Letter from Australia 128 – The Christian ‘Middle Road’ that leads to Disaster
Brothers and Sisters,
It’s hard to describe how difficult it is to write some of the things I write. There is a price to be paid. In fact, for a while I had toned down and even stopped. But in recent weeks I have started writing again on a more regular basis. In particular two articles I wrote for Christian Today have gone viral.
The UK Parliament’s vote for abortion up to birth is absolute evil – CT
The Quiet Judgement on the UK – CT
A good example of this was an article published by Dave Williams – https://faithroot.com/2025/06/18/pure-evil-dangers-in-christian-responses-to-the-decriminalisation-of-abortion-for-mothers/
At first sight it seems harmless, reasonable – just a request to speak more compassionately. But I found it deeply hurtful and discouraging. Why? Maybe my pride was just hurt? Maybe I deserved it? But as I reflected on it, I realised that it was precisely this kind of response which does so much harm, and for me it is way more than personal. The author whilst expressing agreement with the view that abortion is wrong and even evil, then accuses me of being inaccurate and unhelpful, lacking compassion. Little wonder that so few Christians want to make public comments when this is the kind of reaction they get from their own side.
Let’s just reflect on what Dave says.
1) Using evil is hyperbolic. Although abortion is evil – we shouldn’t say that. Somehow this is considered to be more compassionate. This is the argument that I hear so often used – but the trouble is it ends up accusing Christ of being unChristlike. Jesus had no problem in calling people evil… (Matthew 7:11). When Dave agrees that abortion is evil but then argues that we shouldn’t say that, he is not only being contradictory and lacking courage, but he is also being unChristlike.
2) It is not changing the status of abortion as a criminal act – But it is. That’s what decriminalisation means. When the State says we will not treat burglary as a crime, they are de facto decriminalising. When they say we will not treat abortion as a crime, they are de facto decriminalising. When someone writes an article complaining of ‘inaccuracy’ they should at the very least get their facts right!
3) Abortion is already legal so why would decriminalising it be evil? That’s like arguing that killing Jews was already legal in Nazi Germany – so what difference did it make if they use gas chambers instead of machine guns?! Most people recognise that this week a Rubicon was crossed in the UK – at both ends of life. And yes, decriminalising abortion and permitting the killing of the sick and dying – is evil.
4) Concern about how this will be heard…
Concern for who? Those who have abortions? The politicians? The media? The nice people at the dinner parties we are trying to impress? And why should we be concerned about whether others think what we say isn’t nice? Were the prophets concerned about how the kings of Isreal heard them? Was Jesus concerned when he said – ‘”Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean.”(Matthew 23:27) Didn’t he know that was hardly the way to win friends and influence people?!
5) We want to insist that abortion is not evil because of increased viability
Why? To use Dave’s own criteria – how does that sound? It seems as though he is saying that losing a one-day old embryo is the same as losing a child one day from birth. Whilst I argue that both are wrong – there is also a difference…and viability is a key argument in the case against abortion. One that Dave seems prepared to overthrow.
And why the snarky language about cuteness – has anyone made that argument?
6) I should not speak about pure evil because there is a danger it could be applied to the mums or the MPs. Again, that is not how Christ spoke. It is pure evil to kill a baby. Those who commit that act are doing an evil act – they are not ‘pure evil’. They are not irredeemably evil…. or worse than everyone else. But they are evil….as the Bible says. In fact, the bible says that all of us are evil. (Romans 2:9-18)
7) We can’t say they are evil because MPs have received violent threats. Dave makes the direct and illogical equation between saying someone is evil, and encouraging people to kill them. That is a false equation and hyperbolic nonsense. It is a form of emotive bullying seeking to silence those who dare to speak out. It means that no one could say anything any politician did was evil. Our politicians are facilitating and enabling evil – they are the powers of this world. But no Christian should ever endorse, hint at, or advocate violence against politicians – because our battle is not against flesh and blood and we do not fight with the weapons of this world.
8) Calling people evil turns some people into monsters and separates their sin out from others. No, it doesn’t. This is again applying somewhat limited sociological theory rather than the teaching of Christ. When I have sat and held the hand of a young girl, weeping because of the guilt she felt over killing her own baby, I did not in any sense think she was worse than me – or should be marked out for being particularly evil. All of our hearts are evil and can find ways to justify our evil acts. “”The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:9).
9) We must acknowledge a genuine desire to be compassionate in the motivation of those who are seeking this change. Why? Do we know their heart and their motivation? We know what they say – but we also know that the devil comes as an angel of light. Whilst some might be motivated by compassion, I also know that others use compassion as a weapon (just as they do with euthanasia) – as a means to emotionally bully us into accepting what they do. They take extreme cases and then say if you do not agree with our solution, you are unloving. It’s the same when people tell us that unless we accept transgender ideology we don’t care about a transgender teenager who commits suicide.
The reality is that abortion is the secular sacrament of our society. It is considered as a right. To speak against it is to commit blasphemy. Many of those who were advocating for the bill that passed (at least 116 of the MPs) were also supporting a motion which would have made abortion up to birth, on demand, for any reason, a right in UK law – to be provided on the NHS. This was just the first step. Where is the compassion there?
10) “There is a danger that we might resort to shouting our anger and disgust and so fail to seek to make the compassionate argument for a different way.”
But who was shouting? I do tend to get angry and feel disgust at racism, domestic violence, rape, child abuse, exploitation of the poor. Don’t you? I also feel sick that we now live in a society where mothers (and fathers) are permitted to kill their babies.
What Dave does here is again a form of manipulation. Saying something is evil (in public) is to be angry and not to show compassion.
The irony is that Dave meanwhile argues that we must acknowledge that those who argued for the decriminalisation of abortion were being compassionate – whereas those of us who argued that such an act was evil, were uncompassionate, angry and unhelpful.
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)
The trouble with these kinds of articles is that they both feed off and create a narrative. I have lost count of the times that people have come up to me and said that I was not as bad/nasty/evil as they had been told – usually by other Christians. If you actually read the article, I would challenge you to find what Dave found there.
But is has been ever thus. In the name of compassion, niceness and getting a seat at the table – some Christians feel comfortable in criticising and condemning a more robust approach. Of course they are not entirely wrong. There is a judgemental, condemnatory, self-righteous and harsh approach that does more harm than good. But the Christian response should never be to respond to one extreme by going to the opposite one. There is a tightrope to walk….and sometimes we fall off it.
My concern is that, as I have found, it is so easy to get tired and to give up. The only way for anyone to get on in the evangelical subculture is stand in the middle of the road – whilst declaring the way to go. But as the saying goes – ‘man who stands in middle of road gets run over’. This week we got steamrollered – we were hit with the full force of the anti-Christian ideologies. Britain took another step away from our Christian foundations, and back to progressive paganism. Some of us have to call that evil. And if others say that’s not nice – I just simply ask where the command to be nice is found in the Bible!
There are dangers in Christian responses to the evil of abortion. Judgementalism, harshness and unrighteous anger are certainly some. But so are blandness, compromise, cowardness and lack of clarity. It is the latter, rather than the former, which has more facilitated the change in our culture.
I hope to return to this subject again next week. But until then may you know the peace of Christ, live for God’s glory, be empowered by the Spirit – “so that you may become blameless and pure, ‘children of God without fault in a warped and crooked generation.’ Then you will shine among them like stars in the sky.” (Philippians 2:15)
Yours in Christ,
David.
PS. Despite what I have said I do appreciate correction and advice from friends – because the wounds of a friend are faithful. It’s just that over the years I have learned that there are some faithless wounds as well!
PPS – The reason I have written this publicly is that the article attacking me was published publicly….and public error has to be answered publicly – especially when it does damage…