Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist….
I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic (Darwin 1887/2005).
St. Thomas Aquinas stated clearly that "it belongs to the notion of man to be composed of soul, flesh, and bones", thus supporting his theory of the Trinity of Man. John Locke accepted the concept of soul but viewed personhood of the individual as a distinct state, closely tied to consciousness— "Socrates asleep, and Socrates awake, is not the same person…. For if we take wholly away all consciousness of our actions and sensations, especially of pleasure and pain, and the concernment that accompanies it, it will be hard to know wherein to place personal identity”
Some will remember recent legal arguments centered on the topic of personhood. The Honorable Barry Schaller (2008), an Associate Justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court, noted that such questions were central to the recent case of Terri Schiavo.
The case of Terri Schiavo…raised a virtual cascade of questions that concern the state of American society and culture. What is the nature of personhood and when does it end? What level of respect and, with it, autonomy accompanies an individual into old age or incapacity?
As the human body deteriorates, does personhood devolve? Is an ill or dying human being accorded less status as a person than others? Such propositions directly question whether personhood is a conditional state rather than an innate characteristic of human beings. If personhood can end before life ends, then human nature becomes a fragile expression of self-awareness, and is not a robust and inalienable foundation of human rights and culture.
The Apostle Paul directly addressed the transcendence of human personhood by teaching that personal identity survives physical death, stating that “we are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.” Speaking of the end of life, Tertullian held that human personhood was not removed in impending death but rather limited in its fullest expression. Tertullian stated that
when death is a lingering one, the soul abandons its position in the way in which itself is abandoned. And yet it is not by this process severed in fractions: it is slowly drawn out; and whilst thus extracted, it causes the last remnant to seem to be but a part of itself. No portion, however, must be deemed separable because it is the last; nor, because it is a small one, must it be regarded as susceptible of dissolution.
The concept of conditional personhood is morally flawed. It is similar to the argument that the fire of a single birthday candle is subservient to a bonfire. Fire exists, and regardless of the state or condition of the fire, there is an inherent capability for the fire to expand.
Likewise, we find ourselves at the controversial topic of personhood at the beginning of life. This debate also reached back to antiquity. the Pythagoreans believed that the contents of a mother's womb was "a living being, ensouled from the moment of conception, and that ensouled human life. as divine in par, was to be inherently respected and protected until natural death."
If we recognize the concept of personhood, we place upon society certain requirements. Society must recognize the worth of the individual once personhood is established. We are also faced with the concept that personhood is not a "right", if we define rights as possessions of the person and not as attributes which define an individual.
It is within this struggle to define and assign rights to personhood that we find ourselves today in the aftermath of Roe v. Wade. Justice Blackmun explicitly noted that “the Constitution does not define “person” in so many words.” Roe was finally settled with a focus on fetal development and not on personhood. Justice Blackmun held that the State
has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a “compelling” point at various stages of the woman's approach to term.
In Roe, the fetus gained no recognition of personhood, and the rights of the fetus were not recognized or established. Its interests were held to increment with fetal development as with the ability of the fetus to survive. The political rights of personhood were vested with viability.
Christians, however, point to the absolute truths of the Declaration of Independence -
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. —That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…
Created equal is a powerful statement. It imputes a beginning, and in that beginning, an existential state of being. If a being exists at time of creation, then, most certainly, the arguments of personhood are moot.
It is clear from the earlies teachings of scripture that abortion is an evil that is an afront to a Holy God. Hear the words of Psalm 139:16
Your eyes have seen my unformed substance;
And in Your book were all written
The days that were ordained for me,
When as yet there was not one of them.
and Proverbs 6:16-17
There are six things which the Lord hates,
Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him:
Haughty eyes, a lying tongue,
And hands that shed innocent blood,
Christians cannot support those politicians that support abortion. It is a violation of all that is good and right. We must approach this issue with the idea of personhood - that, at conception, a living organism is started on a marvelous developmental journey that will manifest in a human form of imago Dei.
If we realize that the womb contains life, and we have no right to terminate that life, we will arrive at the destination that abortion is murder, and cannot be allowed, under any circumstance.
Upon this truth, I stand!
