My Better Half

Today is my darling wife Melany's birthday (thoughtlessly, I almost mentioned the number, but caught myself at the last moment--a mistake like that could be fatal!  ;-)  I don't think I've ever expressed, in a public forum, just how wonderful this lovely lady is and how much she means to me. We've been married 31 years, and I'm still learning from her--and all good things, too.

It was on a Saturday night in September, 1976, at someone else's birthday party in our apartment complex near Michigan State University, that we first met. As I recall she was sitting on the floor with a plate of cake in her lap, chatting with whoever was around. I was immediately attracted by her radiant smile and cheerful, easygoing manner, and sat down on the floor next to her--pretty uncharacteristic for a buttoned-up bookworm like me. We had a nice conversation about something since forgotten, and then--being the selfless, generous person she was and is--she introduced me to another young lady. She's often told me since that she instantly regretted doing so. No lasting harm done; after a few weeks' diversion, we both had to admit that our initial instincts were best, and we started over. Before my graduation that June, we had an "understanding," as folks used to say. But first I had to finish law school--and then there was a year of work to accumulate a nest egg. More hesitation, then commitment--for good! We got married on the Fourth of July, so we'd always have fireworks on our anniversary!

The years since then have been a daily revelation to me of God's wondrous grace and providence. There's no "rational" explanation for why an introverted, skeptical boy from western New York and an outgoing, optimistic girl from central Michigan would somehow find each other, be mutually attracted, and yoke their whole futures together--and stay together--despite all the forces of geography, destiny, personal predilection, and life challenges that would buffet them over the years. How has she found it in herself to put up with all my shortcomings and grievous mistakes, and all the disappointments and unrealized dreams that marriage inevitably entails? Only the merciful and miraculous will of God, and the bountiful guidance of the Holy Spirit, can explain these things. What other force could enable us to have and raise three wonderful children to maturity, and them to stay in the path of righteousness and safety in the face of all the physical and moral dangers confronting them in this modern world?

But God didn't act alone in producing this miracle. More than anyone else it has been Melany through whom He worked. Her example of patience, kindness, diligence, faith, and good cheer continues, every day, to be a wonder and an inspiration to me and the children. She brings out the best in us and has made us far better people than we could ever have been without her. Our family and all that we, our children, and our grandchildren will ever be and accomplish in this life, are her eternal monument. May God bless her abundantly and keep us all together, for long years and forever, in the palm of His hand.

Faith on a Wire

I've been wanting to post about the June 15 high-wire walk across Niagara Falls by Nik Wallenda, but as always, my insanely busy schedule has kept me from doing so in a timely manner. Patience and persistence usually win out in the end, however. Mr. Wallenda has proved that.

Some months ago I heard about New York and Ontario authorities dispensing with their century-long ban on daredevil stunts at Niagara Falls so as to allow the 33-year-old Wallenda,of the famous "Flying Wallendas" family of aerialists to attempt a crossing of the Niagara Gorge directly over the brink of the Falls. I took a rather dim view of that action at the time, wondering what other silliness local authorites would stoop to promoting in order to generate a few dollars to prop up their ailing economy. More recently, I heard that the "event" would be televised, but didn't make any special plans to watch it, as I regarded the whole thing as roughly equivalent to the second coming of that 1970s oddball Evel Knievel.

But with Friday evening winding down and a little free time on my hands before retiring, I decided to check out the broadcast. I grew up just a few miles from the Falls on Grand Island, New York, and worked in the Niagara Falls State Park for two summers during college, so I'm quite familiar with all parts of it and thought it might be a hoot to see all the commotion and circus atmosphere there on TV.  I had heard that Wallenda had been required to use a safety tether to prevent a fatal mishap, so I didn't have to worry about having to witness something like that (I might be a little more squeamish than the average person). I wasn't quite prepared for the experience I was about to have.

I tuned in just a few minutes before Wallenda started his walk, so I didn't see any of the lead-up coverage. It was interesting indeed to see the area at the head (or is it the foot?) of Goat Island I had walked through countless times brilliantly illuminated, jammed with people at 10 o/clock at night, and being  televised around the globe. Suddenly the camera focused on Wallenda, who climbed up onto a 2-inch metal cable stretched across the precipice of the Horseshoe Falls and the yawning Niagara Gorge into Canada, balanced a long pole between his outstretched hands, and began stepping, ever so sedately, down the wire.

In moments, Wallenda was beyond land and suspended above the raging rapids of the Niagara River as they approached the brink of the Falls. I was transfixed. The aerialist was walking ramrod-straight, atop a wire narrower than an infant's foot,  perfectly focused and calm--even talking casually with reporters and his father by microphone--as the angry torrents rushed past beneath him. Soon he was at and then across the edge of the cliff itself, while thousands of gallons per second of frigid water hurtled over with a deafening roar, into a churning maelstrom 174 feet below (this is not hyperbole; I've spent countless hours at this place myself and can attest to the fantastic power and violence of all that water). The photography during this part of the show was breathtaking, as it focused on the tiny figure traversing the almost-invisible wire while dwarfed by the mighty Falls behind him.

 

But that was hardly the most difficult part of the walk. Wallenda kept going, robot-like, into the swirling clouds of mist above the center of the "horseshoe."  "Mist" is a misleading word; the flying water here is actually equivalent to a cold, driving rainstorm, whipped about by fierce and ever-shifting winds (if you've ever taken a ride on the Maid of the Mist boat near the base of the falls, you've experienced this for yourself). Yet, through all the breathtaking ferocity about him, soaking wet and perched precariously where the water below is deeper than the Falls themselves are high, Wallenda never faltered, or even paused. His moccasin-clad feet seemed to be small machines unto themselves, advancing in short, careful steps with an amazingly precise rhythm that never varied during the entire almost-half-hour of the walk, regardless of the elements hurling against their owner's body.  Again, the video was amazing; despite the swirling mist, Wallenda (and his incredibly calm, focused gaze) was so clearly visible to the camera I felt almost as though I were walking backwards on the wire just a few feet ahead of him, through the eerily backlit cloud.

The most amazing feature of the event, however--at least for me--was hearing Wallenda, over an open wireless microphone, thanking and praising God and Jesus Christ (for example, "Thank you Jesus, my righteous king . . ." "Thank you, Lord God.  Thank you, Jesus." ) as he stepped relentlessly along the wire. It was electrifying to hear a famous, accomplished person, at the moment of his greatest trial and his greatest triumph, extolling our Lord and giving Him all the glory. I had no idea at before then that Wallenda was a Christian, but learning so at that moment and in that way put the whole event in a new, positive perspective for me. I want to thank ABC for not shutting off Wallenda's mike in secular embarrassment at this flagrant display of religious faith.

Perhaps it's only natural that someone who makes a career out of risking his life would get into the habit of praying, mostly to be spared sudden, violent death. But Wallenda didn't seem to be praying for deliverance so much as thanking God in advance for success and for the opportunity to glorify Him in front of millions of people. There wasn't a trace of fear in his voice, only exultation.

Some people have criticized the feat as a pointless, self-glorifying stunt that only "tempted" God even as Wallenda was flaunting His name. Others have suggested that Wallenda's prayers were but a cheap play for sympathy, approval, and even money from a gullible public. I can't see into another person's soul--no one can--so I couldn't pass judgment on Wallenda's motives. I can only judge what I witness, and what I saw Friday night was an intensely focused, remarkably calm, utterly confident man who--for all the world to see and hear--committed his every step in absolute trust and gratitude to his Savior.

Wallenda's "stunt" seems much less crazy and irresponsible when one considers the combination of personal and spiritual elements that made it possible: ambition, resolve, tenacity, self-assurance, self-sacrifice, patience, relentless preparation, carefully cultivated skill, and, perhaps most of all, faith: faith that it could be done, that he could do it, and that the Lord would sustain him and see him through to success in the end. Maybe the act of walking on a wire over rushing water does not, of itself, substantially benefit anyone. But the fact that Wallenda could do such an improbable thing and the way he did it, despite the laws and elements of nature and all the challenges that would have defeated a less stalwart man (like me), serves as a compelling model for all people of the faith it takes to realize a seemingly "impossible dream."  Wallenda's feat maifests the truth of what Christ himself said: "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26) The formula: strive to and beyond what you think are the very limits of your capability, and then, when you have done all you can do, trust the rest--and yourself--entirely to the Lord. That's what Wallenda did up there on that wire a week ago Friday night.  As he explained in a post-event interview: "Faith plays a huge role in what I do," Wallenda said. "I believe God has opened many doors for me in my life and this is one of them. To inspire people around the World, let them know the impossible is not so impossible if you set your mind to it."

As another perceptive commentator has observed:

What Wallenda taught us as he walked across the Falls was the power of awe.  He taught us the power of worship.  Intensely concentrating in order to maintain his balance and composure, Wallenda's mind was on His God who had given him the incredible ability to pull of this stunt and who had created wonders of creation such as Niagara Falls.  And so he gave witness to Christ all the way across the Falls.

* * * * * 

One other thing about this event merits discussion. Wallenda expressed some embarassment and annoyance both before and during the walk at having to wear a safety line that secured him to the cable, which was required by ABC, and perhaps local authorities, as a condition of getting permits and TV coverage for the act. While that might have been an "insult" to Wallenda professionally, I am SO glad he used it and didn't take it off during the walk, as some people predicted he might. Wallenda has a wife and small children, all of whom were present at the event.  It's unthinkable what they and we would have had to witness had he not worn the safety line and fallen from the wire, all the more with such a tragedy being broadcast on television around the world. In my personal opinion, we don't need any more obscene violence, or threatened violence, for people to watch as "entertainment."  Enough with degrading voyeurism!  That this wasn't necessarily a "death-defying stunt" (it still might have been; safety devices don't always work, as parachutists know all too well) didn't detract one iota from its power for me; in fact, I wouldn't have watched it otherwise. It was enough to see whether such a feat was humanly possible. That he did it, regardless of the harness, thrilled me and millions the world over to no end. If Wallenda attempts a wire crossing of the Grand Canyon, as apparently is his plan, I pray he uses (or is made to use) a safety tether again. If so, I'll watch and be thankful to him for the faith he's so boldly modeled for all, whatever the outcome.

SEE FOR YOURSELF!  Click here to see the complete Niagara Falls high-wire walk program from ABC (including pre-event coverage, with commercials). For raw video of the walk itself (no audio), click here.  For highlights of the walk itself (without commercials), click here.

Memorial Day: Mansions of the Lord

He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth;
he breaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder;
he burneth the chariot in the fire. ~ Psalms 46:9

Tomorrow, May 28, is Memorial Day in the United States. On this day we remember and honor those men and women in the Armed Forces who gave their lives in service to our country. Today, for those who have never lost a close relative or friend serving in the military, Memorial Day seems to mean little more than an extra day off from work and an occasion for picnics and used car sales. But for those who have borne such a loss, or who have simply made it their business to honor our fallen heroes and support their families, Memorial Day is a profoundly moving time.

But not always a somber, wretched time. Perhaps because Memorial Day falls in the fullest flower of spring, it has always cast for me a ray of light and hope, just behind the dark wall of painful remembrance. As a child I would go with my grandmother every "Decoration Day"--as it was then called--to the cemetery behind our family's church, where we laid a pot of flowers at my long-departed grandfather's grave and with Grandma would say a brief, silent prayer. I recall it as always being sunny and warm. All the veterans' graves were adorned with colorful flags. Yes, we often had a family picnic too, but it was always preceded by that quiet remembrance.

This bonding of grief and hope, sadness and peace is reflected in a moving contemporary hymn to fallen servicemen called Mansions of the Lord. The text was composed by Christian songwriter, screenwriter, and director Randall Wallace, and the music by English film score composer Nick Glennie-Smith.It was sung by the U.S. Military Academy Glee Club during the closing credits of the 2002 film We Were Soldiers, which chronicled the November 1965 Battle of Ia Drang in Viet Nam. The hymn also served as the recessional in the 2004 funeral of President Ronald Reagan.

The text consists of three short stanzas that dwell not on war and death, but on the eternal peace of Heaven--the "Mansions of the Lord"--to which a fallen soldier (or sailor or airman) is commended by his comrades, who promise to stand guard and remember him always. The hymn reminds us that in that blessed place there is no more war, no fear or pain, no anguish or loss--just "divine embrace, eternal light." The music is likewise simple, dignified, and uplifting, and reinforces the text's message of hope (as the hymn is not in the public domain the sheet music can't be reproduced here, but if you'd like to view and download it for a fee, click here).

To fallen soldiers let us sing,
Where no rockets fly nor bullets wing,
Our broken brothers let us bring
To the Mansions of the Lord.

No more bleeding, no more fight,
No prayers pleading through the night,
Just divine embrace, eternal light
In the Mansions of the Lord.

Where no mothers cry and no children weep,
We will stand and guard though the angels sleep,
All through the ages safely keep
The Mansions of the Lord.

  Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, Washington, DC, USA

The presentation below is the original version of the hymn sung in We Were Soldiers by the Cadet Glee Club of West Point, along with a stirring orchestration and a moving video tribute to fallen warriors and their families:



You'll notice that this presentation includes a solo voice portion not part of the hymn itself, excerpted from the lament "Sgt. MacKenzie" by Joseph Kilna MacKenzie, as sung in a Scottish dialect and with a "translation" to standard English:

Lay me doon in the caul caul groon
Whaur afore monie mair huv gaun
Lay me doon in the caul caul groon
Whaur afore monie mair huv gaun

Ains a year say a prayer faur me
Close yir een an remember me
    *****
Lay me down in the cold cold ground
Where before many more have gone
Lay me down in the cold cold ground
Where before many more have gone

Once a year say a prayer for me
Close your eyes and remember me

Below is another presentation, also sung (I believe) by the Cadet Glee Club but without orchestration--except for a very poignant bugle introduction--and is accompanied by another very moving video.



The video below presents the Cadet Glee Club itself performing Mansions of the Lord, with an introduction that provides some very thought-provoking information on just how many men and women have given their lives in America's service in the last hundred years:



War, though sometimes necessary in the defense of truth, justice, and national survival, is perhaps the greatest scourge in human experience. The believer--especially the believing soldier and his or her family--longs and prays for the day when war and conflict are no more, and we rejoice eternally, together, in the presence of our Savior and Heavenly Father.  It is this hope that we share with departed loved ones, and which, perhaps, inspired these beautiful passages from Scripture:

[T]hey shall beat their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruning hooks;
nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war anymore. ~ Isaiah 2:4

And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;
and there shall be no more death,
neither sorrow, nor crying,
neither shall there be any more pain:
for the former things are passed away. ~ Revelation 21:4

May the soldiers, sailors, and airmen of today live to see it,
and lock arms with their departed comrades once more.

NOTE: This post was adapted from another on my blog Songs of Praises, which features the best in hymns and sacred music.

Angel(s) of Mercy

It's been far too long since I posted here, and to those (few) who follow this blog, I apologize. Most of my posts involve a certain amount of research, and I simply haven't had time to do much of that lately, what with unusual pressures at work and many family adventures (most of them delightful) at home. Political controversies, battles in the culture wars, and other momentous events have come and gone without comment from me. How can humanity cope?

So, before this blog is entirely forgotten, I'll post about the one subject on which no research is needed--my family! And at this time one member in particular, who gives so much of herself to others day in and day out: my sister Patti!

We grew up together in Grand Island, New York with our two other brothers and, of course, Mom (Gail) and Dad (John) Fleming. Patti (at left in high school) was special as the "baby sister," but she didn't let it go to her head too often--she just suffused our family with her sweet glow!  Mom and Dad moved to Jacksonville, Florida (where Mom grew up) in the mid-80s, and Patti followed a few years later. There she met an exceptional gentleman named Jason, and they were married. Not long after that, they were blessed with a son, Jonathan, who's now a fine young man working his way through college. In recent years Patti has shared countless sewing and craft-making secrets, as well as whimsical thoughts and pearls of wisdom, on her blog It's a Wonderful . . . 

This sounds like a "happily ever after" story, and in a way it is--but only part of it.  The other part consists of Patti's tireless efforts for people outside her home. She works at the Women’s Help Center in Jacksonville, providing pregnancy tests and sonograms, counseling in favor of life and against abortion, and generally offering guidance and support to women and couples facing the most important choices in their lives.

Most important, she--with Jason's tireless help--constitutes Mom and Dad's lifeline in their later years. Patti helps nurse them through health challenges and drives back and forth to hospitals and doctor's offices. She and Jason have put in many hours keeping Mom and Dad's computer up and running so they can stay connected with the digitized members of the family. Other errands and chores Patti and Jason have done for Mom and Dad are countless, and all without a moment's hesitation. I and my brothers, who live too far away to provide that support, only wish we could pitch in more and lighten their load. For now, I can at least pay them a little tribute in a public place and express our thanks for all that they do to help Mom and Dad (and others) live "happily ever after"!

 Patti today in downtown Jacksonville

 

Jason with our grandson Liam

Family Values

One of the saddest things one sees these days--and regrettably, one of the most prevalent--is the disintegration of families. In western countries divorce is now rampant, to the point that stable, long-term marriages are a distinct minority of adult relationships. But even in "whole" families it is disturbingly common to see parents, children, and siblings (even as adults) deeply alienated from each other, always squabbling over things great and small, and doing their best to avoid meaningful contact. I know too many members of other families who live right around the corner from each other but haven't spoken in years, and some in which a sibling left home at the first opportunity and was never heard from again. In how many others do family members share little more than a mailing address, all caught up in personal pursuits and rarely, if ever, really communicating with each other or chatting around the dinner table?

God instituted the family for many reasons, not least of which is to provide us with guidance, support, and comfort in times of trial, or just to enrich our day-to-day lives here on earth and make us happy. Family is where we are meant to teach, learn and practice commitment, caring, self-sacrifice, patience, faith, and love--all of which are vital to reaching our full potential here on earth, and to attaining eternal life with the Lord and each other in Heaven. Indeed, we should strive to make our families a microcosm or preview of Heaven itself--especially since, if you believe as I do, that we'll still be together as family in that beautiful world! Our material circumstances in this life may be meager, but our lives can be richer than any king's if we share love one with another.

Certainly this is not an easy task, but how could we grow without challenge and perseverance? No two or more human beings can live together in a small space without friction and some conflict. We're weak and fallible beings, and are bound to say and do things, now and then, that may hurt or disappoint our loved ones. So, repentance, patience, and forgiveness become a way of life in strong families. For them, love means ALWAYS having to say you're sorry--and always saying, "That's OK--I forgive you." Faith and prayer are indispensable for all family members, and when shared hold them together like nothing else.

Scripture is such an important and inspiring guide in this work. The Bible is permeated with wisdom concerning families and their generations, and how family members should live together (see, for example, Ephesians 5:22-33; 1 Peter 3:1-7). This wonderful passage condenses it into a nutshell (Colossians 3:18-21):

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.
Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

These lines immediately follow Paul's characterization of a true Christian (Colossians 3:12-17):

Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.
And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful.
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

This is the formula not only for a strong faith community, but for making and keeping a strong family!

I was immeasurably blessed to have grown up in a loving, resilient family. Working together peacefully could be difficult, and we often had to ride out storms of conflict. But thanks to the teaching and good example set by our parents, we hung together and grew in love over the years. We learned what a strong family looks like and how to build and maintain one, and hopefully are modeling those things to our own children so they can have the same blessings. My siblings and I are scattered about the USA now, but we've never been "closer" to each other.

If your family is less than what it should be, start rebuilding it TODAY: recommit to your spouse, reconcile with your children and with your own parents and siblings--don't let ANY past wrong or hurt stand in your way. With a contrite heart ask their forgiveness, and forgive them freely and eagerly. Involve yourself actively in their daily lives. Make the tent as big as possible, and welcome grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins under it. Find humor and the joy of discovery in everything. It's never too late to start over, on the right road. For the road to Heaven is paved with family love.

NOTE: This post was adapted from another of mine on Faithful Feet, a collaboration of people from around the world dedicated to sharing the Good News and simple insights into a life of faith and joy.

Infanticide: The New Abortion

"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not."

Matthew 2:16-18 (referring to the Massacre of the Innocents, when Herod the Great ordered the slaying of all young male children in the village of Bethlehem after the birth of Christ)

A few days ago I read an article that made me literally sick to my stomach--and genuinely frightened for the future of mankind. In the early 21st century, Western "civilization" seems to be reaching levels of depravity not seen since the hideous Nazi regime of the 1930s and 40s. I didn't live in Germany back then, but I've read enough about it to understand something of the moral wasteland that produced such demented monsters as Adolf Hitler and Dr. Josef Mengele, the "Angel of Death" at Auschwitz--and that it's in the process of happening again today, on a global scale.

The very title of the article, published February 23 in the Journal of Medical Ethics, makes the blood run cold: After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live? The authors, medical "ethicists" Alberto Giubilini of Monash University in Melbourne, Austrailia and Dr. Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne, take the position that in circumstances in which the abortion of a fetus would be legal, what is termed "after-birth abortion" should also be permissible, even where the newborn is perfectly healthy. In other words, whenever it's all right to kill a fetus, it should be all right to kill a newborn baby. Consider this chilling explanation in the authors' own words:

A serious philosophical problem arises when the same conditions that would have justified abortion become known after birth. In such cases, we need to assess facts in order to decide whether the same arguments that apply to killing a human fetus can also be consistently applied to killing a newborn human.

Such an issue arises, for example, when an abnormality has not been detected during pregnancy or occurs during delivery. Perinatal asphyxia, for instance, may cause severe brain damage and result in severe mental and/or physical impairments comparable with those for which a woman could request an abortion.

[. . .]

[While] people with Down's syndrome, as well as people affected by many other severe disabilities, are often reported to be happy . . . [n]onetheless, to bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole, when the state economically provides for their care. On these grounds, the fact that a fetus has the potential to become a person who will have an (at least) acceptable life is no reason for prohibiting abortion. Therefore, we argue that, when circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible.

Failing to bring a new person into existence cannot be compared with the wrong caused by procuring the death of an existing person. The reason is that, unlike the case of death of an existing person, failing to bring a new person into existence does not prevent anyone from accomplishing any of her future aims. . . . If the death of a newborn is not wrongful to her on the grounds that she cannot have formed any aim that she is prevented from accomplishing, then it should also be permissible to practise an after-birth abortion on a healthy newborn too, given that she has not formed any aim yet.

The authors reason that the moral status of a newborn is equivalent to that of a fetus--on which abortions in the traditional sense are performed--rather than that of an older child, because neither a fetus or a newborn can be considered a "person" in any “morally relevant sense." This is why they believe the practice they advocate is better described as "after-birth abortion" than as "infanticide."

To Giubilini and Minerva, not all human beings--which apparently they acknowledge fetuses and newborns to be, at least in a genetic sense--can be considered "persons" entitled to rights. They explain as follows:

Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’. We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.

[...]

Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life: spare embryos where research on embryo stem cells is permitted, fetuses where abortion is permitted, criminals where capital punishment is legal.

To the authors of this paper, an individual's own ability to understand the value of a different situation--which depends on some level of consciousness and mental development on his or her part--determines personhood. They reject any argument that as “potential persons” fetuses and newborns have a right to reach that potential, stating that such a right is “over-ridden by the interests of actual people (parents, family, society) to pursue their own well-being because . . . merely potential people cannot be harmed by not being brought into existence.” The overriding interests of "real people" likewise should control the choice of adoption, the authors suggest, stating that if the mother were to “suffer psychological distress” from giving up her child to someone else, then "after-birth abortion" should be considered an acceptable alternative. Giubilini and Minerva therefore conclude that “what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled."

Responding to widespread criticism and outrage over its publication of the article, the editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics stated that

[T]he novel contribution of this paper is not an argument in favor of infanticide . . . but rather their application in consideration of maternal and family interests. The paper also draws attention to the fact that infanticide is practised in the Netherlands . . . The authors provocatively argue that there is no moral difference between a fetus and a newborn. Their capacities are relevantly similar. If abortion is permissible, infanticide should be permissible.

What the editor finds disturbing is "[n]ot that people would give arguments in favour of infanticide, but the deep opposition that exists now to liberal values and fanatical opposition to any kind of reasoned engagement."

It seems that the authors of this paper, as well as the editor of the journal in which it was published, have unwittingly done the pro-life movement an inestimable service. This cold, dispassionate argument for the legalization of infanticide lays bare the sterile, inhumane reasoning that leads directly from a justification for the indiscriminate termination of prenatal life to the brazen murder of newborn babies--and perhaps to the utilitarian killing of older children or even adults who, for various reasons, are incapable of forming personal "aims" or of appreciating the difference between their current life situation and any other, including death. This is the alarm that pro-life advocates have been sounding for years, and they now have this paper to show as Exhibit A in support of their position. Moreover, the journal editor's indignation at the understandable outrage prompted by a naked argument for infanticide clearly shows how twisted are his and the authors' priorities, and how morally bankrupt are those who would frankly advance such an idea.

At the core of Giubilini and Minerva's argument for infanticide, as well as that for justifications of abortion "on demand," is a concept of the universe in which there is no God by whose creation, law, and love human life is endowed with value. For adherents to this view, being genetically "human" and having the "potential" for a full and independent existence cannot be accepted as the source of value entitling one to a right to life, as that might impinge on another's freedom to terminate a pregnancy. So, a higher level of humanity--"personhood"--must be posited as the crucial point at which one gains sufficient dignity to enjoy any right to continue living (does this not echo the "human/subhuman" dichotomy upon which Nazis and slave owners rested their theories of racial superiority?) Giubilini and Minerva define personhood in this sense as the "self-consciousness" that enables an individual to appreciate life (or to distinguish it from oblivion) and to formulate and pursue personal "aims" or goals. Any other source of value, they suggest, is merely an irrational and impermissible "projection" of others' subjective values onto that individual. This is an entirely "me-centric" measurement of humanity, as it is devoid of any thought that a higher (that is, Divinely-established) set of values, transcending the individual, society, or even mankind generally, might apply. If the individual-- the first level of "me"--is incapable of self-consciousness and self-actualization, the theory goes, it has no moral significance and may be casually destroyed at the whim of its parent or the community that would otherwise be responsible for it--the next and highest level of "me." Again, in this view, life has no value beyond its usefulness to itself or to the community. This is true for both fetuses and newborns, as neither has developed the level of consciousness and independent will that constitutes "personhood."

This paper makes crystal clear that abortion and infanticide are barely-separated steps along one continuum of soul-less, anti-human utilitarianism. And its views actually threaten millions of lives today--indeed, in the Netherlands and Belgium, the killing of terminally ill and disabled newborns, as well as euthanasia generally (the next step along the continuum) are already practiced. If the views of Giubilini and Minerva gain traction in the American medical ethics community, such horrors could well become the norm here, and soon.

The moral shortcomings and terrible implications of this paper are almost beyond counting, but here a few of the most important:

First, the authors do not address the question of the age at which an infant should be considered a "person," nor do they suggest any way to reliably determine when a particular newborn has reached this magic moment. Are we to trust the subjective judgment of those who feel "burdened" by the child, or of those who work for them, and have a vested interest in being rid of it?

Second, not only disabled or terminally ill newborns, but also perfectly healthy babies who haven't yet developed to the point of "personhood," would come within the class of those who can be killed with impunity. In fact, the authors' definition of "personhood" would render expendable anyone, young or old, who never developed or has lost meaningful self-awareness and self-direction, including many of profoundly retarded and Down's Syndrome children, the severely brain-damaged, late-stage Alzheimer's sufferers, and persistently comatose patients. To Giubilini and Minerva they are not people and have no value or right to live, and should therefore be disposed of so as not to burden others.

Third, and especially in connection with the point just discussed above, one commentator asks:

[I]f babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life,” then why is it only their parents who are entitled to kill them? Shouldn't they be fair game for anyone? In particular, as the authors note, the state has a legitimate interest in the cost of dealing with disabilities. So does the state have a right to mandate an “after-birth abortion?” If not, why not?

If the state can promote or compel infanticide and homicide of the insensate, directly or indirectly through incentives or regulation, the practice can be used for population control, eugenics, scientific experimentation, or to ration and manage the expenses of health care and public welfare, among other government purposes--just as in Nazi Germany a few decades ago; just as in communist China today. Is this the kind of society that any feeling human being would want to live in?

Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, sums up the matter eloquently:

This article in the Journal of Medical Ethics is a clear signal of just how much ground has been lost to the Culture of Death. A culture that grows accustomed to death in the womb will soon contemplate killing in the nursery. The very fact that this article was published in a peer-reviewed academic journal is an indication of the peril we face.

The only sane response to this argument is the affirmation of the objective moral status of the human being at every point of development, from fertilization until natural death. Anything less than the affirmation of full humanity puts every single human being at risk of being designated as not “a person in the morally relevant sense.”

Let us pray that "after-birth abortion" never gains acceptance and becomes another, larger-scale Massacre of the Innocents.

From Humble Beginnings . . .

Today, February 12, marks two very special anniversaries. One is of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, who held the American family together through its severest trial, and did so much to make it one again. The other is of the marriage of my parents, John and Barbara Gail (Hobbs) Fleming, who created the wonderful family in which I and my siblings were privileged to grow up.

Neither of these blessed endeavors had an auspicious beginning. Mr. Lincoln was born on February 12, 1809 in a one-room log cabin in Hardin County, Kentucky to frontier farmers Thomas Lincoln and Nancy Hanks Lincoln. Mom and Dad eloped and were married on February 12, 1954 before a justice of the peace in the small town of Kingsland, Camden County, Georgia.

Lincoln educated himself and labored on and about his family's small farms, as well as in various small-time jobs and enterprises, and attained no public prominence until his mid-20s. When they married Dad was an enlisted man (corpsman) in the United Stats Navy, son of a house painter and an innkeeper's daughter, Mom a policeman's daughter and a freshman student in college, which she left. They literally lacked a pot to piddle in, but struggled together and after Dad's discharge settled in western New York state (Grand Island) where Dad had grown up, and had 4 children over the next 8 years. They built much of their first house themselves, on a small lot that had been part of Dad's family's farm. Dad drove a milk truck for his uncle's dairy business; Mom stayed home--as most mothers did back then--with us kids. We probably weren't "poor," but certainly weren't "rich" or even very "comfortable." But Mom and Dad worked hard to make sure that we children never lacked for what we really needed. We never felt deprived, nor entitled to anything more than we had. We were praised when we did well, comforted when we were hurt or sad, punished when we did wrong. We were taught how to read, draw, and do basic things for ourselves before we went to kindergarten. We learned to be respectful toward adults and never to be mean to other children. We were regularly given chores to do, which we sometimes did willingly--but almost always did, like it or not. We ate meals together, around the kitchen table. We went to church, as a family, most every Sunday. We children knew we were loved and cared for, and that our parents would give their lives for us if necessary.

Abraham Lincoln went on to political greatness and national immortality. Mom and Dad never gained nor sought public prominence. But what they achieved matters even more to me and their other children. They taught us how to be decent, faithful, self-sufficient people, and good citizens. They taught us what family is all about, and showed us how to build and maintain strong ones of our own. It wasn't always easy growing up, and there were plenty of "confrontations" among us. But the glue of love and commitment that held us together, though it may have bent a little now and then, never cracked or broke. Mom and Dad saw to that. Thanks to them, all of us siblings and all of our children are devoted to them and to each other, and get along better than virtually any family I know of. I can't adequately express what a blessing that is. And we owe it, ultimately, to two humble people who tied the knot 58 years ago today, and are still around to warm us with their sunshine. Thank you Mom and Dad, and the Lord who gave blessed us with them!