There exists a very deep division in our country’s body politic and one Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade, stands central within its breach. There are constitutional issues that inform both sides of the abortion debate and I am not sufficiently educated in political science nor the law to confidently render a considered opinion. I can only speak confessionally about the subject, and following is my attempt.
My wife, the Rev. Lynnsay Buehler and I, both divinity school graduates, are parents of an adopted child. For years we tried to become pregnant and for years we passed every insulting test the medical professionals threw our way, only to be given the verdict that they didn’t know why we couldn’t have a child by natural means. We considered alternatives, like IVF, but between that tortured route and the fact that there were so many children in desperate need of a home, we chose to enter the process of adoption. After a 10-year emotional rollercoaster ride and with two days’ notice, we were informed of a mother who was about to give birth to a child she determined she couldn’t raise alone. Given the situation, an arrangement was made for Lynnsay and me to adopt the one who was to become our adored son Robert, now 25. I will never forget the lunch I had with his biological mother the day before Robert was born. The first thing I did was to thank her for bringing the child to term. At that point in our nation’s history, this college student had a decision to make regarding her pregnancy, she made a judgement call, and both Lynnsay’s and my families have been richly blessed through Robert’s life. All this to say - I don’t have any glee about thoughts of an abortion since our family has been given a great gift whose creation was not our own.
But even given our good fortune, I do not support taking away the right of a pregnant woman to make her own choice as to whether she gives birth or ends her pregnancy.
But how do I come to that position?
In my opinion, the issue we are nationally debating is “morally ambiguous.” That means that there are two opposing moral foundations involved. In this case: the sanctity of life AND the ability of a moral agent to make a choice. This “agency” position is summed up in the baptismal covenant that Episcopalians, like me, affirm — We strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being.
Discussions among medical doctors and theologians help us understand that agreements concerning when life begins are difficult. Many evangelical Christians lean toward the interpretation that life begins at conception. The Jewish tradition says that life begins with first breath. Despite these differences of understanding, we hold in common that life is sacred.
There is another strand within the Christian tradition that offers an important word here, that being Christian Realism, a perspective clearly articulated by Reinhold Niebuhr, a former minister and ethics professor at Union Theological Seminary. This theological position holds that we live in a fallen world and, consequently, there are times when we have to make decisions on matters that are morally ambiguous. That means there is no completely right or completely wrong answer, and so we have to make judgement calls based on practical consequences.
For example, Jesus held that killing is wrong and his life gave testament to the fact that he was willing to die at the hands of those who could not hear or see what he was teaching and offering them, but he was not willing to kill or to harm them. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a last century Christian minister, had to consider if it were a greater sin to be a part of a plot to kill Hitler, or to allow Hitler to continue persecuting Jews and placing all of Europe under the dark cloud of Nazism. As perhaps you can see, there is no moral silver bullet in this situation. Bonhoeffer was “stained by sin” no matter the choice he made. This faithful disciple of the 20th century made his choice to participate in the (failed) plot to kill Hitler, which led to his imprisonment and execution by Nazi loyalists just before World War II ended in Europe.
It is my belief that we are ultimately saved by God’s grace and are not condemned by the actions we take or fail to take in our broken world. But that moves my confession into the realm of salvation and atonement, and away from the topic at hand.
If we bring Christian Realism to bear on the issue of abortion, it seems to me we are brought to a choice between the sanctity of life (whenever we perceive life begins) and taking away the right of a woman to make a choice -- in this case denying her justice and not respecting her dignity. (This is crass to say, but I think if men could get pregnant, we would have privileged access to abortions. Such is my suspicion of the history of many men and our disordered, and sometimes misogynistic, relationship with women. Think witch burnings, denying suffrage, and pay disparities.)
And with regard to practical consequences, these are the considerations that pregnant women have to make “in the trenches” with much of life stacked against them, politically and economically. Men debate this issue in the comfort of their legal and moral theorizing.
Whether the decision made in Roe v. Wade was based on a faulty constitutional premise or not, I happen to agree with the middle ground it carved out as it upheld the right of the mother to choose (upholding justice and one’s dignity) to the point of the viability of the fetus (honoring sanctity of life). Forcing a decision any sooner than viability is not respectful of the mother’s life and autonomy, and denies enough time to make an informed choice. Any later and we may be denying a life that could exist outside the womb, drawing a first breath.
I wish to conclude this confession from my perspective as a United States citizen and as a person formed through Christian faith – I believe we must respect the plurality that exists within our American democracy just as we try to do within my church. Why? Because we are all made in the image of God which confers both a dignity and freedom for making the world a better, safer place to live.
It is my hope that these observations will help us maintain a space for democratic dialogue, and for allowing mutual respect, forgiveness and compassion to thrive in our country.
Rob Townes was raised in Grenada. He resides in Decatur, Ga., but family, friends and business often bring him back to his ancestral state.
