Surprised by Life - Abortion and Christian Faith

Dear Parish Faithful & Friends in Christ,

I have been slowly reading through a book entitled Philosophers Who Believe - The Spiritual Journey of 11 Leading Thinkers. This book is a collection of essays from 11 prominent contemporary philosophers from the English speaking world of North America and England. Each describes his path to the Christian Faith, often cast as a real revelation, as in C.S. Lewis' famous description of being "surprised by joy." As the book cover states: "These philosophers explode the stereotype that intellectuals cannot believe."

One of these thinkers is John Rist. I was drawn to his chapter because I have read his excellent book on St. Augustine. He is a historian of philosophy and has already written books on Plotinus and the Stoics. What further caught my attention as he was explaining his "conversion" to Christianity, were a few insightful paragraphs that he wrote about abortion, under the subheading of "The Search for Justice." After his Roman Catholic wife suffered through two miscarriages, they both began to think long and hard on willful "terminations." I would like to share these few paragraphs with you as a further follow-up to our recent Sanctity of Life Sunday and a meditation that I sent out last Thursday with some passages from Fr. Breck's book on Orthodox bioethical thinking. When John Rist began to think hard about abortion, he still was not a Christian, but it was precisely this issue that made him think further about the existence of God. So, from his spiritual autobiographical essay entitled "Where Else?," the philosopher John Rist writes the following:

The problem of justice which from the mid-sixties came increasingly to attract my attention was that of abortion, as issue which in my younger days of growing radicalism I had ignored, following the stream of fashion ...

Abortion did not concern me first a religious matter, as issue concerned with the sanctity of life. Indeed, a person who does not believe in God can hardly be expected to take the "sanctity" of life seriously. For me, abortion was a simple question of justice, of unjust killing. One was not allowed (rightly) to "terminate" the lives of one's infants or teenagers because they were too expensive or troublesome; on the same grounds one should not therefore be allowed to kill one's unborn child either. What mattered was simply whether or not the child is a human being. Once I satisfied myself that it is - and later scientifil findings have only confirmed that view, confirming also that those who deny it deny it merely because it is inconvenient, that is, because they choose to deny it - then if any "unjust" killing is wrong, abortion is wrong. It is the killing of the innocent and the defenseless for no other reason than that one wants them out of the way.

Note that this is not an argument against all killing; I am not and have never been a pacifist. This argument against abortion does not depend on a claim that all killing is wrong; it is a claim that no one should be killed simply because someone wishes them dead and they are unable to defend themselves. It is important to recognize that the unborn are not only innocent; they are incapable of intending evil or doing anything by their own deliberate action which is in any way harmful or dangerous to anyone. To kill them is to kill them because they happen - inconveniently - to exist.

I admire John Rist's lucidity in uncovering the basic issues involved in the abortion debate and stating them clearly. It is that clarity that keeps the issue alive at the most serious level. However, he challenges those of a "prolife" position not to fall into the same blindness of denial when other inconvenient facts of life come before our attention:

I became disturbed that many of those opposed to other political and social injustices seemed to favor abortion; it made me suspect that their reasons for opposing other injustices might not be as firmly grounded as they and I had assumed. I also worried about the attitudes of some other "prolifers," as we began to be called when the political process to allow the legal killing of the unborn built up in the sixties. Some of them seemed curiously oblivious to other injunctgions to assist their fellow human beings, even when they might have regarded these injunctions as divinely sanctioned. Again, it seemed that the explanation lay in the false ethical view that if I do not admit something (such as exploitation of the poor or disadvantaged) to be wrong, then it is not wrong; it can be explained away as, for example, a merely unfortunate function of the laws of economics. There is no obligation to do more than allow other people to come into existence and compete, however unfair the conditions.

I believe that over the years many Christian churches and organizations have made a point of addressing that very fair and telling reproach. We must be willing to support and assist children who are born into a world suffering from injustice and marked by an unfair "playing field." A direct experience of that injustice is what drives many disadvantaged young women toward an abortion, even against their conscience. Whatever our modest contributions may be, "prolife" must extend beyond the womb and into the light of day.

Fr. Steven

A Zacchaeus Moment

Dear Fathers, Parish Faithful & Friends in Christ,

"For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost." (LK. 19:10)

At yesterday's eucharistic Liturgy, we heard the story of the towering figure of Zacchaeus the publican (LK. 19:1-10). This is one of the many wonderful paradoxes of the spiritual life that characterize the Holy Scriptures. The paradox is found in the fact that the "towering" figure of Zacchaeus was actually "small of stature." (v. 3) And if indeed he had defrauded his neighbors as he alluded to (v. 8), then he was "small" in even more essential matters. Through repentance, conversion, and right action Zacchaeus grew in stature right before the eyes of those who with faith could "see" this transformation. Zacchaeus personifies the type of change that is possible through hearing the Good News and embracing it in thought, word and deed. This passage, unique to the Gospel According to St. Luke, is thus perfectly placed as the first announcement of the approach of Great Lent. For in the Orthodox Church, this is always the prescribed Gospel reading for the fifth Sunday before the start of Great Lent. The four pre-lenten Gospel readings to follow will then guide us to Monday, March 10, the first day of the lenten journey that will lead us to Holy Week and then Pascha on April 27. (This is one of those years when the Orthodox date of Pascha widely diverges from that of the Western Easter on March 23).

Returning to the Gospel passage, we find the story of Zacchaeus evenly divided into two parts - and outdoor scene (v. 1-5) and an indoor scene (v. 6-10). Outdoors, and in full view of the gathered inhabitants of ancient Jericho, the despised "chief tax collector," the rich Zacchaeus, risks the humiliation of being laughed at because he makes the socially unconventional choice of climbing up into a "sycamore tree" in order "see who Jesus was." What may have been acceptable behavior among children, would only have drawn the surprised and scornful stares of Zacchaeus' over-taxed neighbors. I always remember that in a meditation on Zacchaeus, the late Metropolitan Anthony Bloom wrote that the equivalent act today would be that of a renowned corporate executive scrambling up a light pole in a downtown area in order to see someone passing by. (For those with a "boss" that you may not be too fond of, perhaps there may be minor consolation in fantasizing such a scenario and its reaction in your own mind). There then occurs that life-changing encounter between Zacchaeus and Jesus. For Jesus looks up at the strange figure of this man "small of stature" eagerly looking down upon Him, and says to him in response: "Zacchaeus, make haste and come down; for I must stay at your house today." (v. 5)

The transition to the indoor setting is now made when Zacchaeus "made haste and came down, and received him joyfully." (v. 6) Yet one can sense the oriental custom of a crowd hovering at the entrance or even coming and going with a certain freedom. The raised eyebrows and clucking tongues of an undescribed "they" who look on and articulate their stern disapproval - "He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner" (v. 7) - is a reaction encountered elsewhere in the Gospels when Jesus freely chose to sit at table with sinners and tax collectors (cf. MK. 3:15-17). This disapprobation on the part of the scribes and Pharisees then evoked his memorable (and ironic?) saying: "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." (MK. 3:17) The Messiah is not bound by religiously sanctioned social convention that divides people into the convenient categories of the "righteous" and "sinners," "saved" and "lost," the "pure" and "impure." Or rather, by making clear that He has come to bring salvation to everyone, beginning with the marginalized and distressed members of His own society, Jesus reveals the inclusive love of God that tears down all such former barriers. Zacchaeus is a striking and personalized example of this inclusive love of God for "the lost."

Never a distributor of "cheap grace" though, Jesus demands repentance and conversion. And this comes dramatically from Zacchaeus when he publicly declares: "Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have defrauded any one of anything, I restore it fourfold." (v. 8) In this, Zacchaeus goes beyond what the Law required for such an act of restitution. (EX. 21:37; NM. 5:5-7) The Lord then signifies or "seals" the truth of this conversion when He solemnly pronounces the joyful declaration: "Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost." (v. 9-10) It is interesting to note that the blessing of Jesus is given to the entire household. The household of Zacchaeus, in turn, becomes a microcosm of the entire design of salvation: The Son of Man came to seek and save the entire cosmos groaning inwardly and subject to futility as it awaits redemption (cf. ROM. 8:19-23) In this, we and our households resemble that of Zacchaeus, regardless of how "righteous" we may consider ourselves (to be dealt with next Sunday in the Parable of the Publican and the Pharisee!).

We can never afford to allow our supposed familiarity with a Gospel passage to blunt its sharp edge. It is that sharp edge that cuts through our many defensive layers of evasions and self-deception. Otherwise, the passage "softens" into a didactic story about a bad man changing his life and becoming "nice." However, I believe that no matter how well we know the story about Zacchaeus, the only familiarity that we could claim with him is the familiarity of having an equally profound "Zacchaeus moment" in our own lives. Such a "moment" would initially be characterized by an equal desire to "see Jesus" - above all else. Than we would need to be willing to overcome our own "smallness of stature" by perhaps first overcoming the tyranny of social convention and respectability before we get to our actual sinfulness. This may mean going beyond our own conventional patterns of church going and the "safety" of keeping the demanding call of Christ at a safe distance so that it cannot overly impinge upon our lives. There may yet be a sycamore tree that we need to climb.

Fr. Steven

Battling Abortion in Productive Ways

Dear Parish Faithful,

This is a bit behind - partly because my email server was down all last week - but I wanted to do some follow-up since The Sanctity of Life Sunday on January 22. As I wrote recently, abortion is not a one day issue for the year to be chastized and condemned; and then essentially hidden until the following year. It is something that is with us every day, and threatens to remain so for the forseeable future. It takes thoughtful and prayerful reflection so as to understand the bioethical issues involved. A Christian response can be much more effectively formed with study then by an emotional response that is always in danger of breeding hatred of a demonized opponent. Be that as it may, I wanted to reproduce the paragraphs from Fr. John Breck's book: Longing for God - Orthodox Reflections on Bible, Ethics, and Liturgy that I read aloud to everyone on that Sunday. Especially for those who were not in church that day, or who came after the homily. In an article entitled, "The Status of the Unborn - Again," Fr. John closes with a few excellent paragraphs that firmly and soberly summarize a sound Orthodox "pro-life" position:

Science and politics often mix no better that oil and water. Although embryology may confirm that human life exists both genetically and developmentally from conception, concern to placate pro-choice advocates has led all three branches of government to preserve the "right" even to such late-term procedures as "partial birth abortion," an act of undisguised barbarity.

While many abortion opponents are trying to overturn Roe v. Wade and similar legislation, working as it were from the bottom up, it may prove more effective to reverse course and begin with the most egregious practices in the abortion business. President Bush has expressed clear opposition to partial birth abortions. If they could be outlawed throughout the country, then this would go a long way toward confirming what Jewish and Christian tradtions have always known: that life in the womb is human life, worthy of legal protection. Then it would be necessary to work incrementally backward, eventually to eradicate from the public's mind the false distinction between "child," "fetus" and "embryo."

Science operates on the basis of knowledge; politics, on the basis of pressure. It is up to each of us, in appropriate and peaceful yet firm and relentless ways, to apply that pressure. Then eventually we may make it beyond this tragic moment in our history, marked by a level of self-interest that allows incipient human life to be sacrificed in the interests of cloning, the harvesting of embryonic stem cells, and partial birth infanticide. Then finally we might acknowledge and affirm, through public policy as much as through religious conviction, that the "status of the embryo" is none other than the status we enjoy ourselves, as citizens endowed with certain inalienable rights, and as persons endowed with the Image of God. (p. 87)

When we approach the Chalice to receive the Eucharist, we are approaching and then receiving Life in abundance. We must stand in defense of the sanctity of life if we are to receive from the Chalice of Life in a "worthy manner." Informing ourselves of the bioethical issues involved is a good starting point, and we thank God that we have theologians and pastors such as Fr. John Breck to guide us with clarity and conviction.

Fr. Steven
~~~


Dear Parish Faithful,

Below is a bit of updating in relation to yesterday's "theological thoughts" about abortion, from Luke Loboda. - Fr. Steven

Father,

After reading your email following up on abortion and our faith, I wanted to make sure you were fully aware of recent legislation and so forth. Father Breck's comments (I do not know when he wrote them) are a bit out of date on the partial-birth abortion issue.

Congress did pass a Partial-Birth Abortion Ban in 2003. The law prohibits the procedure described below:

An abortion in which the person performing the abortion, deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that t he person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus. (18 U.S. Code 1531)

Although it might be a bit confusing, at least this disgusting barbaric procedure (also known as "intact Dilation and Extraction") is outlawed. The problem is that other late-term procedures are possible and this procedure represents less than 1% of abortions (estimated as about 2000/year). Still, that is 2000 lives saved per year. The Supreme Court also upheld the constitutionality of this ban in the case Gonzales v. Carhart.

So while we have far to go, at least this "start" has been made.

In Christ,
Luke

The Sign

Dear Parish Faithful,

I am beginning a new semester at Xavier University today later in the afternoon. I enjoy teaching very much, especially the interaction with the students as I learn what their concerns are, how they view the Christian Faith, and what types of questions they have about God and life in general. It also keeps my mind "sharp," or so I like to believe, by reading new books or rereading old ones; or further refining and fine-tuning my presentation of Orthodoxy to an almost exclusively non-Orthodox group of young people. That is the exciting challenge. Unfortunately, the Orthodox Church continues to remain a well-kept secret, so I am always beginning from scratch, so to speak! (Today's average student, alas, is terribly ignorant of some of the basic truths of Christianity, regardless of his/her respective church - a downward spiral that I have noticed over the years as this condition continues to worsen). A fair share of my students admit to me that they have grown up with hardly a trace of religious belief in their lives. This tells me that we are dealing more and more with an unchurched society. We need to present the Gospel from its most basic perspective as "Good News" about an abundance of life that bursts through the secular constraints of a godless universe.

Be that as it may, I have chosen a new book for this semester entitled: The Sign of the Cross - the Gesture, the Mystery, the History by Andreas Andreopolous (we can safely assume that he is Greek Orthodox). Over the years, I am asked about the history of the sign of the Cross: just where did it come from and how old is this practice. And this is a question that I have never been able to get a handle on. In reading the first chapters of Andreopoulos' book, I realize why this is so - it is a complicated but fascinating history that one must piece together somewhat painstakingly. On an upcoming Sunday I will try and relate some of that history during a post-Liturgy discussion. One thing we can be assured of, however, is the antiquity of the gesture of the sign of the Cross - in many early sources referred to simply as the "sign." For the present, though, here is a good summary paragraph that is developed in great detail in the relevant chapter about the history of the sign of the Cross:

No conclusive evidence points to a date or place for adopting the cross as a symbol, although possibly the cross was already in use during apostolic times. We see traces of the symbol appearing in the second century, in the writings of Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Irenaeus of Lyons. Eventually adopted as a symbol of historic, spiritual, and liturgical significance, the cross came into use as Christianity grew and matured. Theologians explored the mystery of the death of Jesus Christ, remembering the actual cross on which he died. Then suddenly, in the fourth century, the cross became an established symbol. (p. 7)

Historical questions about the origin of beliefs and practices are endlessly fascinating. However, my primary purpose this morning is to share a wonderful and beautiful passage with you from St. Cyril of Jerusalem (4th c.) about the meaning of the Sign of the Cross and why it is so essential for us to practice with love and care:

Let us then not be ashamed to confess the Crucified. Let the cross as our seal, be boldly made with our fingers upon our brow and on all occasions; over the bread we eat, over the cups we drink; in our comings and in our goings; before sleep; on lying down and rising up; when we are on our way; and when we are still. It is a powerful safeguard; it is without price for the sake of the poor; without toil, because of the sick; for it is a grace from God, a badge of the faithful, and a terror to the devils; for "he displayed them openly, leading them away in triumph by force of it." For when they see the Cross, they are reminded of the Crucified; they fear him who has "smashed the heads of the dragons." Despise not the seal as a free gift, but rather for this reason honor your benefactor all the more. (Catechetical Lecture, 13, 36)

The Sign of the Cross is a gift from God that allows us to outwardly express our faith in the Crucified Lord of Glory - our Savior Jesus Christ. It does not work as a talisman or magical charm. Only with faith in Christ is it a meaningful gesture. It is one of the unwritten traditions handed down through the centuries and now kept alive in our generation by the same Orthodox Faith as that of our fathers and mothers who have gone before us into everlasting rest. We now "pass it down" (the meaning of the word Tradition) to our children as we explain to them that Christ died for us on the Cross. In fact, this simple gesture may be the first thing that we teach our children to do as they begin to grow and develop. It thus becomes a natural part of their lives. We should not be ashamed of making the Sign of the Cross in any particular setting (though never as to draw attention to ourselves), but always with the greatest of care as we witness to the Crucified One.

Fr. Steven

Theophany and the Imitation of Christ

Dear Parish Faithful,

I wanted to briefly comment on yesterday's Liturgy and the Great Blessing of Water to follow. First of all, I cannot recall the church being that full since last Pascha. The communicants were many and the line for venerating the Cross at the end seemed "endless." It was, after all, a Sunday, but I would also venture to say that the Feast of Theophany had something to do with the large numbers present for the Services. In addition to most of the parish being present, we had our share of guests, some of whom I believe are residents of Cincinnati. Hopefully, they left with the impression of a lively and, more importantly, faithful and traditional Orthodox Christian community that they will consider as a future spiritual home. That is why openness and friendliness to an unfamiliar face is so important, and that is a "built in" ministry for every parishoner. Many Romanian Orthodox Christians who are relatively new to the area are finding their way to our parish and we rejoice in their presence. We sincerely hope that their numbers among us continues to grow in the future. I ask any of our parishoners aware of such new residents to encourage them to visit our parish.

It was wonderful to have all of the children gathered around the table set aside for the Great Blessing of Water eagerly, yet patiently, waiting with their empty water containers in hand. The "holy materiality" of the Church is something that our children are instinctively attracted to. The concreteness and tangibility of the entire Liturgy, which embraces all of our senses - touch, taste, hearing, smell and sight - bring our children into the sacred atmosphere of the Liturgy even though they do not as of yet "understand" the profound theological character of the prayers. There is no doubt that it can be "long" and challenging to their attention spans - as yesterday must have been! - but they manage to do quite well, and the children remained orderly and well-behaved yesterday during the lengthy Blessing of Water. With so many children, there is no doubt that our parish is alive and well!

For us "adults," a major Feast of the Church, such as Theophany, always offers us the opportunity to place our own lives within the infinitely wider context of the Life of Christ. The Baptism of Christ, the source of our own baptism and Christ's solidarity with sinful humanity (though He is without sin), reminds us of what that baptism has committed us to: being disciples of Christ, which means putting His incomparable teaching into practice in addition to "believing" in Him. Following His Baptism, the Lord "was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil." (MATT. 4:1) Besides learning that we need to fast in order to overcome temptation, because the Lord Himself fasted; we also learn that direct temptation can be resisted, rejected and rebuked by turning to the Scriptures. When Christ was tempted/tested by Satan three times in the wilderness, He drove Satan away by quoting from the Scriptures. (see MATT. 4:1-11) I wonder how often or how readily we turn to the Scriptures to fight against temptation when it comes our way. If a Bible is at hand - at home or at work - we could open it when tempted and begin reading a psalm or passage from the Gospel in order to dispel the tempting thought by the power of the Word of God. When Christ was tempted to break His fast in the wilderness, not only by eating, but by changing the stones into bread, He rebuked Satan by quoting from the Book of Deuteronomy: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." (DEUT. 8:3)

These are instances in which we can do as Christ did. The "imitation of Christ" is essential to our "life in Christ."

Fr. Steven