Our Dirty Little Secret

2 Samuel 11:1-27

Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah dwell in booths, and my lord Joab and the servants of my lord are camping in the open field. Shall I then go to my house, to eat and to drink and to lie with my wife? As you live, and as your soul lives, I will not do this thing.” Then David said to Uriah, “Remain here today also, and tomorrow I will send you back.” So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. And David invited him, and he ate in his presence and drank, so that he made him drunk. And in the evening he went out to lie on his couch with the servants of his lord, but he did not go down to his house.

In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it by the hand of Uriah. In the letter he wrote, “Set Uriah in the forefront of the hardest fighting, and then draw back from him, that he may be struck down, and die.” And as Joab was besieging the city, he assigned Uriah to the place where he knew there were valiant men. And the men of the city came out and fought with Joab, and some of the servants of David among the people fell. Uriah the Hittite also died. Then Joab sent and told David all the news about the fighting. And he instructed the messenger, “When you have finished telling all the news about the fighting to the king, then, if the king's anger rises, and if he says to you, ‘Why did you go so near the city to fight? Did you not know that they would shoot from the wall? Who killed Abimelech the son of Jerubbesheth? Did not a woman cast an upper millstone on him from the wall, so that he died at Thebez? Why did you go so near the wall?’ then you shall say, ‘Your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead also.’”

So the messenger went and came and told David all that Joab had sent him to tell. The messenger said to David, “The men gained an advantage over us and came out against us in the field, but we drove them back to the entrance of the gate. Then the archers shot at your servants from the wall. Some of the king's servants are dead, and your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead also.” David said to the messenger, “Thus shall you say to Joab, ‘Do not let this matter trouble you, for the sword devours now one and now another. Strengthen your attack against the city and overthrow it.’ And encourage him.”

When the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she lamented over her husband. And when the mourning was over, David sent and brought her to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord.[1]

January 22, 1973, is a day which will live long in infamy. On that day, the learned justices who make up the Supreme Court of the United States of America found in the constitution of that great nation a right of a woman to murder her unborn child. The learned justices, ruling in Roe v. Wade, found that a “right of privacy” earlier discovered was “broad enough to encompass” a right to abortion. A state could only regulate abortion for the purpose of protection maternal “health.” Issued on the same day, Doe v. Bolton defined “health” to mean “all factors” that affect the woman, including “physical, emotional, psychological, [and] familial [health], and the woman’s age.” In effect, a woman’s “right” to abortion was unchecked by judicial fiat.

The Supreme Court essentially decided that a woman “owned” her unborn child, much as a slave-owner once “owned” slaves. Since the woman was the “owner” of the unborn child, she had a right enshrined in law either to keep or to dispose of that child. Since that time, tens of millions of unborn children have been slaughtered in utero. The churches of North America have roused themselves occasionally to condemn the ruling and to slam those women who choose to deal with their desperation through choosing to abortion over birth.

Each year, on the Sunday in January nearest the anniversary of that ruling, churches throughout North America observe a Sunday which has become known as Sanctity of Life Sunday to teach the congregations of the fundamental right to life. Many Christians will form what are called “life-chains”—lines of people protesting the evil of abortion. Multiplied sermons are preached condemning the practise of abortion. Coming from these sermons and activities will no doubt be other activities designed to attempt to reverse the general social acceptance of abortion on demand.

I cannot approve of abortion. Nevertheless, I am deeply disturbed by the reaction of many, if not most, of my fellow evangelical Christians. First, I am concerned at the tendency to harness the churches in an attempt to legislate against specific moral evils. The Faith of Christ the Lord is not to be reduced to a mere political institution. The message of life is delivered in order to change hearts, and we are convinced that that changed hearts will result in transformed lives.

Again, I view much of the efforts of evangelical Christians as cheap Christianity. Too many of my fellow Christians are looking for an easy way to serve God. We are given a commission by Christ Himself—a commission to win souls and thus transform lives. If we are unwilling to win the lost, we have no moral right to tell those same lost people how they should live their lives. Too few of us have inconvenienced ourselves to comfort a terrified teenager wondering how her parents will react to the presence of an unanticipated grandchild. Too few of us have opened our homes and our hearts to receive these frightened girls, much less to receive the children if they should be born. Too few of us have been willing to listen to our own children, to hear them as they struggle against the pressure to conform to the mores of a fallen world. The churches are not to become just another political entity, but we of the Faith are to serve as lights in the midst of the darkness. We do this as individuals and not as a political power.

My concern is not simply that abortion exists as the principle means of birth control in our nation today, my concern is that the churches have failed to address a dark secret. Many congregations contain men who pressured women to have abortions. These men struggle with feelings of guilt over their actions when they think about them. Many congregations contain women who terminated a pregnancy before they came to faith. These women struggle with fear and guilt over what they think is a dark secret.

Nancy Pruett, director of the American Family Association, stated last year that “even pro-life believers, when faced with the shame of a pregnancy outside of marriage, will do as King David did. She remarked that Christians “will resort to murder to cover the sin. Some don't believe their church would ever accept them if they had [borne] the child. Many Christian parents insist that their churchgoing teen-ager abort rather than bring shame on the family.” This is a shocking statement which should challenge us as Christians. I may have doubted such contentions at one time, but I no longer question her statement and the shocking evidence she presented at that time.

The Barna research organisation has documented a disappointing slide in moral acuity during the past decade. One study, dated September 10, 2001, bears the title Practical Outcomes Replace Biblical Principles as the Moral Standard.[2] Another study, dated August 6, 2001, informs us that born again adults are just as likely to divorce as are non-Christians.[3] Such studies lead me to believe that there is a dreadful slippage in moral standards among professed evangelical believers. Therefore, the assertion of Nancy Pruett becomes all together too believable.

The question is not, “Are there among us men and women who have sinned in this manner.” The question which should attract our attention is “How should we, as believers in the Word of God, respond to those hurting people among us who have chosen to kill the young which God has given?” This is the message to which God has directed me this day. This is the study God has called me to present. May He give me His strength to accomplish His will as I seek to instruct each of us who name the Name of Christ, and as I endeavour to comfort those who hurt among us.

The Account of David’s Sin — It is a terrible recitation of human sinfulness before us. David saw a woman bathing. Though informed that she was another man’s wife, David sent for this woman determined to sleep with her. Because he was king, he knew that he could send for her without anyone questioning what he was doing. He was accountable to no man!

The woman’s husband, Uriah, was absent, serving the king as a soldier in defence of the nation during the spring campaigns. Uriah was not just any soldier—He was armour-bearer to the field marshal.[4] He was himself a man of considerable importance. The king knew all this, and yet he slept with Uriah’s wife and she became pregnant. Time passed and the woman missed her period. She likely waited some time to confirm for certain that she was pregnant. Eventually, she informed David that she was pregnant.

The king deliberately chose to deceive his loyal servant. He sent for Uriah, husband of Bathsheba whom the king had impregnated. When Uriah arrived in the city, David attempted to induce him to go home and sleep with his wife. Uriah was a man of noble character; he was unwilling to avail himself of any creature comforts so long as the armies of the king were engaged in combat. He had shared their hardship in the field, and though he was back in Jerusalem at the King’s command, he would forego all pleasures, enduring hardship, as did his comrades. David then attempted to get Uriah drunk so he would lower his standard and go home to sleep with his wife, but the good man refused to surrender his standard calling for united sacrifice together with the armies of the king. He would not give himself pleasure while others sacrificed.

David resorted to murder by proxy to cover his sin. Others needn’t know that Uriah had not slept with his wife—if he died in combat. Joab, field marshal of the army, was instructed to ensure that Uriah did not return. When Uriah was dead, David was informed. He received the news with composure, nonchalantly dismissing the messenger who had brought the sad news. However, note the final two verses of our text.

When the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she lamented over her husband. And when the mourning was over, David sent and brought her to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord.[5]

David is the focus of the account, but I cannot help but wonder about Bathsheba? The English Standard Version informs us that she lamented over her husband. Translating somewhat literally, the Berkeley Bible states that she made lamentation over Uriah.[6] The language could lead us to believe that her mourning was mere form. The root of the word for lamenting is the word dp's;, which means to beat the breast. Lamentation began immediately with death, went on as the body was carried to the tomb and continued at least seven days following burial.[7] Grief could be demonstrated in various ways, including going barefoot, stripping off one’s clothing, cutting one’s body, fasting, scattering ashes, or beating some part of the body. Weeping, especially by women, was such an established sign of mourning that in later times professional mourners would be employed to wail loudly.

Before ever this sin was consummated, Bathsheba could have refused to sleep with the king. Later, she could have refused to live with him. Her mourning seems somewhat contrived here. The fact that the text acknowledges her action and then passes to the next phase of her life leads us to believe that the death of Uriah, and her own complicity in the crime through having brought about his death by sleeping with the king, were not issues of great moment. Nevertheless, the final statement of the text makes plain that God has a view which cannot be neglected.

The Human Tendency to Sin — Each of us is a fallen being. We are thoroughly sinful. In the language of the theologian, we are utterly depraved. God, speaking through Jeremiah, says The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure [Jeremiah 17:9]. The human condition is such that even our best thoughts fail to approach the righteous standard which God sets. Our best efforts toward goodness are inevitably tainted with our own sinful situation. Every aspect of our being is sinful; there is nothing of ourselves which can be offered to God and merit His praise or acceptance.

James, the brother of our Lord, spoke of our fallen situation, analysing how sin gains a place in our lives. He wrote, When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death [James 1:13-15].

Temptation to sin comes to every human; it is part of the human condition. James says that temptation arises from our own desires. David looked at a beautiful woman bathing, and he began to desire her beauty. There is an awful difference between lust and love. Lust desires to enslave; love longs to free. Lust seeks to possess; love seeks to complement. Lust focuses on gratifying the self; love focuses on building another. David’s desire overrode what scant goodness he possessed and gratifying his own desire was all that mattered. Just so, our own lusts drive us to our own destruction.

Martin Luther was wont to say that he could not keep the birds from flying over his head, but he could keep them from roosting in his hair. Just so, I cannot keep temptation from coming, but I need not embrace it. David’s first look was innocent, but when he lingered, he began to lust. His own evil desire dragged him away and enticed him. The remainder of this passage is overlooked, perhaps deliberately, when we are in the grip of our own lust [ejpiqumiva]. The passage warns that desire, once conceived, gives birth to sin. Sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

Before David knew it, Bathsheba was before him. We can imagine that he dismissed the messenger. Events took their course, and soon she was in his arms. Was she flattered at his attention? Did she remember that she was married? Did he think of his sin against this woman’s husband? Did he think of his position as king? Likely, lust burned hotly and both were caught up in the moment, seeking to gratify whatever passion burned most brightly at that moment.

The deed was done. She cleaned herself and returned home. He returned to his duties as king. Each appetite sated and the incident behind them. Before the incident is finished, many people will die, however. Bathsheba carries a child, sired at the expense of her own dignity and at the expense of the honesty of the king. Her husband will shortly be murdered as the cost of sin begins to add up. The child will die shortly after death. Later, the king’s daughter will be raped by one of her brothers; and another brother will kill the rapist in revenge for his sister’s humiliation. That brother will lead a rebellion, and the king will see many of his subjects killed in combat. The cost of sin is always greater than we imagine.

When the abortionists tell young women to rid themselves of the foetus, calling it “the product of conception,” do they warn of the consequences? Do they speak of the increased incident of cervical cancer? Do they warn them of the vastly increased possibility of infertility? Do they tell them of the long-term mental and emotional complications arising from the knowledge that they killed their own child?

Does the man who pressures a woman to abort realise that he will likely experience feelings of guilt? Does anyone warn that man who watches helplessly as a woman kills his child that he will experience increased frustration because he did not protect his own young as God intended? Are such men aware of the emotional trauma which attends their failure to fulfil the role God designed them to fill?

The Human Response to Sin’s Exposure — The text does not dwell on David’s reaction to Bathsheba’s message that she was pregnant. In fact, the text is succinct, leaving us to put together the pieces. Then she went back home. The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant” [2 Samuel 11:4b, 5]. It is as though we read the word, Oops! Everything seemed so tidy, but it has turned so messy.

When Moses warned the tribes of Gad and Reuben, together with the half-tribe of Manasseh, occupied the Transjordan region, to keep their word, he appended this warning. You may be sure that your sin will find you out [Numbers 32:23]. It is a warning which every individual should wisely take to heart. You may be sure that your sin will find you out. Simply because you have sinned in one instance does not mean that you should compound the sin through performing yet other sins in a futile effort to cover over the first sin. In fact, and especially if you claim to be related to Christ the Lord, you may be certain that you cannot hide your sin. It will be revealed!

David’s rush into sin had consequences, and when he was about to be exposed, he reacted. The most natural reaction to exposure of one’s sin is fear, and fear is a lousy platform from which to plan one’s future. I am reminded of our first father when he sinned against the Creator. Eve was tempted by the serpent. She believed his lie that if she ate of the tree she would be like God. The fruit promised so much and looked so inviting, and so she ate. Though Eve was deceived, Adam chose to rebel against the command of God, and so he ate from the fruit.

Immediately, each of our first parents knew that they had sinned. They were aware of their condition, and at the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden, they hid themselves. God called out to Adam, Where are you? Adam’s response is instructive. I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid [Genesis 3:10].

The response of Adam to sin was fear. David’s response to sin was fear. In the same manner, the immediate response of each of us when we have sinned is to fear. We fear exposure, and so we attempt to cover over our sin. Whether as little children we attempt to hide the crumbs from stolen cookies so that our mothers will not know our sin, or whether in fear we attempt to get rid of any evidence that we have sinned sexually, our immediate thought is that we can hide our sin through getting rid of the evidence.

David sinned against God… sinned against Uriah… sinned against Bathsheba… sinned against all Israel… by sleeping with Bathsheba. When his sin threatened to be exposed because he had impregnated the woman, he attempted to cover his sin through lies and deceit, and finally when lies and deceit failed, through murder. He only succeeded in multiplying his own culpability before God and before man. In the same way, when we have sinned, we only compound the sin when we attempt to hide it or seek to take it away through our own sinful efforts.

We know that killing an unborn child will never suffice to remove the guilt which comes from exposure. An adulterous affair is not covered over by killing the child which comes from that affair. The momentary gratification of our own desires cannot be swept away through killing that which grows in the womb. The fear of an uncertain future is not removed and the future secured through murdering a child.

God’s Response to Sin — The eleventh chapter of Second Samuel ended with the sobering knowledge that the thing David had done displeased the Lord. How does God respond to human sin? If I know how God responds, perhaps I can teach how we as Christians and as a congregation should respond to sin. In order to explore this vital issue, I need to move ahead to the following chapter in the book.

God confronted David with his sin. The Lord sent Nathan to David. Nathan was the prophet of God. His was the unenviable task of confronting the king with his own sinful behaviour. Just so, God confronts us as Christians with our sin. Perhaps He does so through a message preached in our presence. Perhaps He does so through the words of a dear friend or colleague. Perhaps we are convicted through the reading of the Scripture. Whatever method God uses, it is His Spirit working to convict us of our sin.

Jesus said that when he [the Holy Spirit] comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgement: in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and in regard to judgement, because the prince of this world now stands condemned [John 16:8-11]. Because we belong to Him, He will convict our hearts.

God reminded David that there were consequences to sin. Indeed, we know that the wages of sin is death [Romans 6:23]. God called David to account, confronting him with his duplicity, confronting him with his own lust, confronting him with the murderous nature which had seized him after his sin threatened him. Now, there would be consequences—David would pay with many tears.

This is what the Lord says: “Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity upon you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel” [2 Samuel 12:11, 12].

How do you react when confronted with God’s discipline? When God reminds you that every choice has a consequence, how do you respond? As a little boy, I learned there were consequences to every choice. My father believed in applying the board of education to the seat of learning. I confess that I likely needed strong discipline to mould my will. My father would sometimes take off his belt and strap me with that belt. I learned quickly that if I tried to draw away, the blows hurt. However, if I drew close and hugged him, the blows did not sting and we were quickly reunited.

Something like that is true with God. Your Father does not delight to hurt you, but He desires what is best for you. The author of the Hebrew letter states of God’s discipline, that our fathers disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, that we may share in his holiness. No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it [Hebrews 12:10, 11].

At last, God provided a covering which David could not provide. So, David, confronted with God’s message that he would be disciplined, responded with confession. I have sinned against the Lord [2 Samuel 12:13a]. In turn, God responds to the penitent heart, saying, The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die [2 Samuel 12:13b]. In effect, David had attempted to cover over his sin, but when confronted by God, he confessed that he needed a divine covering for the sin.

Let me give you some insight into this business of a covering. When Adam and Eve sinned through disobedience, God provided a covering for their sinful condition. Genesis 3:21 states that the Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. The two were naked, uncovered, so they hid from God until there was a covering for them. This is the meaning of atonement. A covering for sin must be provided so we can again enter into the presence of the Lord God.

This is what God did for David. He held him accountable for his sin, but He forgave His sin. Atonement was provided—a covering for the sin was provided. Following this exchange with God’s prophet, David wrote the fifty-first Psalm. Listen to the words of a portion of that Psalm.

Have mercy on me, O God,

according to your unfailing love;

according to your great compassion

blot out my transgressions.

Wash away all my iniquity

and cleanse me from my sin.

For I know my transgressions,

and my sin is always before me.

Against you, you only, have I sinned

and done what is evil in your sight,

so that you are proved right when you speak

and justified when you judge.

Surely I was sinful at birth,

sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Surely you desire truth in the inner parts;

you teach me wisdom

in the inmost place.

Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean;

wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.

Let me hear joy and gladness;

let the bones you have crushed rejoice.

Hide your face from my sins

and blot out all my iniquity.

Create in me a pure heart, O God,

and renew a steadfast spirit within me.

Do not cast me from your presence

or take your Holy Spirit from me.

Restore to me the joy of your salvation

and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

Then I will teach transgressors your ways,

and sinners will turn back to you.

Save me from bloodguilt, O God,

the God who saves me,

and my tongue will sing of your righteousness.

O Lord, open my lips,

and my mouth will declare your praise.

You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it;

you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings.

The sacrifices of God are a

broken spirit;

a broken and contrite heart,

O God, you will not despise.

[Psalm 51:1-17]

These are the words of a penitent individual. He is no longer attempting to cover over his sin. He is confessing his sin. He accepts his role in sin and acknowledges that he sinned against God. He seeks restoration to God, and we know from the passage we have just considered that God did indeed hear this prayer. David was forgiven and God was honoured.

Here is my concern today. Among us are perhaps women who have been injured through accepting the lie that they could cover over their situation. Perhaps they were pressured by a man who feared discovery. Perhaps they were assured that there was nothing to the procedure to remove a lump of tissue from their womb.

Nancy Pruett says that spiritual pride must be addressed as a leading cause of abortion among Christians. “Many had abortions for ‘image maintenance’ … and we don't want people to find out that we have sin in our lives,” she says. About half the one hundred fifty women she had counselled about their abortions, during thirteen years of her ministry, were Christians when they ended their pregnancies. A survey of nearly 10,000 abortion patients, conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute in 1994-5, revealed that Catholics were as likely as women in the general population to have an abortion, while Protestants were 69 percent as likely as women in the general population, and evangelical or born-again Christians were at 39 percent likelihood to have had an abortion as were women in the general population.

As we reach out, it is highly likely that we will bring women into the Faith who have had abortions. Above all else, we need to realise that these women have suffered the death of a child. They will not be helped by condemnation, but they are in need of help. Let us always remember to tell them that help is available in the presence of Christ the Lord. As such women confess their sin, He will forgive them. He will provide a covering for their sin and bring them into full fellowship. As we reach out, we will doubtless reach men who feel helpless at the thought they were unable to protect their child at the time of greatest vulnerability—while still in the womb. As such men come seeking God’s help, let us ensure that we do nothing to turn them from Him who gives grace and help in time of need.

Let not the church think herself immune to such hurts. We have among us hurting people. Our responsibility is to ensure that they find a place of refuge where they may gain strength until such time that they can take their place together with us. Those who hurt, suffering from the ravages of sin, must know that they are welcome among the people of God and that they will not be condemned. Make no mistake! We hate the sin, for the effects of such sin are horrible and hurtful in the extreme. But let none of us think that we are immune from the effects of such evil. As the Apostle has warned each of us, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall [1 Corinthians 10:12]!

We must not excuse sin, but neither must we condemn sinners. We must dare confront those who sin with the truth of the Word of God, calling them to repentance and faith. We know that only through confession is forgiveness found, and only when forgiveness has been extended can the healing process begin. Those among us who suffer in silence from past sin are slowly self-destructing, taking their families with them. Those post-abortion women who live in silent torment must know that they will find hope and help with the church of the Living God. Let us resolve to be that church.

Knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit [John 19:28-30]. This is a vivid description of the final moments of a great transaction which occurred at Calvary. Jesus, the Son of God is making atonement—providing that infinite covering—for sin. Even now, we can see His great heart breaking as He gives Himself for our sin.

Crying out, tetevlestai, He bowed His head and gave up His Spirit. Atonement is made! A covering is provided! Sin no longer need keep any man from God. Grace is offered to all who will receive it. Let the church trumpet the triumphant note that God forgives sinners and receives them as His own dearly loved children.

The author of the Hebrew letter speaks of this mysterious work which Christ performed. Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted [Hebrews 2:14-18].

This is our message which we proclaim to all who will receive it. Christ will accept you as you are. You need no longer walk in the pain of the past, but rather you can be freed to walk in the glorious light of His love. Do it now. Do it today. Come and be free of all that has hurt for so long. Come and receive His grace. Come, and angels attend you in the way. Amen.

J

anuary 22, 1973, is a day which will live long in infamy. On that day, the learned justices who make up the Supreme Court of the United States of America found in the constitution of that great nation a right of a woman to murder her unborn child. The learned justices, ruling in Roe v. Wade, found that a “right of privacy” earlier discovered was “broad enough to encompass” a right to abortion. A state could only regulate abortion for the purpose of protection maternal “health.” Issued on the same day, Doe v. Bolton defined “health” to mean “all factors” that affect the woman, including “physical, emotional, psychological, [and] familial [health], and the woman’s age.” In effect, a woman’s “right” to abortion was unchecked by judicial fiat.

In a decision not unlike the infamous Dred Scott case, the Supreme Court of the United States of America essentially decided that a woman “owned” her unborn child, much as a slave-owner once “owned” slaves. Since the woman was the “owner” of the unborn child, the learned justices discovered a right enshrined in law, whereby a woman may either keep or dispose of her unborn child. Since that time, tens of millions of unborn children have been slaughtered in utero. The churches of North America have roused themselves occasionally to condemn the ruling and to slam those women who choose to deal with their desperation through choosing to abortion over birth.

Each year, on the Sunday in January nearest the anniversary of that ruling, churches throughout North America observe a Sunday which has become known as Sanctity of Life Sunday, a day set aside for teaching the congregations of the fundamental right to life. On that Sunday, many Christians form what have come to be called “life-chains”—long lines of people protesting the evil of abortion. Multiplied sermons are preached condemning the practise of abortion. Coming from these sermons and activities will no doubt be other activities designed to attempt to reverse the general social acceptance of abortion on demand.

I cannot approve of abortion. The Word of God clearly condemns the practise and my own conscience can never justify the act. Medical studies and extensive research in the literature convinces me that it is never necessary to kill the unborn. Nevertheless, I am deeply disturbed by the reaction of many, if not most, of my fellow evangelical Christians. First, I am concerned at the tendency to harness the churches in an attempt to legislate against specific moral evils. The Faith of Christ the Lord is not to be reduced to a mere political institution. The message of life is delivered in order to change hearts, and we are convinced that that changed hearts will result in transformed lives.

Again, I view much of the efforts of evangelical Christians as cheap Christianity. Too many of my fellow Christians are looking for an easy way to serve God. We are given a commission by Christ Himself—a commission to win souls and thus transform lives. If we are unwilling to win the lost, we have no moral right to tell those same lost people how they should live their lives. Too few of us have inconvenienced ourselves to comfort a terrified teenager wondering how her parents will react to the presence of an unanticipated grandchild. Too few of us have opened our homes and our hearts to receive these frightened girls, much less to receive the children if they should be born. Too few of us have been willing to listen to our own children, to hear them as they struggle against the pressure to conform to the mores of a fallen world. The churches are not to become just another political entity, but we of the Faith are to serve as lights in the midst of the darkness. We do this as individuals and not as a political power.

My concern is not simply that abortion exists as the principle means of birth control in our nation today, my concern is that the churches have failed to address a dark secret. Many congregations contain men who pressured women to have abortions. These men struggle with feelings of guilt over their actions when they think about them. Many congregations contain women who terminated a pregnancy before they came to faith. These women struggle with fear and guilt over what they think is a dark secret.

Our dirty little secret is that we are not all that different from the remainder of the world. Nancy Pruett, director of the American Family Association, stated last year that “even pro-life believers, when faced with the shame of a pregnancy outside of marriage, will do as King David did. She remarked that Christians “will resort to murder to cover the sin. Some don't believe their church would ever accept them if they had [borne] the child. Many Christian parents insist that their churchgoing teen-ager abort rather than bring shame on the family.” This is a shocking statement which should challenge us as Christians. I may have doubted such contentions at one time, but I no longer question her statement and the shocking evidence she presented at that time.

Nancy Pruett says that spiritual pride must be addressed as a leading cause of abortion among Christians. “Many had abortions for ‘image maintenance’ … and we don't want people to find out that we have sin in our lives,” she says. About half the one hundred fifty women she had counselled about their abortions, during thirteen years of her ministry, were Christians when they ended their pregnancies. A survey of nearly 10,000 abortion patients, conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute in 1994-5, revealed that Catholics were as likely as women in the general population to have an abortion, while Protestants were 69 percent as likely as women in the general population, and evangelical or born-again Christians were at 39 percent likelihood to have had an abortion as were women in the general population.

The Barna research organisation has documented a disappointing slide in moral acuity during the past decade. One study, dated September 10, 2001, bears the title Practical Outcomes Replace Biblical Principles as the Moral Standard.[8] Another study, dated August 6, 2001, informs us that born again adults are just as likely to divorce as are non-Christians.[9] Such studies lead me to believe that there is a dreadful slippage in moral standards among professed evangelical believers. Therefore, the assertion of Nancy Pruett becomes all together too believable.

The question is not, “Are there among us men and women who have sinned in this manner.” The question which should attract our attention is “How should we, as believers in the Word of God, respond to those hurting people among us who have chosen to kill the young which God has given?” This is the message to which God has directed me this day. This is the study God has called me to present. May He give me His strength to accomplish His will as I seek to instruct each of us who name the Name of Christ, and as I endeavour to comfort those who hurt among us.

Nancy Pruett says that spiritual pride must be addressed as a leading cause of abortion among Christians. “Many had abortions for ‘image maintenance’ … and we don't want people to find out that we have sin in our lives,” she says. About half the one hundred fifty women she had counselled about their abortions, during thirteen years of her ministry, were Christians when they ended their pregnancies. A survey of nearly 10,000 abortion patients, conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute in 1994-5, revealed that Catholics were as likely as women in the general population to have an abortion, while Protestants were 69 percent as likely as women in the general population, and evangelical or born-again Christians were at 39 percent likelihood to have had an abortion as were women in the general population.

----

[2] Practical Outcomes Replace Biblical Principles As the Moral Outcome, September 10, 2001, http://www.barna.org/cgi-bin/PagePressRelease,asp?PressReleaseID=97&Reference=E&Key=abortion

[3] Born Again Adults Less Likely to Co-Habit, Just as Likely to Divorce, August 6, 2001, http://www.barna.org/cgi-bin/PagePressRelease,asp?PressReleaseID=95&Reference=D

[4] Martin Abegg, Jr., Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible (HarperSanFrancisco™, 1999)

[5] Holy Bible, English Standard Version

[6] Modern Language Bible, The Berkeley Version, Revised Edition, Zondervan, Ó 1945, 1959, 1969

[7] R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Volume 2 (Moody, Chicago, Ó 1980) 630

[8] Practical Outcomes Replace Biblical Principles As the Moral Outcome, September 10, 2001, http://www.barna.org/cgi-bin/PagePressRelease,asp?PressReleaseID=97&Reference=E&Key=abortion

[9] Born Again Adults Less Likely to Co-Habit, Just as Likely to Divorce, August 6, 2001, http://www.barna.org/cgi-bin/PagePressRelease,asp?PressReleaseID=95&Reference=D