me that more than a few of our very own young ladies have visited an abortion clinic to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy.

Why?

So why is this happening? Surely our young people know it is wrong to murder their unborn child? We teach this at home, school and church. We write letters to our politicians and newspapers. We take our teens to the March for Life walks. And yet, some who publicly parade with placards on Parliament Hill one month, find themselves the next month quietly visiting an abortion clinic for a consultation. What is going through their minds?

Motives

We need to pay attention to their motivation. It’s true for all of us that our actions flow out of our desires. When facing temptation, each of us will decide to do what we most want to do at that moment. It’s just like the decision some make to have sex before marriage. They know God is against it. They likely have seen certain embarrassing results of it in the lives of other church people, they know what can happen, but in that moment of decision the desire for pleasure (theirs, that of their partner or both) exceeds the desire to please God. And the potential consequences are irrationally pushed out of their mind thinking, “That won’t happen to me!”

If we wish to have our teens and young adults keep their bodies sexually pure, we need to convince them that the greatest pleasure ultimately comes from seeking to please God in every decision. Just like with Eve, reaching for the forbidden fruit comes from the conviction that doing so will result in a better outcome – usually some form of self-pleasure. Yet we know what misery followed Eve’s decision – and every such decision since! But if we and our children understand that God will freely give us pleasure and fulfillment as a gift so long as we give our heart to Him in love and obedience, that will be the strongest defence against sexual temptation.

Fear

When it comes to the decision to abort, it’s not pleasure which motivates but most often fear. Consider the predicament one of our 17 year old girls might be in when she learns she is pregnant. All her life her parents have taught her that pre-marital sex is a sin. The feeling of her personal shame is high. She realizes all at once that if this comes out in the open, her parents and family will carry the shame as well – and they will be upset! Perhaps her father is an elder – what a public embarrassment for him! She anticipates an angry response.

She also worries greatly whether she will be able to raise this child on her own, whether she will be capable as a mother. The more she thinks about the future of her child, the more anxious she becomes: will he be labelled all his life? Maybe my child will be picked on and bullied. As an unwed mother, she thinks her reputation will follow her all her life and her child will have to always live with a social stigma too. The window of opportunity to decide is short (soon she’ll start to show!) – and she concludes: I can’t do it! I won’t do it!

Accessibility

When these fears are at their height, a young pregnant woman searches in desperation for a solution – and she finds a straight-forward one via the internet at the abortion clinic. She can’t talk to her parents and she dare not talk to her friends or even the child’s father – no one must know! Fear drives her to be anonymous and to seek a quick remedy – and both are freely offered at the local abortion clinic. Over the last 30 years, these clinics have not only sprung up in many Canadian communities but they are prominently advertised and their costs are covered by the government. Abortion is promoted as a socially acceptable, ‘easy’ and even ‘safe’ solution to the ‘problem’ of an unwanted pregnancy.

Imagine being in the shoes of such a young lady. You only have yourself to reason with, or possibly the people at the clinic who favour abortion. Many thoughts go through your mind: “It’s not that different from using birth-control is it? If only I’d been smarter, I wouldn’t have gotten pregnant – one visit to the clinic and my problem is over! I’ve only been pregnant three weeks – it’s not really a baby in there yet, is it? Having an abortion this early is not murder – it’s just a group of cells! It’s just a miscarriage that’s been organized, that’s all. God won’t mind because He knows it was all a mistake and I’m too young to be a mother.” So many emotions, so many thoughts (many not rational), but in the end the immaturity of youth, a frantic need for a quick and quiet solution, and the lack of a supportive Christian sounding board makes the choice to abort the most attractive at that moment. What she wants most at that moment is to avoid the troubles of admitting her sin – and the die is cast.

Climate Change

That is what we as church community and as families must change – the forceful pressures which make our daughters feel trapped in the consequences of their actions. Let me be crystal clear: we must not dumb-down or minimize the sin of pre-marital sex. It remains contrary to God’s will. But there is forgiveness in the blood of Christ for all who repent – forgiveness and reconciliation! It’s maddening to think that some of our young people would rather murder their unborn children (with all of the dire consequences) than seek the help of their parents, office bearers, or extended church family!

We need to adjust our social climate so that conditions favour dealing with the sexual sin (and resulting pregnancy) in a spirit of Christ-like love, forgiveness and restoration rather than hiding it. And with forgiveness needs to come support. When a church member falls into sin, we are called to restore him gently, remembering how prone we are to fall ourselves (Gal 6:1). Paul even says that we are to “carry each other’s burdens” in this way. From our attitudes to our actions, our calling is to surround every repentant sinner with grace-filled care, remembering that this is precisely how our Father in heaven deals with us (Luke 15:20-32).

Test Yourself

Does your daughter (and your son too!) know if she falls into sexual sin, she can talk to you about it without you having a fit of anger? Does she believe the consequences of admitting her sexual sin to you as mother or father would be worse than not to do so? Has it been stressed so much in your home that (in her mind at least) it is a ‘greater sin’ to bring shame on the family name than it is to quietly snuff out the life of the unknown unborn?

Have previous cases in the church been handled roughly or insensitively by the consistory, bringing unnecessary difficulty upon a repentant woman or couple? Has total silence of the consistory contributed to damaging rumours? Do congregants expect a public shaming or is there a track record of gentle, public restoration in the case of sins which become public? In short, does the young lady have reason to fear reaction to her news in her family or church?

New Emphasis

If there is any doubt about the answers to these questions, we need to sound a new note in our homes and congregations. Or rather, we need to sound an old note more clearly and consistently across the board, the note of grace. To be sure, our children need to grow up knowing right from wrong and the consequences of sin, but just as well, they need to know forgiveness and renewal in the blood and Spirit of Christ. Grace never glosses over sin or dismisses it but rather grace – God’s work of salvation in Christ – pays the high cost of our sin and goes to work transforming our hearts and lives.

The fears of our young adult children are often times our fears as parents passed down to them – the fear of man. As parents, we fear a bad reputation and embarrassment and will do virtually anything to protect ourselves. We don’t want anyone thinking poorly of us and so we let people see only our “good” side, our strong features. We never show our faults or at least we minimize them as much as possible.

We carry-on this same pattern with our children. They must never see our weaknesses or sins. If you’ve never said to your kids, “Dad was wrong and I’m sorry” or “Mom sinned against you earlier today – can you forgive me,” then chances are you’ve never heard them say that to you voluntarily, from the heart. And if they don’t feel free to admit their more common sins knowing they will find a kind and forgiving heart, what makes you think they will come to you when the issue is weightier like a pre-marital pregnancy?

Transparency

What we need is more transparency and humility as parents and also as office bearers. We need to be less afraid of man and instead develop a healthier fear of God. We ministers and elders along with fathers and mothers need to be more open about our mistakes and sins – and what we do about them. We all know each person is a sinner. We all know that Christians are people who struggle against sin and daily need forgiveness. Yet we can’t seem to let this show to our neighbour! The example of the Apostle Paul is just the opposite! (1 Timothy 1:15,16)

I’m not saying we need to hang out all our dirty laundry. But let’s not pretend we don’t have any either! Let’s live in the reality that all our dirty laundry is washed whiter than snow in the blood of the Lamb – and let’s encourage our family and friends to live this way too! Our past sins and mistakes can be lessons for another’s benefit, as the Bible demonstrates in more than one place.

Soft-Landing

Let’s be real and honest with one another, encouraging the confession of sin and sincere repentance. In our dealings with our children and teens, with our parishioners and fellow congregants, let us do what we can to let them know there is a soft landing in our home and church for broken sinners looking for forgiveness. As grace abounds, fear will melt away – also for those who have had an abortion.

As much as the unlawful killing of our pre-born family and church members hurts us all and is an offense to God, yet the blood and Spirit of our Saviour are there to wash also this sin away. It’s a great burden for a conscience to bear alone but let us offer help and healing by households and churches filled with compassion. Let’s start the conversation about grace with our sons and daughters today – and let’s keep it the centre-piece of our relationships all through-out God’s family.

Peter H. Holtvlüwer

Reprinted with permission from the author.