Tertullian on Jeremiah and the Life of the Unborn

Tertullian on Jeremiah and the Life of the Unborn

Dr. Todd A. Stepp OSL
www.wesleyananglican.blogspot.com

The upcoming Old Testament lection comes from Jeremiah 1:4-10. In my study, I found the comments of Tertullian of Carthage (late 2nd/early 3rd centuries) on verse five to be very interesting in relationship to the issue of abortion.

Jeremiah 1:5 quotes God as saying: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations" (NRSV).

Tertullian comments: "The embryo therefore becomes a human being in the womb from the moment that its form is completed. The law of Moses, indeed, punishes with due penalties the one who shall cause an abortion, inasmuch as there exists already the rudiment of human being that has imputed to it even now the condition of life and death, since it is already liable to the issues of both, although, by living still in the mother, it for the most part shares its own state with the mother" (One the Soul 37. As found in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, OT XII).

One might ask what Tertullian means by "the moment that its form is completed" (emphasis, mine). One could argue from the remainder of his comments that one need not think in literal terms of absolute completion of form; that, instead, it could be argued that Tertullian would accept the "completion" of conception, i.e., once a human being has been formed in terms of conception. However one may answer that question, it is clear that his comments refer to one (in this case, Jeremiah) who is not yet born.

What I find of interest in this passage, along with the story of the blessed virgin Mary's visit to Elizabeth, is how God is actively at work in and through those (i.e., Jeremiah, John & Jesus), who had not yet been born.

In Jeremiah's case, God knew him even before he was formed in the womb, and before he was born, God consecrated/sanctified him and appointed him to be a prophet.

In John's case, he is filled with the Holy Spirit before he is born (cf., Luke 1:15), and he actually prophesies prior to his birth (by virtue of his "leap[ing] for joy," and through the words of his mother), as one sees in Luke 1:41-45.

In addition to whatever weight these passages might add to the argument that infants are proper candidates for baptism, they certainly support those churches (like the Church of the Nazarene) that take a stand for life.

Abortion is NOT Healthcare!

Abortion is NOT Healthcare!

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 2, 2009

Email RSS Print

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Members of the House of Representatives are working on a second phony compromise that would try to mitigate some of the concerns pro-life lawmakers and groups have about the abortion funding found in HR 3200, the main health care "reform" bill in the House.

The current bill contains the Capps Amendment that abortion advocates have been portraying as a compromise that prohibits abortion funding.

But pro-life groups and leading pro-life lawmakers such as Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan have exposed the Capps language as a fraud by noting that it allows massive abortion subsidies and mandates.

Knowing Stupak has assembled potentially enough pro-life and moderate Democrats to join Republicans in voting down the rules for debate on the bill or the bill itself if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi doesn't allow a debate on his amendment to yank the abortion funding, pro-abortion lawmakers are hoping to pacify him and his coalition.

Now, pro-abortion Rep. Henry Waxman, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is trying to work out a compromise with some of the members of Stupak's coalition who are not as strongly pro-life.

The goal appears to be to "strengthen" the Capps Amendment in a way that would siphon off votes from Stupak's coalition but to do so in a way that doesn't actually amount to a complete stoppage of the abortion funding Stupak and pro-life advocates desire.

Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat who is one of the pro-abortion leaders in the House admitted to the Denver Post today that the goal is to peel off enough members of Stupak's coalition to get a winning vote on the rule and the bill and allow massive abortion funding at the same time.

Douglas Johnson, the legislative director of National Right to Life, tells LifeNews.com that pro-life lawmakers and advocates need to see through this phony compromise.

"Pelosi and Waxman are working on cosmetic changes to the Capps Amendment, which they will then try to peddle as an even-more-generous 'compromise' by the pro-abortion side (but which in reality will put the federal government into the elective abortion business in both the public plan and the premium subsidy program)," he said.

Johnson is concerned that some familiar faces from the Stupak coalition will emerge in support of the fake compromise -- including Rep. Tim Ryan, an Ohio Democrat who was formerly pro-life but now has a consistent pro-abortion voting record. The mainstream media portrays Ryan as pro-life even though he hasn't voted that way in a couple of years.

"In any such new twist on the Waxman-Capps scam, we can expect that a prominent role will be assigned to [Ryan], who actually does the bidding of Planned Parenthood .. and Nancy Pelosi," Johnson said.

Even if the House members adopt the new Waxman language, Johnson says that doesn't alleviate the concern of abortion funding found in the public option.

He says the government option "problem is very important and separate and distinct from the premium-subsidy problem."

The independent FactCheck.org web site has verified pro-life analysis that the public plan will pay for abortions "so long as the plans took in enough private money in the form of premiums paid by individuals or their employers. The Capps language also would allow private plans purchased with federal subsidies 'affordability credits' for low-income families and workers to cover abortion."

FactCheck indicates that both private and public insurance plans would include abortion funding under the legislation pending in Congress.

"Low- and moderate-income persons who would choose the 'public plan' would qualify for federal subsidies to purchase it. Private plans that cover abortion also could be purchased with the help of federal subsidies," the web site says. "As for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a 'public plan' and newly subsidized private plans to cover all abortions."

ACTION: 1) Go to http://www.Senate.gov and contact your two senators to urge them to support any amendments to stop abortion funding. 2) Contact members of the House Rules Committee (see http://rules.house.gov) and urge them to allow a vote on the Stupak amendment to stop abortion funding.