It is easy to glamorize and romanticize the “abundant life” so it sounds like waltzing through life from one joy or one victory to the next. This is the Christian life “plus.” Then there are the ordinary folk who stumble along living quite unspectacularly. For the most part my life has been of the more ordinary sort. No super Christian here.
It might be helpful to ask: did Jesus himself live the “abundant life” that he came to give us? What was the shape of His life? He certainly did not lead a very glamorous life. He said of Himself that “… the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and give his life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28). In Philippians 2 it is written that we should “have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” Central to His abundant life is the cross.
In Hebrews chapter 12, Christians are challenged thus: “… let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.” Again it is the cross which significantly defines His life.
The cross also defines the life of those who would follow Him. He said to His disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel’s will save it” (Mark 8:34-35). There is that cross again. Contrary to the wisdom of this world, it seems to be the key to an abundant life. Christ did not come to give us unending happiness or even joy. He gives us the gracious forgiveness of all our sins; He gives us the hope of eternal life, but always there is a cross to take up with Him. That cross was the sign that marked us forever in holy baptism.
How does this “abundant life” of taking up the cross relate to our life and ministry in the pro-life cause? Now at 75 years of age I look back at 40 years of work in this effort. In broad outline this is my story, my testimony as the co-founder of Lutherans For Life along with Dr. Jean Garton, one of the most wonderful friends of my life. It might well be said that I had the idea and the initial vision for Lutherans to work together in the pro-life cause, but it was she who made that idea and vision come together in a dynamic organization. Behind it all was our God calling us to this work and this challenge. Together we sought obediently to follow Christ.
The story begins much before Lutherans For Life. In 1968 one of my closest friends in life, a Benedictine monk, invited and challenged me to join him in defending the life of humans in the womb as yet unborn.
He was and is an extraordinary person. The call of the cross was laid upon him. I am convinced that he became the most significant pro-life leader in the world. Twice he was commended by the Pope himself. Pope John Paul II once said to him, “God will reward you in heaven by surrounding you with a great number of babies.”
Not long after that he invited me to join him at a meeting at a home in Minneapolis to give birth to Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL). At that meeting were: a professor of OB-GYN at the University of Minnesota Medical School, a priest-professor at a Catholic seminary, a Methodist OB-GYN doctor and his wife, a Catholic surgeon and his wife, and a Catholic wife of a veterinarian. The wife of the Catholic surgeon went on to become a national leader in Birthright and the Methodist doctor became the first president of MCCL. He was succeeded by his wife who later became the president of National Right to Life and a highly placed pro-life leader in the Reagan administration. MCCL would go on to become one of the most powerful state pro-life organizations in the United States. From this involvement my life changed greatly. As a Lutheran I was called upon for meetings, writing, and speaking.
I was soon to learn three basic things: (1) Being involved so publicly with the pro-life cause made one a “marked” man, especially in my own church community, the American Lutheran Church. As a college professor, I was still a lay person. When I was ordained and became a pastor in 1972, this made an even greater difference. (2) I soon learned that the struggle, really the battle, was not merely against flesh and blood but against powers and principalities of evil. This was emotional and spiritual warfare. (3) Because we were always dealing with matters of life and death, it was extremely emotionally stressful. As time went on I spent countless hours on the phone and in person encouraging and counseling others in the cause who were being overwhelmed by this stress. It was stunning to see three marriages break up, partly from obsessive involvement and commitment.
I also quickly learned that life in such a demanding effort could only be sustained at the cross. But this “abundant life” would not have been possible without a supportive wife and children. I will never forget when my ten-year-old son, Daniel, asked me: “Dad, why do you have to make all these trips to Minneapolis? What is this abortion stuff all about?” Calmly I told him that a woman could have a doctor kill the baby in her womb before it was born. Quite terrified, he nearly shouted at me, “You mean mother could have had that done to me—or to Martha or Nathan or Stephen?” In that instant I knew I was spending time away from my children for the sake of my children. Now they are all pro-life.
There were numerous requests to debate. One stands out above all others. The abortion issue was being hotly contested in the Minnesota legislature so the Minneapolis Jaycees decided to hold a public debate on the subject. A medical doctor and I were to face two pro-abortionists. Both were leaders in that movement in the state and one was among the leaders nationally. I led off making my case on the basis of the dehumanization we had seen in slavery (I was an advisor to an African-American Student League at college), in the Jewish situation, and in the way we dehumanized people in war—such as in the Vietnam war when we were hearing much of “body count.” The debate was spirited; a coat hanger was waved about with all the drama of the death of a college “snow queen.” Then came the shocker. There were two black women prominently seated in the front row. They were deeply absorbed, listening intently. Then one stood up. There was utter silence. She spoke: “When I came here, I thought abortion was okay, but after listening to Professor Eichhorst talk about dehumanization, I changed my mind. We have had enough of that already. We do not need to do it with children.” There was a laudable gasp in the audience; the jaws of the pro-abortion debaters dropped. The debate was over.
Her name was Irma Craven; she had been a social worker for nearly three decades in New York City and now in Minneapolis. She was a bold, confessing Christian. That night, she was converted to be a pro-lifer. She went on to speak around the country, and even around the world. She wrote a booklet called, Abortion and Black Genocide. At the Democratic National Convention in New York in 1972, she seconded the nomination of the pro-life presidential candidate, Ellen McCormick. I last saw her in 1991 when Judy, my wife, and I had lunch with her. Not long after that she entered into her heavenly reward.
On January 10, 1973, MCCL held a huge pro-life banquet in St. Paul. Dr. Paul Ramsey, professor of ethics at Princeton Seminary, was the speaker. Privately, he told me he had heard from inside sources that the pro-life struggle seemed lost. He had heard that the Supreme Court would soon make a decision in favor of abortion. He was right. Twelve days later, on January 22, we all got the fateful news of Roe v. Wade. We were stunned—not just by the decision, but by its breadth, allowing abortion virtually from conception to natural birth. Now even more work was called for. As I remember, in 1974 and 1975 I went to Washington for pro-life marches. We gathered over one half million strong. The intensity of this battle magnified. In new ways it really became a struggle of life and death.
The year 1974 was crucial for me. The Commission on Church and Society, I believe that was its name, of the American Lutheran Church had proposed a new abortion position for the church. It was to be adopted at its national convention in Detroit. This new statement favored liberalization of the abortion stance for the whole church. Dr. George Muedeking, the great pro-life editor of The Lutheran Standard, our church paper, asked me to write an article. This catapulted me into the hot seat. I was invited to represent the pro-life side at the hearings on the issue. I had to do the radio and TV shows and meet the press. It was scary and it was lonely. In the end, the vote put us on the side of approving abortion.
Another big thing happened to me that year. A pastor in the United Church of Christ came to my office one day in St. Cloud, Minnesota. As we talked, the abortion subject came up. In spite of the position of his church, he was willing to step forth on the pro-life side. Both of us were distressed that in a day of ecumenism, so many church people were joining the culture to see abortion as strictly a Catholic issue. Eventually we decided to act, putting together a not-for- profit organization called, ForLife, Inc. We would publish mostly non-Catholic material on abortion. To get started, I had to sign for $24,000 in loans. Having no assets, I had to find a co-signer. Now this pro-life cause was looking expensive. Then what seemed like a miracle happened. I had seen the film, The First Days of Life. It was the awesome story of a baby developing in the womb and being born. But it looked like there was no chance to obtain rights to that film. But “no” was not an acceptable answer or attitude. With persistence, McGraw Hill sold us rights and we began the marketing. This film went flying off the shelf. Some chapters of pro-life groups had more than five copies. It was shown on national TV. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, saw these awesome pictures of life from conception to birth. From 1974 to 1984 I believe it was the most significant pro-life tool in America.
All of these experiences kindled in me the question: With so many Lutheran pro-lifers, why can’t we step forward with a united witness on this issue? One day we would.
In the aftershock of the Supreme Court decision, more Christians saw the need to face this issue. Evangelicals were having a hard time dealing with it because they were so averse to becoming involved in secular politics. Looking at the situation today, that seems hard to believe but it is absolutely true. Likewise it is hard to believe that in the ’60s and ’70s it was primarily the Democratic Party that was pro-life and the Republicans were soft on abortion. The great evangelist, Dr. Billy Graham began to struggle with the matter of abortion. In 1975, to become informed on this issue, his offices invited as consultants, a group of 13 people including Dr. Everett Koop, the Surgeon General. Dr. Ralph Bohlmann and I were also invited. It was a thrilling time for Dr. Bohlmann and me to be together because we had been good friends in graduate school at Yale University. This meeting gave further impetus to the idea for Lutherans For Life. If there could be “Baptists for Life,” “Episcopalians for Life,” etc., why not “Lutherans For Life”?
I made several attempts to convene some leading Lutheran theologians and pastors but we could not get together. Once our plans were defeated by a terrible national blizzard. Then schedules wouldn’t cooperate. But the seed was sown. Finally two strong leaders came forward, Dr. Jacob Preus and Dr. Ralph Bohlmann.
They had discovered just the right leader in Dr. Jean Garton. Under her leadership the organization came to life with a great supporting cast. She served as president and I as vice president. And then the day came when a new generation of deeply committed people emerged to carry on the mission.
After wearing many hats and performing many functions, I had to slow down in my involvement in 1982 when I moved west. But there was yet another chapter to be written in this discovery of the “abundant life.” In 1988, a new Lutheran church body came into existence—The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
Leaders in this new church have given social statements a high priority; great sums of money and much human energy have been spent to address social issues. The first statement produced was on abortion. A task force was convened in 1990 to tackle this issue. Along with three others who had strong pro-life convictions I was invited to be a member. I am convinced I was not invited because of what I might contribute but because of being one of the most visible pro-lifers in the church. The appearance of fairness, of openness, and inclusiveness had to be maintained. At our first meeting it became apparent to me that the statement from this group would clearly be strongly tilted to a pro-abortion position. Thus the pattern was set for subsequent social statements: the outcome desired was to be achieved by the selection of those to develop the statement. It was immediately clear to me that the critical votes would be decided by a vote of 4 to 11 or 5 to 10. Consider these facts: (1) Not one of the pro-lifers was a woman. Thus during discussion one of the non-members of the task force could shriek of her disgust that only men were defending a pro-life position. (2) There was one lawyer and she was on the pro-abortion side, though not adamantly so. (3) There was one African-American who knew little about abortion but was on the pro-abortion side. (4) The same was true of an Hispanic—though she was very thoughtful in her position. (5) There was one physician and she performed abortions. (6) Every resource person who spoke to us was on the pro-abortion side until I made a very strong protest to the leaders. There was but one staff person who often spoke guardedly to turn the focus to a pro-life position.
Sadly, I regret to say that this was the worst experience I ever had in seeking within the church to take up the cross and follow Christ. A great colleague in this battle was the late Dr. Jim Burtness, a professor at Luther Seminary. He was fantastic in his defense of unborn children.
At this stage of life I am thrilled to see others carry the cross for the sake of unborn children. They are thus living the “abundant life,” losing their life for those who will not thank them and whom they will never know. But God knows, God sees, and one day great will be God’s reward to them.