Who, me?

For your hands are defiled with blood
  and your fingers with iniquity
    - Isaiah 59:3

It is much, much worse than I have yet admitted. The prophet's words are for my ears, his accusing fingers are pointed at me, and I am condemned. Not only have I been less than steadfast in defending human life, but I have been one of those who shed the innocent blood. For all my pro-life talk, I myself am guilty of the crime of abortion.

O, but that was years ago, and, until the prophet pointed at me, I didn't know I was guilty; I really didn't. I knew abortion was wrong. That the deliberate killing of a wholly innocent little one was evil. I also knew that God forgives a repentant sinner, that great though the sin is, His mercy and forgiveness are greater. What I didn't know was that I was in need of repentance myself.

From the time that I saw those little ones as the the least of my brethren, I sought to come to their aid. Along with other pro-life folks, I prayed. I wrote letters and signed petitions. I prayed some more. I fasted. As the years passed, I lamented greatly that our prayers seem to go unheard. I cried out

Why have we fasted,
    and thou seest it not?
 Why have we humbled ourselves,
    and thou takest no knowledge of it?  ^[1]

This cry was heard, and God answered. But I did not like the answer.

Yes, I prayed, and the prayer was heartfelt. I fasted, and the fast was in earnest. In the meantime, I worked my job, collected my pay, and willingly surrendered a goodly portion of that pay to the government. And I learned how that money was used to fund Planned Parenthood, Title X abortions, and contraception, abortion and population control programs around the world. And I slowly came to admit that I was feeding the dragon. The prophet's finger was pointed at me, and I stood condemned.

This was God's answer to my cry?? That my prayers are hollow and my fasting cheap as long as I keep willingly contributing to the crime?

But... but... but, I don't want to pay for the killing of those helpless babies! Er... uhmmm... I mean, this isn't my idea! But.. well... but... O, dear me!

Well, yes, it is my money, I suppose. I put forth the effort, the time, and the skills to obtain it. And some of it is used to slaughter the innocents. I can no longer deny the truth. OK... (sigh)... I admit it. I am guilty.

This, too, by the grace of God, is a matter for repentance.  ^[2]

---

Note 1: Isaiah 58:3a [RSV]
Note 2: See: ProLifeStrike.org

Persons

A person's a person, no matter how small
  - Horton

As in the previous post where i briefly discussed the definition of marriage, i turn now to the definition of persons. Not just the nominal definition where we decide to use the utterance "person" to mean a certain thing, but beyond that to a real or explanatory definition, to discovering what is the essence of the underlying reality.

In his book Healing the Culture, Robert J. Spitzer, S.J., Ph.D. moves through the 4 levels of definition, from the nominal, subjective definition to the objective explanation: what the subject is, what it does, and what is its final end or purpose. So, what is a person? What distinctive characteristics does a person possess? I cannot do justice to Dr. Spitzer's thorough analysis in one little blog post (i really recommend reading the book), but a brief summary would involve recognizing the inherent capacity for the transcendental: that persons alone have the drive and the ability to appreciate things like eternity, truth, love, goodness, beauty, etc. The religious perspective would call this the spiritual dimension of our nature.

Well, what of someone who doesn't appear to possess this dimensionality? Should such a one no longer be considered a person? Is a severely mentally handicapped individual not a person? What about someone in a persistent coma? For that matter, what of someone who is drunk? Or asleep? Turns out that the discovery of inherent powers also involves the recognition that these powers may not always be manifest, due to external or internal conditions, but that the underlying potential must still be acknowledged. Else we would end up with the silly notion that someone's inherent personhood could be turned off and on like a faucet, or was dependent upon accidental conditions.

OK, so when does a person become a person? Glad you asked. This may be one of the least ambiguous questions, since we have the biological evidence to support what our theology has taught us all along: that the new person begins to exist at the moment of conception, when all of the potential powers first come into existence. Yep, that little muffin in the oven is not just a blob of tissue, but a real person.

The quite simple yet undeniably reasonable conclusion to all this is this: that every being of human origin should be considered a person.

Even were we to entertain questions about this conclusion, we would do well to err on the side of caution, and assume personhood rather than deny it. History demonstrates the bleak alternative: Hitler doubted the inherent potential of non-Aryans. The Dred Scott decision questioned the full personhood of black slaves. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, repeatedly expressed doubt over the worthiness of the "inferior races". And on and on.

The ramifications are clear. Since the pre-born baby and the comatose patient are persons, let's see them as Whos and not merely whats.