Monthly Archives: January 2015

My Daughter Lydia, God, and Abortion: Theologically interpreting my wife’s pregnancy, part III

19 Monday Jan 2015

Posted by in Abortion, Expecting Parents, Pregnancy and Theology, Science

≈ Comments Off on My Daughter Lydia, God, and Abortion: Theologically interpreting my wife’s pregnancy, part III

Tags

, , , ,

I consider myself a father now although my daughter is still in my wife’s womb. There is good “scientific” reasons for this, like the size, shape, human features, muscular control of my daughter’s body by her mind (kicks, movement), but all this is so cold. The whole tendency to only scientifically look at things is so narrow a window. What about relationship, the wonder of new life, and communion in heart and soul in the father and the mother towards our daughter, and towards one another around this new life. Are these to be disdainfully dismissed because “science” is somehow the supreme way of viewing things even though what makes us feel most alive as humans is often not understanding things in a scientific analysis. Sliding down a waterpark ride is thrilling and makes me feel alive; doing the math to calculate what scientifically is happening when I slide down is a distant shadow of the experience. Love between two people is earth shaking; scientifically looking at love between two people as natural selection, reproduction, and the continuation of the species is not.

Lydia is a person with her own identity beyond either my wife or me. This is not manifest until Lydia is born, but what is readily needed for a person to be a person is being created there even if not separate from my wife’s body yet. Said differently, Lydia is distinct from my wife right now although not separate (like the Trinity, I’d remind you). God is knitting Lydia together in my wife’s womb; truly a marvel this is! Lydia will have both my features and Gloria’s, physically as well as character-wise.

Aside from the typical arguments against abortion made in public political discourse, I want to make a plea. Please consider people as persons, not as scientific objects. Please don’t confuse a baby-in-the-womb with a woman’s body; this baby is distinct even if not yet separate. Please embrace your own humanity, for heaven’s sake, enjoying all it is to be human by experiencing people as people, babies-in-the-womb as marvelous others, and not as “scientific masses of molecules, electricity, and energy.” Do you not know that you depersonalize yourself when you depersonalize others, whether adults or babies-in-the-womb?

I am a father, and if you’re an expecting man or woman, you are a mother or a father too. I am a man, you are a woman, and we are dignified in each act of “life-giving” we do, whether in terms of family, supporting others, or building them up. Life-elimination is poison to our own souls.

Dr. Scalise

Interpreting my wife’s pregnancy theologically: part II

15 Thursday Jan 2015

Posted by in Genesis, Pregnancy and Theology, Trinity and Pregnancy

≈ Comments Off on Interpreting my wife’s pregnancy theologically: part II

Tags

, ,

I wish to return to a bit more down-to-earth reflection on Gloria’s pregnancy next time, but you’ll no doubt forgive me for allowing the theologian in me to think a bit this time. Christians believe that God is the Holy Trinity; we especially have our Greek and Russian Orthodox brothers and sisters to thank for their wonderful tradition of thinking hard on how God is Three in One, with an eye to the Three-ness. What does all this have to do with my daughter who is currently in my wife’s womb, you may wonder? The doctrine of the Trinity teaches that each Person (Father, Son, and Spirit) dwell in One Another perfectly–which is why we Christians can still rationally claim that They are One. Similarly, a baby dwells in her mother, my daughter in Gloria, during pregnancy. Now, we must be careful not to push the comparison too far as though a pregnant woman is a perfect or exact analogy for God the Trinity; she is not. Nevertheless, a pregnant woman, I argue, is perhaps the best analogy in all of creation for God the Trinity. Where else is there a consciousness dwelling within another consciousness? This is what the doctrine of the Trinity commends although never without its own proper mystery. Someone might object: but God the Trinity is three, not two. This is true, but we would be amiss is we didn’t recognize that the child, my daughter, carries me (the father) within her as well. There is no doubt that she does biologically, and given the regular fact that children share their parents personalities, we are not speculating to hold that she likewise carries my personality in her as well. Thus, there are three people represented in my daughter, herself, my wife, and me. I got this thought during my research for my dissertation, and there I discuss it in far greater detail than I want to here. The idea does not owe to me, to be sure, because I looked hard at Gen. 1:26-28 and 2:24. When God says He makes “man” in His image in 1:27, He clearly refers to both man and woman in this image.

It reads, from the English Standard Version: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”

Thus, it would be better to translate the Hebrew word “adam,” at the beginning of verse 27 as humanity rather than man: “So God created humanity in His own image, in the image of God he created humanity; male and female he created them” (trans. mine from the Hebrew, italics and bold mine). Some might think this is reading into the text, but a common literary feature of Hebrew prose, and especially poetry, is that it uses parallelism, which is why, if you’ve ever read the OT at length, you always get the feeling that the authors are repeating themselves. They are! Thus, the final phrase, “male and female He recreated them,” is a parallel restatement of “in the image of God He created humanity.” This final line gives the most specific and detailed information about what the image of God is. For our word smiths and lovers of definitions, take heart because all Hebrew lexicons (dictionaries) relay that the Hebrew word, adam, has at least three meanings: one refers to the human being named Adam, the second to just man in the typical individual male sense, and finally, the one I am arguing for here, it can refer to all humans generally.

What do we find in Gen. 2:24? Verses 22-23 arguably give us a more specific account of how woman was created, by being taken from the rib of Adam. Then, God says, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (ESV). What we find is that God creates woman by taking a part of Adam that dwelt in him (part of him), his rib, and creating woman. Then, God says man and woman are to procreate (sex) by the phrase “shall become one flesh.” God chose humanity, both man and woman, to be His analogy (image; cf. Gen. 1:27). The sexual component to human generation is part and parcel to this image since in 2:24 it is the very first thing we find out about the male and female relationship (they shall become one flesh). It was therefore not happenstance that I saw a image of the Trinity in my wife’s pregnancy; the pointers were already there in the first Book of Scripture.

My wife’s pregnancy is fulfilling the purpose contained in Gen. 2:24, and, through it, modeling, in an imperfect way, God the Trinity. Woman was taken from within man; and a child is comes by man from woman. One person, my daughter, Lydia, dwells within my wife, Gloria, and that one person, Lydia, contains both me and my wife as well as beautiful uniqueness all her own. A child is, in a fascinating sense, three persons in one; God, on the Christian view is three Persons in One, the Holy Trinity.

Dr. Scalise

Interpreting my Wife’s Pregnancy Theologically: Part 1

14 Wednesday Jan 2015

Posted by in Biblical Application, Biblical Interpretation, Pregnancy and Theology

≈ Comments Off on Interpreting my Wife’s Pregnancy Theologically: Part 1

Tags

, ,

Something that has utterly fascinated me in my wife’s pregnancy is the healing effect it has had on her. She was both lactose and gluten intolerant before she became pregnant, but she can now eat things that have both dairy and gluten in them! Some of you, if you’ve spoken with me about this, know that one biblical text came to my mind. 1 Timothy 2:15 is instruction on how women are to act in the church who Timothy oversaw. It deals with how women are to have quiet spirits, kindly learning and asking their questions in a non-disputive way; many of these women were no doubt influenced by the Temple cult of Diana (Artemis), which was in Ephesus and functioned with women priests as overseers of the cult’s activities. Paul then points out the circumstances that led to the fall included divisiveness between the man and woman (vv. 13 – 14), which leads him to say, “But [woman] will be saved through childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.” Unless you’ve studied NT Greek for some time, it is unlikely that you’d be aware of the fact that the Greek word for “saved” (σωζω) can and is translated into English in a number of ways. The most prominent among them are saved, preserve, deliver, and healed. The authors of the Gospels use σωζω frequently with the meaning of “healed” (Mt. 9:21, 22, Mk. 5:23, 28, 34, 6:56, 10:52).  This list of verses is not exhaustive, so we are well within our interpretive rights to question whether or not σωζω in 1 Tim. 2:15 might have the meaning of “healed.” 1 Tim. 4:16, just two chapters after 1 Tim. 2:15, does not use σωζω with the meaning of “saved” either. It reads, “Give attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in practicing them. For by doing this you preserve yourself and those listening to you” (trans. mine from Greek NA 27 ed.). Now, if the part of the text with σωζω in it read, “For by doing this you save yourself and those listening to you,” we’d have a real problem on our hands since Paul would essentially be saying that we can save ourselves, which is clearly contradicting the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I am the first to admit that my opting for “healed” is derived from my experience of my wife’s healing, but I hasten to add that every interpreter is influenced by his experience. The one who thinks he or she is not influence in this way is deceived and in danger of thinking s/he has an objectivity that could only be true of God — who we most certainly are not. It is not unimportant that the translation of “saved” doesn’t make much sense in 1 Tim. 2:15. What does it mean, after all, to say that women will be “saved through childbearing?” Women are most certainly “healed” through childbearing in psychological ways as are men. I am already starting to experience the opening of my own spirit to warmer expressions as I think about this little girl on the way. I’ve watched the transformation of many women when children are coming; it’s staggering! I want to understand σωζω as referring to biological healing — as in my wife’s case and other women with similar stories during their pregnancies — and psychological healing, drawing out that inherent tenderness of women so clearly manifest when children are on the way. I think the meaning of “preserved” for σωζω might be a helpful understanding too in 1 Tim. 2:15. The innocence of children is truly a marvel in this world of sorrow and pain, a glowing gem in murky woods. This beauty has a way of drawing out what is beautiful in us, both women and men — as Jesus said, parents know how to do good to their children (Lk. 11:11 – 13). Thus, the procreation process, from sex to pregnancy to birth and thereafter, all seem to “preserve” humanity both in its biological continuation and in “healing” the many damages we experience while journeying through the darkness of this world, whether biological issues (like my wife’s intolerances) or psychological issues.

My wife’s pregnancy has made me rethink this text: “But [women] will be healed through childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.” I contend that the healing refers to biological healing and psychological healing as well as having a preservational effect on family and, through family, on the rest of humanity.

Dr. Scalise