It's no secret to my familiar readers of this blog or social media content that I'm pro-life (not just abortion, but capital punishment, euthanasia, war, etc.) And, yes, I was brought up Roman Catholic, but no, my religion, beyond a general moral context, really didn't influence my position on abortion. Abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the New Testament and I had not heard the subject discussed during military (USAF) sermons. As I've written elsewhere, I stumbled across the word while reading a newspaper and asked me what it meant. Mom gave a very clinical, nonjudgmental definition and I recoiled in horror at the very thought. "But, Mom, that's MURDER. What does the Church say? The Church has to be against it."
For me, it starts with the scientific fact that human life begins at conception. Your DNA signature is present then as now; as adults or born persons, we are simply at a later stage of development. Many leftist Catholics-in-Name-Only, e.g., Biden, Pelosi, and Cuomo, rationalize their "pro-choice" position as not imposing their faith on others. (Abortion is a moral teaching, not dogma.)
"Progressives" have sought to redefine Christ to fit their ideology. Let's make a few things clear:
- Christ was a strict moralist, not an appeaser. This is seen particularly on the question of the indissolubility of marriage. He does not accept Moses' embrace of divorce. When His disciples argue that His words are too hard for prospective/current followers to follow, He answers "Many are called; few are chosen."
- Christ was not a Statist; in fact, He was executed by the State/Romans. Many of his religious adversaries were seen trying to paint Him as an insurrectionist. This is directly seen in the incident on whether He should pay taxes to Caesar.
- Christ forgives sins, but He does not rationalize them. When the men get ready to stone the adulteress, Jesus pointedly doesn't dispute the charge or its sinful nature; He doesn't argue that the woman was trapped in a bad marriage. After stopping the stoning, Jesus pointedly tells her to go and sin no more He is not excusing her sin, but forgiving it.
So one pro-abort troll on Twitter triggered me with a disingenuous observation that Jesus did not speak on abortion; if it was an issue, why isn't it recorded? Well, first of all, only a fraction of the things Jesus said or did during His 3-year ministry is recorded. Second, it is my contention that elective abortion was rarely practiced or debated. Third, as one of my sources cited below points out, Jesus did not speak out on pedophilia, elderly abuse, or 101 other abominations. Does that mean Jesus tolerates such evil?
The first point to this is the Didache, one of the earliest Church writings (most scholars point to the late first century). Chapter 2 (Gross Sin Forbidden: "you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is begotten". Note that the young Church was expanding into the ancient worlds of Rome and Greece where abortion and infanticide were accepted. Hence, where did this originate? Obviously from Christ and/or prevailing Judaic concepts.
We find other sources as well, E.g., Roman historian Tacitus' History of the Jews 5,5:
"However, the Jews see to it that their numbers increase. It is a deadly sin to kill a born or unborn child"
And this is from Romano-Jewish historian Josephus:
"The law moreover enjoins us to bring up all our offspring: and forbids women to cause abortion of what is begotten; or to destroy it afterward. "
For additional Jewish/other references, see here.
The disingenuous pro-abort trolls tend to bring up 2 Old Testament quotes:
- Exodus 21:22 allegedly claims that if a man's violence leads a women to "miscarry", he is subjected to a fine; the death of a woman capital punishment. This seems to be a matter of Biblical interpretation. The actual word for miscarriage varies with other texts, and other interpretations seem to suggest premature delivery. In this context, if no further harm comes to the women or her child, a fine is prescribed. Capital punishment is relevant to the loss of life to the mother, child or both.
- Numbers 5:11-31. Again, this is the dubious question of Biblical translation and the use of the term "miscarry". The context is of a husband who suspects his wife has been unfaithful but doesn't have the prescribed multiple witnesses, and we have a ritual having the women ingest some holy water potion; if the spouse has been unfaithful, there will be a curse with certain physical effects (like infertility); the pro-aborts suggest an abortion. Pregnancy is not listed as a supplemental fact to the adultery allegation. Moreover, holy water is not an abortifacient. "According to the ancient Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah, a woman who was pregnant or was nursing a child was not to undergo the ordeal at all!" Long story short, more conventional interpretations are that the unfaithful spouse may be cursed with infertility
