I read The Book of Books. The radical impact of the King James Bible 1611-2011. It’s worth a read, though it has its problems.
One amazing statement, though, makes me wonder how disagreements are addressed. It’s about abortion.
Rightly enough, abortion is a very sensitive issue. All the personal dynamics are powerful for any man or woman involved. And then there are the myriad ethical matters (sexual ethics, personal and community responsibility, the care of the weak, legislating in areas of disagreement, etc).
Yet I thought it extraordinary to read these words from the author, Melvyn Bragg:
Neither abortion nor contraception carry stigma any more except in a few remaining repressive boltholes.
He could not write ‘no stigma at all’ – it would be too obvious a lie. So, instead, those who disagree with Bragg’s ethics are allocated to the pit of repression.
The strength of this dismissal makes me wonder what’s going on. That’s what I would ask Bragg, if I was in any kind of pastoral relationship with him. Especially so since, in this very book, Braggrepeatedly shows understanding for people whose views he disagrees with radically.
One again I’m terribly saddened by this. It dismisses, without thought, thousands of attacks on the weak and defenceless. It also marginalises adult men and women who’d like to face up to their own suffering – even wrong-doing – in treating the unborn. All it says is, ‘If you have a problem, it’s your problem. Forget it, and don’t talk to me.’
That’s not what I want to say! That’s not loving!
What are your thoughts? What’s a better way to have the conversation on this difficult topic?