A Sacred Life?
Job 10:8-12
According to a Washington Post article by Marc Kaufman, dated Nov. 3, 2003, a young California woman went to a Planned Parenthood office in September looking to end her unwanted pregnancy. Because she was still early in her pregnancy, the clinic offered her the choice of taking the "abortion pill" or having a surgical abortion. The woman, Holly Patterson of Livermore, chose the medical route and took the first pill, mifepristone, better known as RU-486, at the clinic. She was given a second drug, misoprostol, to take at home the next day. Within four days, Patterson, 18, was at a hospital emergency room, complaining of severe pain and bleeding. She returned three days later, vomiting and in great pain, and died that afternoon. On Friday, the local coroner concluded that she had died from "septic shock, due to endomyometritis [inflammation] due to therapeutic, drug-induced abortion." The report does not describe exactly how and why the medical abortion caused Patterson’s death -- that information is expected later this month -- but the coroner’s conclusion will increase the stakes in what has already become an emotional landmark in the long-running struggle over abortion. For abortion opponents, Patterson’s death is proof that medical abortion is hazardous. As soon as the death was reported, they began a campaign to spotlight the case as another reason the Food and Drug Administration should embrace their citizens’ petition to ban the drug. Abortion rights supporters reply that if Patterson did die of complications from her abortion, it would only underscore that the procedure is remarkably safe. More than 200,000 women have successfully used the drug in North America since it came on the market three years ago, they say, and Patterson’s death would be the first directly attributable to a medical abortion administered to a woman without other health problems.
In 2002, 71 inmates in this country were executed, 5 more than in 2001. Of those executed in 2002, 53 were white, 18 were black. Lethal injection accounted for 70 of the executions; 1 was carried out by electrocution. At year end 2002, 37 States and the Federal prison system held 3,557 prisoners under sentence of death, 20 fewer than at year end 2001. All had committed murder. Among persons for whom arrest information was available, the average age at time of arrest was 28; 2% of inmates were age 17 or younger. Approximately 90 percent of those on death row could not afford to hire a lawyer when they were tried.—American Civil Liberties Union. "We have enormous protections, the best by far, but we’re never going to have a system that will never execute an innocent person." Statement of Chairperson of the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee made while supporting the death penalty in 1997.
The case of Michael Martin, a 41-year-old Michigan man who suffered head injuries as a result of a 1987 car-train accident, is currently before the Michigan Court of Appeals. Oral arguments are scheduled for 5/6/93. Michael is conscious, alert, appears happy, plays card games, and loves country-western music. He has communicated through a computer-augmented device that he wants to live. Mary Martin, his wife and legal guardian who has been in contact with the Hemlock Society, wants to have his food and fluids (provided by gastrostomy tube) withdrawn. She says that, years before the accident, Michael had made statements indicating that he would never want to be maintained as a vegetable. Michael’s mother and sister are fighting for his right to live and want Mary removed as his guardian, but have been unable to establish legal standing. According to his sister, Pat Major, "Brain-injured is not brain dead…. This is euthanasia -- get rid of anyone who needs care." [The Detroit News, 10/25/92: 1B] Mary Martin is currently appealing a 11/12/92 ruling by probate Judge George Grieg which rejected her request (to have Michael starved and dehydrated to death) on the basis that Michael’s statements prior to the accident were not written. But the judge indicated that he would have granted the wife’s request if Michael were terminally ill or unconscious. The fact that Michael currently expresses the wish to live was ruled irrelevant by the judge because of Michael’s "impaired condition." Yet Michael has been assessed as a level five on the Los Amigos Ranchos scale, a scale used by rehabilitation doctors to assess a patient’s improvement. A level five means that the patient is interactive and ready for intensive rehabilitation. Court testimony also indicated that Michael has an I.Q. (after the accident) ranging from between 61-73 -- the range fore someone mildly retarded. Judge Grieg’s ruling raises serious questions regarding the autonomy of disabled patients and just how "impaired" a person has to be before he or she no longer has rights and interests. The Michigan Supreme Court eventually ruled in favor to Michael’s wishes after his accident.
What do these things have in common? They are all issues concerning the sanctity of life. They are also all among the most hotly debated issues in our country. Rarely will you find someone who doesn’t have an opinion on one or all of these issues.
For some time now, Southern Baptists have recognized the Sunday before January 22 as “Sanctity of Life Sunday.” The focus of observation has been on abortion through the years (and rightfully so). Still, I am worried that we may forget that there are other issues involved that should at least be addressed on this day. I know that doing so will undoubtedly cause some people anxiety, and a fear of distracting us from the abortion issue. I wish to do neither. I think we can and should broaden the issue of sanctity of life without forgetting the cause that began our interest as a denomination in the arena of the sanctity of life.
However, my purpose today is not to raise more issues of debate per se. Today, I want to fundamentally get to the basic issue at hand. Is life sacred? Folks if it isn’t then all of the debates from here to eternity are pointless. If life isn’t sacred then the death of any number of babies, the loss of innocent victims to war, the execution of persons innocent or guilty is moot. Death amounts to nothing more than the cessation of a biological being.
I believe that life is sacred. I believe that it is so for a simple reason. Let’s turn to the Word of God to find that reason. We will do so by observing two truths found in the story of Job.
I. Life can become confusing and painful.
Job’s experience in the sufferings of life produced real struggles with the issue of life. In chapter three, Job cursed the day of his birth. He hated his existence and longed for death (3:20-22; 7:16; 9:21; 10:1) But Job refused to take his own life, choosing to wait on the sovereign time of God. 6:8, 9; 14:5, 13.
Issues of sanctity of life occur because life is difficult. A teenage girl discovers she’s pregnant and is overcome by the fears of what the pregnancy could mean to her life: she’s confronted by a reality that will change her life, no matter what decision she makes after-the-fact. A patient is told that he is terminal and will probably die a long and painful death: he begins to wonder if there is another way out—death with dignity (or at least as little pain as possible). A person is murdered—and a suspect is tried, convicted, and sentenced to death: the death watch on his date of execution brings out the victim’s family seeking closure, but it also brings a crowd of celebrants unrelated to any involved, people who just seem to party and thrive because of death. A war is fought, perhaps on justified grounds, but as countries debate on political resolutions, innocent parties suffer and die, caught in a crossfire and labeled the innocuous “collateral damage” of military reports.
If these issues never arose, then we wouldn’t be involved in a heated debate in this country. We would have no cause to champion. We would have no sides to debate. And we wouldn’t be living in the real world. I believe a day is coming when evil will be gone—when sorrowing and suffering will end: but that day is ahead of us and we must live in the now.
Transitional Sentence: Living in a world marked by sin, each one of us here knows that life can be painful.
II. Yet life is still a gift from God.
In spite of the confusion and paradox of life Job found himself in, he still believed that God had given him life. (v. 8) Job believed he was the immediate work of God, which raised his question on suffering, "Will you now turn and destroy me?" (v. 9) He called upon God to remember his creation work of Job (just like Adam). (v. 10) The unformed body of Job was purposefully designed by God from preexistent life, just like a mother pours milk that came from the living body of an animal for her child into a glass, or a farmer carefully prepares to make his cheese. (v. 11) The development of the unformed body of the child into the differentiated mature human form is also a direct result of God’s actions. (v. 12) the conclusion: God’s gift of life was not to be viewed as an accident, or as a problem.
Job understood that it was the kindness of God that let him live. He affirmed God’s sovereign action of providence in his life—"And in our providence watched over my spirit." God could have allowed Job to have died in the womb. He could have allowed Satan to take his life. But instead, God had a purpose to protect his life for reason. Even with this testimony of faith, Job continued to struggle with the issue of his trials—throughout most of the book, he demanded his innocence and believed that God was punishing him unfairly. Did Job’s difficult life have any reason to continue to be lived? In the end, Job met God through the sufferings of life: indeed he found a reason to live.
I offer no easy answers to the difficulties of life, my friends: all I can offer is the faith, the conviction that life is a gift which must be cherished. So what should we do as Christians when it comes to issues of life?We must firmly be committed to the belief that all persons are created in the image of God: therefore human life has dignity. We must diligently work for justice in this world, committed to the cause of speaking out for the innocent victims of a society that seems to be cheapening life. In the case of abortion, we should be outspoken advocates of alternatives to the taking of infant life: and we should willing to look for alternatives—even if it were to mean more taxes to raise the children rescued from abortion. We should take an active stand in training our own children (and grandchildren) about the precious gift of life. In that training, we must address the issues of consequences and responsibility for sinful actions—we cannot afford to be silent here. Our children must know that a holy God wants them to be holy. And we must model that behavior.
My friends, you will never know how much I wish I could do away with all of the issues raised today. I don’t want to be living in a world where abortion is seen as a form of birth control. I don’t want to be living in a world marked by war, murder, destruction. But I am—and so are you. What are we going to do about it? Do we idly sit by and watch the destruction claiming that we have no power? I hope not. Dear Lord in heaven forgive us if we do. The greatest power in the world is at our disposal—God Almighty promises to hear our prayers. This morning, I ask you to join me here at this altar in a sincere and vital prayer that our Nation, our World will begin to recognize that life is sacred!
