Madueme, Md, Phd (Cand.), Research Analyst

DIGNITAS a publication of THE CENTER FOR BIOETHICS & HUMAN DIGNITY • VOLUME 18 • NO 3 • Fall 2011

THINKING THEOLOGICALLY ABOUT BIOETHICS

HANS MADUEME, MD, PHD (CAND.), RESEARCH ANALYST

Can bioethics be Christian? In the following commentary, focus on the individual, the principle of justice speaks to the we try to offer one perspective on how aspects of Christian needs of the broader society. Justice demands that patients be theology can inform bioethics. We do not try to engage any treated fairly or equally. These four principles can plausibly be one specific bioethical issue from a Christian perspective. Nor seen as evidence of God’s common grace. Christians and non- do we try to offer any new, groundbreaking way of thinking Christians can use them in ways that promote a just bioethics. about bioethics from a theological perspective. Much more These four principles were originally offered as a way to bridge modestly, we seek to prime the pump by offering six loosely the differences between various religious and philosophical related points of entry into how to think about bioethics from perspectives. Since we live in a pluralistic and ideologically a distinctively Christian perspective. The six points are only a divided society, secular bioethics has offered potential ways to sketch, items for discussion rather than a definitive, compre- reach consensus on how to arrive at the common good; but, hensive treatment. These comments are lightly revised from a of course, that is all rather optimistic! These principles reflect talk I gave at the 2011 Christian Medical and Dental Associa- the naiveté of what historians call the Enlightenment—and tions (CMDA) conference; they thus reflect the concerns of many have rejected those assumptions. Furthermore, as we CMDA as well as the unique challenges of the North Ameri- Christians think about bioethics we are compelled to balance can cultural context. common grace with the recognition of the noetic effects of sin. The first point of entry is something of an icebreaker, an In the Greek language, noētikos means intellectual, so the attempt to offer one or two points of theological contact with “noetic effects of sin” are how sin affects our intellectual lives. the current, largely secular conversation about bioethics. Sin’s noetic effects are the many ways in which sin sabotages What kind of posture should Christians adopt toward secular our intellectual lives. An important study by Stephen Moroney bioethics? If I am a medical student and I am sitting in that helps us understand this aspect of the doctrine of sin.2 We can compulsory class on medical ethics that no one cares about distinguish two levels of influence: sin affects whatever topic but we all have to take, in what category should I place the we are engaging intellectually or it affects me, the individual material that we are being asked to study? I think a helpful first person. Moroney calls these two elements the “object known” response from the believer is the doctrine of common grace. and “the personal subject.” This makes sense—sin can either According to this doctrine, God shows mercy on all human affect me, the thinker, or it can affect whatever I am think- beings, whether they are regenerate or unregenerate. He gives ing about. Our ability to think properly about bioethics can life and pours out many blessings to all. It is by God’s common therefore be impaired by the noetic effects of sin. Whenever grace that all human beings have the ability to show virtue and bioethics touches subjects that are central concerns in the justice in displays of authentic morality. And it is also a testi- witness of Scripture, we can anticipate the noetic effects of sin. mony to God’s common grace that all human beings, whether Graham Cole explains, believer or unbeliever, can study history, science, and even bioethics, since we all use thought and rationality.1 For instance, [W]here the Scriptural testimony will particularly impact our consider the four-principle method of applied ethics popular- understanding of the disciplines, I believe, will have to do with ized by Beauchamp and Childress in their book Principles of our anthropology. Every discipline presupposes some doctrine Bioethics. It forms the foundation of secular medical ethics: of the human. In some disciplines that doctrine is very much beneficence; non-maleficence; autonomy; justice. Beneficence on the surface and potential conflict between the Christian and is the duty to do good for the patients. Non-maleficence, others will [be] more to the fore. One might suggest that there is a conversely, is the duty not to harm the patient—“First of all, do principle of proximity to the anthropological. In the discipline of no harm.” Autonomy speaks to the patient’s right to self-deter- logic where the human is not the object of inquiry conflicts may be mination. The individual patient has a right to determine his minimal. But in the discipline of psychology such conflict may be or her healthcare. Finally, whereas the other three principles inescapable.3

continued next page continued from front page. thinking theologically The same point is made by Merold Westphal in a different from the director’s desk idiom, SIGN-UP TODAY This I take to be a formulation of what one of my teachers used to BY PAIGE C. CUNNINGHAM, JD The Center for Bioethics & Human FOR 2012 Dignity (CBHD) is a Christian call the Law of Inverse Rationality. By this he meant that the abil- EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR bioethics research center at Trinity ity of human thought to be undistorted by sinful desire is inversely International University. CBHD MEMBERSHIP proportional to the existential import of the subject matter. We “Exploring the nexus of biomedicine, biotechnology, and can be reasonably rational at the periphery of our interests, where hat kind of glasses are you wearing? Perhaps contact lenses? Or maybe you only need our common humanity.” opportunities for prideful self-assertion are limited. But the closer Dignitas is the quarterly the topic to the core of our being, the greater the tendency to sub- the occasional pair of sunglasses. Glasses are analogous to our worldview, the filter publication of the Center and is a through which we interpret everything we see. It’s an analogy that breaks down, to vehicle for the scholarly discussion ordinate truth to other values. This has the clear implication that beW sure, but it is useful in reminding us that we all perceive and interpret reality in different ways. of bioethical issues from a Judeo- sin’s role as an epistemological category will be especially signifi- 2012 MEMBERSHIP Christian Hippocratic worldview, Our perspective or point of view is our worldview. And our worldview has a great deal to do updates in the fields of bioethics, cant in the areas of ethics and politics, theology and metaphysics.4 medicine, and technology, BENEFITS with what we think, learn, and know about our world. and information regarding the Center’s ongoing activities. As we study matters that touch on those core issues at the In the world of bioethics, worldview comes squarely up against the questions of who is a human center or close to the center of the human condition, we can • Subscription to Dignitas, the being? What does ‘dignity’ mean? How do we gather, analyze and interpret data? What are the CBHD Staff expect the noetic effects of sin to be alive and well. boundaries of medicine, science, and technology? Our worldview may lead us to evaluate all input Paige Comstock Cunningham, Center’s quarterly publication and a JD, MA The more devastating aspect of sin’s effects, however, is on the according to a pre-determined, desired outcome. Or, it could engender a deep sense of humility Executive Director so-called personal subject, which in this case would be the • One-year subscription to Ethics & and awareness of our human limitations. Michael J. Sleasman, PhD Managing Director & Research Scholar bioethicist or physician. A bioethicist has a unique personality, Medicine: An International Journal of Let me illustrate how a faulty worldview—the “wrong” pair of glasses—can lead to wrong, even Jennifer McVey, MDiv family upbringing, idiosyncrasies, likes and dislikes, strengths Bioethics, disastrous, conclusions. The United Nations Millennium Development Goal 5 calls for a 75% Event & Education Manager and weaknesses, and so on. All of these factors—“cultural, reduction in maternal deaths by 2015. When the data is evaluated globally, we are far from Glory Diaz religious, social, psychological, political and economic influ- • Discounted rates for all CBHD Communications Manager & 5 achieving that goal. When examined country by country, the statistics disclose a less uniform Executive Assistant ences” —exponentially increase and complicate the ways in events. You will not want to miss using pattern. Most maternal deaths occur in a few countries: Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, and sub- Hans Madueme, MD, PhD which the noetic effects of sin affect an individual. These theo- that benefit for our 2012 summer Saharan Africa. For example, there is a marked contrast between Sri Lanka, which had a total of Candidate logical realities are helpful to understand; they help explain conference “The Scandal of Bioethics: Research Analyst 190 maternal deaths in one year, and Sierra Leone, where one in eight women die in childbirth. how professional bioethical discussions rarely illuminate the April Ponto Reclaiming Christian Influence in Research Assistant most ethically salient facts. It helps us understand the observa- So, what’s the problem? Technology, Science, and Medicine.” 2 Kirsten Riggan, MA tion made by some wag: how do you define a bioethics expert? 3 First, the actual number of women who die in childbirth has been overreported. Rather than Research Assistant Answer: bioethics experts are people invited as media pundits • We are continuing to offer Brandi Williams 500,000 deaths annually, the number likely is closer to 350,000. This may be due in part to faulty Event & Education Assistant to comment on issues as a way to legitimate what we have consultation services for planning record keeping, coupled with “tortuous statistical techniques and educated guessing,” accord- already decided we want to do as a society. The noetic effects your own bioethics events, both with ing to one World Bank researcher. Some WHO researchers admit to “adjusting the data” up to Subscriptions of sin also clarify why secular bioethical discussions, even the Subscriptions to Dignitas are respect to logistics and content. 50 percent to match what they expected to find, in order “to make the numbers turn out right,” available to members of CBHD. most serious ones, often diverge significantly from a robustly 1 For student membership, the Christian bioethics. In other words, we would be exceedingly • Finally, membership entitles you to reports Donna Harrison, MD. rate is $30/calendar year; regular member is $75/calendar year. naïve if we thought that everything that goes by the name of discounted rates on a number of select Secondly, what counts as “maternal mortality” varies, depending on the researcher’s worldview. CBHD membership also includes a bioethics is simply a manifestation of God’s common grace; it professional journals and magazines If she has an agenda to legalize abortion, then the data may skew in that direction. Thus, deaths subscription to Ethics & Medicine: An International Journal of Bioethics, as is surely that, but it is also—perhaps more so—a manifestation relevant to bioethics. from miscarriage (spontaneous abortion) may be counted as a maternal death, but deaths from well as several other benefits. of the noetic effects of sin. induced abortion might be excluded. Accurate data should separate childbirth, spontaneous abortion, and induced abortion (by method, whether surgical or chemical). Submissions & Correspondence The most significant personal dimension to sin’s noetic effects Inquiries about permissions is the presence (or absence) of spiritual regeneration and the 2 for use, as well as any editorial WHO’s Reproductive Health Indicators link the safety of abortion with its legal status. This flies correspondence and manuscript Spirit’s ongoing sanctification. As Hebrews 5:11-14 suggests, SIGN-UP ONLINE AT: in the face of some of the most reliable evidence that legalized abortion may hinder reductions proposals should be directed to Michael Sleasman by email separation from God distorts my knowledge of him, and vices www.cbhd.org/supportjoin in maternal mortality. Maternal mortality has increased in the U.S., which has one of the most ([email protected]). Manuscript like self-centeredness, pride, impatience, and envy all pervert permissive abortion regimes among liberal democracies.3 proposals should be in MS Word, use endnotes for all references, and my noetic capacities. “Our moral and spiritual state affects follow The Chicago Manual of Style. 6 Third, efforts to reduce maternal mortality may actually be efforts to reduce maternity. UN plan- what we think,” explains Moroney. This observation does not ners and other policy makers have made no secret of their intention to reduce population growth © 2011 The Center for Bioethics & mean that Christians will always offer the most helpful per- EXPLORING THE Human Dignity worldwide, particularly in majority world countries (developing nations). “Family planning spectives on bioethics. Indeed Christians are far from immune services” are promoted as necessary to reduce maternal mortality. These services include preg- to the noetic effects of sin—so there is no infallible way to NEXUS OF nancy termination by induced abortion. “Fertility regulation” is a convenient label for chemical predict how these effects will play out in bioethics scholarship, and medical abortions in countries where it is illegal. Deaths from the “abortion pill” or use of a or any other scholarship for that matter. This is all the more BIOMEDICINE, BIO- manual vacuum aspirator would not be counted as maternal mortality due to induced abortion. reason for us Christians to think faithfully about bioethics in our vocations in a very careful, wise, and prayerful way—and TECHNOLOGY, Finally, language is being misused and abused to disguise agendas that are objectionable, both in also, to do so in conversation with others who have different the U.S. and in the targeted nations. Obfuscation and misdirection are evidence of a worldview perspectives and therefore different blind spots, for that will & OUR COMMON HU- 2065 HALF DAY ROAD | DEERFIELD, IL 60015 USA V 847.317.8180 | F 847.317.8101 help mitigate the noetic effects of sin in our own lives. Perhaps continued on page 7 [email protected] | WWW.CBHD.ORG continued next page thinking theologically, continued that is the beginning of a theological ones.”9 The immediate problem with there are clearly exceptions. There are are only suggestive, trying to gesture at it exerts on bioethics and bioethical Protestants and especially evangelicals argument for bioethics to be done in this approach is that there is far more evangelical scholars who are addressing something richer, more profound, more discussions. What I want to suggest, typically are not. The main point I wish a more dialogical, multicultural, and going on in Scripture than imperative the weaknesses that Hollinger identi- reflective of the deep resources avail- controversially, is that Christian doc- to make under this heading is, first, that global key. commandments—there are prayers, fied, but as a generalization it does seem able within the Christian tradition (for trines, particularly when they are more there are historical reasons that modern songs, parables, letters, hymns and so as if Hollinger’s criticisms could be an ecumenical example, see the journal central than peripheral to the Christian Protestants have resisted embracing the The second point of entry relates to the on. What will evangelical bioethics do addressed to this generation. Evangeli- Christian Bioethics). We know there tradition, have a greater authority than natural law tradition. Second, I want to role of Holy Scripture and the Chris- with those parts of Scripture? Hollinger cal contributions to bioethics continue is something better, but there are not science and should recalibrate and suggest that Protestants, especially con- tian tradition in bioethical reflection. goes on to give three specific concerns to be haunted by these unsatisfying uses many examples to which we can point. reinterpret many of those same bioethi- fessional evangelicals, need to retrieve For Protestant Christians, especially related to the evangelical use of Scrip- of Scripture. It is sad to have to say that. Roman Catholic thinkers are often cal discussions. Evangelicals are right, something like natural law to help them evangelicals, it is important to maintain ture in ethical debate. much more rooted in doctrinal reflec- therefore, to appeal to the imago Dei in think in the most competent ways about the authority of the Bible. Scripture This brings us to the third point of entry tion than their fellow Protestants, not bioethical debate. It grounds much of new bioethical challenges. is the “norming norm,” the ultimate First, Scripture does not specifically which is closely related to the second, least because they are more ostensibly the recent work on the significance of There is growing historical evidence that standard of authority; whereas tradition address many modern bioethical issues. namely the role of Christian doctrine rooted in a longer, ongoing tradition of human dignity as a bioethical concept. some version of natural law is consistent is the “normed norm,” it is an author- Therefore if we only appeal to explicit in bioethical reflection. Recent theolo- ethical reflection. Evangelical Protes- Of course, there are poor or superficial with the thought of the early Reforma- ity but only a relative authority since it imperative commands in Scripture for gians have mourned the relative absence tants should be dissatisfied with this examples of how to use this doctrine in 7 tion tradition.16 That is an important stands under the authority of Scripture. bioethical reflection, then we will think of Christian doctrine in the life of the state of affairs; we ought to do better Christian bioethics, but I am saying that insight because, for so long, Protestant All our traditions, even our ecumeni- that Scripture does not address many, church, let alone in the wider public (here the complaints by Hollinger seem evangelicals are right to draw on it as we 11 theology and the natural law tradition cal councils and creeds, must always perhaps most, urgent problems facing discourse. One sociologist even talks of relevant). develop bioethical positions. be tested by Holy Scripture. As the us today in bioethics. Hollinger says: the “strange disappearance of doctrine were thought to be highways travel- Westminster Confession of Faith puts it, “Of course most evangelicals realize in the church.”12 Many Christians, both There is one exception. Evangelicals The image of God is only one doctrine, ing in opposite directions. Protestants “The supreme judge by which all contro- this dilemma and yet want to speak to evangelicals and non-evangelicals, are have done much work with the doctrine and there are many other doctrines that continue to be scared of the natural law versies of religion are to be determined, these issues. But the fact that they have more likely to find their self-under- of the image of God, the imago Dei. Christians confess that are central to tradition. Many are simply unaware of and all decrees of councils, opinions of given so little attention to most of them standing in the plausibility structures In ethical debates about abortion and the biblical narrative. Evangelicals have this part of the Christian heritage. A ancient writers, doctrines of men . . . (with the exception of abortion), may of our therapeutic, individualistic, embryonic stem cell research, we fre- been far less impressive here, showing a valid concern from Protestants relates to are to be examined . . . can be no other in part be rooted in a biblicism which postmodern culture. Whatever hap- quently see reference to the significance very paltry theological range and imagi- the Protestant Scripture principle. As I but the Holy Spirit speaking in the moves from direct-statement impera- pened to Christian doctrine? A church of this doctrine for understanding what nation. In my experience, even evan- have mentioned already, Scripture is the Scripture” (I.x). This insistence assumes, tives to the issues at hand.”10 Hollinger’s historian has described doctrine in the is at stake scientifically, metaphysically, gelicals who work more regularly in the norming norm; we Protestants hold to and doctrinally. Biblical texts become area of bioethics find it hard to think sola scriptura, and that is a good thing. 4 of course, that confessions are already second concern is closely related. following way: doctrine is “What the 5 summaries of long, patient, consensual When evangelicals cannot find relevant church of Jesus Christ believes, teaches, significant here, including passages like in robust doctrinal ways about these Some evangelical bioethicists worry exegesis of biblical texts, but the Refor- imperatives in Scripture, they then look and confesses on the basis of the word of Genesis 1:25-27, Genesis 9:6, James 3:9, issues. There are notable exceptions, that natural law thinking tends to rely mation point still stands. Protestants are for passages which can be applied to the God.”13 More needs to be said, of course, and others. If you have read up on this however, like recent books by David on human powers of reason; as such, 14 right to stake this position. True Prot- contemporary bioethical issue—even if but let us use that as our functional defi- topic recently, you will know there have VanDrunen and Brent Waters. There they say, it neglects the noetic effects of estants do not hold to sola scriptura as those passages are not directly related nition for our present purposes. I want been long debates within the tradi- are also signs that some of our younger sin and the priority that we should be if it is opposed to church tradition; no, to the issue at hand. Specifically, Hol- to argue that Christian bioethics cannot tion and among biblical scholars about emerging scholars are making strides giving to Holy Scripture. I think these they will want to be catholic, they will linger mentions passages like Luke 1:41, survive without deeply integrating how to understand the image of God. in this area. Many of them are trained are valid, important concerns, but let want to think and confess the faith in Jeremiah 1:5, and Psalm 51:5, argu- doctrinal perspectives into bioethical In what does it consist? Our rational in the more rigorous metaphysical me explain why I think that Protestant continuity with the orthodox, universal ing that these are often appealed to by reflection. Christian doctrine needs to capacity? Our functional capacity? Our philosophical tradition, something that bioethics can still learn from the natural church. Therefore both Scripture and evangelicals as an argument for the full inform, it needs to structure, it needs to ability to be vice-regents, representa- has been more common within Roman law tradition. It has to do with what I the confessional tradition are important personhood of the unborn. The problem shape how we analyze many bioethical tives of God on earth? And so on. These Catholic circles. These are all promising call ontological rather than epistemo- 17 (with Scripture the ultimate norm). To here, he says, is that none of those bibli- problems that we face in the twenty-first exegetical debates have their place, of signs, but we can and should do better. I logical reasons. Ontology is about the think critically about bioethics is to cal texts address the metaphysical status century. course. I do not want to suggest that would suggest that we approach the dif- nature of reality; epistemology is about think biblically and along the patterns of the unborn which is what is relevant the doctrine of the image of God is a ficult problem of enhancement, just to the nature of knowledge. Natural law We must pause and recognize the irony set by the orthodox tradition. to the abortion debate. Finally, the third transparent or undisputed concept. pick one example, from the perspective traditions that make universal, unquali- here. Part of the difficulty, the challenge concern that Hollinger emphasizes is Nevertheless, such debates cannot in of specific, abiding Christian doctrines fied epistemological claims do strike me In 1989, over twenty years ago, Den- before us, is that as important as this that evangelical biblicism works with a themselves minimize the theologi- that can help us in our analysis. as potentially undermining an evangeli- nis Hollinger published an article in task is, it remains largely undeveloped cal significance of the doctrine of the cal Scripture principle. We must always truncated vision of the biblical material. My fourth entry point into a Christian the Journal of Religious Ethics titled, in literature written by evangelicals. image of God. They raise questions that insist that Scripture has authority over 8 It so privileges the imperative passages perspective on bioethics relates to the “Can Bioethics Be Evangelical?” In One does find scattered essays writ- we need to work through in company all human areas of knowledge, but I in Scripture that it misses the other natural law tradition; it has close ties that article, he faulted evangelicals for ten here or there where an evangelical with other believers from the past and think there is something to be said for genres of Scripture which may also have to my first point about the doctrine of what he called their “biblicism.” While tries to think about a doctrinal issue, the present. Doctrines themselves are a more ontological understanding of a significant bearing on problems in common grace.15 So, one definition of Hollinger affirms the evangelical com- like God’s providence, in relation to a reliable windows into what is really real; natural law. Christian bioethics will bioethics. natural law is that it is “unchanging mitment to a high view of Scripture, he bioethical concern. However, it seems they are God-given; they are drawn be strengthened by a robustly realist moral principles common to all people regrets the fact that evangelical bioeth- Dennis Hollinger wrote that article much rarer to find our most significant from and rooted in Scripture and they understanding of natural law. What by virtue of their nature as human ics tends to “draw the content and style over twenty years ago, but it is not clear scholarly treatments wrestling with therefore ‘share’ in its authority. Modern I mean is this: consider the situation beings.” Again, Catholic bioethicists are of ethical reflection directly from bibli- that much has changed in evangelical Christian doctrine in meaningful, science has an epistemic authority that with reproductive ethics. Protestant more familiar with this category, but cal statements, particularly imperative bioethics. Let us not be unfair here; substantive ways. Even my remarks here continued on page 10 thinking theologically, continued that is the beginning of a theological ones.”9 The immediate problem with there are clearly exceptions. There are are only suggestive, trying to gesture at it exerts on bioethics and bioethical Protestants and especially evangelicals argument for bioethics to be done in this approach is that there is far more evangelical scholars who are addressing something richer, more profound, more discussions. What I want to suggest, typically are not. The main point I wish a more dialogical, multicultural, and going on in Scripture than imperative the weaknesses that Hollinger identi- reflective of the deep resources avail- controversially, is that Christian doc- to make under this heading is, first, that global key. commandments—there are prayers, fied, but as a generalization it does seem able within the Christian tradition (for trines, particularly when they are more there are historical reasons that modern songs, parables, letters, hymns and so as if Hollinger’s criticisms could be an ecumenical example, see the journal central than peripheral to the Christian Protestants have resisted embracing the The second point of entry relates to the on. What will evangelical bioethics do addressed to this generation. Evangeli- Christian Bioethics). We know there tradition, have a greater authority than natural law tradition. Second, I want to role of Holy Scripture and the Chris- with those parts of Scripture? Hollinger cal contributions to bioethics continue is something better, but there are not science and should recalibrate and suggest that Protestants, especially con- tian tradition in bioethical reflection. goes on to give three specific concerns to be haunted by these unsatisfying uses many examples to which we can point. reinterpret many of those same bioethi- fessional evangelicals, need to retrieve For Protestant Christians, especially related to the evangelical use of Scrip- of Scripture. It is sad to have to say that. Roman Catholic thinkers are often cal discussions. Evangelicals are right, something like natural law to help them evangelicals, it is important to maintain ture in ethical debate. much more rooted in doctrinal reflec- therefore, to appeal to the imago Dei in think in the most competent ways about the authority of the Bible. Scripture This brings us to the third point of entry tion than their fellow Protestants, not bioethical debate. It grounds much of new bioethical challenges. is the “norming norm,” the ultimate First, Scripture does not specifically which is closely related to the second, least because they are more ostensibly the recent work on the significance of There is growing historical evidence that standard of authority; whereas tradition address many modern bioethical issues. namely the role of Christian doctrine rooted in a longer, ongoing tradition of human dignity as a bioethical concept. some version of natural law is consistent is the “normed norm,” it is an author- Therefore if we only appeal to explicit in bioethical reflection. Recent theolo- ethical reflection. Evangelical Protes- Of course, there are poor or superficial with the thought of the early Reforma- ity but only a relative authority since it imperative commands in Scripture for gians have mourned the relative absence tants should be dissatisfied with this examples of how to use this doctrine in 7 tion tradition.16 That is an important stands under the authority of Scripture. bioethical reflection, then we will think of Christian doctrine in the life of the state of affairs; we ought to do better Christian bioethics, but I am saying that insight because, for so long, Protestant All our traditions, even our ecumeni- that Scripture does not address many, church, let alone in the wider public (here the complaints by Hollinger seem evangelicals are right to draw on it as we 11 theology and the natural law tradition cal councils and creeds, must always perhaps most, urgent problems facing discourse. One sociologist even talks of relevant). develop bioethical positions. be tested by Holy Scripture. As the us today in bioethics. Hollinger says: the “strange disappearance of doctrine were thought to be highways travel- Westminster Confession of Faith puts it, “Of course most evangelicals realize in the church.”12 Many Christians, both There is one exception. Evangelicals The image of God is only one doctrine, ing in opposite directions. Protestants “The supreme judge by which all contro- this dilemma and yet want to speak to evangelicals and non-evangelicals, are have done much work with the doctrine and there are many other doctrines that continue to be scared of the natural law versies of religion are to be determined, these issues. But the fact that they have more likely to find their self-under- of the image of God, the imago Dei. Christians confess that are central to tradition. Many are simply unaware of and all decrees of councils, opinions of given so little attention to most of them standing in the plausibility structures In ethical debates about abortion and the biblical narrative. Evangelicals have this part of the Christian heritage. A ancient writers, doctrines of men . . . (with the exception of abortion), may of our therapeutic, individualistic, embryonic stem cell research, we fre- been far less impressive here, showing a valid concern from Protestants relates to are to be examined . . . can be no other in part be rooted in a biblicism which postmodern culture. Whatever hap- quently see reference to the significance very paltry theological range and imagi- the Protestant Scripture principle. As I but the Holy Spirit speaking in the moves from direct-statement impera- pened to Christian doctrine? A church of this doctrine for understanding what nation. In my experience, even evan- have mentioned already, Scripture is the Scripture” (I.x). This insistence assumes, tives to the issues at hand.”10 Hollinger’s historian has described doctrine in the is at stake scientifically, metaphysically, gelicals who work more regularly in the norming norm; we Protestants hold to and doctrinally. Biblical texts become area of bioethics find it hard to think sola scriptura, and that is a good thing. 4 of course, that confessions are already second concern is closely related. following way: doctrine is “What the 5 summaries of long, patient, consensual When evangelicals cannot find relevant church of Jesus Christ believes, teaches, significant here, including passages like in robust doctrinal ways about these Some evangelical bioethicists worry exegesis of biblical texts, but the Refor- imperatives in Scripture, they then look and confesses on the basis of the word of Genesis 1:25-27, Genesis 9:6, James 3:9, issues. There are notable exceptions, that natural law thinking tends to rely mation point still stands. Protestants are for passages which can be applied to the God.”13 More needs to be said, of course, and others. If you have read up on this however, like recent books by David on human powers of reason; as such, 14 right to stake this position. True Prot- contemporary bioethical issue—even if but let us use that as our functional defi- topic recently, you will know there have VanDrunen and Brent Waters. There they say, it neglects the noetic effects of estants do not hold to sola scriptura as those passages are not directly related nition for our present purposes. I want been long debates within the tradi- are also signs that some of our younger sin and the priority that we should be if it is opposed to church tradition; no, to the issue at hand. Specifically, Hol- to argue that Christian bioethics cannot tion and among biblical scholars about emerging scholars are making strides giving to Holy Scripture. I think these they will want to be catholic, they will linger mentions passages like Luke 1:41, survive without deeply integrating how to understand the image of God. in this area. Many of them are trained are valid, important concerns, but let want to think and confess the faith in Jeremiah 1:5, and Psalm 51:5, argu- doctrinal perspectives into bioethical In what does it consist? Our rational in the more rigorous metaphysical me explain why I think that Protestant continuity with the orthodox, universal ing that these are often appealed to by reflection. Christian doctrine needs to capacity? Our functional capacity? Our philosophical tradition, something that bioethics can still learn from the natural church. Therefore both Scripture and evangelicals as an argument for the full inform, it needs to structure, it needs to ability to be vice-regents, representa- has been more common within Roman law tradition. It has to do with what I the confessional tradition are important personhood of the unborn. The problem shape how we analyze many bioethical tives of God on earth? And so on. These Catholic circles. These are all promising call ontological rather than epistemo- 17 (with Scripture the ultimate norm). To here, he says, is that none of those bibli- problems that we face in the twenty-first exegetical debates have their place, of signs, but we can and should do better. I logical reasons. Ontology is about the think critically about bioethics is to cal texts address the metaphysical status century. course. I do not want to suggest that would suggest that we approach the dif- nature of reality; epistemology is about think biblically and along the patterns of the unborn which is what is relevant the doctrine of the image of God is a ficult problem of enhancement, just to the nature of knowledge. Natural law We must pause and recognize the irony set by the orthodox tradition. to the abortion debate. Finally, the third transparent or undisputed concept. pick one example, from the perspective traditions that make universal, unquali- here. Part of the difficulty, the challenge concern that Hollinger emphasizes is Nevertheless, such debates cannot in of specific, abiding Christian doctrines fied epistemological claims do strike me In 1989, over twenty years ago, Den- before us, is that as important as this that evangelical biblicism works with a themselves minimize the theologi- that can help us in our analysis. as potentially undermining an evangeli- nis Hollinger published an article in task is, it remains largely undeveloped cal significance of the doctrine of the cal Scripture principle. We must always truncated vision of the biblical material. My fourth entry point into a Christian the Journal of Religious Ethics titled, in literature written by evangelicals. image of God. They raise questions that insist that Scripture has authority over 8 It so privileges the imperative passages perspective on bioethics relates to the “Can Bioethics Be Evangelical?” In One does find scattered essays writ- we need to work through in company all human areas of knowledge, but I in Scripture that it misses the other natural law tradition; it has close ties that article, he faulted evangelicals for ten here or there where an evangelical with other believers from the past and think there is something to be said for genres of Scripture which may also have to my first point about the doctrine of what he called their “biblicism.” While tries to think about a doctrinal issue, the present. Doctrines themselves are a more ontological understanding of a significant bearing on problems in common grace.15 So, one definition of Hollinger affirms the evangelical com- like God’s providence, in relation to a reliable windows into what is really real; natural law. Christian bioethics will bioethics. natural law is that it is “unchanging mitment to a high view of Scripture, he bioethical concern. However, it seems they are God-given; they are drawn be strengthened by a robustly realist moral principles common to all people regrets the fact that evangelical bioeth- Dennis Hollinger wrote that article much rarer to find our most significant from and rooted in Scripture and they understanding of natural law. What by virtue of their nature as human ics tends to “draw the content and style over twenty years ago, but it is not clear scholarly treatments wrestling with therefore ‘share’ in its authority. Modern I mean is this: consider the situation beings.” Again, Catholic bioethicists are of ethical reflection directly from bibli- that much has changed in evangelical Christian doctrine in meaningful, science has an epistemic authority that with reproductive ethics. Protestant more familiar with this category, but cal statements, particularly imperative bioethics. Let us not be unfair here; substantive ways. Even my remarks here continued on page 10 thinking theologically, continued

bioethics, especially at the lay level, is all here. Please understand that we do not interested in here—because I think we supportive of abortion rights, but neither needed to come out of their evangelical Protestant campus ministers who were over the map on this. Some evangelicals have to use the expression “natural law”; can take the challenge of syncretism and were they strongly pro-life either. From enclaves and become actively engaged in deeply concerned about what was hap- use the oral contraceptive pill, some do Lutherans talk about “orders of creation” apply it to the North American context 1971-1979, the Southern Baptist Con- the public life of the nation. Significantly, pening in modern medicine; these cam- not. Some favor the use of IVF, others do which gets at the same idea. We confes- of bioethical debate in a fruitful and self- vention supported abortion in limited they argued that evangelicals needed to pus ministers along with others were not. Some would reject the very idea of sional evangelicals need to do more work critical way. circumstances (rape, incest, damage to collaborate with other pro-life groups instrumental in the rise of bioethics. The surrogate motherhood, others embrace in this area. We need to think more maternal emotional, mental, or physi- including Roman Catholics and people role of evangelical Protestants in North For as we all know, bioethics is it. The main problem here is the lack of clearly about how to relate the idea of cal health), and opposed legislation that from other religious beliefs so that American bioethics was obviously richer intensely politicized in the U.S. The an overall theological consistency, and natural law to more familiar theological would restrict abortion. Two points may together they could effect change.19 And and more complex than I have been able embryonic stem cell debate is a case in we could magnify the point by look- concepts like common grace or general be worth making in that regard. First, so was born the conservative evangeli- to capture in this brief historical narra- point. Republicans tend to be pro-life ing at other non-reproductive ethical revelation. We need to clarify how orders North American evangelicals at the time cal pro-life coalition. As one popular tive of the pro-life movement!)21 and support adult stem cell research; questions. of creation complement an evangelical tended to be politically quietistic. They author put it in a history of the pro-life Democrats tend to be pro-choice and That brings me to my second point—and Scripture principle. Gaining more clarity were not actively engaged in the political movement, These are very complicated issues so support embryonic stem cell research. here is why I have used the notion of in these and other areas can only help process and had largely retreated from I do not want to pretend I have found When President Obama took office, one Evangelical leaders began to call on “syncretism” to catch what I want to say us, moving forward, as we engage press- public engagement in cultural affairs, the silver bullet. One dimension of the of his first moves was to disband the Christians to stand in the public arena here. North American evangelicals made ing questions in modern bioethics. so that is one reason that in the early problem is that the standard evangeli- President’s Council on Bioethics because and apply the principles of the gospel to an about turn with respect to political 1970s evangelicals were not notable for cal approach is sometimes vulnerable The fifth point of entry into a Christian he thought it had an ideological agenda every aspect of their lives—both in the engagement. Now we are all too familiar opposing the liberalizing of abortion. to a functionally nominalistic approach perspective on bioethics is what I have (as you know, this council was com- inner realm of piety and in the outer in the U.S. with how bioethical contro- The second reason that evangelical Prot- to Scripture. Briefly, nominalism is the called “the problem of syncretism.” Here missioned by George W. Bush in 2001 realm of polity. In 1978, Jerry Falwell’s versies have large political ramifications. estants were not politically involved in view that there are no universal essenc- I am stealing a page from the discipline and was led by Leon Kass until 2005 Moral Majority was organized. Shortly It is here that we see the problem of syn- standing up for the rights of the unborn, es; they do not have an independent of missiology, the study of Christian when Edmund Pellegrino took over). afterward, James Dobson’s Focus on the cretism. The most powerful expression even when they disagreed with Roe, has existence. All we have are particular or missions. In the context of missiology, These polarizations are so familiar to us Family, Pat Robertson’s Freedom Council, of syncretism in this context is when to do with Catholic-Protestant relations individual things; our human minds we refer to syncretism as those instances as North Americans that they become John Whitehead’s Rutherford Institute, evangelicals think that a single politi- at the time. Catholics as we noted were construct their “essences.” Realism in a given setting when the Christian reified, they become tangible political Beverley LaHaye’s Concerned Women cal party somehow determines how we engaged in the abortion debate within disagrees and affirms that there are uni- gospel is corrupted or subverted by realities that structure the way we think for America, and D. James Kennedy’s should think about abortion and other the political sphere. Harold O. J. Brown versal essences and that these universals non-Christian assumptions or cultural about bioethical issues. Christians who President’s Council joined veteran groups bioethical issues. Believers from other who was the editor of Christianity Today exist independently of our reasoning patterns. For instance, imagine that mis- should know better are often snookered like Howard Phillip’s Conservative Cau- countries who have visited or live in the in the early 70s, remarked: “At that about them. (Realism and nominalism sionaries have traveled to a non-Chris- by these unfortunate trends. Here we cus, Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, Paul United States know exactly what I mean. 10 point, a lot of Protestants reacted almost 11 were vigorously debated in the medi- tian village in Ghana; they diligently need to tread carefully because we are Weyrich’s Free Congress Foundation, and It is difficult to have a serious or mean- automatically—‘If the Catholics are for eval period). Here is how I am trying to preached the gospel of Jesus Christ dead on emotionally volatile ground. Nev- Rus Walton’s Plymouth Rock Foundation ingful discussion about bioethical issues it, we should be against it.’ . . . The fact apply these categories to bioethics: What and risen, witnessing a number of con- ertheless we need to speak with both on the front lines.20 if we think that political affiliations are that Catholics were out in front caused do our bioethical convictions refer to? versions among the people. They estab- Christian courage and humility. If we what is most important. The tail should many Protestants to keep a very low This history invites a few observations. What aspect of reality are they about? lish new churches, they translate Bibles are to think critically and theologically not be wagging the dog. Do not mis- profile.”18 In other words, because the The first point is that when we review When I say that standard evangelical into the ethnic dialect, people hear about bioethics, we need to understand understand me. Abortion is a deeply Catholics were publically against abor- this history we see that Catholics were bioethics is sometimes vulnerable to regular sermons and Bible instruction the perennial temptation for North important issue. It makes a lot of sense tion, evangelical Protestants reacted by much more consistent than evangeli- a functional nominalism in its use of and so on. However, when many of these American evangelicals toward what we to vote along a party line because of how keeping largely silent on the issue. cals. We need to be clear about that. On Scripture, I mean that bioethical realities new Christians are affected by some can rightly call political syncretism. I am that party aligns on the abortion ques- the abortion question, Catholics were lack a robust realism. The only ground- physical complaint or a really difficult sure I do not need to be making these Everything changed by the end of the tion. That is not the whole story though; most consistent in pointing out the deep ing for our bioethical convictions is situation at home, they do not go to the points to this audience, but it is still 70s. Probably the two most significant political strategy is one thing, theologi- moral questions that were relevant to explicit divine commands in Scripture. pastor. They go to the local witch doctor! worth briefly reviewing the issues. figures for evangelicals were Francis cal substance is quite another. Evangeli- the discussion. Evangelicals were late Part of the problem as we have already I think we are all familiar with this kind Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop. Schaef- cals need political strategy and we need First a little history: in North America comers. We should be ashamed about mentioned is that Scripture has much of scenario. This is what we would call fer was a Protestant lay theologian theological substance; we should keep prior to the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 that. As orthodox Protestants, we should more to say about bioethics than explicit syncretism—the problematic blending of who founded the L’Abri Fellowship in these two categories conceptually dis- when the Supreme Court ruled that the have discerned how the Scriptures and divine commands. Furthermore, this Christianity with non-Christian thought Switzerland and was the author of many tinct. Evangelicals who confuse a politi- fetus was not a person with constitu- our Christian tradition spoke power- kind of evangelical nominalism does patterns. In such a situation, we want books that encouraged the cultivation cal party’s sensibilities with Christian tional rights, it was primarily Catholics fully about the metaphysics of person- not help us see how Scripture testifies to to ask—we need to ask—whether the of a serious evangelical mind. C. Everett convictions are syncretistic. There are who were opposed to abortion. It was hood and what it means to be made in a real, moral ontology, a created order. Christian gospel has really deeply and Koop was then at the Children’s Hospital appalling and embarrassing examples of Catholics who opposed any kind of lib- the image of God. Part of the historical We evangelicals need a richer language truly converted the minds and hearts of in Philadelphia and later became Presi- this kind of thing and it would probably eralization of abortion. Protestants were reason for this shortcoming, of course, to talk about the ontological aspect of these people, or whether conversion has dent Reagan’s Surgeon General. Schaef- not be edifying to start listing them. To very slow in joining the pro-life move- was the political quietism that emerged our bioethical claims. We need a more only been superficial. Of course, among fer and Koop sounded the trumpet and be sure, we need faithful thinkers who ment. Surprisingly, after Roe v. Wade as a result of fundamentalist-modernist compelling way to speak about the missiologists there are debates about awoke evangelicals from their political can help us develop a more responsible many mainline Protestants were in controversies in the early twentieth bioethical realities that exist and that are these matters and the example I have slumbers. In a number of very influen- theology of political engagement (it is as general approval of liberalizing abortion, century. (In the 2011 CBHD summer morally binding on all people indepen- given is rather stereotypical, some- tial writings and lectures, they warned if evangelicals moved from one extreme and there were some who supported conference, Dr. Edmund Pellegrino dently of what any of us think or say or what cliché. There is enough truth in that America was falling away from its to another, from political quietism to the Supreme Court decision. North informed his audience that what we do. The natural law tradition can help it, though, for the purposes that we are Christian heritage and that Christians a kind of naïve, exuberant political American evangelicals were not as now know as bioethics had its origins in

continued next page thinking theologically, continued

continued next page activism). More relevant to our present secular habits. In a very profound sense, try to justify theoretically the way we 4 Merold Westphal, “Taking St. Paul Seriously: Sin (Wheaton: Crossway, 2009); Brent Waters, This R. Wagner; South Bend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press, as an Epistemological Category,” in Christian Mortal Flesh: Incarnation and Bioethics (Grand 2003), 126. topic: if we are to be thinking critically the Lordship of Christ extends over are already living our lives practically. Philosophy (ed. Thomas Flint; Notre Dame, IN: Rapids: Baker, 2009). VanDrunen’s work reflects 20 George Grant, Third Time Around: A History of the about bioethics, we will need to decouple every dimension of our lives. As 1 Cor- Godliness is important. Maybe it is not a University of Notre Dame Press, 1990), 205. the Presbyterian tradition; Waters is more main- Pro-Life Movement from the First Century to the political red herring issues from the inthians 10:31 has it, “So whether you sufficient condition for getting the right 5 Stephen K. Moroney, “How Sin Affects Scholar- stream. Present (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, ship: A New Model,” Christian Scholar’s Review 28 15 My earlier reflections on natural law and 1991), 143. bioethical questions that demand serious eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all bioethical position, but it is necessary for (1999): 446. Reformed bioethics can be found in a small 21 For more information see Thomas McElhin- theological and philosophical work. One for the glory of God” (NIV). Bioethics Christians. 6 Ibid., 444. commentary I wrote some years ago for CBHD: ney and Edmund Pellegrino, “The Institute http://cbhd.org/content/natural-law-reformed- problem with allowing political agendas is a part of modern life that extends into 7 For a recent Protestant defense of this position, on Human Values in Medicine: Its Role and If you will allow me to bring these ser- bioethics-another-look. Influence in the Conception and Evolution of to dominate our intellectual horizons is both our public and our private lives. If see Kevin Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A monic observations home, I would say Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theol- 16 E.g., see Stephen Grabill, Rediscovering the Bioethics,” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 that the North American political public we are to engage critically, that is Chris- Natural Law in Reformed Theological Ethics (2001): 291-317. that Christian bioethics urgently needs ogy (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), discourse is so shallow. It is too restrict- tianly, with bioethics, it must be in a way 151-85. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006); J. Daryl Charles, Retrieving the Natural Law: A Return to Moral First to be democratized within confessional 8 Dennis Hollinger, “Can Bioethics Be Evangeli- ing, squeezing everything into a narrow that affects how we think about bioethics Things (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008); David evangelicalism. This may be one of the cal?” Journal of Religious Ethics 17 (1989): 161-79. bandwidth of pro-life or pro-choice. The politically and also how we live out our VanDrunen, Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms: most pressing needs in Christian bioeth- 9 Ibid., 162. A Study in the Development of Reformed Social fact of the matter is that evangelicals convictions on a day-to-day basis. ics today. We need to find creative and 10 Ibid., 163. Thought (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010). need to be more pro-life, we need to have We might emphasize the point here by effective ways to help cultivate the most 11 Cf. Vanhoozer, Drama of Doctrine. 17 For a similar distinction, see Oliver O’Donovan, a much more robust understanding of 12 Alan Wolfe, Transformation of American Religion: Resurrection and Moral Order: An Outline for Evan- drawing connections between godliness serious, the most responsible, and the the ontology of sex and the significance How We Actually Live Our Faith (New York: Free gelical Ethics (2d ed.; Eerdmans, 1994), 85-87. and the noetic effects of sin. Bioethics most Christian bioethical sensibilities Press, 2003), 67, cited in Vanhoozer, Drama of 18 Cited in Robert C. Post and Reva B. Siegel, of procreation, we need to care much is not just about theory. It is not merely within our churches, among parents and Doctrine, xi. “Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and more about the problem of abortion and Backlash,” (2007) Faculty Scholarship Series. about abstract philosophical debates children, among academics and every- 13 Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic the hypocrisies that exist in many of our Tradition (100-600) (vol.1 of The Christian Tradi- Paper 169. http://digitalcommonslaw.yale.edu/ and arguments. It is one thing to have day people. To realize that Christian tion; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971), fss_papers/169. churches on these matters. However, an intellectual position on a bioethical bioethics cannot be the preserve of only 1. 19 Jack Willke, “A History of Pro-Life Leadership: For we also need to cast our ethical gaze Better or Worse,” in Back to the Drawing Board: issue, and it is quite another to live and the academics and scholars is to stand in 14 E.g., see David VanDrunen, Bioethics and the much more broadly to see that Christian Christian Life: A Guide to Making Difficult Decisions The Future of the Pro-Life Movement (ed. Teresa breathe those convictions, to exemplify the best tradition of Reformation Prot- bioethics transcends political affiliations; them in our lives with the help of God. estantism. Christian bioethics is not just political discourse in North America is If I am a Republican evangelical, and my for the academic priests and the schol- too morally thin, too hypocritical, too beautiful sixteen-year-old daughter gets arly monks; it is for all of us, those in the simplistic, too superficial, to be a reli- pregnant out of wedlock—it is a disgust- pulpit and those in the pew. Christian able guide for how faithful Christians ing, indeed abominable, hypocrisy to bioethics must be the responsibility of all 12 can honor God in all of their lives, both 13 allow her to secretly have an abortion. Christians, men and women, adults and private and public—not least in bioeth- If Christian medical students are using children—bioethical problems are our ics. To be aware of and sensitive to this BIOETHICS AT THE BOX OFFICE: AN UPDATE cognitive stimulants, then it hardly problems. We face these decisions every problem of syncretism is already a first COMPILED BY CBHD RESEARCH STAFF seems worth the effort for those same day. Our lives are morally freighted step in taking more seriously the chal- students to write articles criticizing moment by moment in a way that seems lenges that face Christian bioethics. the problem of cognitive enhancement much more palpable today than in The note I want to end on is a more pas- or the challenges of neuroethics. This perhaps any other generation. In short, toral one, what we might call “Everyday makes sense: if we Christian bioethi- if we believe in Christian bioethics, if we Bioethics.” There are several ways we cists and medical professionals cannot want to think critically and theologically can make this point. Abraham Kuyper get it right in our own personal lives, about bioethics, if we want to live out recap of relevant materi- In Time (2011, Rated PG-13 for violence, Never Let Me Go (2010, Rated R for some was a Dutch Calvinist theologian and then we can hardly blame the millions our deepest convictions before God with als that have premiered on some sexuality and partial nudity, sexuality and nudity) Categories: polymath who founded the Free Univer- of Christian non-physicians who are fear and trembling, then let me suggest and strong language) Categories: Cloning, Organ Transplantation sity of Amsterdam (it now goes by the struggling with these issues. There is a that there is more than enough for you the silver screen since 2010. Genetic Engineering, Human En- acronym VU University) and he became more important point I want to make, and me to be getting busy with in the AReaders are cautioned that the films hancement, Radical Life Extension Tron Legacy (2010, Rated PG for se- quences of sci-fi action violence and the prime minister of the Netherlands though: failing to practice a distinctly days ahead. represent a wide variety of genres and in 1901. He famously said, “there is not Christian vision of bioethics in our Limitless (2011, Rated PG-13 for thematic brief mild language) Categories: a square inch in the whole domain of lives can even affect our own theoreti- may not be appropriate for all audiences. material involving a drug, violence Artificial Intelligence, Emerging our human existence over which Christ, cal convictions. That is the connection 1 Vincent Bacote, The Spirit in Public Theology: The reason for the rating classification including disturbing images, sexual- Technologies, Human Enhance- Appropriating the Legacy of Abraham Kuyper ity and language) Categories: Hu- ment, Transhumanism who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: between godliness and the noetic effects is provided where available. Viewers are ‘Mine!’” What he meant was that genu- of sin. If our own lives are not notable (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 92. man Enhancement, Neuroethics. 2 Stephen Moroney, The Noetic Effects of Sin: A encouraged to read annotations/synopses ine Christians should not be satisfied for a consistent and convincing witness Historical and Contemporary Exploration of How with a secular-sacred fallacy. We should to an evangelical bioethics, it is not long Sin Affects Our Thinking (Lanham, Md.: Lexington available through such websites as www. Love and Other Drugs (2010, Rated R not think that if we are true followers before our own ostensible, theoretical Books, 2000). for strong sexual content, nudity, 3 Graham A. Cole, “Scripture and the Disciplines: movieweb.com or www.imdb.com. For of Christ that we can compartmental- convictions begin to change and our pervasive language, and some drug The Question of Expectations” (paper presented more backlists of Bioethics at the Box Of- ize our lives into those areas that are arguments start becoming self-serving at the Conference on Scripture and the Disci- material) Categories: End of Life, devoted to pious or spiritual activities on this or that issue. That is a manifes- plines, Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL, 25 May fice visit our website at http://cbhd.org/ Pharmaceutical Ethics 2004), 14. This paper has since been published and those areas that are meant for more tation of the noetic effects of sin as we in Australia as Zadok Paper S142 Summer 2005. resources/reviews/movie-review. activism). More relevant to our present secular habits. In a very profound sense, try to justify theoretically the way we 4 Merold Westphal, “Taking St. Paul Seriously: Sin (Wheaton: Crossway, 2009); Brent Waters, This R. Wagner; South Bend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press, as an Epistemological Category,” in Christian Mortal Flesh: Incarnation and Bioethics (Grand 2003), 126. topic: if we are to be thinking critically the Lordship of Christ extends over are already living our lives practically. Philosophy (ed. Thomas Flint; Notre Dame, IN: Rapids: Baker, 2009). VanDrunen’s work reflects 20 George Grant, Third Time Around: A History of the about bioethics, we will need to decouple every dimension of our lives. As 1 Cor- Godliness is important. Maybe it is not a University of Notre Dame Press, 1990), 205. the Presbyterian tradition; Waters is more main- Pro-Life Movement from the First Century to the political red herring issues from the inthians 10:31 has it, “So whether you sufficient condition for getting the right 5 Stephen K. Moroney, “How Sin Affects Scholar- stream. Present (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, ship: A New Model,” Christian Scholar’s Review 28 15 My earlier reflections on natural law and 1991), 143. bioethical questions that demand serious eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all bioethical position, but it is necessary for (1999): 446. Reformed bioethics can be found in a small 21 For more information see Thomas McElhin- theological and philosophical work. One for the glory of God” (NIV). Bioethics Christians. 6 Ibid., 444. commentary I wrote some years ago for CBHD: ney and Edmund Pellegrino, “The Institute http://cbhd.org/content/natural-law-reformed- problem with allowing political agendas is a part of modern life that extends into 7 For a recent Protestant defense of this position, on Human Values in Medicine: Its Role and If you will allow me to bring these ser- bioethics-another-look. Influence in the Conception and Evolution of to dominate our intellectual horizons is both our public and our private lives. If see Kevin Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A monic observations home, I would say Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theol- 16 E.g., see Stephen Grabill, Rediscovering the Bioethics,” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 that the North American political public we are to engage critically, that is Chris- Natural Law in Reformed Theological Ethics (2001): 291-317. that Christian bioethics urgently needs ogy (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), discourse is so shallow. It is too restrict- tianly, with bioethics, it must be in a way 151-85. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006); J. Daryl Charles, Retrieving the Natural Law: A Return to Moral First to be democratized within confessional 8 Dennis Hollinger, “Can Bioethics Be Evangeli- ing, squeezing everything into a narrow that affects how we think about bioethics Things (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008); David evangelicalism. This may be one of the cal?” Journal of Religious Ethics 17 (1989): 161-79. bandwidth of pro-life or pro-choice. The politically and also how we live out our VanDrunen, Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms: most pressing needs in Christian bioeth- 9 Ibid., 162. A Study in the Development of Reformed Social fact of the matter is that evangelicals convictions on a day-to-day basis. ics today. We need to find creative and 10 Ibid., 163. Thought (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010). need to be more pro-life, we need to have We might emphasize the point here by effective ways to help cultivate the most 11 Cf. Vanhoozer, Drama of Doctrine. 17 For a similar distinction, see Oliver O’Donovan, a much more robust understanding of 12 Alan Wolfe, Transformation of American Religion: Resurrection and Moral Order: An Outline for Evan- drawing connections between godliness serious, the most responsible, and the the ontology of sex and the significance How We Actually Live Our Faith (New York: Free gelical Ethics (2d ed.; Eerdmans, 1994), 85-87. and the noetic effects of sin. Bioethics most Christian bioethical sensibilities Press, 2003), 67, cited in Vanhoozer, Drama of 18 Cited in Robert C. Post and Reva B. Siegel, of procreation, we need to care much is not just about theory. It is not merely within our churches, among parents and Doctrine, xi. “Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and more about the problem of abortion and Backlash,” (2007) Faculty Scholarship Series. about abstract philosophical debates children, among academics and every- 13 Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic the hypocrisies that exist in many of our Tradition (100-600) (vol.1 of The Christian Tradi- Paper 169. http://digitalcommonslaw.yale.edu/ and arguments. It is one thing to have day people. To realize that Christian tion; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971), fss_papers/169. churches on these matters. However, an intellectual position on a bioethical bioethics cannot be the preserve of only 1. 19 Jack Willke, “A History of Pro-Life Leadership: For we also need to cast our ethical gaze Better or Worse,” in Back to the Drawing Board: issue, and it is quite another to live and the academics and scholars is to stand in 14 E.g., see David VanDrunen, Bioethics and the much more broadly to see that Christian Christian Life: A Guide to Making Difficult Decisions The Future of the Pro-Life Movement (ed. Teresa breathe those convictions, to exemplify the best tradition of Reformation Prot- bioethics transcends political affiliations; them in our lives with the help of God. estantism. Christian bioethics is not just political discourse in North America is If I am a Republican evangelical, and my for the academic priests and the schol- too morally thin, too hypocritical, too beautiful sixteen-year-old daughter gets arly monks; it is for all of us, those in the simplistic, too superficial, to be a reli- pregnant out of wedlock—it is a disgust- pulpit and those in the pew. Christian able guide for how faithful Christians ing, indeed abominable, hypocrisy to bioethics must be the responsibility of all 12 can honor God in all of their lives, both 13 allow her to secretly have an abortion. Christians, men and women, adults and private and public—not least in bioeth- If Christian medical students are using children—bioethical problems are our ics. To be aware of and sensitive to this BIOETHICS AT THE BOX OFFICE: AN UPDATE cognitive stimulants, then it hardly problems. We face these decisions every problem of syncretism is already a first COMPILED BY CBHD RESEARCH STAFF seems worth the effort for those same day. Our lives are morally freighted step in taking more seriously the chal- students to write articles criticizing moment by moment in a way that seems lenges that face Christian bioethics. the problem of cognitive enhancement much more palpable today than in The note I want to end on is a more pas- or the challenges of neuroethics. This perhaps any other generation. In short, toral one, what we might call “Everyday makes sense: if we Christian bioethi- if we believe in Christian bioethics, if we Bioethics.” There are several ways we cists and medical professionals cannot want to think critically and theologically can make this point. Abraham Kuyper get it right in our own personal lives, about bioethics, if we want to live out recap of relevant materi- In Time (2011, Rated PG-13 for violence, Never Let Me Go (2010, Rated R for some was a Dutch Calvinist theologian and then we can hardly blame the millions our deepest convictions before God with als that have premiered on some sexuality and partial nudity, sexuality and nudity) Categories: polymath who founded the Free Univer- of Christian non-physicians who are fear and trembling, then let me suggest and strong language) Categories: Cloning, Organ Transplantation sity of Amsterdam (it now goes by the struggling with these issues. There is a that there is more than enough for you the silver screen since 2010. Genetic Engineering, Human En- acronym VU University) and he became more important point I want to make, and me to be getting busy with in the AReaders are cautioned that the films hancement, Radical Life Extension Tron Legacy (2010, Rated PG for se- quences of sci-fi action violence and the prime minister of the Netherlands though: failing to practice a distinctly days ahead. represent a wide variety of genres and in 1901. He famously said, “there is not Christian vision of bioethics in our Limitless (2011, Rated PG-13 for thematic brief mild language) Categories: a square inch in the whole domain of lives can even affect our own theoreti- may not be appropriate for all audiences. material involving a drug, violence Artificial Intelligence, Emerging our human existence over which Christ, cal convictions. That is the connection 1 Vincent Bacote, The Spirit in Public Theology: The reason for the rating classification including disturbing images, sexual- Technologies, Human Enhance- Appropriating the Legacy of Abraham Kuyper ity and language) Categories: Hu- ment, Transhumanism who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: between godliness and the noetic effects is provided where available. Viewers are ‘Mine!’” What he meant was that genu- of sin. If our own lives are not notable (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 92. man Enhancement, Neuroethics. 2 Stephen Moroney, The Noetic Effects of Sin: A encouraged to read annotations/synopses ine Christians should not be satisfied for a consistent and convincing witness Historical and Contemporary Exploration of How with a secular-sacred fallacy. We should to an evangelical bioethics, it is not long Sin Affects Our Thinking (Lanham, Md.: Lexington available through such websites as www. Love and Other Drugs (2010, Rated R not think that if we are true followers before our own ostensible, theoretical Books, 2000). for strong sexual content, nudity, 3 Graham A. Cole, “Scripture and the Disciplines: movieweb.com or www.imdb.com. For of Christ that we can compartmental- convictions begin to change and our pervasive language, and some drug The Question of Expectations” (paper presented more backlists of Bioethics at the Box Of- ize our lives into those areas that are arguments start becoming self-serving at the Conference on Scripture and the Disci- material) Categories: End of Life, devoted to pious or spiritual activities on this or that issue. That is a manifes- plines, Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL, 25 May fice visit our website at http://cbhd.org/ Pharmaceutical Ethics 2004), 14. This paper has since been published and those areas that are meant for more tation of the noetic effects of sin as we in Australia as Zadok Paper S142 Summer 2005. resources/reviews/movie-review.