A Love for Life

Christianity's Consistent Protection of the Unborn

Di Mauro

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2008
• eBook ISBN: 9781498274562
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Religione

Is abortion ethical? The answer to this question is often obscured by rhetoric, slogans, and politics. And the media message on abortion is often of little help. When the typical American opens up her morning newspaper, she sees the topic debated between pro-lifers and pro-choicers but receives little information that could help her make an informed moral decision. And as she reads further about the subject, it seems that the Christian church, often an ethical guide in many of her decisions, is of no use to her. Sadly, she is told that the church is just as divided as the rest of society on the topic. So our average American is left to fend for herself. She must somehow decide the right answer with little guidance from society, from the church, or even from God himself.But is our average American really without guidance? Has she gotten all the information she needs about abortion, or has she received only the five-second sound bite that leaves her as confused as she was before she heard about the abortion debate? And has God been silent on the abortion question? Has the church really shown a diversity of opinion on the sanctity of life?A Love for Life will provide Christians with the biblical and historical information that they need to make an informed decision on the abortion question. It will also take a critical and biblically-based look at the arguments and theologies of today's most prominent pro-choice clergy. And it will determine if abortion really fulfills the will of God, as many pro-choice Christians believe, or whether abortion is a clearly sinful act. In short, readers of A Love for Life will discover the real message of the church on abortion.

1

Ancient Traditions

Historical Jewish Views on Abortion

Christian doctrine on the morality of abortion was to a large degree “inherited” from our Jewish ancestors. Therefore, a review of early Jewish attitudes towards life in the womb is needed to understand later Christian ethical positions on this practice.

Any discussion of Jewish views on abortion often begins with a review of Exodus 21:22–25. This passage provided direction on how to punish a man who had, in the course of a fight with another man, accidentally injured a woman and caused her to have a miscarriage. Much has been made of this passage in the abortion debate, because it is arguably the only verse in the Old Testament which deals with the punishment given to a person who kills an unborn child.

The use of this verse has been complicated by the fact that it has been rendered differently in the ancient Hebrew and Greek texts. In the original Hebrew text, the passage required the violator to pay a fine to the woman’s husband in reparation for the unborn child’s death. If the assault resulted in the woman’s death or injury as well, the text called for an “eye for [an] eye,” meaning an equivalent punishment for the perpetrator: his execution if the mother was killed, or a physical punishment if the mother was injured.1

While the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, it was later translated into Greek for use by Greek-speaking Jews. This translation, also known as the Septuagint, contains an incorrect translation of the Hebrew version of Exodus 21:22–25. It states that if the miscarried child was “imperfectly formed” a fine would be due, but if the child was “perfectly formed” the violator deserved punishment by execution.2 In other words, in the Greek text causing an early-term miscarriage was punishable by fine, while causing a later-term miscarriage was punishable by death.

One might wonder at this point how to define an “imperfectly formed” or “perfectly formed” child in regard to Exodus 21. This is an important question since the distinctions between ‘formed’ and ‘unformed,’ and ‘souled’ and ‘unsouled’ fetuses are discussed throughout this book. While the answer over the years has varied, one popular belief before the nineteenth century was that a fetus took the shape of a baby around 40 days gestation, at which time it was also ensouled. However, since we know today that the development of a child is continuous from the moment of conception (with a measurable heartbeat at only 20–30 days gestation), these distinctions are scientifically outdated and arbitrary.

The Greek text’s distinction of punishments in Exodus 21 has often been mentioned by pro-choice biblical commentators, because they believe it indicates that an early-term abortion is not the equivalent of murder and should be permissible. But using this text to make a biblical case for the permissibility of an early-term abortion is flawed on two counts. First of all, the Greek version is not the original text and therefore can provide little biblical guidance on the matter. Secondly, even if it were reliable, it can only be said that it simply provides a lighter penalty for causing an earlier-term miscarriage (probably before 40 days gestation). The bottom line is that in all cases described above, both in the Greek and Hebrew versions, Exodus 21 shows that causing a miscarriage at any point in a pregnancy was considered sinful and was punishable under ancient Jewish law.

Any confusion over Exodus 21 can also be explained by reviewing the moral traditions of the Jewish people. These traditions amply demonstrate the high regard that biblical Judaism had for life growing within the womb. Ronald B. Bagnall, the former editor of Lutheran Forum, notes that the great cultural difference between the Jewish people and their Gentile neighbors was their respect for human life. He writes, “In contrast to other nomadic peoples, the Israelites were not allowed to leave behind those who had become a burden or a bother.”3 This care for human beings living outside the womb was also provided to those humans still living inside the womb. Michael Gorman, dean of the Ecumenical Institute of Theology, writes in his book Abortion and the Early Church that, “It was a given of Jewish thought and life that abortion, like exposure, was unacceptable, and this was well known in the ancient world.”4

The historical Jewish belief in the sinfulness of abortion has also been well documented in its religious literature. For instance, the Sibylline Oracles, which were Jewish apocalyptic writings from the first and second century b.c., describe the sins of women who were condemned to hell. These women, “having burdens in the womb[,] produce[d] abortions; and their offspring [were] cast unlawfully away.”5 And in the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, an example of Jewish wisdom literature that was written either in the first century b.c. or the first century a.d., states that “a woman should not destroy the unborn babe in her belly, nor after its birth throw it before the dogs and vultures as prey.”6 In addition, the apocryphal text 1 Enoch, which was written either in the first or second century b.c., reveals the negative attitude that the Jews had for abortion when it explains that a wicked angel taught human beings to “smash the embryo in the womb.”7

“A woman should not destroy the unborn babe in her belly.”

—Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides

Many contemporary scholars have also noted the strong pro-life beliefs of prominent Jewish thinkers, such as the philosopher Philo. For instance, Gorman has pointed out that Philo spoke out against abortion in the centuries before and during the time of Christ.8 And G. Bonner, a former reader in theology at Durham University, concurs with Gorman’s findings, and he even attributes Philo’s position to his reliance upon Exodus 21:22–25.9 In addition, the first-century Jewish hi...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Chapter 1: Ancient Traditions
• Chapter 2: In God’s Own Words
• Chapter 3: From Day One
• Chapter 4: Penalties and Penance
• Chapter 5: Great Minds
• Chapter 6: Breaking from Tradition
• Chapter 7: Controversy
• Chapter 8: Headcount
• Chapter 9: Conclusion
• Appendix I: Current Denominational Statements on Abortion
• Appendix II: Member Organizations of the National Pro-Life Religious Council
• Bibliography