fighting for doctors’ rights?
consequence that still lives with us is that in 1967, when the Abortion Act was passed, hardly an evangelical voice was raised in protest. That would not happen today.
We live in an age that views things very differently. But are we right? 50 years ago such an article as this would never have been considered. The evangelical position that I have described was, to some extent, a reaction to the ‘Social Gospel’ that had developed at the end of the 19th century, influenced by liberal theology and the rejection of the evangelical belief in the Bible as literally true and containing all that was needed for salvation. Polarisation ensued. Things were either black or white. In many ways those days were more simplistic but also more dedicated, self sacrificing and self denying than our own.
In the eyes of many there was a clear separation between issues to do with the world and issues to do with church. For many, the latter consisted of preaching the gospel. Anything else was only valid if it enabled such preaching or evangelism. Nothing was good for its own sake. Indeed, in the more reformed (ie Calvinistic) part
36
of the church, a sort of ‘worm’ theology had developed – all that was not directly seen to be from God, or the preaching of the gospel, was to be regarded as of no value. The best I could do was ‘like filthy rags’ 2
, in
comparison to what God could do.
a sense of vocation
50 years ago the world was a more ordered place. There was a sense of service and altruism. The word ‘vocation’ was in common use, certainly for those entering the Christian ministry, or becoming missionaries and committing themselves to a life of service, and in some cases intense poverty. To some extent it is still understood today that those entering such a lifestyle and ministry will only do so out of a sense of calling. But in the past, those entering the professions of medicine, nursing and teaching, would also have been expected to have a similar vocation, especially, but not exclusively, in Christian circles.
Medicine being a vocation, rather than a job, led to a very different mindset. Being a doctor defined me. It was not what I did, but what I was. It was a great privilege. My whole
life was to be spent in caring for others, rather than seeking for the best ends for myself.
The great danger, of course, would be just to assume that this was in every way correct, because it sounds so full of high principle. But there were downsides. Like Christian ministers, many Christian doctors’ families suffered. Children could feel that they came a poor second to their father’s care of everyone else in the community. There was little challenge to a system that often needed to be challenged. Often Christians stood aloof from the messy world of politics and debate. There were some, however, who combined a costly vocational call, with a willingness to challenge the system and bring about positive change. These, if their lives also
nucleus christmas ‘08
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44