LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2010, Page 288

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

288

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

Defending Pre-Implantation Human Life
in the Public Square:
A Response to Wyoming District Concerns
about the CTCR report
Christian Faith and Human Beginnings
At its 2006 convention the Wyoming District adopted Resolution 3-09 “To Emphatically State the Biblical Position Regarding
the Unborn.” In March of 2007 this resolution was submitted by
the Wyoming District to the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations [CTCR] “for a response.” The resolution adopted by the
Wyoming District includes the following “resolveds” pertaining to
the CTCR’s 2005 report Christian Faith and Human Beginnings

[CFHB]:
RESOLVED, That the Wyoming District thank the CTCR for
their work in the past on issues relating to the sanctity of human
life, and for their work in this [2005] document, which uses scripture to remind us that all life begins at conception; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Wyoming District caution its pastors
against an injudicious use of this document, and urge the pastors
and congregations of the district to use caution when referring to
this report, and express its regret that this document is not clear
enough to receive an unqualified commendation for use by pastors
and congregations; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Wyoming District formally request that
the CTCR revisit its report, “Christian Faith and Human Beginnings” so that this report would make clear and unambiguous the
scriptural teaching on this issue that “the living but unborn are persons in the sight of God from the time of conception. …”
The CTCR is grateful, first of all, for the seriousness with which
the Wyoming District has approached this crucial issue, and for the
attention it has given to the CTCR’s 2005 report. The Commission
also appreciates the Wyoming District’s recognition that its report
CFHB (like its previous reports on beginning-of-life issues) “uses
scripture to remind us that all life begins at conception.” As the
CTCR states at the very outset of its report: “The Commission will
be defending the position that pre-implantation embryos in laboratories are to be accorded protection on the same basis as live-born
humans” (7, fn. 4). This position is reaffirmed in the concluding
paragraph of the report. “Human embryos,” says the Commission,
“beginning with conception, are set on a course of development
that leads continuously to an unfolding of a unique human life”
(47). “We have found no moment in this unfolding where a convincing line can be drawn between embryonic life that need not
be protected and embryonic or fetal or live-born life that should
be protected” (47). The report closes with the affirmation that “the
Bible speaks of God’s love and care for an individual from even
before the earliest physical moment. We therefore apply the principle ‘Always to care, never to kill’ to pre-implantation human life”
(47).
From the Commission’s perspective, in fact, clear and unambiguous statements such as these stand at odds with the Wyoming District’s expression of “regret that this document is not clear enough
to receive an unqualified commendation for use by pastors and congregations” and its view that this report needs to be “revisited” in
order to “make clear and unambiguous the scriptural teaching on
this issue that ‘the living but unborn are persons in the sight of God
from the time of conception.’ ”
At the same time, the Commission recognizes the fact that certain aspects of this report might be misread and/or misunderstood,

including such critical issues as the specific focus of this report and
its usage (within the context of this specific focus) of the “burden
of proof” argumentation. Misunderstandings of this nature seem
especially evident in the “whereases” of the Wyoming District
resolution, which identify specific issues underlying the concerns
expressed in the final resolveds. In the response that follows, therefore, the Commission seeks to address these issues, which fall into
two major categories: 1) concerns about terminology and 2) concerns about argumentation.
Before addressing these specific concerns, a preliminary word
may be helpful. At the very beginning of its report on CFHB, the
CTCR references its work in previous reports on human beginnings and then states that “in the present report … our focus is on
Christian participation in public debate concerning the use of embryos for medical research and therapy” (4, fn. 1; emphasis added).
This is a critical point for understanding the approach taken by the
Commission in its 2005 report. In The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod, we regard the Holy Scriptures as the written Word of God
and the only rule and norm for faith and practice. Because of our
faith in God’s Word, which is rooted in our faith in Christ, we are
compelled to serve our neighbors in both church and society. This
includes speaking and acting in the public square in ways that promote the common good and demonstrate care and compassion for
all human life.
Effective Christian activity in the public square, furthermore,
involves making use of arguments and strategies that are grounded
not simply in “what the Bible says” but in human reason and natural law (which are accessible to all people). The Commission is
convinced that what it says in CFHB regarding the value of human
life at every stage of its development is completely consistent with
what it has said in its previous reports regarding this issue. What is
new in this report is the “focus on Christian participation in public debate concerning the use of embryos for medical research and
therapy” (4, fn. 7; emphasis added). Christian participation in public debate requires the use of language, argumentation, and strategies that—according to Scripture itself—are most appropriate and
effective for interaction in the secular realm, where God’s Word is
not regarded as authoritative. The response offered below seeks to
“flesh out” these presuppositions and distinctions in ways that help
to make more clear the nature and purpose of the Commission’s
approach in this report.

Concerns about Terminology
In its fourth whereas, the Wyoming District resolution says:
“Previously the CTCR has been unequivocal in its statement that
life begins at conception, but in this document speaks of … ‘development that leads to … a human life.’ ”
Unfortunately, the partial quotation of this sentence results in
the impression that it is saying just the opposite of what it actually
says. The entire sentence (quoted earlier in this response) reads as
follows: “Human embryos, beginning with conception, are set on a
course of development that leads continuously to an unfolding of a
unique human life” (47; emphasis added). The continuous unfolding of a unique human life, asserts the Commission, begins with
embryonic human life at the moment of conception. As the CTCR
says in its 1984 report Abortion in Perspective: “Human beings
come into existence and then gradually unfold what they already
are” (28, fn. 17; emphasis added). There is absolutely no “equivocation” in the statement on page 47 of CFHB or in the report as a
whole regarding the fact that human life begins at conception. The
very sub-title of the Commission’s report is “Christian Care and
Pre-Implantation Human Life” (emphasis added), and the Commission’s unyielding position throughout this report is that human life

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 288

4/15/10 2:40 PM