Amendment 2 and the resurrection of Auschwitz I

Something for all Christians and their denominations to consider in light of God's Truth. To be sure, some LCMS churches did voice a much needed Word from God on this issue through seminars and lawn signs, but rare was the witness, especially in the public sphere, as far as this person could discern. Worse yet, seminary avoided a great opportunity to witness to a much needed public through the ownership of South Campus on Clayton Road. Six signs were procured and placed in the front lawn of South Campus on Clayton Road, but taken down at the request of seminary personel. After much deliberation and discussion, it is the position of this author that the decision to remove the signs was un-Lutheran and unfaithful to the witness of God's Word in our context and community. May God forgive us and lead us to more fully embody His Will and Kingdom here on earth.

Resurrecting Auschwitz I: the church’s needed voice is rarely found.

“In Germany, they [the Gestapo] came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionists. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.”[1]

It hardly seems real to consider the horrors of Auschwitz to be alive and well, and that in America! But this is in fact what has happened. The concern of this paper is not as much the seemingly deliberate move of the Missouri people to vote for cloning humans[2] for personal use as much as the lack of voice in the public square by LCMS churches and it’s members to effectively speak on behalf of God concerning this important change in our society.[3]

First, one must understand the scope of the issue. In this most recent voting election, Amendment 2 was incorporated. This seemed to be more about what Amendment 2 ‘didn’t specifically say’ than what it did say. Among the many atrocities it brought to the Missourians, one of its qualities was its deceitful wording. Besides leaving the door open for many future unethical practices, it also sought to gain credence with the American people by redefining the word ‘cloning.’ The amendment reads as if it was “banning cloning” of human beings. However, if one were to read the entire amendment,[4] he would find that the document’s authors redefine cloning to include only cloned embryos that are returned to the mother’s womb for full-term development.

Since this is not the procedure the researchers are looking to do, but rather only need the embryo to develop into a blastocyst,[5] it was a perfect plan. “What ‘plan’ do they have?” you may ask. The amendment allows for any of these possibilities, and probably more:

1. Cloning human beings for the sole purpose of use and destruction.

2. Cloning human beings for research purposes. This could save drug companies up to $500 million and almost 8 ½ years of testing, getting the product on the shelves in virtually no time.

3. The researches have a blank check with which to write and take any tax money necessary for their special interest, unethical research.

4. Research is not the only future possibility. We are less than 10 years away from a full-functioning artificial womb.[6] As long as the embryo is not being placed back in the mother’s womb, it would be ‘legal’ to grow a baby for an undetermined time in this tissue. This could give rise to “organ transplant factories” in which people clone their own DNA and steal the organ(s) needed for their own use.[7]

5. This not only totally under minds the pro-life argument, making legal abortion after day 15, but it also nullifies certain existing abortion laws.

6. The harvesting of eggs from women. This procedure has taken at least 25 lives and caused at least 600 women to have post-surgery complications. It is risky and can also cause one to become sterile.

7. Unborn humans created by In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) could be killed at any stage of development to obtain their stem cells or “late embryonic body parts,” and neither the Legislature not Missouri citizens could do anything about it.

As Robert P. George, Ph.D., and member of the President’s Council on Bioethics has written:
“Based on the literature I have read and the evasive answers given by spokesmen for the biotechnology industry at meetings of the President’s Council on Bioethics, I fear that the long-term goal is indeed to created an industry in harvesting late embryonic and fetal body parts for use in regenerative medicine and organ transplantation.”

All this and not one cure has been found through embryonic stem cell research. Only Adult stem cells are used right now, and scientists have even found ways to tweak the cells into becoming pluripotent.[8] The embryonic stem cell cures are decades away, if that, while the proponents of this amendment expect to gain huge profits from the passing of this legislation.[9]

This is no different, if not worse, than Auschwitz I in Hitler’s day. Dr. Josef Mengele led experiments in Block 10 and other concentration camps. They conducted pseudoscientific research on infants, twins, dwarfs and performed forced sterilizations, castrations and hypothermia experiments on adults. What’s worse about Amendment 2 is that human embryos are even less capable of standing up for themselves and are the weakest of the weak in our culture, totally helpless and dependent upon others for good will and life.

Missouri has decided to turn its back on these “lowly” people. Even worse, many of the pastors in the LCMS are not engaging the discourse.[10] According to my past experience, very few pastors choose to engage in difficult, but practical life issues. We are all too accustomed to strict Law and Gospel preaching and teaching and do not wish to dig into difficult application. It seems as though we are afraid of being incorrect or taking people’s eyes away from justification through Christ.

But there may be very good reasons to attempt such an issue from a biblical worldview Especially concerning are the assumptions some may come to with our lacking dialogue. Those paying attention may come to one of these troubling conclusions:

1. We don't know what God really thinks about the issue.

2. We don't care about what God thinks about the issue.

3. We are scared to tell people what God thinks about the issue.

4. We think God is "ok" with cloning.

None of these answers are acceptable, for they all fall short of our position. However, if our position is not made perfectly clear, how are people to understand God’s view? I have seen cars pulling out of LCMS church parking lots with a “Vote Yes on Amendment 2” bumper stickers. It is perfectly clear that there will always be someone who doesn’t ‘walk the line,’ but clear education and teaching should lead almost all to the biblical conclusion of this horrible practice.

“But doesn’t this get in the way of the Gospel?” “Won’t this take us off-topic into territory that is better left to the medical field?”[11] “If we speak on this issue, what issue won’t take the place of church ministry and practice as we know it?” These are all good questions which must be carefully weighed, but before doing so, we must also give ear to Luther:

“If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved and to be steady on all the battlefield besides is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that one point.”[12]

It could be argued that defending the life of the weak is highly biblically important. When prioritizing teaching and preaching decisions, one must put justification by faith in Jesus Christ first and foremost, but that does not mean that every sermon and bible class must contain this information and this information alone. Pastors must be good stewards of the whole of Scripture, which includes our everyday lives and dealings. We must never distract from major tenets and foundations of the faith, but build on Jesus Christ.[13] Jesus was specifically interested in the well being of people and bringing His Kingdom into a present reality. This social aspect has to include speaking for those who cannot speak for themselves, namely, in this case, the unborn.

Unfortunately, not all agree. Some feel that pastors should stay completely out of anything not directly affiliated with church. Some feel that a voice should come from experts in their field, thereby excluding any other vocation from asserting a biblical view on the given subject. Some feel that pastors should have a say in all things. Who is correct? What should be done, and why?

There is no direct ‘black and white’ answer to questions such as these. However, some guiding priorities should lead us in a generally biblical direction. First of all, Jesus held the value of life extremely high. His Word teaches that human life is exceptionally important; in fact that is why He put on human flesh to save all people, including the weak.[14] Although that seems to rank the highest, we must also concede that this life is second to eternal life, therefore justification by faith in Christ should never be neglected or missed, but the foundation by which all is understood and matured. With this foundational element in place, we can move along as Paul did with the Christians in Corinth, seeking to bring them into spiritual maturity in Christ, finally working in the direction of Paul:

NIV 2 Corinthians 10:3 For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

What concerns me is the lack of backbone to this issue in a public way.[15] We must take the opportunity to address these issues and equip our people to engage the culture where they have influence.[16] We must also not shy away from possible opportunities to relay the truth. It was suggested that the 6 “No Cloning” signs retrieved for the front lawn of South Campus be taken down for fear of a ‘liberal’ taking action against this seminary.[17] Although this kind of suit is possible, the effects of nothing said could be much more devastating for the life of thousands, maybe millions of unborn children.[18] These things must be considered very carefully and weighed according to God’s truth and power, not according to man’s wisdom or concern. May God’s tension of love and action on our behalf lead us to consider and take to heart the whole of His Word, as well as these words of Winston Churchill:

“If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

[1] Martin Niemoller, German Pastor before World War Two.
[2] If indeed the people understood the amendment, then one should apply Luther’s words as found in volume 51, p. 37: “Where there are no Christians, or perverse and false Christians, it would be well for the authorities to allow them, like heathens, to put away their wives, and to take others, in order that they may not, with their discordant lives, have two hells, both here and there. But let them know that by their divorce they cease to be Christians, and become heathens, and are in the state of damnation.” Although the morality of life versus divorce would need engagement.
[3] The reality of this statement comes from past experience and present day discernment in general and does not necessarily reflect every situation and individual LCMS member. President Kieschnick is to be applauded for his memo on October 20th, but seemingly few pastors took the issue head on.
[4] This document is not easily found, and furthermore, the average voter does not look into such propositions well enough to figure this out, so the deception was built on people’s lack of knowledge. Hosea 4:6 comes to mind.
[5] The technical name for a human being at 15 days of life.
[6] Mice have already been grown to full gestation (although deformed), and goats have also survived almost full-term. Human embryos have been successfully planted already in an artificial womb tissue and allowed to grow for 6 days, after which they were ‘aborted’ because the test was not ready for continuation. Dr. Hung-Ching Liu of Cornell University’s announced the latter result in 2002.
[7] Although successful acceptance of the organ is more likely, rejection is not totally taken out of the realm of possibility in this process because the procedure always causes unforeseeable mutations in the genes.
[8] This is the famed reasoned argument for embryonic stem cell research. When cells are found to be pluripotent, this means that they can become anything. Not only can Adult stem cells become pluripotent, but they also do not cause cancer as embryonic stem cells have shown to do.
[9] Unfortunately, this amount of “set up” is necessary to better understand the problem of not speaking out on this issue.
[10] Again, this general statement does not include all pastors and leaders, as my RFE pastor held a comprehensive analysis on the subject and brought the issue up consistently over 3 weeks.
[11] The medical field are the ones positioning this amendment. The “yes” rally election night was held on Washington University’s campus.
[12] Luther, Martin. Statement. Robert Flood, The Rebirth of America (Philadelphia: Arthur DeMoss Found., 1986), p. 127.
[13] As Paul speaks of in 1 Cor. 3.
[14] He came for the sick and those needing a physician, not the well.
[15] By “public” it is meant direct contact by way of encountering others, especially those outside of our community, not through usually unsolicited places like http://www.lcms.org/ and elsewhere.
[16] This very idea was discussed at the recent conference called Called to Engage the Postmodern World.”
[17] It was suggested that this could be politically arguing one candidate over another, however, the law specifically allows pastors to speak out on moral and biblical issues of the day.
[18] This author also understands the tension of being “wise as serpents but innocent as doves,” but prioritizes life needs over possible unlawful suits, especially under the circumstances.