My response

My letter, published in the 7 November issue of Christian Renewal magazine, responding to the below letter.

------------------------------------------------

In response to the letter by Mr. Henry Groen in the 24 October edition of Christian Renewal:

I appreciate Mr. Groen’s response to my article, and I offer a few thoughts in reply:

1. Mr. Groen repeatedly asserts that frozen embryos have no souls; for example: “A human being does not become a living human being until God gives it a soul at the time when the woman conceives.” In the case of frozen embryos, however, conception has already occurred. So if embryos become human beings and receive souls at conception, then frozen embryos are human beings and have souls.

Indeed, that is the central point of my argument: if life begins at conception – which I have argued previously in, for example, the 17 January edition of Christian Renewal – then these already conceived, now frozen embryos are human beings and should be treated accordingly.

Perhaps Mr. Groen meant that a soul is conferred to the embryo not at conception but at implantation, a point that frozen embryos have not yet reached. But this distinction is completely arbitrary: no substantive change to the embryo itself occurs between the moment before it implants and the moment after. It seems problematic to choose this or any other equally arbitrary point to confer humanness on an embryo.

Indeed, if we believe that embryos are not human beings until implantation, then we should have no problem with the “post-coital,” “morning after,” or “plan B” (as it is alternately called) contraceptive pill. An embryo does not implant on the uterine wall until five days after conception, and this contraceptive works by simply preventing implantation. If not-yet-implanted embryos are not human beings, then this contraceptive poses no threat to human life and we should not oppose it. But if human life begins at conception, than we should oppose it on the grounds that even a not-yet-implanted embryo is a human being.

2. Mr. Groen describes embryos as “potential” human beings. We need to be careful using this particular language as it is precisely the same as that used by the pro-abortion and pro-embryonic stem cell research movements. They, too, assert that embryos are not real human beings – or “living human beings,” to use Mr. Groen’s other description – but rather “potential” human beings.

But I will again press the question: when do these embryos become human? Certainly by birth, and certainly no earlier than conception, so it must be at some point between the two. But when? Mr. Groen does not adequately answer this question, but we must if we are to be consistently pro-life.

I submit that the only answer to that question that is not arbitrary and indefensible is that human life begins at conception, and consequently I reject the idea that frozen embryos are theoretical, possible, potential human beings.

Brian Douglas
Brighton, England

A letter . . .

. . . published in Christian Renewal magazine, 24 October, 2007, responding to my article, Embryo Adoption: Questions Answered.

------------------------------------------------

Re: Ethics, embryo adoption: Questions answered (CR, Sept. 12, 07, Vol. 26, #1).

It was with great interest that I read the above mentioned article. It is good that someone opens this matter for a discussion. There are a number of points that could be addressed. However, I will just address one issue in that article.

Mr. Brian Douglas states repeatedly, that the embryos are human beings. I would rather say that they embryo here, has the physical potential to become a human being. The 400,000 frozen embryos he mentioned have no souls. A human being does not become a living human being until God gives it a soul at the time when the woman conceives. Only God can give us a soul. Read Ezekiel 18:4 - "Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine." Doctors cannot produce a soul in a dish.

The article ends by saying that there is no difference between adopting an embryo and adopting a child. There is no comparison between adopting a child that already lives and has a soul, and an embryo that has no soul. For this readon, in my understanding, no one is under any obligation to adopt an embryo, while adopting a child is commendable.

(signed)
Dundas, Ontario

Why Christians should read Shakespeare's Henry V

Published in the 7 November edition of Christian Renewal magazine.

In Henry V, Shakespeare uses the title character to put forward his vision of the ideal king. The play begins when Harry, as Henry V is affectionately nicknamed, learns that he is the true heir to the throne of France; he informs the French monarchy that he intends to exercise his right and asks them to step aside. Their response is to mock him: they send him a gilded barrel of “treasure” in tribute to their claimant king – a treasure of tennis balls, implying that Harry is more fit for games than governing.

Harry sets out with his army to force the French to recognize his claim. Undaunted by the fact that the French army is superior in size and skill to his own, he presses forward with courage and resolution.

As the play progresses, Shakespeare’s king is revealed to be larger than life – indeed, he seems nearly perfect in character and ability. No less than the Archbishop of Canterbury says of him:

Hear him but reason in divinity;
And, all-admiring, with an inward wish
You would desire the king were made a prelate:
Hear him debate of commonwealth affairs;
You would say it hath been all in all his study:
List his discourse of war; and you shall hear
A fearful battle rendered to you in music.
Turn him to any cause of policy,
The Gordian knot of it he will unloose,
Familiar as his garter: that, when he speaks,
The air, a chartered libertine, is still,
And the mute wonder lurketh in men’s ears,
To steal his sweet and honeyed sentences:
So that the art and practice part of life
Must be the mistress to this theoric . . . (1.1)

As the story progresses, Shakespeare demonstrates his vision of an ideal king through Harry’s three principal actions.


First: by his speeches, Harry conquers those who oppose him.

Harry begins his conquest of France at Harfleur, and at pivotal points in the battle to take the city, Harry’s speeches, even more than his sword, decide the battle. In a monologue interspersed with descriptions of the horrors of war that will come upon the citizens of Harfleur if they prolong the battle, Harry appeals to the city’s governor and citizens:

How yet resolves the governor of the town?
This is the latest parle we will admit:
Therefore to our best mercy give yourselves . . .
Therefore, you men of Harfleur,
Take pity of your town and of your people . . .
What say you? Will you yield, and this avoid? . . . (3.3)

The city does yield and consequently becomes the first part of France to recognize Harry as its king. The English army marches immediately onward toward the full French army.


Second: by his speeches, Harry rallies his friends.

Harry’s army meets the mighty French army near a castle caled Agincourt. It is to be an almost apocalyptic battle – the battle of battles, the one that will settle the question of who will rule France. The outcome appears decided before the battle even begins, though, as the English are outnumbered five to one.

Throughout his preparations for the battle, Harry demonstrates extraordinary care for those with him. In an age in which common soldiers were considered to be expendable pawns in the king’s game, Harry’s deepest concern is for even the basest of his men. On the eve of the battle, he disguises himself and goes from campfire to campfire to learn how his men are and to encourage them.

On the fateful morning, before the epic fight begins, Harry overhears one of his nobles wish for ten thousand more men on their side. To rally his friends, encourage them, and prepare them for the battle to come, Harry gives his most memorable speech:

What’s he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin:
If we are marked to die, we are now
To do our country loss: and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God’s will, I pray thee wish not one man more. . . .
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England:
God’s peace, I would not lose so great an honour,
As one man more, methinks, would share from me,
For the best hope I do have. O, do not wish one more:
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart, his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man’s company
That fears his fellowship, to die with us.
This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall see this day, and live old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say, “To-morrow is Saint Crispian.”
Then will he strip his sleeve, and show his scars,
And say, “These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.”
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he’ll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words . . .
Be in their flowing cups freshly remembered.
This story shall the good man teach his son:
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be rememberéd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers:
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother: be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition.
And gentlemen in England, now a-bed,
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here;
And hold their manhoods cheap, whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day. (4.3)

Immediately after the speech, the English prepare for battle. The French attack, the battle is fought, and the English win a stunning victory. In the end, ten thousand French nobles and soldiers die; of the English, only 29 men are killed. Harry tells his men where the credit for their victory lies:

Was ever known so great and little loss,
On one part and on th’other? Take it, God,
For it is none but thine! . . .
And be it death proclaiméd through our host
To boast of this or take that praise from God
Which is his only. . . .
[His men are only allowed to speak of the battle’s outcome] with this acknowledgement,
That God fought for us! (4.8)


Third: by his speeches, Harry gains a bride.

After the battle, the two monarchs meet to settle the conflict. Among other things, it is decided that Harry will marry Katharine, the French princess; their wedding will be a symbol of the union of the English and French throne. As the conqueror, Harry could simply claim Katharine and take her for himself. Instead he woos her, desiring that she genuinely love him.

In a playful scene (5.2), Shakespeare uses the couple’s language barrier to comic effect as Harry attempts, at first in overly ornate language and often using downright silly analogies, to profess his love for Katharine. The French princess asks him in her broken English, “Is it possible dat I sould love de enemy of France?”

Harry reassures her that he loves France so much that he “will not part with a village of it.” He attempts to prove this to her by professing his love for her in French – rather humorously as his French turns out to be far worse than her English. Finally he gives up his fumbling for words and says:

"Now fie upon my false French! By mine honour, in true English, I love thee, Kate; by which honour, I dare not swear thou loves me, yet my blood begins to flatter me that thou dost; notwithstanding the poor and untempering effect of my visage. . . . I was created with a stubborn outside, with an aspect of iron, that when I come to woo ladies, I fright them: but in faith, Kate, the elder I wax, the better I shall appear. My comfort is, that old age, that ill layer up of beauty, can do no more spoil upon my face. Thou hast me, if thou hast me, at the worst; and that shalt wear me, if thou wear me, better and better: and therefore tell me, most fair Katharine, will you have me? . . . Come, your answer in broken music; for thy voice is music, and thy English broken: therefore, queen of all, Katharine, break thy mind to me in broken English; wilt thou have me?"

She agrees, and by his words Harry has turned the daughter of his fiercest foe into his queen.


Why Christians should read Henry V

Harry’s appeal is universal – rare indeed is the reader who does not admire him greatly and perhaps even wish that Harry were the head of state in his country. But as excellent as Harry is in courage and character, there is a greater king than Harry: his words and deeds pale in comparison to those of Jesus.

Like Harry, Jesus conquers his enemies by the power of his words. But while Harry’s battle speeches are filled with threats of destruction, Jesus’ words in this time of grace are those of love, offering forgiveness to anyone who repents. Only Jesus is able to work in the hardened hearts of his mortal enemies and make us his friends, giving us a genuine, abiding love for himself.

Like Harry, Jesus rallies his friends by the power of his words: there can be no greater encouragement in times of trouble than God’s Word. But while Harry could only inspire his men to fight for victory, Jesus guarantees victory. Even more, Jesus himself does all the fighting, conquering death itself and leaving us to borrow Harry’s words: “God fought for us!” And while Harry’s men could never be his brothers in more than a figurative sense, Jesus makes us the very sons and daughters of God, co-heirs with him of the kingdom of God.

Like Harry, Jesus woos a bride by the power of his words. Unlike Harry’s beautiful princess, however, Jesus’ chosen bride – the church, his people – was already hopelessly corrupted, unfaithful, and defiled. Yet he demonstrates his love for her in this: while she was still a sinner, he sacrificed himself to make her a more pure and perfect wife than any other. And no language barrier or any other obstacle can prevent him from communicating his eternal love to her.

Christians should read Shakespeare’s Henry V because it makes them think even more highly of Jesus. Harry is the best kind of king we could hope for in this life, but the character, words, and deeds, of Jesus, our eternal king, are far more amazing and beautiful than Harry’s.

Also, Christians should read Shakespeare’s Henry V because it can help them point others to Jesus. Harry appeals to all kinds of people, Christians and non-Christians alike, and many would wish that we had such a king in our often lonely, impoverished, nasty, and brutish world. But Christians can respond: we do! We have a king greater than Harry, and his kingdom has come and is yet coming and will be forevermore.

For any who are interested in reading Henry V, it can be read for free on several websites; simply search for it in any search engine. Also, I highly recommend the film version starring Kenneth Branagh.

After God fought for them, Harry and his men sang from Psalm 115:

Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us,
But unto your Name give glory.

What more can we say but “Amen”?

Why Christians should read/watch/listen to/know about . . .

An introduction, published in the 7 November edition of Christian Renewal magazine, to a forthcoming series of articles.

Christians have sometimes earned a reputation for withdrawing from non-Christian expressions of culture and setting up their own alternatives: for example, their numerous publishing houses, enormous music industry, and separate film production companies. Ignoring for the moment that the largest of the Christian arts companies are actually owned by massive secular corporations (HarperCollins or Gaylord Entertainment, for example), it is reasonable to say that Christians have “ghettoized” to at least some degree as far as the culture is concerned.

Often this withdrawal is of necessity. Few secular publishers, for example, would bother to publish theological books. Even more importantly, our culture is often more than simply non-Christian, it is anti-Christian, and many of its words and images are antithetical to the Christian worldview and objectionable to those who hold it.

This withdrawal from anti-Christian culture, however, is itself an admission of the power that words and images have us. All words and images are expressions of ideas. Everything that has ever been written, drawn, sung, sculpted, or filmed reflects in some way the mindset of its creator.

In terms of our own sanctification, we must recognize that we do not come to faith as clean slates. We have all been “shaped” by the words, images, and associated ideas of the culture in which we grew up. To one degree or another, we will reflect our cultural origins until our dying day (and beyond?).

This is good in some ways. God has made a diversity of people on the earth, each one with a unique appearance, set of interests, and personality. It can be a very beautiful, God-honoring thing when these various people interact. The New Testament church was characterized by a great diversity of personalities and ethnic, economic, and educational backgrounds.

But it can also be dangerous. We all have a latent mindset that is at odds with the truth and righteousness of God. Too often we make assumptions or decisions without realizing how we are being influenced by our “former manner of life,” as Paul describes it. Sanctification is the process of replacing this residual “old self” mindset with the “new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

In terms of interacting with our culture, we must recognize that anything we say or do will be received within a certain cultural context or mindset. The people to whom we speak do not come to the proclamation of the gospel with a clean slate of ideas either. They too have been shaped by the words and images they have encountered throughout their lives, and if we are to engage those around us effectively, we must understand what they think and why.

Words and images both reflect and shape the soul, and no one is exempt from their influence. That is why it is so important for Christians to boldly proclaim the gospel, for Christians are the only ones who offer words of truth and hope amongst the cacophony of ideas that are being screamed at us every moment, it seems at times, of every day.

“How are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, ‘How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!’” (Romans 10:14-15, ESV).

This series will examine various aspects of our culture with these thoughts in mind. It begins in this issue with a great work of literature; in future issues, it will consider music, film, and various iconic figures and events. Our goal in examining each of these is to understand them in light of the gospel, and I hope they will encourage Christians to live boldly as salt and light in the world.