What does ‘life is sacred’ mean?

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 28/09/2020 (1866 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The story of local Christian leader John Regehr, 93, choosing medical assistance in dying appeared on the Faith page of the Aug. 22 edition of the Winnipeg Free Press. It included his family’s apprehension his decision would “cast a pall” over his life in the broader Christian community.

After all, most people of religious faith maintain life is sacred. But what does that mean?

First, to which forms of life does it refer? Is all life sacred, including plants and fungi? Are only sentient beings sacred, those who are conscious of and responsive to sense impressions, including even invertebrate animals? Or is only human life sacred, because only we bear the image of God?

The latter is the anthropocentric (centred on humans), mainstream Christian interpretation, as derived in part from “have dominion” in Genesis 1:26, 28. It is also the human exceptionalism that, as practiced since the Industrial Revolution, has contributed so significantly to environmental degradation and anthropogenic (caused by humans) climate change.

Or is all life truly sacred? The millennia-old, alternate, biocentric Christian interpretation views creation as the first incarnation, Jesus as the second, and humans as called to “serve and guard” the first in Genesis 2:15.

What parts or kinds of human life are sacred? Are ovarian eggs that get flushed in menstruation and male sperm that get flushed in nocturnal emissions sacred? Or is only the fertilized egg sacred because it is a totipotent stem cell capable of becoming an entire human body?

Are adult stem cells with fewer potencies therefore not sacred? The single-cell zygote is indeed a potentially self-sustaining human body, though it is still far from the consciousness, volition, emotion, reason, and identity that emerge developmentally into personhood.

Assuming independent personhood is realized, what about the blood its body may shed in lacerations, surrender to medical tests, or donate to other bodies? A blood cell is also human life, one which we handle rather freely. So is it only human cells and organs which are or have the potential to be self-sustaining and independent that are sacred? But no cells actually are, by themselves.

What then of human bodies which are no longer self-sustaining or independent, such as those dependent on vital organ transplant or other medical interventions to prolong their life? At what exact point does the body return to the earth whence it came?

Manitoba is the only province that has a legal definition of death — irreversible cessation of brain function — and it is based on medical definitions, in contrast to religious definitions based on heart function.

Moreover, has the person with a do not resuscitate (DNR) clause in their will already desecrated the sacredness of human life by mandating medical intervention to prolong their life be withheld? Has DNR simply been a precursor, albeit in reverse, to what is now termed MAID in which medical intervention hastens death, and which 84 per cent of Canadians favoured in a 2014 national survey?

Furthermore, what does sacred mean?

Does it refer to things set apart from the ordinary, mundane, and profane, things that are an end in themselves, not merely an instrumental, utilitarian means to an end, things deserving veneration and reverence? Then in what sense is life set apart from life? Moreover, are there seven Christian sacraments (Roman Catholic) or only two (Protestant)?

How does the variety of entities deemed sacred help us understand the complex character or quality of sacredness? Do similarities and differences between sacred places, buildings, occasions, texts, rites/rituals, objects, symbols, relationships, and social positions clarify or complicate our understanding of the sacredness of human life? For example, on what basis do we decline, enter, practice, or exit sacred relationships such as marriage, or sacred callings such as priest or prophet?

Are there degrees of the sacred, such as the holiest of holies?

How then do we act toward the various types of the sacred? What does reverence do?

Does it take a strictly hands-off, passive posture, or does it actively engage the sacred in diverse ways, such as visiting and leaving sacred places, erecting and dismantling sacred buildings, planning and conducting sacred occasions, interpreting and translating sacred texts, reviewing and revising sacred rites/rituals, and assembling and positioning sacred objects?

How did some Christians become willing to kill or die for sacred symbols? Historically and cross-culturally, how have people in different times and places constructed and deconstructed what they deemed to be sacred?

In other words, how have they sacralized and de-sacralized particular entities, whether consciously or subconsciously, intentionally or unintentionally, consistently or inconsistently? Invariably, human fingerprints are clearly visible all over what is deemed sacred.

For some who do indeed believe life is sacred, saying so is the beginning, not the end, of a necessarily nuanced discussion. And for John Regehr, choosing to end his life when he did was not sacrilege.

Dennis Hiebert is a professor of sociology at Providence University College

faith@freepress.mb.ca

The Free Press is committed to covering faith in Manitoba. If you appreciate that coverage, help us do more! Your contribution of $10, $25 or more will allow us to deepen our reporting about faith in the province. Thanks! BECOME A FAITH JOURNALISM SUPPORTER