Richard Mouw
President, Fuller Theological Seminary

Richard Mouw

Mouw, a philosopher, scholar, and author, is president of Fuller Theological Seminary. He has been recognized as an important voice among reform-oriented evangelicals.

 ALL POSTS

Beyond Saying "No"

You certainly don’t have to be religious to acknowledge that there are moral boundaries that a physician should not cross in responding to a patient’s needs and wishes. And for the believer--Christian, Jewish, Muslim, for example--those boundaries will be reinforced by strong religious convictions. There are some things that God forbids us to do.

But this is not simply a case of religious obligations versus the obligation to serve patients. For the believer, serving a patient is itself a matter of religious conviction. In Christianity, for example, physical healing is one of the things we are called by God to promote. Jesus devoted a lot of attention in his earthly ministry to responding to genuine physical needs.

It is not enough, then, for a physician simply to say “No” to a certain expressed need or wish--or more generally, to refuse to engage in a certain kind of practice or procedure. Even in saying “No,” the obligation to be a healer does not disappear. If, for example, certain Christian communities insist that physicians should not perform abortions, they--along with the physicians in their midst--have a religious obligation to provide alternative ministries of healing, compassion and support for people who in their own lives see abortion as the only solution.

For those of us who claim to be servants of the One whom we refer to as “the Great Physician,” saying “No” to a specific practice or procedure does not cancel our obligation to work for the well-being of people who need healing and comfort.

By Richard Mouw  |  August 13, 2007; 9:30 AM ET
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: A Necessary Tension! | Next: 'Do No Harm'

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



Hi you have a nice homepage notem6715

Posted by: melony | September 24, 2007 5:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Holla and Happy Thanksgiving. notem6715

Posted by: marvel | September 22, 2007 3:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Would it be OK for a Mormon doctor to apply electroshock therapy to "cure" a gay? Ask Michael Otterson, spokesman for the LDS Church about such doctors at BYU.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 14, 2007 7:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Would it be OK for a Mormon doctor to apply electroshock therapy to "cure" a gay? Ask Michael Otterson, spokesman for the LDS Church about such doctors at BYU.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 14, 2007 7:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment

How condescending!

they--along with the physicians in their midst--have a religious obligation to provide alternative ministries of healing, compassion and support...

If the patient asks for a legal procedure, the physician should provide it or, if conscience forbids, refer to someone who will (and not charge for the visit.) A woman seeking an abortion knows the alternatives. It is not the right of the meddling physician to dissuade her. The alternatives are not medical options.

The "servants of the One" should not presume to know what is best for the rest of us.

Posted by: Observer | August 13, 2007 3:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Even in countries where the law permits abortion for rape victims, women who seek the operation can encounter a wall of obstruction. In Peru, a 17-year-old girl discovered that her foetus had anencephaly - meaning that it was going to be born without a brain - but a doctor refused to allow her access to an abortion. She was compelled to give birth and breastfeed the child for four days before its died.

In the Sante Fe province of Argentina, a social worker told the organisation Human Rights Watch about a woman who went into hospital after having an unsafe abortion and was bleeding badly. "A doctor started to examine her, and when he realised, he threw down his instruments and said: 'This is an abortion. You go ahead and die'."

Conscience - such a wonderful thing!

Posted by: J Green | August 13, 2007 2:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment

No kidding? "There are some things that God forbids us to do." Can't find an argument against that. But what does "God forbids us to do" anyhow?

Exodus 20
The Ten Commandments
1 And God spoke all these words:

2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

3 "You shall have no other gods before [a] me.

4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments.

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul says your God is a rather "strange" one. I'm having trouble not believing it. Maybe we should be sure we have the correct God before we start deciding what "God forbids us to do." I understand the punishment for "strange Gods" is rather severe. Could it be worse than the punishment for no God at all?

"I am the Lord your God" should be "I am just plain one and only God" shouldn't it? Doesn't this say that was only "the God" of a group of people? Why should I accept that God as my God not being in that group of people myself. Your God isn't the loot form a robbery is it?

The Romans insisted on robbing the Jews and the Jews managed to hide everything but their God so the Romans took it? That taught them a lesson not yet forgotten.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 13, 2007 2:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Well lets hope and pray that God doesn't decide to once more decide what is morally allowable based on the color of ones skin, the others belief or non-belief or even the sex of the patient.

But the fact is, we are already seeing worrying signs that this is once more starting to occur in certain fields of care.

Duty to people needs to come first. This slippery slope of faith and conscience are the divisions of divisive teachings which will ultimately result in needless suffering.

Posted by: J Green | August 11, 2007 1:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Are there other areas besides abortion where you feel prayer and social support may have more to offer than medical science?

Posted by: Viejita del oeste | August 10, 2007 7:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2009 The Washington Post Company