 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
in hopes of expelling the fetus. In general, abortion was not a perfected science but was readily practiced, sometimes even up to the 7th month of pregnancy, albeit abortions this late usually were fatal to the mother.
The Greeks
In ancient Greece, it is not absolutely certain that official legal decrees were made against abortion, but the ethics of the practice were debated across a variety of perspectives. From a medical perspective, the Oath of Hippocrates, 460-357 B.C., included a promise to not perform an abortion with a pessary:
I swear by Apollo Physician, by Asclepius, by Health, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture. . . . I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment, but never with a view to injury or wrong-doing. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly, I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause an abortion (20).
In social and philosophical circles, however, abortion was endorsed. Plato, 427-347 B.C., for instance, recommended that a woman conceiving after 40 years of age should arrange an abortion, writing:
A woman, I said, at twenty years of age may begin to bear children to the State, and continue to bear them until forty. . . And we grant all this, accompanying the permission with strict orders to prevent any [subsequent] embryo which may come into being from seeing the light; and if any force a way to the birth, the parents must understand that the offspring of such an union can not be maintained, and arrange accordingly (20).
Similarly, Aristotle, 384-322 B.C., wrote that the state should regulate procreation and pregnancy, and that abortions should be performed on deformed children:
Let there be a law that no deformed child shall be reared; but on the ground of number of children, if the regular customs hinder any of those being born exposed, there mut be a limit fixed to the procreation of offspring, and if any people have a child as a result of intercourse in contravention of these regulations, abortion must be practiced on it before it has development and sensation of life; for the line between lawful and unlawful abortion will be marked by the fact of having sensation and being alive (21-22).
It is unlikely that Plato and Aristotle condoned abortion generally or for convenience, as Aristotle at least made distinctions between "lawful and unlawful" abortions, but each viewed the individual as existing for the benefit of the state: concerns like poverty and overpopulation therefore took precedence over "the rights of the unborn" (22-23). Lastly, among religious perspectives, the Stoics believed that life began when an infant took its first breath and remained part of the mother until then, yet these disapproved of the practice of abortion (23). Others, like the Orphics, were concerned with the fate of the unborn's soul in the after-life and therefore condemned abortion (23-24). Also, there is mention in some circles
that abortion-like practices made one ritually impure (24).
The Roman Period
In the Roman Monarchy and Republic, there is evidence that abortion was illegal in certain cases. Roman law forbid the use of drugs that aided abortion, although not to protect the fetus but to protect the health of the mother. Of note, Roman law did not consider the fetus a person, so rights to protect it did not exist (26). Furthermore, Roman law was very concerned with the "rights of the husband." Plutarch for instance, found the use of poisonous drugs, presumably for abortion, as a just reason for divorcing a wife, revealing the predominant Roman view of abortion as an offense against the husband - the father had the most power in the Roman family (24-25). Cicero, 106-43 B.C., called for capital punishment upon women who abort - not for injustice against the fetus but for its injustice to the father, the family name, humanity, and the state (26). That such discussion was centered around abortion makes evident that it was nonetheless widely accepted and practiced.
In the days of the Roman Empire, abortion continued to be both debated and widely practiced. From certain quarters, the practice was condemned. Augustus, 27 B.C., made unsuccessful attempts to limit abortion (27). The poet Ovid, 43 B.C. - A.D. 17, wrote reproachingly of abortion, "Where is the maternal sense? Where are the pious wishes of the father." (28). Favorinus, A.D. 57/67-127, wrote:
Poor women . . . endure the perils of childbirth, and all the troubles of nursing to which their lot condemns them; but how often does a gilded bed contain a woman that is lying in it? So great is the skill, so powerful the drugs, of the abortionist, paid to murder mankind within the womb (29).
Juvenal, A.D. 57-127, equated abortion with murder (29). Soranos, A.D. 98-117, thought that abortion was unacceptable to hide adultery or maintain feminine beauty, but was permissible to save a woman's life (29). The first century Stoic, Musonius, found abortion to be contrary to the purpose of sex and large families (30). By the third century, there is evidence that abortion could be punished as a crime: the emperor Septimus Severus, A.D. 193-211, enacted a rescript on the matter (30). However, the concern behind this legislation was the rights of the husband and the duties of the wife not the right to life of the fetus (30-31). The third century jurist Paulus thought abortion not to be murder but a "bad example" worthy of punishment:
Because the thing is a bad example, lower-class people who give a drink to cause an abortion or to excite passion (although they don't do it deceitfully), are to be condemned to the mines, and more distinguished persons to be relegated to an island and deprived of part of their wealth. If by this drink a woman or man has died, they are condemned to capital punishment (31).
In the Digest, a third century Roman document, an abortion was considered an offense to the father and a bad example; danger to the mother and disregard for the rights of future citizens may also have been motives for its legal condemnation (31-32). In summary then, during the Roman period (through the third century), abortion was not punished as a crime unless the father disapproved or the mother was harmed or poisons were used. The child in the womb was not considered a "life" and was only given value in its potential usefulness for the state (32).
Judaism
The ancient Jewish perspective on abortion stands in contrast to the more lenient stances among the Greco-Roman world. Both pagans and Jews testify to the Jews' love for life and stance against abortion (34). The Hebrew Bible, however, records no specific reference to the practice of abortion, but other Jewish literature through A.D. 500 prohibits the practice in several places (33). The evidence among Jewish writings depict two slightly different schools of thought within Judaism: the Alexandrian school and the Palestinian school. The Alexandrian school was influenced by Greek thought and also the Greek
translation (LXX) of Ex 21:22-25, which translates the passage in such away as to ascribe penalty to the one who causes the death of a "fully formed" fetus while still in the womb (34-35). The Hebrew text is
translated as follows:
If men strive together and strike a pregnant woman so that her child comes out of her, but there is no harm, [the guilty one] will surely be fined according to what the woman's husband demands of him, and he will pay according to the judges' decision. But if there is harm, then you must give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth.
The "harm" in this passage is normally understand as toward the woman. The LXX, however, translates "there is no harm" as "there is no form":
If two men fight and they strike a woman who is pregnant, and her child comes out while not yet fully formed, the one liable to punishment will be fined; whatever the woman's husband imposes, he will give as is fitting. But if it is fully formed, he will give life for life.
The change makes the penalty apply explicitly to injuring the fetus. Philo, 25 B.C. - A.D. 41, elaborates on this by prescribing a fine for one who harms an "unformed" fetus and death for one who kills a "formed" fetus, making a connection between abortion and murder and showing more concern for the child than "rights of the father" (35-36). Other Alexandrian writings, Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 50 B.C.-A.D. 50, and Sibyllene Oracles, 1st and 2nd century B.C. both condemn abortion. The former states:
A woman should not destroy the unborn babe in her belly, nor after its birth throw it before the dog and the vultures as prey (37). The Alexandrian school, then, considered harm to the fetus in the womb to be both immoral and punishable (38).
The opinion of the Palestinian school is found in the Mishna, Talmud, and Josephus, and considered four main issues: the development of the fetus, its religious and legal status, accidental or necessary feticide, and deliberate feticide (38). It seems that the fetus, in the majority opinion, did not have a legal status, was not as important as the life of the mother, yet was thought to show the Creator's handiwork (42). One writing put it this way:
If a woman is in travail, the child must be cut up while it is in the womb and brought out member by member, since the life of the mother has priority over the life of the child; but if the greater part of it was already born, it may not be touched, since the claim of one life cannot override the claim of another life (42).
Yet, regarding the Creator's handiwork, the Talmud says:
What is the purport of the Scriptural text, I will give thanks to thee for I am fearfully and wonderfully made? . . . If a dyer puts different ingredients into a boiler they all unite into one colour, whereas the Holy One, blessed be He, fashions the embryo in a woman's bowels in a manner [such] that each develops in its own natural way (42-43).
If a mother's life was in danger, the fetus was to be extracted; yet, the Palestinian school still regarded the fetus as a work of the Creator. In the case of deliberate abortion, however, there is not much recorded, which is probably due to the extreme rarity of the procedure (42-43). Joseph, though, calls deliberate abortion murder:
The Law orders all the offspring to be brought up, and forbids woman either to cause an abortion or make away with the foetus; a woman convicted of this is regarded as an infanticide, because she destroys a soul and diminishes the race (43).
The minority opinion, contrary to the majority, did give a fetus legal status, citing the statement "within a man" in Gen 9:6 as a reference to the unborn (44). In any case, all schools condemned deliberate abortion as immoral and as a disregard for human life. Within the Palestinian school, a clear distinction was made between accidental/therapeutic and deliberate abortions, whereas the former was up for debate ( i.e., over the severity of the penalty to be enacted in such cases, the legal status of the fetus, etc.) but the latter was not.
Early Christianity: The First Three Centuries
As Christianity came on the scene, being influenced by Jewish thought
which regarded the fetus as a life and the handiwork of the Creator,
its stance on abortion also stood in contrast to the Greco-Roman
world. While the New Testament, like the Old Testament, itself makes
no explicit reference to abortion (although Gorman thinks the mention
of pharmakeia in vice lists could reference abortifacients), later
Christian writing and reflection stood decidedly against the practice
(48). In the Didache , "murderers of children" are described as those
on the "way of death (49-50). The Epistle of Barnabas condemns
abortion as murder and sees the fetus as a rightful object of neighbor
love (50). The Apocalypse of Peter describes retribution from aborted
children toward the mothers who aborted them:
And near that place I saw another gorge in which the discharge and
excrement of the tortured ran down and became like a lake. And there
sat women, and the discharge came up to their throats; and opposite
them sat many children, who were born prematurely, weeping. And from
them went forth rays of fire and smote the woman on the eyes. And
these were those who produced children outside marriage and procured
abortions . . . And the children shall be given to the [caretaking,
protecting] angel Temlakos. And those who slew them will be tortured
forever, for God wills it to be so (51).
Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 150-215, approves of the apocalypse's
depiction and continues the early Christian theme that abortion is on
par with murder:
Our whole life can go on in observation of the laws of nature, if we
gain dominion over our desires from the beginning and if we do not
kill, by various means of a perverse art, the human offspring, born
according to the designs of providence; for these women who, in order
to hide their immorality, use abortive drugs which expel the matter
completely dead, abort at the same time their human feelings (52-53).
Athenagoras, mid to late 2nd century, argued that Christians
considered woman who abort as murderers who will give an account to
God, and that the fetus is a living being:
What reason would we have to commit murder when we say that women who
induce abortions are murderers, and will have to give an account to
God? For the same person would not regard the fetus in the womb as a
living thing and therefore an object of God's care [and then kill it]
. . . But we are altogether consistent in our conduct. We obey reason
and not override it (53-54).
Tertullian, A.D. 160-240, who sought to defend Christianity against
charges of immorality had plenty to say about the practice of
abortion:
In our case, murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy
even the foetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives
blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a
birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you
take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to birth.
That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in
the seed (55).
And,
In this matter the best teacher, judge, and witness is the sex that
is concerned with birth. I call on you, mothers, whether you are now
pregnant or have already born children; let women who are barren and
men keep silence! We are looking for the truth about the nature of
women; we are examining the reality of your pains. Tell us: Do you
feel any stirring of life within you in the fetus? Does your groin
tremble, your side shake, your whole stomach throb as the burden you
carry changes its position? Are not these moments a source of joy and
assurance that the child within you is alive and playful? Should his
restlessness subside, would you not be immediately concerned for him?
(55-56)
Minucius Felix, A.D. 200-225, argued similarly in his writings:
And there are women who swallow drugs to stifle in their own wombs
the beginnings of a man to be—committing infanticide before they give
birth to the infant (58).
Despite the strong early Christian stance against abortion, it was
nevertheless practiced by some who called themselves Christians. Some
Christian theologians took corrective measures agaisnt this.
Hippolytus, A.D. 170-236, wrote:
Women, reputed believers, began to resort to drugs for producing
sterility, and to gird themselves round, so to expel what was being
conceived on account of their not wishing to have a child either by a
slave or a paltry fellow, for the sake of their family and excessive
wealth. Behold, into how great impiety that lawless one has proceeded,
by inculcating murder and adultery at the same time! (59-60)
Cyprian, A.D. 200/210-258, wrote of a certain Novation:
The womb of his wife was smitten by a blow of his heel; and in the
miscarriage that soon followed, the offspring was brought forth, the
fruit of a father's murder. And now he dares to condemn the hands of
those who sacrifice, when he himself is more guilty in his feet, by
which the son who was about to be born was slain? (60).
There is no question, therefore, about the mainline Christian stance
toward abortion within the first three centuries. The fetus in the
womb is God's handiwork and should be the object of neighbor those;
those who destroy the fetus have committed murder and will be called
to account.
Early Christianity: The Fourth and Fifth Centuries
When Christianity became more established and institutionalized
(especially due to the conversion of Constantine), its stance on
abortion took on more "official" forms, but nevertheless remained
firmly against the practice. The Spanish church, at the Council of
Elvira, A.D. 305, excommunicated woman who aborted (64):
Canon 63: If a woman becomes pregnant by committing adultery, while
her husband is still absent, and after the act she destroys [the
child], it is proper to keep her from communion until death, because
she had doubled her crime.
Canon 68: If a catechumen should conceive by an adulterer and should
procure the death of the child, she can be baptized only at the end of
her life.
This made abortion a more serious crime than killing a slave.
Interestingly, the later Council of Ancrya (A.D. 315) softened the
punishment to 10 years of penance (65):
Canon 21: Women who prostitute themselves, and who kill the children
thus begotten, or who try to destroy them when in their wombs, are by
ancient law excommunicated to the end of their lives. We, however,
have softened their punishment, and condemned them to various
appointed degrees of penance for ten years.
From the theologians and fathers of the third and fourth centuries, a
vast array of profound theological statements regarding abortion are
found in their writings. Basil of Caesarea, A.D. 330-379, wrote the
following on abortion in correspondence with Amphilochius in A.D. 374:
She who has deliberately destroyed a fetus has to pay the penalty of
murder. And there is no exact inquiry among us as to whether the fetus
was formed or unformed. For, here it is not only the child to be born
that is vindicated, but also the woman herself who made an attempt
against her own life, because usually women die in such attempts.
Furthermore, added to this is the destruction of the embryo, another
murder, at least according to the intention of those who dare such
things. Nevertheless, we should not prolong their penance until death,
but should accept a term of ten years, and we should determine the
treatment not by time, but by the manner of repentance (66-67).
And, in the same letter:
Moreover, those, too, who give drugs causing abortion are [deliberate
murderers] themselves, as well as those receiving the poison kill the
fetus (67).
Basil, then, making no distinction between formed and unformed
fetuses, equated abortion with murder; yet found room for repentance
and forgiveness. Ambrose of Milan, A.D. 339-397, wrote:
The wealthy, in order that their inheritance may not be divided among
several, deny in the very womb their own progeny. By use of parricidal
mixtures they snuff out the fruit of their wombs in the genital organs
themselves. In this way life is taken before it is given . . . Who
except man himself has taught us ways of repudiating children? (67-68)
Jerome, A.D. 342-420, speaking of immoral women, says:
[They] drink potions to ensure sterility and are guilty of murdering
a human being not yet conceived. Some, when they learn they are with
child through sin, practice abortion by the use of drugs. Frequently
they die themselves and are brought before the rulers of the lower
world guilty of three crimes: suicide, adultery against Christ, and
murder of an unborn child (68).
A fourth century manual called Constitutions of the Holy Apostles,
A.D. 380, also condemned abortion:
Thou shalt not slay the child by causing abortion, nor kill that
which is begotten. For everything that is shaped, and hath received a
soul from God, if it is slain, shall be avenged, as being unjustly
destroyed (69).
Two final individauls, Augustine, A.D. 354-430, and John Chrysostom,
A.D. 347-407, both gave serious attention to the issue of abortion.
Augustine valued life in the womb, although he was unsure about when
"life" began; he nonetheless disapproved of abortion (70-72). Here is
a sampling of his thought:
Sometimes indeed, this lustful cruelty, or if you please, cruel lust,
resorts to such extravagant methods as to use poisonous drugs to
secure barrenness; or else, if unsuccessful in this, to destroy the
conceived seed by some means previous to birth, preferring that its
offspring should rather perish than receive vitality; or if it was
advancing to life within the womb, should be slain before it was born
(71).
And,
To deny, for example, that those fetuses ever lived at all which are
cut away limb by limb and cast out of the wombs of pregnant women,
lest the mothers die also if the fetuses were left there dead, would
seem much too rash (71-72).
Chrysostom, however, found abortion to be a clear-cut moral evil and
preached strongly against it:
Why sow where the ground makes it its care to destroy the fruit?
where there are many efforts at abortion? where there is murder before
the birth? for even the harlot thou dost not let continue a mere
harlot, but makest her a murderer also. You see how drunkenness leads
to whoredom, whoredom to adultery, adultery to murder; or rather to
something worse than murder. For I have no name to give it, since it
does not take off the thing born, but prevents its being born. Why
then dost thou abuse the gift of God, and fight with His laws, and
follow after what is a curse as if a blessing, and make the chamber of
procreation a chamber of murder, and arm the woman that was given for
childbearing unto slaughter? For with a view to drawing more money by
being agreeable and an object of longing to her lovers, even this she
is not backward to do, so heaping upon they head a great pile of fire.
For even if the daring deed be hers, yet the causing of it is thine.
Hence too come idolatries, since many, with a view to become
acceptable, devise incantations, and libations, and love-potions, and
countless other plans. Yet still after such great unseemliness, after
slaughters, after idolatries, the thing [fornication] seems to many to
belong to things indifferent, aye, and to many that have wives, too
(72-73).
In summary, Christians in the fourth and fifth centuries maintained a
strong stance against abortion, despite questions over punishment;
also, certain Christians brought the potential for repentance and
forgiveness into the discussion (73).
Conclusion
On a wider scale, it is quite important and necessary to understand
the Christian stance against abortion alongside its early stance
against violence and bloodshed in general. The early Christians lived
in a violent Greco-Roman world that deprecated life in "its wars,
gladiatorial fights, innumerable crucifixions, exposure of the newborn
and abortion of the unborn" (82-83). Christians, in following the
example and teaching of Jesus, were called to prefer neighbor love,
non-violence, and compassionate justice in contrast to society's
preference for bloodshed (83). In practice this meant an unusual love
for society's outcasts, lepers, the poor, woman, children, etc., and
even love for enemies (83). Notably, within early Christianity,
Christians also stood opposed to war in addition to opposition against
abortion (84-90). Christians naturally could not separate abortion
from other forms of violence, and especially war. After the time of
Constantine and the development of the "just-war" theory, abortion was
still condemned but warfare was condoned. In any case, the earliest
Christian ethic is well summarized by Gorman:
The earliest Christian ethic, from Jesus to Constantine, can be
described as a consistent pro-life ethic. It was in favor of human
life regardless of age, nationality or social standing. It pleaded for
the poor, the weak, woman, children and the unborn. This pro-life
ethic discarded hate in favor of love, war in favor of peace,
oppression in favor of justice, bloodshed in favor of life. The
Christian response to abortion was one important aspect of this
consistent pro-life ethic. Rooted in Jewish love for life and hatred
of bloodshed, it developed a specific Christian character as part of
early Christian holistic discipleship. To follow Jesus was to forsake
bloodshed (90).
For the earliest Christians then, abortion was an act of violence
against a human life.
