Operation Rescue:

An Ethical Evaluation
by Grover E. Gunn, ill
I hate to be undecided on issues. I had
already made up my mind on Operation
Rescue and was wondering when I
would have an opportunity to get in-
volved. The prospect of being a martyr
of sorts had a romantic appeal for me. If
I had any fears, it was fear of what my
Christian friends would think if I turned
~ ~ o w n an opporturucy to participate. I
didn't want them to think I lacked cour-
age and conviction. Then just as that
opportunity to be involved directly in
an Operation Rescue effort materialized,
some of my Christian friends brought
to my attention some questions they
had about the tactics of Operation Res-
cue. These questions had never occurred
to me, and I did not have any answers. I
began asking several of my ministerial
friends about their position on Opera-
tion Rescue. Now I am writing this
article on my findings and conclusions
to . date. I am not writing as one who
thinks he haS the final word on the sub-
ject. I am writing more as one who
wishes to use the discipline of writing
to clarify further his thoughts. I also
want to submit my tentative conclu-
sions to the scrutiny of others.
. As you probably know, Operation
Rescue is a movement that is using
direct action to save babies from abor-
tionists. Before Operation Rescue, prac-
tically all pro-life activists were using
on1y the indirect action approach. They
worked to save unborn babies from the
abortionists by educating people about
the evils of abortions, by working to
elect pro-life candidates tci public office,
by lobbying for anti-abortion legisla-
Grover E. Gunn, ill is pastor of the
Carrollton Presbyterian Church
(PCA) in Carrolfton
1
Mississippi.
He is co-author of tne book,
Dispensationalism Yestl!rday, Today
and Tomorrow.
tion and executive decisions, and by pro-
viding practical alternatives to abortion
to women with crisis pregnancies. The
pro-life movement has made much pro-
gress in all these areas. Nevertheless the
abortionists continue to slaughter be-
tween one and two million unborn chil-
dren each year. Some have apparently
concluded that these indirect approaches
at saving the unborn children from the
abortionists are not enough. Direct ac-
tion must be used as well. The result
has been the development of Operation
Rescue.
In an Operation Rescue effort, pro-
. life activists gather at an abortion center
for a public protest against abortion.
Then those who are willing to go the
extra step to direct action seek to block
the entrances of the abortion center. The
stated purpose is to temporarily shut
down the killing center. Those pregnant
women seeking an abortion who are
denied entrance can come back later or,
in larger cities, can go to another
abortion center. The argument is that a
certain percentage of those women seek-
ing an abortion, forced to delay the
lethal procedure, reconsider and change
.their minds. Entrance to the abortion
center is restricted to some degree until
the police arrive and arrest and remove
those blocking the entrance. The Opera-
tion Rescue participants go with police
peaceably. Most offer passive resistance
by allowing their bodies to go limp, a
maneuver which forces the police to
carry them off the scene. This tactic
lengthens the time the abortion center
is blocked. After being arrested, so.me
refuse to give their true names. They
call themselves "Baby Jane Doe" or
"Baby John Doe" in honor of the
nameless mllltitudes of aborted babies.
This stratagem delays police processing
and legal proceedings, clogging and
inconveniencing the judicial system.
What are we to say to this? How
should we answer this call to direct
action? Answering this question is not
simple. Let's begin with the principle
of higher law.
We cannot argue against Operation
Rescue with a simple law-and-order
argument as if the Christian should al-
ways obey the state in any and every
circumstance. The Bible does teach that
the Christian citizen should obey the
civil magistrate, but the Bible also
teaches that there are exceptions to that
rule. The . authority of the civil magis-
trate is not fmal and absolute. It is de-
rived. granted to him by God. The Bible
gives the civil magistrate guidelines
concerning his authority, C1Ild the ci vii
magistrate sins whenever he legislates
and executes laws beyond these Bib-
lically defmed boundaries. The Chris-
tian citizen, however, can still be obli-
gated to obey the civil magistrate even
when the civil magistrate has gone be-
yond his Biblically defined sphere of
authority. The Christian cail. often obey
these sinfully legislated human laws
without sinning himself.
The Christian is justified in dis-
obeying the civil magistrate orily when
his obeying the civil magistrate's law
necessarily involves his disobeying
God's law. The classic example is in
the book of Acts where the Apostles
continued to proclaim the gospel of
Jesus after the Jewish rulers had ordered
them to cease. The Apostles there had
to choose between obeying God and
obeying nten; they could not in those
circumstances do both. An Old Testa-
ment example is the Hebrew midwives
in Exodus 1 who refused to obey
Pharaoh's order that they kill the male
Hebrew children. In such situations,
civil disobedience is not merely an op-
tion but a moral necessity. Therefore,
Christians should use the direct action
tactics of Operation Rescue if and only
if the principle of obeying God rather
than men not orily allows it but de-
mands it.
This Biblical principle of higher law
is our criteria for evaluating Operation.
Rescue. The participant in Operation
Rescue direct action is violating man's
Page22--------------------------------------------------
The Counsel of Cbalcedon, December, 1988
law by trespassing on private property
and by blocking public access. What
law of God would he be breaking if he
obeyed the law of men and did not tres-
pass and block public access through
participation in the Operation Rescue
effort? That is the most basic question.
We can evaluate direct action from
several perspectives, and let us begin by
looking at it as a form of vigilante
action. The current civil laws do not
require anyone to have an abortion; they
merely allow it. The current abortion
laws do not require anyone to do some-
thing sinful. What the current abortion
laws do is to permit as legal a practice
that would be legally defined as a crime
in a God-honoring society. When some-
one blocks access to an abortion center,
he is using a form of force and coercion
to prevent others from taking an action
which he regards as criminal but which
the state has defined as legal. This is
vigilante action. God has entrusted the
sword of force and coercion to the civil
magistrate alone; the individual citizen
has no authority to wield that sword.
Vigilante action is wrong and therefore
is no justification for direct action.
As a Biblical example, consider the
actions of the three Hebrew children
when Nebuchadnezzar conunanded all to
bow before his idol. The three Hebrew
children refused to bow down them-
selves even upon threat of death. Yet
they did nothing to try to force others
not to bow down before the idol. They
made no efforts at making citizen's
arrests even though God's law taught
that open idolatry ought to be illegal.
At this point, proponents of direct
action often ask a hypothetical ques-
tion. What should the Christian do if he
sees obvious evidence that his neighbor
is beating his child to death? Should he
not try to intervene even if he has to
trespass on the man's property to do so?
My answer is that the Christian should
intervene indirectly by calling the po-
lice and directly if conunon sense con-
siderations allow it. I mean, if the
Christian is a weak, elderly person, and
the abuser has some lethal weapon, the
direct action options might be some-
what limited. I do concede the point
that there are situations where direction
is justified to stop child abuse. This,
however, is comparing apples with
oranges. Direct action to stop child
abuse is not a vigilante action. Physical-
ly abusing a post-natal child is illegal;
deliberately aborting a prenatal child is
legal. When the Christian trespasses to
stop child abuse, he is acting on the
principle of the citizen's arrest. The
civil magistrate is on his side, sym-
pathetic with his emergency use of
force. The civil magistrate is not on the
side of those blocking passage to abor-
tion centers.
A second perspective from which to
evaluate Operation Rescue direct action
is as an effort to change society. The
civil rights activists and the anti-war
activists of the '60's used direct action
very successfully as a means of social
extortion. With the help of the media,
they got society's attention for their
causes. They clogged the judicial sys-
tem and threatened continuing social fer-
ment and chaos until their demands
were met. It worked, but that does not
mean it was right. The end does not
justify the means.
Christianity strongly emphasizes
changing unjust social practices
through indirect action. The Apostle
Paul did not invest his time and efforts
in the politics of power to try to force
justice on society. He instead preached
the gospel and concentrated on writing
God's laws on people's hearts through
the power of the Holy Spirit. Paul
sought to tum the pagan world upside
down not by fermenting social revolu-
tion or by clogging Caesar's judicial
system but by the "foolishness" of
preaching the cross of Jesus Christ.
Paul considered this spiritual weapon
mighty in God for pulling the world's
strongholds. He was determined to
know nothing but Jesus Christ and
Him crucified.
In the Great Conunission, Christ
conunanded His church to disciple the
nations. Surely the church has not
finished discipling a nation until its
laws are just. Yet the church does not
begin the work of discipling with the
nation's law books. The work begins
with the hearts of the citizenry. Christ
conquers nations from the inside out
and from the bottom up.
The Bible often compares the growth
of God's kingdom to the slow, steady
growth of a garden. The Christian is
responsible for the direct action of sow-
ing, cultivating, and watering, but only
God can perform the direct action of
giving the increase. Even though the
kingdom of God may seem like a
mustard seed, the smallest seed in the
garden, we should not give up on our
indirect action of gospel sowing, cul-
tivating, and watering. The kingdom of
God will one day be the biggest plant
in the garden.
Some involved in direct action argue
that they are following the example of
Christ by giving themselves as a sacri-
fice in order to save others. But are they
really following the example of Christ?
They seem instead to be following the
example of the Zealots and of Bar
Kochba, the militant false messiah who
tried to defeat pagan Rome through
direct action. Jesus made very clear to
Pilate that His kingdom was not to be
established through direct action:
"My kingdom is not of this world. If
My kingdom were of this world, My
servants would fight, so that I should
not be delivered to the Jews; but now
my kingdom is not from here." '
We have no reason to believe that
Christ would condone tl1e more passive
direct action of Mahatma Ghandi or
Martin Luther King as a way of
changing society. We are not following
Christ's example when we are trying to
use the world's methods to do the Lord's
work.
On this question of changing society
through direct action, an issue related to
prophecy comes to mind. For years,
many people refused to get involved in
Christian efforts at promoting social
righteousness. They argue that such
efforts were futile and misdirected.
There would be no progress toward
social righteousness until Jesus returned
and ruled the earth with a rod of iron
from an earthly throne. In essence, they
believed that the indirect action of
preaching the gospel in the power of
the Spirit could change individual lives
but no society at large. Jesus can heal
from a distance the Roman centurion'
The Counsel of Chalccdon, December, 1988
--------------------------------------------------------Pagc23
servant but not a spiritually sick civili-
zation. Jesus can change society only
through His immediate physical pre-
sence and direct coercive actions. That
once was a popular rationale for- not
"polishing the brass on a sinking ship."
Now, more and more, many of these
people are getting- involved in the effort
to conquer society for the Lord Jesus,
and praise God for that Many have
realized that Jesus does not have to be
physically present to change society.
But have some failed to learn in addi-
tion that Jesus conquers nations today
through the indirect action of gospel
means? Do some still believe that ana-
tion can be effectively discipled only by
means of the iron rod of coercive direct
-- - action?-- - - - ----- ..... ---------- --------- -- --
Also, many people have been in-
fluenced by various varieties of perfec-
tionism. Perfectionism is the teaching
that by some direct action of the will
(such as willing to put Christ on the
throne of one's heart), one can shortcut
the sanctification process and reach a
state of sinlessness. Here we see evi-
dence of a theological propensity to ex-
pect quick results and shortcuts through
some form of direct human action ..
Could part of the motivation for Opera-
tion Rescue be a form of social perfec-
tionism?
So far we have found no Biblical
justification for the -direct action tactics
of Operation Rescue, but there is one
other perspective to examine. We need
to consider them as an effort to save vic-
tims.
The Bible unquestionably teaches
that the Christian should help victims
when doing so is legal. The primary-
example of this is the parable of the
Good Samaritan. The waylaid victim
was left half-dead and was probably,
like the unborn child, not in any o n d ~
ition even to ask for help. Like the pro-
life volunteer who works to save an un-
born child, the Samaritan had no idea if
the one he worked to save would later
be a saint or a scoundrel. We know
clearly that Christ gave the parable of
the Good Samaritan as an example for
us to follow.
What do you think the Good Samari-
tan would have done if he had come
earlier and had found the thieves in the
process of waylaying their victim? I be-
lieve he would have intervened with
force if he had the means to do so. I
believe he would have followed the
example of Abraham who used force to
deliver Lot from the four kings. This
would be direct action analogous to the
direct action against the child abuser we
have already discussed. But what would
the Good Samaritan do if he came
across a man being robbed and waylaid
by official tax agents with legal author-
ity and Caesar's blessings. That would
make the situation much more compli-
cated. And the situation gets even more
complicated when not only the state but
also the parents of a_ minor victim are
on the side of the criminal.
There are a few Biblical examples of
saints who defied a civil authority to
save someone's life. Rahab harbored the
two spies and then helped them escape
from Jericho. Obadiah hid one hundred
prophets in caves and fed them when
they were threatened by Jezebel. Jehosh-
eba gave the royal son Joash secret re-
fuge from Queen Athaliah. The Magi .
deceived Herod so that the Christ Child
could escape to Egypt, Note that in
each of these cases, _a saint or saints
gave a person refuge from a civil author-
ity or helped a person escape from a
civil authority. Do these examples justi-
fy Operation Rescue as an effort to help
the unborn child escape the abortionist?
I don't believe so, because Operation
Rescue's strategy is to try to deny the
mother_ access to the abortionist, even
though that is presently illegal, with
the hope that the mother -will change
her mind during the delay. What would
be a true parallel to this? A true parallel
would be if a true prophet under the rule
ofan idolatrous king had tried to deny a
mother access to the altar of Molech
where she planned to sacrifice a child.
Why did no prophet in ancient Israel
ever use this tactic against Molech
worship and other similar evils? Isn't
that what the prophets in Israel should
have been doing if the principles of
Operation Rescue are valid? Yet such
parallels to Operation Rescue's strategy
for saving victims &re absent from the
Bible. - -
The advocate of Operation Rescue
also has to explain why he does not
also advocate direct action efforts to
save the victims of every other "legal
crime" in our society. Are we to kidnap-
children given to the legal custody of
homosexuals? Are we to block access
to .-theaters showing pornography? Are
we tO conduct "shotgun weddings"?
Where do we draw the line? Where does
it stop? If the Bible mandates our pro-
viding a direct action rescue for. the
victim of one "legal crime," then where
does the Bible prohibit our providing a
similar rescue for the victims of all
"legal crimes"? .
Those participating in Operation Res-
cue also need to explain why they
should limit their direct action options
to ti-espassing and the passive, nmi-
violent blocking of abortion center
entrances, They could let the air out of
the abortionist's tires. They could keep
the abortion center's phone busy and set
tip fake appointments. They could call
in false pizza orders for the abortion
center's staff. They could splatter the
building with chicken blood. If legality
is rto longer an issue; then the possi-
bilities are endless. If trespassing is
legitimate. then why not these others?
The conclusion I come to is that
there certainly is no absolute mandate
for all Christians to be involved with
Operation Rescue. Beyond that, I have
come to doubt that any Christian
should be involved in these direct action.
efforts. I would compare those. Chris-
tians who are protesting abortion- and
supporting Crisis Pregnancy Centers to
Wilberforce, the man who led the fight
against the slave trade in England. I fear
that those advocating direct action are
following the example not of Wilber-
force but of the abolitionist radical John .
Brown. They have been attracted to the
low road because it looks like a short-
but I fear it is really a dead end. D
As we approach the first of
next year, please prayerfully
consider the financial needs
of The Counsel of Chalcedon.
Please respond generously to
the forthcoming letter in
December.
Page24--------------------------------------------------
The Counsel of Chalccdon, December, 1988