Last week I wrote in response to Matthew Parris’ article in the Times where he argued that not only should euthanasia be legalised but that if this led to social pressure on the terminally ill and vulnerable that this would be a welcome thing. My article was published online by Evangelicals Now and I also included it on the blog here.
There have in recent years been increasing attempts to legalise euthanasia including through the courts and currently a private members’ bill has been proposed in the Scottish Parliament. One might argue that those legal efforts are more likely to bring about change than a newspaper columnist’s opinions. So, why did I put my focus on the latter? Well, I have in the past responded to attempts to legalise assisted dying including by writing to my MP and I would encourage you to do the same whenever this comes up. However, I do think that there is something about the Parris article which required a specific response and in some senses made it more dangerous than efforts in the courts and parliaments.
There are two reasons for this. First, because previous attempts to legislate or to get judges to make a ruling have still tended to rely on an appeal to human compassion. The primary case has been that those wishing to end their lives are suffering and that they have a basic right to die with dignity. Now, we might and should argue against those claims. I do not believe that euthanasia is the compassionate response to suffering and I don’t believe it is a good ending. I believe there are huge dangers when we begin to try and play God. Only Jesus is lord over life and death. However, such arguments still recognised a shared value, a similarity of world-view, namely that human life has value and dignity. And whilst many may have forgotten the foundation for this, it does rely on the belief that we are made in God’s image. That’s where our value comes from.
This is one of those examples where I think Tom Holland in his book, Dominion, gets it right. Even as people attempt to overturn the Christian values at the heart of our culture and law, they must rely on those very values and foundation themselves.
However, Parris in his argument kicks away that foundation. Human value is neither “self-evident” nor based on revelation. People do not inherently have value and dignity. We are, in his worldview, not made in God’s image. Parris reaches the logical conclusion, if we do not have value because we are made in God’s image, then we are only units, our value is determined by our usefulness to society. When we are no longer useful then we no longer have value. We are commodities.
It is perhaps a good thing that Parris has been open about this. It brings into the light not only the dark side of the euthanasia debate but the darker side of atheistic thinking in general. It demonstrates the empty futility of attempting to develop a humanistic ethic.
Yet, it is important though to shine the light on such thinking because it needs to be opposed. This brings me to my second point. You see, whilst laws may be changed, the real battle is to change minds and hearts in order to shape a culture. And notice how deep this goes. Because it is not just about showing mercy to the suffering but about how we view and value others, then if this argument is lost by Christians, then the world we live in will be just a little bit darker. As I argued in my previous article, it won’t just be about the pressure on the old, sick and culnerable to die, it will be about how we treat people in society.
This brings me to a final point. Some might argue that all of this is going to happen anyway and we should just get on with preaching the Gospel. I do agree that our primary focus is the Gospel and my primary job is to teach God’s Word. It’s the good news of Jesus that people need. However, I also believe in common grace. This means that I’m concerned to see people in wider society benefit at least a little from the overflow of God’s goodness. And I want to be a witness to what it is that we are saved for. We are saved from sin to be part of God’s alternative community, to call people into a different kingdom with better values and true hope.
That’s why I chose to speak up in response to Parris and that’s why I’m encouraging you to as well.
Faithroots 