Share
by Clint Friesen
I remember vividly sitting in the living room of an elderly couple from my church. I had been pastoring in the church ten years, but only recently had become the lead pastor of the congregation. The wife, a usually vibrant and energetic lady, had invited me and my wife over to let us know that she had been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. She knew that the cancer would kill her, and that pancreatic cancer was known to be a particularly aggressive and painful cancer. She was afraid of the pain to follow. During the conversation, one in which she reminded me regularly of the beautiful life of faith that had been lived, she said something that struck me as something deeply true, something the Apostle Paul might have said: “I have tried to model faith with my life, and now I will try to model faith in my dying.”
In Canada, and around the world, people are living longer[1], which also means many are reaching ages where deterioration (mental or physical) becomes a deep challenge. Since legislation in Canada legalized Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), more people are seeking assistance in death each year. From 2021 to 2022, Canada increased in MAiD deaths by over 31%, becoming more than 4% of all deaths in Canada[2]. Popular opinion seems to indicate that Canadians are widely in agreement with the medical field helping people end their lives, whether by providing the necessary drugs for the patient to take, or actively delivering the medications that end life.
That killing an innocent person[3] is morally wrong is a point I will not make here because it is widely accepted on all sides of the issue at hand.[4] This is not intended to beg the question of whether MAiD patients are guilty in any unique sense, nor whether the person who commits suicide apart from the medical system are guilty of a crime punishable by death. Rather, the question being asked is whether willfully being a party to the death of an innocent person, should be morally acceptable in certain circumstances where the person being killed desires it[5].
I argue that a faithful Christian conviction would not allow a Christian to aid in the death of an innocent human, including their own. I will begin by defining the key distinctions between the side-effects of the use or removal of medicine, Physician-Assisted Death, and Euthanasia (the latter two fall underneath Canada’s definition of MAiD). I will discuss the sanctity of life from a Christian viewpoint, the false idea of autonomy, and the value of mercy and its limitations.
Medication, and its removal
I began with a story of a lady in my congregation. She was concerned about the pain her cancer would bring. Although she intended to live her faith until her cancer took her life, she also wanted the best pain control she could get. Yet, it is well known that effective pain killers are excellent at controlling pain but may also accelerate the coming death[6].
Similarly, I was with another elderly lady in the hospital when her doctor came in. He explained that they needed to do more tests and might need to do another procedure. There was no hope of curing the cancer that had now spread through her body, but they were trying to treat whatever they could. She looked him in the eye and said, “don’t be in too much of a hurry to try to cure me”. He did a double take to make sure he had heard her correctly. He had. She was telling him, “No more treatments”. She passed away on her own the next day.
Maybe the medications to treat a disease are causing the patient to feel sick, or weak and weary at a level they no longer feel like themselves. Maybe they have been through endless procedures and are ready to die. Should medications be removed?
Physician-Assisted Death
In Physician-Assisted Death, medical personnel, usually doctors or nurses, provide the lethal medication necessary for the patient to end his or her own life[7]. In this case, the lethal poison is usually ingested, and the patient passes away because of the lethal drug, not the disease. The medical personnel have not administered the drug to the person, but they have provided it.
Euthanasia
Literally, Euthanasia means “good death”, and happens when medical personnel administer the lethal drug, usually with an injection.[8] The patient seeks death for various reasons[9], and the doctor is present to cause this death. Unlike in assisted-death, euthanasia is the direct killing of the patient by medical personnel.
Is there a difference?
In each of these cases, the medical actions taken have a direct impact on the person’s death. And yet, we should not think of them as the same in moral terms. Death is an inescapable reality. It is not a good thing, but it is a reality. According to the scriptures, death came because of sin (Romans 6:23, 5:12, Hebrews 9:27, etc). As Christians, we are not told to unduly resist earthly death, but rather that Christ has reversed the eternal consequences of death.
We should not take part in the death of an innocent person, whether to provide the means of that death, or to directly cause that death. But for now, I want to state that we are not required as Christians to prolong life indefinitely. We cannot avoid the need to face death, and we need not stop the body at all costs from reaching that end[10]. Neither the removal of medication, nor the administration of pain relief, is aimed at death. In both these cases, it is aimed at easing suffering.[11] They neither aim at death, nor do they flee from it.[12] The disease is allowed to kill the person, not the lethal aid supplied by the practitioner. The Apostle Paul says something to that exact effect when in 2 Corinthians 5 when he compares the human body to a tent and our eternal bodies to a building. Yet he in no way suggests finding a way out as his prerogative. Rather, he states that if he is in this life he will seek to praise the Lord, as he will do when he is eternally clothed (2 Corinthians 5:9). Manifesting God is the goal, not ending, nor prolonging life.
Sanctity of Life
I recently was called by a niece to kill her cat. I hate even writing it that way because it feels harsh. Yet, I want to be clear: I caused the death of her cat by my actions. The cat was sick and had received very costly medical care and yet was still miserable. My niece did not have the money to bring the cat to the vet to be euthanized and so, with many tears, asked if I would do this for her. I took no pleasure in it, but I did it. One of the most common questions posed to those that are against MAiD is that we are denying to a human a right that is given even to animals. In other words, because we take our pets to be put down, or do it ourselves, when they are sick and suffering, we ought to offer the same thing to humans.[13] It is ironic that an argument aimed at human dignity calls for humans to be treated like animals. The truth is that animals do not consent to death. The cat did not ask to die or have any idea what was happening. Honestly, I did not act with compassion for the cat, I acted with compassion for my niece.
Peter Singer is known for following the natural extension of his worldview; namely, that humans do not necessarily have any more value than animals. He admits that his suggestion that a mentally disabled person has less value than a pig makes people upset but suggests it is undeniable.[14] He frames his article around establishing a new set of commandments, clearly a shot taken at a Judeo-Christian worldviews, and says the first new commandment is that we ought not to say that all human life is of equal value. Again, he thinks this is clear.[15]
Yet, to dismantle a religious worldview, he has completely misunderstood or misstated the view. Christian scriptures do not teach that human value is extrinsic, something we gain by performance or affirmation from others. David Gushee rightly recognizes the pure truth is that we matter to God[16], and that human value is in no way granted on the basis of some feature in ourselves, but rather by virtue of that fact God uniquely created humanity in his image for the purpose of relationship with him.[17] We need not understand how we are in the image of God, but that we are apart from our achievements is enough to say that value is intrinsic not extrinsic. Just because a person is struggling to keep normal human functions like breathing, maintaining their bowels, or communicating clear thoughts does not diminish their value. However, it may be up to the rest of God’s image bearers to treat the person in a way that demonstrates they are intrinsically valued by God.[18]
The truth is that the word “value” does not do enough. We think of buying something in a store when we hear value. Or maybe we think of hiring a worker to do work in our house, and the effectiveness of their work is how we think of value. Sacredness speaks of much more. Sacredness speaks of an incalculable preciousness in the eyes of the God of all creation. It is hard to make sense of such a statement, but this is the Christian conviction. At the heart of the Christian message is the idea that God, in the person of the son, was even able to take upon himself humanity for the purpose of redeeming it on the cross. God thought humanity so precious that he died for it as a human. Any notion of extrinsic value cannot come close to this.
It is clear that we ought to be careful with something so precious! Number 5:6-7 warns the people of Israel to be careful; when they wrong their brother, it is an aggression against God. Therefore no human interaction is merely human.[19] Dr. Jack Kavorkian says that “any religion ought to be irrelevant to the strictly secular doctor-patient relationship,” and that “medicine is a purely secular profession, like engineering…”[20] Yet, for a Christian, this can never be. When the question is about a human, it is a sacred question. A question about a bridge cannot compare.
So then, is scripture in favor of killing innocent people under any circumstances? The most obvious statement is in the charter doctrines of Israel, the ten commandments. The Sixth commandment in Exodus 20 says, “thou shalt not kill”. Godly Characters in the Bible long for death at times but never seek it themselves or find the support of others to bring their end[21]. For example, Elijah wishes for death, but in now way attempts to end his life (1 Kings 19). Others despair in the same way but wait for the Lord (Psalm 22). As was already mentioned, Paul thinks death would be better but sees that life is in the hands of the Lord (Philippians 1). Since human life is of sacred value, and since scripture speaks against killing, Christians should not take part in causing the death of an innocent person.
The Lie of Autonomy
For many people, the perception of autonomy is at the heart of their desire for MAiD. They want to do what they want to do. Frank Sinatra’s “I did it my way” plays as the theme song for their lives. People want to imagine what a good life is for themselves and then live that way.[22] Thus, death becomes the last exercise of their self-determination. Medical paternalism has given way to patient autonomy, and patient autonomy is considered absolute.[23] Autonomy is the highest value. In this model medical personnel become more like businesspeople who never forget that “the customer is always right”. This type of autonomy can acknowledge that killing is not good but denying a person wishes is worse. Doctors’ ought to give the customer what they want.
We’ve already seen that the God-given sanctity of life, and the prohibitions against killing others and ourselves would not permit this value on autonomy. But is it best to hold autonomy up as a core value at all? Certainly, I would be willing to argue (somewhere else!), that freewill is truly a gift of God, but freewill is not the same as autonomy. Freewill recognizes that God has given us choices. Autonomy suggests that my choices ought to be respected as morally correct, and without implication for others.
This clearly is not true in the world. We are not autonomous creatures, no matter how we may act. We live in communities, we need each other, we are not independent. When 84-year-old Miriam Lancaster went to a Vancouver Island hospital with back pain and was offered MAiD, it hurt her deeply.[24] Like it or not, the message spoken to her with that request was that her life did not matter. Now this does not prove MAiD is wrong, but it certainly shows that the decisions of some have had implications for others. In the Netherlands, over 6,000 people are carrying cards stating they do not want to be euthanized in the case they are suddenly hospitalized.[25] They fear they will be euthanized without consent. When the decisions of a few suggest that life needs to be justified by many others, intimidating social messages are indeed being received.[26] This is to say nothing of the potential relationship damage between elderly people and their children, or the mixed messaging of a culture that claims to fight suicide while opening wider options for exiting life voluntarily. Indeed, we are not a law unto ourselves.
As followers of Christ, it is even clearer. The scriptures are full of passages that make clear that God has a claim on all of us. The first sin in Genesis 3 is a desire to be “like God”. Being made in the image of God was not enough, humanity has sought to define good and evil for themselves. According to scripture autonomy is not only untrue, attempts at it end with pain and our own destruction. In 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 Paul reminds believers that we “are not our own, we were bought with a price”. That message is truly counter-cultural, and yet, it is at the heart of following Christ. We are not authors of meaning and life, we are characters called to live into the world God has established.
Mercy and Suffering
In the movie Saving Private Ryan there is a touching seen where one of the soldiers has several limbs blown off in an explosion. The medic with the unit administers morphine for the pain, but the man continues to cry for his mom. It is clear the morphine will not ease his suffering, but commander tells the medic to give him all the morphine. The medic begins to protest, thinking the commander does not understand that it will kill the man. The commander understands perfectly and again demands he give him the rest of the morphine. The medic consents, and the man passes away quickly.[27]
Who is not moved by this! Watchers of the movie are thinking, “give the guy the drugs!” And so mercy is quickly treated as the highest of virtues, even above, “thou shalt not kill”. It is said that surely, in other cases of extreme suffering, we should want the same outcome. Mark Duntley, a chaplain and professor in Portland, in his defense of euthanasia, spends considerable time demonstrating that the God of the Bible is a God of mercy.[28] This statement is obvious from the scriptures (Exodus 34, Psalms 103, etc) and certainly should be obvious to followers of Christ. However, proving that God is merciful does not prove that we should approve of MAiD. It does not prove that MAiD is merciful nor whether mercy should be an act that supersedes God’s instructions not to destroy sacred human life.
It is not clear that MAiD is merciful. While it might be overly practical, it is still fair to suggest that we do not know the side-effects of MAiD.[29] Normally when we administer medical care we take time to observe the side-effects. We cannot observe the side-effects of death. I don’t say this to be clever; it is simply the case. We do not know that we have ended a person’s suffering with death. In fact, from a Christian perspective, after death comes judgment to eternal life or eternal death.[30] While this is a scary thought, it is thoroughly Christian.
It seems to me that the mercy of MAiD may be a move away from compassion on several fronts. Firstly, allowing people to live in delusion about their own autonomy, even to the point of death is not merciful. Death, and the process of dying, ought rightly to snap us away from the delusions of control over our lives and call us to a place of dependence on God. Secondly, the mercy of MAiD may be a retreat from the real mercy of enduring with those who are suffering. Sitting with the dying and suffering is difficult, especially when the end will certainly be death. Mercy and compassion ought to affirm value and significance; mercy should not be an excuse to send the message that a person ought to be dead.
One last thought on suffering. According to scripture, suffering is not something that can be avoided. The scriptures do not teach us to seek out suffering, or insist that we remain in it when we can get away from it. But it is not to be avoided at all costs. Our testimony of Christ should not be betrayed to avoid suffering. The sanctify of life should not be violated to escape pain. Suffering is not a good thing, but it is a thing God uses to refine us.
Jesus taught that in this world we will have trouble, but he offers us peace in our place of trouble (John 16:33). Jesus Christ suffered at the cross, and Hebrews 2 teaches Jesus himself was perfected by his sufferings! The Apostle Paul says that he wants to share in the sufferings of Christ (Philippians 3:10), and Peter teaches that suffering reveals the proof of our faith (1 Peter 1:6). Christians should look forward to the time when sufferings end and tears are wiped away, but we should not use mercy as an excuse to avoid the suffering of death.
Conclusion
“I have tried to model faith with my life, and now I will try to model faith in my dying.” I quoted a dear lady from my congregation at the beginning of this paper because I want to live and die like she did: attempting to live life as a model of faith; imperfect, with ups and downs, but a clear conviction of the Lordship of Christ. I pray that even suffering does not steal this from me or those in my care.
Canada has instituted policies allowing for physicians to participate in the killing of patients, whether by offering the poison necessary to do the job, or by administering those poisons themselves. As more people consider this option, faithful Christian conviction demands that we will not aid in the death of an innocent human, including our own.
First, Christians must recognize that human life is more than valuable, it is sacred. God has made us in his image and given created us to relate to him, and we must not seek to end a sacred life. Second, Christians must see that autonomy is an illusion in reality because of how interdependently we have been created, and that ultimately we will answer to God as our creator. We are not authors; we are characters in God’s story…and that is a good thing for us! Finally, mercy must not be allowed as an excuse to destroy God’s image bearers, send humanity to their eternal destinies, nor to avoid the suffering of death that refines our souls.
Christians need to live in a way that demonstrates human sacredness. We need to love those that are suffering well and so remind them of value. We need to walk the hard path with people who are dying and losing hope. Our care for those who are most needy must not make them feel needy but rather precious. Finally, and this may be the hardest, we need to release ourselves from the need to be independent and allow ourselves to be cared for intimately by others.
Clint Friesen is lead Pastor at Steinbach Christian Mennonite Church.
Bibliography
Bowyer, Lynne. “Euthanasia.” THINK 20, no. 58 (2021): 93–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1477175621000087.
Breggen, Hendrik van der. Untangling Popular Pro-MAID Arguments : Critical Thinking About Medical Assistance in Dying (in Canada). [Bolton, Ontario]: Amazon KDP, 2023.
Brock, Dan W, and B D Colen. “Voluntary Active Euthanasia.” The Hastings Center Report 22, no. 2 (1992): 10–22.
Byram, Adrian C., and Peter B. Reiner. “Disparities in Public Awareness, Practitioner Availability, and Institutional Support Contribute to Differential Rates of MAiD Utilization: A Natural Experiment Comparing California and Canada.” Mortality 30, no. 1 (2025): 252–272. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13576275.2024.2328627.
Cassel, Christine K. “Physician-Assisted Suicide: Are We Asking the Right Questions?” Second opinion (Park Ridge, Ill.) 18, no. 2 (1992): 95–8.
Cbc. “Canadians Born in 2030 Forecast to Live 4 Years Longer Than Previous Generation.” CBC, February 22, 2017. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/life-expectancy-lancet-1.3993213.
Duntley, Mark A. “Covenantal Ethics and Care for the Dying.” The Christian Century 108, no. 35 (1991): 1135.
Goligher, Ewan C. How Should We Then Die? : A Christian Response to Physician-Assisted Death. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2024.
Gushee, David P. The Sacredness of Human Life : Why an Ancient Biblical Vision Is Key to the World’s Future. Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2013.
Kass, Leon R. “Why Doctors Must Not Kill.” Commonweal 118, no. 14 (1991): S8.
Magnuson, Ken. Invitation to Christian Ethics : Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2020.
“Manitobans denied MAID more often than other Canadians.” Video. CBC, n.d. https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.7122753.
McCormick, Richard A. “Physician-Assisted Suicide: Flight from Compassion.” The Christian Century 108, no. 35 (1991): 1132.
McDowell, Sean. A Rebel’s Manifesto: Choosing Truth, Real Justice, & Love amid the Noise of Today’s World. Carol Stream, Illinois: Tyndale Momentum, 2022.
Spielberg, Steven. Saving Private Ryan. United States: DreamWorks Distribution, 1998. DVD (or Streaming), 170 minutes.
Tessa Gervasini/EWTN News. “84-Year-Old Woman Speaks Out After Being Offered Euthanasia While Visiting Canadian ER for Back Pain.” NCR, April 1, 2026. https://www.ncregister.com/cna/84-year-old-woman-speaks-out-after-being-offered-euthanasia-while-visiting-canadian-er-for-back-pain.
Uhlmann, Michael M., and Ethics and Public Policy Center (Washington, D.C.). Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated. Washington, D.C., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Ethics and Public Policy Center ; William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1998.
[1] Cbc. “Canadians Born in 2030 Forecast to Live 4 Years Longer Than Previous Generation.” CBC, February 22, 2017. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/life-expectancy-lancet-1.3993213.
[2] Breggen, Hendrik van der. Untangling Popular Pro-MAID Arguments : Critical Thinking About Medical Assistance in Dying (in Canada). [Bolton, Ontario]: Amazon KDP, 2023, 4.
[3] Note: I do not wish to argue for or against the death penalty, killing to defend one’s life, or acts in war. A different argument is required to prove whether Christians should kill in these instances. For the purpose of this paper, I want only to address killing in instances where the person dying is considered innocent.
[4] Brock, Dan W, and B D Colen. “Voluntary Active Euthanasia.” The Hastings Center Report 22, no. 2 (1992): 13.
[5] Note: I should say, “whether a person desires it, or that they would desire it if they were consciously aware enough to do so.” However, I do not want to distinguish mental capacities that would qualify a person as capable of “desiring” death. I want rather to think about the issue of aiding in dying in general.
[6] Magnuson, Ken. Invitation to Christian Ethics : Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2020.
[7] McDowell, Sean. A Rebel’s Manifesto: Choosing Truth, Real Justice, & Love amid the Noise of Today’s World. Carol Stream, Illinois: Tyndale Momentum, 2022.111
[8] McDowell, 111.
[9] Note: In Canada, the law continues to change around what is considered an acceptable request for MAiD. If the Netherlands is any indicator, Canada will continue to provide maid for many different reasons. Ken Magnuson shows that in the Netherlands patients as young as 12 years old can seek assistance in dying, with doctors arguing that this is still too restrictive. Magnuson, Ken. Invitation to Christian Ethics : Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2020, 380.
[10] Goligher, Ewan C. How Should We Then Die? : A Christian Response to Physician-Assisted Death. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2024, 68.
[11] Kass, Leon R. “Why Doctors Must Not Kill.” Commonweal 118, no. 14 (1991): S8, Supplement 11.
[12] Magnuson, 371.
[13] Duntley, Mark A. “Covenantal Ethics and Care for the Dying.” The Christian Century 108, no. 35 (1991): 1135.
[14] Uhlmann, Michael M., and Ethics and Public Policy Center (Washington, D.C.). Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated. Washington, D.C., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Ethics and Public Policy Center ; William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1998, 183.
[15] Uhlmann, 174.
[16] Gushee, David P. The Sacredness of Human Life : Why an Ancient Biblical Vision Is Key to the World’s Future. Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2013, 25.
[17] Gushee, 44.
[18] Bowyer, Lynne. “Euthanasia.” THINK 20, no. 58 (2021): 93–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1477175621000087, 96.
[19] Gushee, 37.
[20] Uhlmann, 265
[21] Note: King Saul, in Samuel 31, is said to have lain on his own sword to speed his impending death. Then, in 2 Samuel 1, it is said that an Amalekite finished him off at Sau’s request. However, while Saul’s suicide is never commented on, his character in the story leads the reader to believe that Saul is no longer doing what is right in the eyes of the Lord. Also, the Amalekite who brags about finishing Saul’s life is ordered to be killed by King David.
[22] Brock, 11.
[23] McCormick, Richard A. “Physician-Assisted Suicide: Flight from Compassion.” The Christian Century 108, no. 35 (1991): 1132.
[24] Tessa Gervasini/EWTN News. “84-Year-Old Woman Speaks Out After Being Offered Euthanasia While Visiting Canadian ER for Back Pain.” NCR, April 1, 2026. https://www.ncregister.com/cna/84-year-old-woman-speaks-out-after-being-offered-euthanasia-while-visiting-canadian-er-for-back-pain.
[25] Magnuson, 381.
[26] Bowyer, 98.
[27] Spielberg, Steven. Saving Private Ryan. United States: DreamWorks Distribution, 1998. DVD (or Streaming), 170 minutes.
[28] Duntley, 1136.
[29] Goligher, 65-68.
[30] Goligher, 63.
