Graphic signs anger pro-abortion pastors, parishioners
I’m always intrigued by the responses pro-lifers get for showing graphic photos of aborted babies in front of pro-abortion churches on Sunday mornings. I hope these protests continue and expand. Parishioners may not understand, but pro-lifers are trying to help them. Their worship services are repugnant to God. Just read Isaiah 1:10-17.
In September World Life Organization’s Todd Bullis and Andy Moore and their team stood for the 11th and 12th time in front of the Custer Road United Methodist Church in Plano, Texas. I’m always impressed by the wise, Godly words they have ready to offer.
Church members walking past the signs either ignored them, expressed support for abortion, or got angry, such as one man you’ll see on the first video who absolutely refused to believe UMC is pro-abortion. Todd told me the man followed up with a phone call but still denied the truth even after Todd led him online to the denomination’s statement.
The pastor at Custer Road, Dr. Ronald D. Henderson (pictured left), engaged in the worst form on deception, claiming from the pulpit his church and denomination “support(s) life and we believe in the sacredness of life and the sanctity of life… from the cradle to the grave.”
Pro-lifers will immediately pick up on the bait and switch. “Cradle” is post-birth, of course.
But did his parishioners? I doubt it.
On September 23, Todd and Andy preached with their signs at a church historic to the abortion movement, “the home of Roe v. Wade,” according to one parishioner.
Pastor Daniel Kanter of the First Unitarian Church of Dallas is even on the board of Planned Parenthood of North Texas, and he was quite bothered by the pro-life protest…
Saynsumthn’s Blog points to a sermon Kanter gave in February entitled, “For the Goddess of Love.”
Raised in an Evangelical Bible church all my life, I’m shocked at the milquetoast and utter falsehoods taught by churches such as these.
That said, we must remain vigilant that our own churches remain firmly anchored.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
The UMC’s stance on abortion was what led my wife, a faithful member all of her life, to leave and become a Catholic convert. Her discovery of UMC’s position came AFTER a conversation she and I had with her pastor who stated in no uncertain terms, “Methodists don’t support abortion”.
Yeah, noted.
Deleted Charles.
Deliberate inflammatory comment.
It is so sad to see these “people of God” in such denial. My heart breaks for them and for the children they support the murder of. That man said his church was not pro-choice but every person that walked by either admitted they were pro-choice or stuck their fingers in their ears. Denial to the Word of God. No wonder God has said, “If my people will repent.” There is no repentance, only sin. Then they use the excuse that Jesus loved everyone. Yes, He did/does but then He tells us to go and sin NO MORE! REPENT FROM YOUR SIN! Do not continue to sin and then live in denial that its okay because He loves us. Yes, I am also a sinner, saved by the Grace of God. I praise You Jesus! However, a Christian cannot openly sin and then continue to sin without being convicted of that sin. If we are not convicted of the sin in our life then something is wrong with our relationship with Christ. We need to pray for God to open their eyes, they have been blinded by Satan, the author of confusion and god (little g) of this world. God, have mercy on us. Blessed be the God of Israel from everlasting to everlasting! And all His children say Amen and Praise the Lord!
This is a GREAT idea… makes it hard to claim ignorance.
After seeing his parents and grand-mother in-action, I wonder what little Boony’s future holds? He is sure to be a boss!
Translation, Carla: You disagree.
It’s OK for your ilk to call women “baby killers”, isn’t it?
Such phonies you are.
Charles, if you actually came to here to dialogue you might learn a few things. Carla killed her baby in a legal abortion. She repents. She has a heart for women who have made the same choice. Nobody is calling women anything but I will loudly proclaim that the child in the womb is our neighbor and as such we are called to love them as ourselves. Abortion is murder. I will never be silent. And shame on “Christians” who like to play church but never get their hands dirty with the work of the Lord…the Lord reached down into the dust to pull up the woman taken in adultery.
More and more and I am realizing that we also need to engage the medical community: Too many ob/gyns are recommending abortion to women in order to avoid “risky pregnancy” and/or “chances of birth defects” and other vague not-diagnoses. If you merely think a woman is at risk, doctors, why do you push her to abort? To save your malpractice premiums? To make your own life easier? Because you think you know better? Because you wouldn’t want a special needs child, you assume no one else will?
One of the reasons post-abortive parents are so outraged by these photos is that some generally nice people have been coerced to abort their children. Sure, we see on the internet that some gals are pretty hard-hearted. But what about the mom who is kind of vaguely pro-life that gets a doom-and-gloom prognosis from her ob/gyn? The anger is coming from somewhere, and sometimes I think it’s the doctors pushing them in order to simplify the doctor’s lives. Health care folks, what do you think? Jill rarely posts an article to which this concern is directly related. But this past week, some of the 40 Days folks have faced an increasing level of anger and sabotage from post-abortive parents. And I bet some of them attend these churches too.
We need to combat the anger with compassion, true, but we need to get at the roots of the problem and I think the doctors are complicit and need to be brought into the pro-life fold.
I believe that God has a Feminine Side, The Heavenly Mother Who is One with the Heavenly Father. She Bears us when we become Born of the Spirit.
The Heavenly Mother is a Goddess of Wifehood, Motherhood, and the Sanctity of Life. Actually She IS the Spirit of Life Inside All Believers.
Anyone claiming to worship a “Goddess of Love” that teaches you to kill your babies is worshipping the Demoness of Child Sacrifice, the dark Moon Goddess of Wicca who is associated with Pan. This “Goddess” the UU’s talk about is the feminine side of the Devil.
Peace to you all.
Sydney, that is your opinion.
Todd and Andy like bullying others. Maybe they’ll find a home with Fred Phelps someday.
Rocky/Charles,
Please choose one name and stick with it. Thank you.
It is so sad to see a pastor who is not pro-life. But the churches are straying away from what Jesus actually said.
There is so much hate instead of love.
Carla Corman, “pro-life” doesn’t only include in utero.
Lots of preachers supported Bush’s attack of Iraq. How un-prolife that is.
Hi Charles,
I am a baby killer. I paid someone to kill my baby in my abortion.
I’ve been called a lot of names. Your point??
Why are you proabortion? Something happened. You are making no attempt to hide your anger so if you have been involved in abortion there is healing for you too.
Back to the topic at hand…….
GO TODD BULLIS!!! GO ANDY MOORE!!
You are shining light into the darkness. You are speaking truth to lies!
THANK YOU!!
Charles, your point is mis-directed.
Life is Life and it starts in the womb at conception and it’s made at God’s image. If a “pastor” is pro-abortion is going against God and is not a Christian pastor.
The main difference between war and abortion is that war is between armed adult soldiers, that is some cases have to defend themselves.
Abortion is always against an innocent harmless child and cannot ever be justified.
Is someone keeping a running tally of the number of parishioners of these churches who have been ‘converted’ by protests? I’m guessing it is very small.
For some reason, it seems most people are not very receptive to having their religious beliefs challenged by clowns with signs standing outside their places of worship.
Joan, I don’t think Todd Bullis and Andy Moore fit the definition of “clown”.
If anybody does would be Daniel Kanter, who plays at being a “minister” .
Joan, ‘sup? Where’s cc? It’s been too quiet without her.
I doubt any pro-lifer is going to see a woman-clown dressed as vulva and declare, “OMG, I’m totes going pro-choice!!” However, there is evidence that some people do change their minds after seeing these images. Still waiting for those “official” photos of abortions that you imply exist, since pro-lifers only use “doctored” or “faked” photos. (anyone besides me see the irony in calling an abortion photo ‘doctored?’)
Is someone keeping a running tally of the number of parishioners of these churches who have been ‘converted’ by protests? I’m guessing it is very small.
http://dreamemporium.com/starfish.html
“Joan, I don’t think Todd Bullis and Andy Moore fit the definition of “clown”.
Upon further consideration, I agree. Clowns have jobs.
Some starfish really put up a fight when you try to save them, don’t they?
Joan, paraphrasing Fr. Pavone, America will not turn from the crime of abortion until it sees what abortion is
On another tone, I see that Obama won’t qualify as “clown” either since he never had a job!
I have to agree with Joan. Picketing churches is not especially helpful. Members of the churches picketed will probably associate pro-lifers with rudeness and callousness, and they will be even less inclined to listen to the pro-life message. It is sad that we must worry about perceived rudeness when we call for an end to the killing of babies, but that’s the way it is.
Speaking personally, I grew up in United Methodist churches. At least at the ones I went to, the modus operandi with regard to anything controversial, be it political or theological, was not to talk about it. There are plenty of pastors, and I think Mr. Henderson is one of them, who want to make everyone think he’s on their side. The UMC is very much like the Laodicean church – too timid to become either hot or cold, with a resulting lukewarm nature that displeases God, but pleases plenty of people desirous of a church which will offend no one. These are not the sort of people who will be convinced by displays of militancy.
Charles, what is my opinion? You keep popping in, trying to take a swipe at us then running for cover. Man up and have an adult conversation. Seriously, let’s talk.
I feel that the Bible does a pretty good job of laying out how to deal with what one sees as sinful behavior by other Christians. I just find it hard to justify picketing.
And I find it even harder to justify letting ‘Christians’ ignore, or even worse support; people in their choice to kill the unborn.
EG: “I just find it hard to justify picketing.”
Oh really? How about cooking pancakes over a fire made of human crap? “And you shall eat it as barley cakes; and bake it using fuel of human waste in their sight.”
I’m not going to bother recounting the couple dozen ridiculously sensational examples of prophetic pantomime I could cite; if you’re familiar with Israel’s prophets at all you know their methods of communication were hardly debate club pablum.
I can see EG among the Israelites God called sluts in their day: “Avihu, look at that bizarre man over there; isn’t that disgusting? Of all the pretentious nerve, claiming to speak for God. Come along children, and please avert your eyes.”
I think you’re being a bit fundamentalistic in your insistence that biblical instructions are the sole model for praxis — as if God’s people are obliged to relegate creativity — arguably part of the imago Dei — to action’s scrapheap.
Matthew 18:15-17.
I’ll throw in Acts 5 for good measure.
If they are from God, deal with them Biblically. If not, leave them alone – they’ll destroy themselves.
Rude? Callous? Militant?
I will STILL speak up for the lives of preborn human beings and their inherent right to life no matter how proaborts PERCEIVE me!!!
Actually prolifist I could have stopped reading your comment after you wrote
I have to agree with Joan……….
“Actually prolifist I could have stopped reading your comment after you wroteI have to agree with Joan”
Sign number one you made need to reconsider your opinion is if you find yourself agreeing with joan.
As an aside, it’s kind of amusing how much people hate being shown what it is that they support.
EG: “If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.”
We’re not talking about church discipline of a member who goes astray. We’re talking about confronting a denomination/congregation who celebrate their commitment to “choice.”
I guess you could call this “telling it to the church.”
prolifist: “Members of the churches picketed will probably associate pro-lifers with rudeness and callousness, and they will be even less inclined to listen to the pro-life message. It is sad that we must worry about perceived rudeness when we call for an end to the killing of babies, but that’s the way it is.”
My God.
When told you’re being rude, you say “yes, and you advocate the slaughter of unborn children.”
Seriously. How stoned are some of us, that we can’t even see the value of drawing attention to the contrast between their mere concern for rudeness and their indifference to — or outright support of — the slaughter?
I have no respect — zero — for hand-wringing about “rudeness” so long as those we’re concerned about offending are advocating the slaughter of innocents.
Seriously, look at Israel’s prophets. Look at Jesus. Look at abolitionists. Look at suffragettes. Look at civil rights activists, whose entirely sane actions were considered worse than rude.
It’s not about trying to be rude. It’s about actively facing people with truth. Of freaking COURSE many of them will consider that rude — because one person telling an emperor he’s naked will be deemed rude until other observers perceive they won’t be deemed rude for acknowledging what the truth-teller is saying.
“Rude” people are often — not always, but often — merely the courageous first to speak the truth plainly.
Wolves in sheep’s clothing.
So Rasqual – your belief is that a person disagrees with a statement that another denomination has made, that the best route a person should take is to publicly protest that church?
Just not buying it.
No, EG — not what I said or implied. I’m not affirming some positive case for action. I’m merely refuting your ridiculous belief that indifferent lack of action is biblical.
Doesn’t matter. Pro-lifers will protest. Your umbrage is delightfully irrelevant.
Oh, and EG? What on EARTH kind of exegesis are you doing in Acts 5? Gamaliel’s counsel is hardly God’s word to us. It sounds like good advice, but “wait and see” is hardly an inspired shibboleth. And — good grief — applied in situ, just here, you’re implying “hey, the pro-choicers might be right. Don’t act.”
How about this, EG — the takeaway from your weird use of scripture is “just flog ’em and leave it at that.” ;-)
prolifist, I think your brief is with Ex-GOP. You’re concerned with rudeness, but EG advocates flogging pro-choice Christians as a wise way of being non-judgmental.
LOL
rasqual,
Don’t bother Ex-RINO. His logic is atrophied due to disuse. It’s hard to use the faculty when it’s twisted up worse than a a Cirque du Soleil troupe on ecstasy. Trying to get it to fit his agenda was a challenging feat!
“a Cirque du Soleil troupe on ecstasy”
LOL
OK, I’m going to bed now. I want to fall asleep with that as my last thought of the day. That could make for some really lucid dreaming!
1 Timothy 4:1-2
King James Version (KJV)
1. Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
2 Timothy 4:3-4
KJV
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
It is just sad to see these “churches” and make no mistake they are not true churches of Jesus Christ if they stand for the killing of the most innocent of human life, are teaching their ungodly doctrine as if it were the gospel.
If they knew that they were in the right would they be getting upset by the protests and the pictures that they see? I think it’s because they know that what they are doing is wrong is why they get so angry about it. Some may do it in ignorance but those that are suppose to be preachers and those that have read their bibles at all should know better than what they are doing. We need to pray for these people that they will open their eyes and come back to the true word of Jesus Christ and stop preaching lies as the truth! They are leading others astray and that is wrong. Those that know the truth have to stand up and try to show them that what they are doing is wrong. Doing what is best for someone and telling them the truth is not being mean or being rude it’s done or should be done out of love! That is what true love is many times is doing what is RIGHT and best for someone even if that’s not what they want to hear.
http://voiceforhope.blogspot.com/
after watching the film, my takeaway was that WE NEED TO BE USING TECHNOLOGY. Where were the Ipads? Where were the android tablets bringing up the websites PROVING that the United Methodist Church supports this barbarism when the parishioner accused us of lying?! We have technology, we should be using it. Hell, even just printed screens of the website stating these things would’ve been helpful. I almost feel sorry for that guy, though. He was so angry about abortion, and took it out on our guys. Misguided, to say the least.
Rasqual -
So you made it clear you aren’t concerned about rudeness…so are any of the various texts regarding handling division or conflict within a church – do any of those apply then in your mind when it comes to abortion? You seem to give abortion a trump card over anything else – is Todd and his gang being too nice? Should they storm the pulpit, take it over, and give their own sermon?
I guess I’m just not going to go as far as JennJ and essentially say that the entire Methodist church has departed from Christianity, are not Christians, and have completely turned away from God. From their history of changing and working with their language of abortion – it’s obvious at the denomination level that they have struggles (but are moving towards better pro-life language). I think what is needed is conversation and prayer. I don’t think what is needed are people trying to create division and shame when the Bible lays out many a thought in regards to decisive behavior.
Ex-GOP any church that preaches that the killing of babies is all right can not be right in the sight of God. That’s not an opinion that is going by what the word of God and the teachings of Jesus Christ state all throughout the Bible. God and Jesus say many times throughout the Bible “Thou shalt not kill”. That’s God’s and Jesus’s words not mine. And they didn’t say thou shalt not kill unless it’s an unplanned pregnancy, or in the case of rape or incest, or if the life of the mother is in danger, they said thou shalt not kill.
I didn’t say that they aren’t Christians because many may not know that their church even stands for these things and are following them in ignorance, but they are erring Christians if they attend a church that upholds these principles and teaching it as the doctrine of Christ. If I was attending a church that stood for such things I would want to know the truth! I would be happy for someone to have brought these very serious sins to my attention. Because I wouldn’t want to go along with their belief that it is all right to murder innocent children. They do need prayer and they need to read their bibles and follow what the word of God says not what man teaches and their doctrines. And I meant my statements for ANY church that teaches those doctrines not any one church in particular. I wasn’t singling out all Methodists I don’t know if all of their churches support that or not (but it is plainly written on the United Methodists churches website that they are for abortion) I’m not a member of that church, but if they do support that and teach it they are wrong and not being a true church of Jesus Christ. No church is a true church of Jesus unless they teach what he taught and not the teachings of others. Jesus would NEVER sanction the killing of an innocent child’s life or teach others that it was all right. I’m not trying to be mean or rude just telling the truth and hoping that these people will open their eyes and turn back to the true word of God! :)
To give joan exactly the amount of fairness she deserves, even a broken clock is right twice a day. So while agreeing with her is a good sign you may need to rethink your opinion, it doesn’t–by itself–automatically make you wrong. It vastly increases your likelihood of being so, though. That I agree with.
“To give joan exactly the amount of fairness she deserves, even a broken clock is right twice a day. So while agreeing with her is a good sign you may need to rethink your opinion, it doesn’t–by itself–automatically make you wrong. It vastly increases your likelihood of being so, though. That I agree with.”
I agree wholeheartedly, I should have been more precise in my comment.
I have no respect — zero — for hand-wringing about “rudeness” so long as those we’re concerned about offending are advocating the slaughter of innocents.
AMEN and AMEN rasqual!!!
During the Todd Akin flap, there seemed to be a general consensus here that his comments were, on balance, not a net positive for the pro-life movement. There was agreement, I thought, that perception (however fair or unfair) was an important aspect of the long term fight to save unborn lives.
When evaluating pro-life activity, there should be one question more important than any other: will more babies live as a result? That is the question we should ask of church picketers. From my experience in mainline churches, pro-life picketing would probably do little but strengthen pro-choice resolve within those churches. As a rule, the blind are not generally happy or willing to listen when their blindness is bluntly pointed out.
If someone can produce evidence that picketing pro-choice churches really does change minds in a way that benefits the pro-life movement overall, I will take back what I said.
Should the truth only be proclaimed how/when there is a likelihood that it will be heeded?
When proclaiming the truth about abortion to people of faith, I don’t think the most important question is “will more babies live as a result”. Do we judge the work of the Biblical prophets based on whether their call to repentance was heeded, or whether they did the will of God in the proclaiming?
prolifist said: ” From my experience in mainline churches, pro-life picketing would probably do little but strengthen pro-choice resolve”
prolifist, I am curious.
What kind of “experience” about picketing did you have?
Have you surveyed people who where the target of picketing?
Was your church picketed?
Or is it just your impression that picketing is ineffective?
Personally, I remember, when I was in college, pro-lifers holding pictures of abortions along the streets of the town made a big “positive” impression on me. The pictures were not pretty, but nevertheless they made me realize what abortion was all about.
If you wanted, to denounce the Holocaust in front of a Neo-Nazi association, you would probably hold pictures of the millions of Jews slaughtered in WWII.
Won’t you hold picturtes of slauthered aborted babies in front of a place that promotes abortion? In the end,we are talking about more than 54 million babies killed in the USA since 1974!
Maybe, picketing the church won’t be as effective for its members (because as you said they are blind), but maybe it is effective on other by standers who realize that abortion is never allowed in Christian faith.
Christians who do picket churches are obeying the scripture that tell us, if we fail to warn our neighbor that his sin is endangering his life, then our own lives are forfeit. But if we warn our neighbor and he doesn’t heed our warning, then we have at least ensured our own life. See Ezekiel for more details. Ezekiel did not say we should only warn our neighbor if we first conclude that our warning will have a positive effect.
Now, I do not support picketing a church because of a single attendee (that’s stalking), but if one set of Christians wants to exercise their free speech upon another set of Christians, I have no problem with that. As I mentioned before, we need to get at the root of the anger. They should be angry not that such pictures would be on display, but rather they should be angry that such children are being destroyed in such a deliberate and unnecessary manner. Everyone should be angry that the activity depicted in the photographs is legal and profitable in the United States of America.
This article made me wonder what “churches” are there out there that are Pro-Choice? I knew there were a few but does anyone know how many and what churches are pro-choice that state that they are or have made it public that they aren’t against abortion?
ninek/others -
I definitely think that there are behaviors in churches that need calling out. In general, I think these behaviors are best called out within a church by people within the church, but that isn’t always possible.
Ninek rightfully says that we should warn our neighbor. There’s more than one way to “warn” somebody. Some will personally feel graphic signs are the way to go. I personally feel that graphic signs in these situation will do more harm that good – they are being used as tools of shame, division and conflict and not as tools to talk as brothers and sisters in Christ.
My other issue is, with admonishment coming from the outside, I think it could be very easy to condemn behavior that may or may not be there. Many individuals who go to churches that preach pro-life messages have abortions. I don’t feel it is best to judge a book by its cover – to say “well, their denomination allows abortion in some cases, so they must obviously be a pro-choice church and therefore they are all going to hell”.
My two cents – not saying all churches are GOOD – saying there are different ways of handling these situations, and some will yield better results than others.
Ex brings up a point that is at the heart of the “judgemental” issue. Non-Christians are under the impression that Jesus said “don’t be judgemental” and almost operate as if that’s all he said. What Jesus meant for us to understand is the same as what Ezekiel meant us to understand: only God can uplift or condemn a person. I can’t tell you that you’re going to hell, because 1) I don’t know and 2) it’s not my call, it’s God’s. When Jesus told us to remove the two-by-four from our own eye before we reach to remove the speck from our brother’s eye, he wasn’t telling us “don’t be judgemental” but rather “don’t be a big hypocrite.”
We can’t tell a whole congregation that they are going to hell: we don’t know and it’s not our call to make. But, we can tell a whole congregation that abortion is a deadly sin. Are there pro-aborts in pro-life churches? Unfortunately yes. Are there pro-lifers in pro-choice churces? Yes again. I wish that the main stream media outlets had the cajones to print abortion photos, but they don’t. They’re cowards. People need to see what “choice” really is. It’s not a little word that means liberty, it’s a big lie that means brutal murder.
Good post ninek.
So where is the post that says pro-choicers are going to hell? I’ve read every comment twice and the only mention I saw of it is what Ex-GOP said, which I read as a strawman since no one was saying what he quoted. (Ex-GOP says: I don’t feel it is best to judge a book by its cover – to say “well, their denomination allows abortion in some cases, so they must obviously be a pro-choice church and therefore they are all going to hell”.)
Lrning -
JennJ’s post at 5:36am certainly implies that the belief is that this church has “departed from the faith” and “embraced doctrines from the devil”.
I see no other sin being implied than having some language in a statement by their denomination, so personally, I would deduce that she meant pro-choicers are going to hell.
WTH?
So, yeah, the only one talking about pro-choicers going to hell is Ex-GOP. That’s what I thought.
Lrning
Who do you believe Jenn was talking about in that post? Or do you think she was just pulling random scripture of the day verses from some site?
Ex-GOP I’ll be happy to tell you what I was referring to in that post. I was referring to the exact scriptures that I quoted. I never said anyone was going to hell and I didn’t imply that by the scriptures that I quoted from the King James Version of the Bible. They are not some day verse from any site. They tell of churches that would teach false doctrines and whose consciences would not be as they should be to where they would be to the point where they had no conscience and allowed things that the bible teaches against. I think those scriptures absolutely apply to any church that is teaching that abortion is all right.
Only God can say if someone is going to heaven or hell. I am a sinner too and I am no one’s judge. I never said that anyone was going to hell in fact I said that they should be prayed for and that I hope they come back to the true word of God. You are the only person that has mentioned hell so please stop trying to say that I said something that I did not.
It’s like ninek said very well in her post that we are to warn or brothers and sisters if what they are doing is wrong. And like she said Jesus never said don’t judge. What the bible says is use righteous judgement. If what a person is doing is wrong by what the bible states it’s not mans judgement that is judging them but God’s.
And one last question for you Ex-Gop would you say that a church has departed from the teachings of the bible if they are saying that abortion is all right and not a sin in the sight of God?
Jenn – Again, maybe I’ve missed in the conversation some specific teaching by this specific church saying abortion is all right. I’m not from the Methodist Church – I don’t know the whole history behind their stance. Their 2004 position seems much like the position of many politicians people consider to be pro-life -
“The beginning of life and the ending of life are the God-given boundaries of human existence. While individuals have always had some degree of control over when they would die, they now have the awesome power to determine when and even whether new individuals will be born.
Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion. But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother, for whom devastating damage may result from an unacceptable pregnancy. In continuity with past Christian teaching, we recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures. We cannot affirm abortion as an acceptable means of birth control, and we unconditionally reject it as a means of gender selection.
We oppose the use of late-term abortion known as dilation and extraction (partial-birth abortion) and call for the end of this practice except when the physical life of the mother is in danger and no other medical procedure is available, or in the case of severe fetal anomalies incompatible with life. We call all Christians to a searching and prayerful inquiry into the sorts of conditions that may warrant abortion. We commit our Church to continue to provide nurturing ministries to those who terminate a pregnancy, to those in the midst of a crisis pregnancy, and to those who give birth. We particularly encourage the Church, the government, and social service agencies to support and facilitate the option of adoption. (See ¶ 161.K.)
Governmental laws and regulations do not provide all the guidance required by the informed Christian conscience. Therefore, a decision concerning abortion should be made only after thoughtful and prayerful consideration by the parties involved, with medical, pastoral, and other appropriate counsel.”
I think their statement is very vague -one person might read abortion on demand, while others might read that they are only talking health of the mother. Again, I haven’t spent much time dissecting the beliefs of the Methodist church as I don’t belong to one.
To answer your question directly – I’d say yes. But I’ll also add to that that I think a lot of churches twist the Bible in ways that depart from teaching of the Bible. The key for me though is the core teachings – the central aspects of Christianity – those are what matter those most.
EG: “So you made it clear you aren’t concerned about rudeness…”
Depends a bit on what you’re meaning with that inference from my remarks. I’m certainly saying that not everything that’s called rudeness has “being rude” as its most salient attribute. If I shove you out of harm’s way and you knew the value of my act, you’d not call me rude; in fact you’d deem me a cretin if I sat by and did nothing, if there was little risk to myself. But if I just shoved you gratuitously, certainly that’d be rude. As far as I can tell, anyway.
If a pacifist calls soldiers baby killers, I don’t think I’d call them rude. I’d call them mistaken — because I’m not a pacifist. Thin-skinned folk would call them rude, I suppose, because they’re offended emotionally before they’re engaged rationally.
“so are any of the various texts regarding handling division or conflict within a church – do any of those apply then in your mind when it comes to abortion?”
I’d think so, sure. Hardly germane in the topic, though.
“You seem to give abortion a trump card over anything else…”
Well EG, I have to admit, your powers of observation are capable of far more than I’d imagined. You’ll make headway in this world, you really will…
Oh, and as for the statement you quote — it’s do-gooder, gratuitous sentimental crap. Totally. They just can’t bring themselves to approve of particular things. Damnable moralists not having the balls to tether what they don’t approve of to any solid rationale. It’s just their ick-factor applied to other people arbitrarily.
Seriously, that thing reads like total sentimental hogwash. I might think differently if I could read how they GROUND the thing — but I doubt any such further explained basis for this statement exists.
Ex-Gop I’m not a Methodist either but I read the same article that you did on this here … http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1732and did you read the one linked in the main article that we are commenting on it was here…http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=4&mid=9239
They clearly state that “ In continuity with past Christian teaching, we recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures.”
And in the link referenced in the main article here on Jill’s blog they are even more clear…
“WHEREAS, these Coalition member organizations hold a wide variety of views regarding policies relating to specific issues of reproductive choice such as when life and personhood begins but, nevertheless, share common religious values, have official pro-choice policies, and are committed to working together to ensure reproductive choice for all persons through the moral power of religious communities, and
WHEREAS, the Religious Coalition supports the right of all persons to have access to a wide range of reproductive health services including sexuality education, family planning services, contraception, abortion services, affordable and quality health and child care,”
They clearly support abortion. It’s stated in more than one place on their website. They are teaching false doctrine that directly goes against the teachings of the New Testament. That’s not in my words it’s in theirs and in the Bible’s. And they are not suppose to be living up to the moral standards of a politician but that of a church of the Lord Jesus Christ.
There are many more churches that do twist the bible I will agree with that sadly it is true. And that’s what this whole article was about and all that any of us were saying to begin with that is what these “churches” have done just that. They have twisted the Bible and are teaching falsely that abortion is all right and that it can be allowed by the church. That is not what the Bible teaches. :)
JennJ –
I read those two statements as well – but couldn’t find (and didn’t search long) what their official statement was (or are they both official?) and what they meant by some of their language. What I can’t tell for sure is if they are saying abortion is okay in lots of situations, or ‘we’re generally pro-life, but don’t want to complete box ourselves in by saying it is never permissible’. Seems to me that the “whereas” statement seems more pro-choice and the first one seems more ambiguous. Furthermore, in the tiny bit of research I’ve done, in ’87, the denomination put together a ‘taskforce for U.M. on abortion and sexuality’ that is very pro-life. Is this still around? The article mentioned a regular newsletter called ‘lifewatch’, and mentioned they belonged to greater pro-life organizations.
Regardless of it all, I doubt protesting the church is the way to get to their hearts.
rasqual – just wondering – do you go to a united methodist church, or have you gone to one?
It’s been many years since I’ve attended one.
“Regardless of it all, I doubt protesting the church is the way to get to their hearts.”
Then it’s a way to declare them a toxic waste dump for the hearing of others.
Apologetics is not always about conversion. It’s often about airing and vindication of truth for its own sake.
“Apologetics is not always about conversion. It’s often about airing and vindication of truth for its own sake.”
Why? So you can, like, feel good about yourself or get points with God or what? I am really not trying to be a jerk, I genuinely don’t get why just “airing the truth” would be a good goal, if it doesn’t save any babies, get any people back on the happy path of Christianity or whatever the goal would be in this situation. Really, what good does airing the truth do if nothing positive happens because of it? I have read this whole thread and I don’t get it.
Why would the value of vindicating truth be making a person feel good about themselves, or getting points with God?
Is truth important, or is it not?
I suppose a person could feel good about themselves, or believe that God might appreciate their concern for truth, if their actions indeed vindicate truth. But whether that would motivate them is a separate question.
As for whether it saves any babies, who’s to say? When you can’t see babies being saved right now, is that lack of result supposed to deter you from truth-telling? Are you supposed to let opiated soma-eaters remain complacent in their ignorance, thus perpetuating the power of the lie over the apathetic? Is indifference the basin of attraction to which we wish our fellow humans to be drawn by default? Are those who possess the truth to become shruggers like the rest?
If abolitionists or suffragettes or civil rights activists had not cared about truth, I strongly suspect things would be a lot different nowadays — and not for the better. Pragmatism (“does it work?”) is part of life. It’s not the prime mover.
Doing the same thing over and over without different results is perhaps foolish, but if what one is doing over and over is true, good, and beautiful in the face of the false, evil and ugly — it’s not crazy. If the world is mad, it’s more — not less — important to be in the right place yourself, and to communicate what’s right to others.
I didn’t say it was crazy, I just don’t get it. I do think that caring about the truth is important, but I can’t seem to make myself okay with just stating the truth regardless of whether I can see results or not. It seems to be a failing of mine.
Ex-Gop I would think that if a person or organization states something publicly on their website it’s pretty much official or they wouldn’t be putting it on there if it wasn’t what they believed. As to whether they labeled it “official” I don’t know I don’t go to that church and I only know what they have stated on their website and what I have read about them but they clearly state in more than one place that they are pro-choice and believe in abortion at least in some cases and that is not what God and Jesus teach in their Holy word.
I don’t belong to the Methodist church as I said before so I can’t answer the question that you had about the newsletter or task force I’m sorry maybe someone else on here might know.
Maybe the protest opened some people’s eyes to the truth and got them to at least start to think about what the church is doing to cause them to be there in the first place. And from there God willing those same people will change their minds and realize that any church that is pro-choice and teaching that abortion is all right in the sight of God is not following God’s word and help put a stop to it.
Knowing the truth is always best. Without a person knowing the truth they can’t do what is right because they don’t know to. Truth truly is freedom without it you have nothing.
Jenn – fair enough on the top part.
A couple other/last questions:
– Should Catholics go protest Southern Baptist churches for their belief in the death penalty? And should they do it with graphic signs of executions that didn’t go so well? Or when individuals within the Catholic church have been caught covering up abuse cases, should they be met with protests from other churches?
– Knowing the truth is best – do you personally feel that the best way to promote Christ’s love and promote the truth is through protesting?
Hi Ex-Gop I’m sorry that I’m just now getting to answer your questions I’ve been sick the last few days so I’m just now getting to respond.
You asked if other churches should protest other churches for their beliefs etc. they have the constitutional right to do so if they feel they should. It’s called freedom of speech. So these people are within their rights to protest because they believe what these churches are doing is wrong.
I stand behind what I said knowing the truth is always the best thing. The truth is truth regardless of who likes it and who doesn’t.
You asked if I personally believed this is the best way to go about promoting the truth is by protesting? No I don’t think it’s the “best” way but these people have the right to non-violently protest their beliefs under the constitution. As long as they aren’t hurting anyone and they are just protesting within the law I see nothing wrong with it. And from what I read about them they are trying to get these churches to realize that what they are teaching is not in accordance with God’s word. So no I don’t think they are wrong in protesting here it sounds like they are doing so out of love.