Related articles and links |  1 of 3

Face it. Culture warriors get battle fatigue. That's why organizations that energize the culture wars on both ends of the spectrum use inflammatory rhetoric and constantly search for fresh sources of outrage.

A new statement from the group informally known as ECT (for "Evangelicals and Catholics Together") offers a decided contrast to this culture-wars-on-amphetamines approach. In "That They May Have Life," ECT calls us to renew our commitment to the "culture of life," without "resign[ing] ourselves to unremitting warfare." While "many despair of finding any commonalities by which warfare can be replaced, or at least tempered, by civil discourse," the statement's authors write, "we refuse to join in that despair."

They write of "our common humanity" and the fact that we share with those who hold opposing worldviews "a God-given capacity to reason, to argue, to deliberate, to persuade, and to discover moral truths regarding questions related to the right ordering of our life together." Come now, let us reason together.

This statement will not likely persuade its political and social opponents. But to the extent that the document is primarily addressed to culture-of-life Christians, it may help some of us change our tone and become both more persuasive and more patient.

Here's the key idea of the new ECT appeal: "[I]t is of the utmost importance that everyone involved in the public discussion of these questions understand the unbreakable connection between a Christian worldview and the defense of human life."

That statement has two dimensions. First, the ECT statement argues, life issues are inherently public and cannot be relegated to some safely private religious realm. Second, it argues that to be a Christian is to be committed to defending human life—if one is honest with our sources in the Bible and historical church teaching. Therefore, if Christians are to be active participants in our political life, they must be allowed to participate as Christians and not be forced into a secularist mode of discourse.

The bulk of the statement's 6,000 words is devoted to outlining the connection between a Christian worldview and a commitment to life. This is a good refresher for those who may have forgotten (or who never really knew) the reasons for a pro-life ethic. They are, briefly:

• The gospel itself is about God sending his Son so that those who believe in him might have life.

• "Every human life is intended by God from eternity for eternity."

• The Bible's message of life is addressed universally—beyond the human race, even to the whole creation.

• The Christian "love thy neighbor" ethic "begins … with respect for the neighbor's right to be, by honoring the gift of God that is the neighbor's life."

• Christianity, from its earliest days, was a "way of life" that contrasted with the pagan culture's "way of death."

These are theological points that cannot be fully known apart from God's revelation in the Bible and in Jesus the Messiah. But they are not irrational beliefs. Almost every thoughtful person recognizes that a society—to be a society—must protect the weak. The difficulty is that, apart from revelation, very few can articulate just why we owe the weak and vulnerable special protection.

Those who do not share our biblical commitments should at least welcome biblical insights because of their high ideals and altruism. Whether or not we claim to have gotten our insights from God, they should be recognized as ideas that can energize efforts to build a safer society.

next page... |  1 of 3

share this page

October 2006, Vol. 50, No. 10