In a truly stomach-turning report, CNN notes that a bag containing the skeletal remains of at least six babies was found on the grounds of a Christian missionary hospital in India. CNN notes that the bones could be from stillborn babies who were not buried properly, or they could be the remains of sex-selection feticides or infanticides.
This is hardly an Indian-specific problem. Would that we could blame such things on a "backward" civilization bereft of "progress" and "Enlightenment." India is a rapidly industrializing country, a nuclear power with a cultural heritage and a Hollywood commerce that is surpassed only by our own. In the United States of America, the only reason we so rarely find such bones is not because of our moral "progress." It is instead because our abortuaries have the technical "progress" to grind the babies to more unrecognizable bits. There should be a sadness here. We don't know the sexes of these babies, and we certainly don't know their names. There are no birth certificates or death certificates, no identifiable next of kin, no gravestone.
They were never named, and were disposed of with a cruel efficiency.
But Jesus knows their names. And one day He will call them, by name, from a grave and welcome them, not as medical waste, but as beloved sons and daughters. He will also remind a vicious and progressive humanity, one by one, "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me" (Matt 25:40 KJV).
So, then again, I suppose, in one very important respect, we do know the name of each baby found in this bag, and each baby left unfound, in garbage receptacles all over the globe. And the name is Jesus.
"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me" (Matt 25:40 KJV).
So, then again, I suppose, in one very important respect, we do know the name of each baby found in this bag, and each baby left unfound, in garbage receptacles all over the globe. And the name is Jesus.
Amen and Amen, Brother Russell.
Posted by: GL | February 18, 2007 at 02:36 PM
Well said.
Posted by: Reid | February 19, 2007 at 09:04 AM
Heartbreaking, absolutely. Even more heartbreaking is the theological question: if these children were conceived in and born into sin, will Jesus call them by name? I shudder to think that He would not. What a broken world we experience more every day...
Posted by: Michael | February 19, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Michael,
I think we can take solace in the fact that an all-knowing, all-just, all-loving, all-merciful God will treat the souls of those unborn children entirely consistent with His character. Whatever He does will be entirely just, loving and merciful. There is no alternative which we could propose which would be better than what He will do. I did, however, entertain the same thought you expressed when I read the original post.
Posted by: GL | February 19, 2007 at 11:42 AM
GL,
Amen. For He is Good and His Love endures forever.
Nevertheless, we must all be as Jacob and wrestle with God some times.
Posted by: Michael | February 19, 2007 at 12:46 PM
This recalls to mind the news story from some years ago, where trash haulers in NY City came across a garbage bags filled with dismembered aborted infants, said bag having mistakenly not been placed in the special "medical waste" disposal area of the hospital. Out of sight, out of mind. . . .
"God bless America" has become a desperate plea of the righteous remnant to avert an all too well deserved outpouring of divine wrath.
Posted by: James A. Altena | February 19, 2007 at 03:58 PM
>"God bless America" has become a desperate plea of the righteous remnant to avert an all too well deserved outpouring of divine wrath.
Francis Schaeffer in his later years said he never prayed for justice for America anymore but just mercy.
Posted by: David Gray | February 19, 2007 at 04:26 PM
I am reluctant to throw cold water on this thread, but I must.
I was with you all the way until you invoked the Judgment on the Sheep and the Goats. This passage seems often to be taken in isolation and given all kinds of strange interpretations.
In the passage, there is a group of people that Jesus rewards the "sheep" for helping and punishes the "goats" for neglecting. We know two things about them: (1) that they were in some kind of need and (2) that they were the brothers of Jesus. The assumption is that their need somehow made them the brothers of Jesus. That is just that; an assumption. The passage nowhere says so.
In Matthew 12:46-50, Jesus says that His disciples, those who do the Father's will, are His brothers.
If you assume that siblings are those with the same parents, that a Son of God is a brother of Jesus, then you might also consider John 1:12-13 and Romans 8:14-16.
I don't see how a fetus could possibly fit the requirements of those verses.
With respect, the Orthdox have a point; it is better to leave some mysteries as mysteries. I don't pretend to know what God, in any of His persons, will do with these fetuses, but I trust Him to do right.
Jeff Sawtelle
Posted by: Jeff Sawtelle | February 25, 2007 at 08:09 AM
>I don't see how a fetus could possibly fit the requirements of those verses.
Well as Peter preached "for the promise is for you and for your children..."
Posted by: David Gray | February 25, 2007 at 09:24 AM