Abortion

Mischief

"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus 21:22-25).

What does this passage mean? A live, albeit premature, birth, is a very much of a possible outcome of an assault on a pregnant woman. Some interpreters, however, do not understand the passage to leave room for this possibility. Jerome's Vulgate renders it, "If men quarrel, and one strike a woman with child and she miscarry indeed, but live herself: he shall be answerable for so much damage as the woman’s husband shall require, and as arbiters shall award. But if her death ensue thereupon, he shall render life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus 21:22-25, Douay). Under this interpretation the passage is inconsistent with classifying abortion as murder, since murder cannot be satisfied with payment of a fine. But the passage reads differently in the Septuagint:

"And if two men strive and smite a woman with child, and her child be born imperfectly formed, he shall be forced to pay a penalty: as the woman’s husband may lay upon him, he shall pay with a valuation. But if it be perfectly formed, he shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus 21:22-25 LXX, Brenton Septuagint).

This was Philo's understanding of the passage:

On this understanding, the passage would categorize abortion as murder, but not from the time of conception. Philo's criteria of human conformation are met at about two months. While Philo's understanding in no way encourages abortion prior to that, his view would not categorize early abortion as murder. As will be seen shortly, many early Christian writers understand the faith to forbid abortion; are their scruples based on this text? Most of the differences between the Septuagint and the later Masoretic Hebrew text are not significant for doctrine; unfortunately this one is. Can the Dead Sea Scrolls provide insight as to the true text?:

"[And if men fight together, and hurt a pregnant woman, so that the child is born, and yet no har]m [comes of the incident, he shall] certainly [be fined as the woman's husband demands of him; and he shall pay as the ju]dge[s determine. But if any harm does come of it, then you shall give life for life, eye for] eye, tooth [for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for] burn, woun[d for wound, blow for blow.] (The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, Martin Abegg, Jr., Peter Flint & Eugene Ulrich).

Unfortunately the bracketed material, which is missing, is crucial. Some readers understand "so that her fruit depart from her" to leave room for a live birth. If that is the case, the passage is anti-abortion. It is unfortunate both the text and its interpretation are uncertain. Josephus claimed to have in his possession the temple text of scripture. He understands the law of Moses both to forbid abortion, and also to categorize it as murder:

Recall, Philo's understanding of the Septuagint categorizes, not all abortion, but that after approximately two months, as murder. But Josephus mentions neither months nor 'trimesters.' He must be understanding the Masoretic text of Exodus 21:22 to categorize abortion as murder, because there is no other text which can be in view. In the Antiquities of the Jews, however, he offers the conventional explanation of this text (Book IV, Chapter 8, 33).

While this flies in the face of rabbinic interpretation, there is nothing in Biblical usage to the contrary. The text says, "...so that her fruit depart." 'Fruit' is 'yeled,' 'child,' 'offspring.' It is not specific as to age or condition, being used even of young men. Nor does it specify a miscarriage versus a live birth: "Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of the rock bring forth? or canst thou mark when the hinds do calve? Canst thou number the months that they fulfil? or knowest thou the time when they bring forth? They bow themselves, they bring forth their young ones [Strong's 03206, 'yeled'], they cast out their sorrows." (Job 39:13). 'Depart,' 'yatsa,' means just that, 'depart,' 'go out.' So there is nothing in the phraseology that precludes a live birth. In that case, Exodus 21:22 would mean that, if and only if the assault on the pregnant woman results in the premature birth of a live, healthy infant, is the assailant to be assessed a fine; under any other result, including miscarriage or the subsequent death of an infant born live, the assailant will answer for murder.

The Sibyls produced a genre of Jewish literature, perhaps not of the utmost respectability, but this woman adds her voice to the testimony that the Jews of the day condemned abortion:

"Those who licentiously defiled the flesh;
And all who loosed the girdle of the maid
For secret intercourse, and all who caused
Abortions and all who their offspring cast
Unlawfully away; and sorcerers
And sorceresses with them, and these wrath
Of the heavenly and immortal God shall drive
Against a pillar where shall all around
In a circle flow a restless stream of fire;
And deathless angels of the immortal God,
Who ever is, shall bind with lasting bonds
In chains of flaming fire and from above
Punish them all by scourge most terribly;
And in Gehenna, in the gloom of night,
Shall they be cast 'neath many horrid beasts
Of Tartarus, where darkness is immense."

(Sibylline Oracles, Book II).

Thou Shalt Not Kill

"Thou shalt not kill." (Exodus 20:13)

Human life has a unique value all its own which is not related to function or utility to others. One Siamese twin cannot take it upon him or herself to declare, 'What use this superfluous appendage, this extra head? Lop it off!' However inconvenient the situation may be, a human life cannot be ended for the sake of convenience.

Transgression

"Thus says the LORD: for three transgressions of the Ammonites, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment; because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead in order to enlarge their territory." (Amos 1:13).

To the most extreme abortion advocates, ripping open a pregnant woman cannot seem a worse crime than ripping open anyone else. There is only one life lost by their count. Yet God sees this crime as especially heinous.

My Name

"Listen to me, O coastlands, pay attention, you peoples from far away! The LORD called me before I was born, while I was in my mother’s womb he named me." (Isaiah 49:1).

Admittedly this passage refers to the Messiah, who pre-existed His incarnation by a factor of eternity. Such eternal existence is not the lot of the average person. Yet this passage does not communicate that there was some nameless mass of tissue filling Mary's womb, which He who had a name waited to inhabit, but rather than the child who bore a name lived in Mary's womb.

Born Guilty

"Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me." (Psalm 51:5 NRSV).

A fish or a tad-pole is not a "sinner," because God has laid down no moral law for such creatures to follow. If the psalmist was a "sinner" since conception, he must have been a human person since conception.

Before You Were Born

While the first clause can be understood in light of God's foreknowledge, the second addresses not knowledge or choice but consecration. The word 'sanctified' means to set apart, to make holy. If before coming forth "out of the womb" Jeremiah was a lifeless conglomeration of cells, what was consecrated or set apart for service?

“Accordingly you read the word of God which was spoken to Jeremiah, 'Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee.' Since God forms us in the womb, He also breathes upon us, as He also did at the first creation, when 'the Lord God formed man, and breathed into him the breath of life.' Nor could God have known man in the womb, except in his entire nature: 'And before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee.' Well, was it then a dead body at that early stage? Certainly not. For “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.'” (Tertullian, A Treatise on the Soul, Chapter 26).

Personal Pronoun

What personal pronoun identifies the inhabitant of the womb? 'It,' as might be appropriate for a not-yet-human mass of tissue? Or 'me' and 'I,' the pronouns persons use of themselves?

New Testament

John the Baptist

"For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb." (Luke 1:15)

Can something non-living be filled with the Holy Spirit? The child was indeed inspired even while in the womb, "For behold, when the voice of thy salutation came into mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy." (Luke 1:44).

"Before these two boys were born, we are told, their relative importance was announced when the fetus of John the Baptist, while still in the womb, leaped to salute the fetus of Jesus (Luke 1:41-44). Surely no one would seriously argue that this story was literal history!" (Bishop John Shelby Spong, The Sins of Scripture, p. 21).

Suppose, however, that it is literal history. Can any believer exclude John, in his status in the womb, from the protection of Exodus 20:13, "Thou shalt not kill."

Testimony

Some moderns might be surprised at the medical competency of the ancients, in both the field of pharmacology and surgery. The authors quoted below are fallible human beings who say, sometimes very profound things, sometimes rather silly things. But these early authors did understand their Christian faith to forbid abortion:

Both surgical and chemical abortion were available in ancient Rome:

"But how few gilded beds contain a female sweating in labor!
It shows how fatal the skill, how potent the drugs, on babe or
Mother, when an abortionist gets high prices to kill
Mankind in the womb. Rejoice, poor husband; give her the pill
Or the dose yourself." (Juvenal, The Satires of Juvenal, VI. 594-598).

Evidently this procedure could be lethal, not only to the child, but also to the mother, on occasion. The emperor Domitian impregnated his niece Julia, then compelled her to have an abortion:

"Later, when she was bereft of father and husband, he loved her ardently and without disguise, and even became the cause of her death by compelling her to get rid of a child of his by abortion." (Suetonius, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Domitian).

Cicero reports a trial for abortion which resulted in conviction, though unfortunately the grounds are somewhat unclear in his account:

"I recollect that a certain Milesian woman, when I was in Asia, because she had by medicines brought on abortion, having been bribed to do so by the heirs in reversion, was convicted of a capital crime; and rightly, inasmuch as she had destroyed the hope of the father, the memory of his name, the supply of his race, the heir of his family, a citizen intended for the use of the republic." (Cicero, For Cluentius, Section XI, 32).

Quintilian mentions this case in his Institutes of Oratory, Book VIII, Chapter IV, 11.