Presbyterians (liberal branch) defeat proposal to oppose partial birth abortion

Presbyterian Outlook ^ | June 21 | Leslie Scanlon

[rwfromkansas]

Attempt to restrict stance on late-term abortions is defeated by Assembly

By Leslie Scanlon Outlook National Reporter

COLUMBUS, OHIO — Continuing the PC(USA)'s ongoing struggle with the issue of abortion, the 214th General Assembly rejected Friday a minority report that wanted the church to say that late-term abortions "may be undertaken only when necessary to save the life of the mother."

Instead, the Assembly adopted a statement that ending a pregnancy late in the term, after the fetus becomes viable and possibly could live after birth, "is a matter of grave moral concern to us all, and may be undertaken only in the rarest of circumstances" when necessary to save the woman's life, "to avoid fetal suffering as the result of untreatable life-threatening medical anomalies," or in cases of incest or rape.

The statement — adopted by a vote of 394-112 — also says such "intensely personal" decisions should be made after prayer or receiving pastoral care, and that choices about abortion "should not be made in a moral vacuum, but must be based on Scripture, faith and Christian ethics."

The debate over how the PC(USA) should clarify its position on late-term abortions — an issue that hadn't been addressed with great specificity by earlier assemblies — was passionate, but respectful.

"We live in a culture that needs to hear the prophetic voice of the church on matters like this," said Eric Richey, a youth advisory delegate from San Diego, who urged his church to stand "with moral courage and Christ-like love" for both the mother and the child.

One man spoke of the decision he and his wife faced when she was in her mid-40s and pregnant with twin boys, one of whom the doctors warned might be born with deformities. They prayed with their pastor and continued the pregnancy, and now "we love those boys."

But another commissioner spoke of a friend who also did not have an abortion and who gave birth to a son who's now "an infant in a 31-year-old body." His parents worry what will happen if they die before he does. If they had known then what they know now, said Carol Tompkins, a minister from Oklahoma, "they would have made the difficult decision to abort."

Lauren Davis, a youth advisory delegate from Florida, said she couldn't be proud of being a member of a denomination that "will mutilate an unborn child."

But Ruth Wasem, an elder from National Capital Presbytery, said the statement that was eventually passed "recognizes the gravity of the decisions these women make . . . Women must be trusted to make decisions about their reproductive health and we must have access to the full array of reproductive health services" and confidence that "our church is with us in prayer and pastoral support."

Judy Woods of the Advisory Committee on Litigation — a group that helped to draft the statement the Assembly approved — said the statement speaks of "viability" rather than abortion at a particular month of pregnancy, because advances in medical treatment are constantly changing the stage at which some premature babies can survive.

Woods said the committee considered conflicting medical opinions on whether there might be medically compelling reasons for late term abortions, and said "the evidence showed that those decisions ought to be medical decisions that are made between the woman and her health care provider."

The statement was prepared in part in response to advances in medical science which were making it possible for fetuses to survive outside the womb at earlier stages of development, Woods told the Assembly Committee on Health and Social Issues.

The church's official policy regarding abortion was approved in 1992 and says in part "… The strong Christian presumption is that since all life is precious to God, we are to preserve and protect it. Abortion ought to be an option of last resort. . . ."

The 1997 General Assembly refused to call for a ban on "partial-birth" abortion, but offered a "moral guidance," calling the procedure a "grave moral concern and should be considered only if the mother's physical life is endangered by the pregnancy."

[rwfromkansas]

To those that don't know, the General Assembly is the national policy-making meeting of the Presbyterian Church (USA), the mainline, liberal branch of the Presbyterian church. As a former PCUSA member, I was following the GA. There has been a lot of good and standing up for Christ at this GA, but I have to say, I was extremely bothered by the outcome of this abortion vote. I stand with the youth advisory delegate that says she is ashamed of her church for supporting the mutilation of babies.

[RnMomof7]

I am always disappointed when the church of Jesus Christ is guided by the world and not God's word. I will not judge the women in these difficult situations though..that is Gods job..it IS the job of the church to help them make godly decisions ( and help them choose life)..guess the PCUSA has decided to give up that responsibility.

Bump FYI

[rwfromkansas]

What frustrates me is that this GA was going to be a great one standing firm in God's Word.....except for this......how disappointing!

[rwfromkansas]

This GA is still one of the best in recent years, but still not completely faithful.

[upchuck]

Sounds like the PCUSA is trying to be PC.

[RnMomof7]

Yep ...scratching itching ears!

[MHGinTN]

Supporting murder most foul by turning the head, passing the buck, skirting the issue, avoiding the truth! PBA is murder. PERIOD.

[PresbyRev]

I have to concur sir. This G.A. was probably the best
in years, most fundamentally in its clear affirmation of Jesus as alone Savior and Lord and God's means (alone) of
grace and salvation.

Why the debate on late-term, p.b.a. I just don't understand.
To allow p.b.a. only in the case of the need to save the mother's life seems common sense and I can't think of any other reason that would be deemed acceptable to make that
tragic ethical decision.

The church reformed and always reforming, though, is a process. I trust the reforming work will continue on and that a future G.A. will
correct this error on the part of the 214th.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

Lauren Davis, a youth advisory delegate from Florida, said she couldn't be proud of being a member of a denomination that "will mutilate an unborn child."

Democrat liberals are in charge of the Presbyterian Church USA, and they will never back down. It's a MORAL OUTRAGE that they disregard the Ten Commandments.

[ffrancone]

I went to a baptism in a PC(USA) church. The sermon stated that Christ came to earth to bring homosexual marriage (you heard me right).

Then, during the offering, two granolas got up and sang Kumbaya (they really did) with guitars. And, they were perfectly serious about it. My wife and I were trying very hard not to laugh, it was such a self-parody of left-wing churches.

It sounds like this congregation is not entirely typical of the denomination. But the fact that it preaches that Christ's mission was to bring homosexual marriage to the earth (a doctrine I had, up until then, entirely missed in the New Testament) and that it is permitted to continue to exist as a congregation in the denomination suggests a church in deep trouble, spiritually and practically.

[rwfromkansas]

My friend, I know.

I will say I was absolutely astounded and elated when they affirmed with such jaw-dropping majority that Jesus ALONE is the way of salvation. It was quite wonderful....in committee it was unanimous.

I had no idea it would turn out that good.

But, I also agree it is perplexing what is confusing about partial birth abortion.

[Artist]

BUMP

[muawiyah]

Whatever these folks think about Jesus is irrelevant as long as they worship the god of death and place their trust in him.

[knuthom]

To allow p.b.a. only in the case of the need to save the mother's life seems common sense and I can't think of any other reason that would be deemed acceptable to make that tragic ethical decision.

Partial birth abortion is NEVER necessary to save the mother's life. Not ever. If the pregnancy must be ended because the mother's life is in danger, it can be. Labor can be induced (just like in a PBA) and the baby delivered - alive. If the infant is too premaure to survive, it will unfortunately die. If it is far enough along, it can be sent to the neonatal nursery. At no point does killing the baby during the process of delivery help the mother.

[Torie]

The moral test set forth above is considerably tighter than the SCOTUS test. I don't find it all that execrable personally. Your mileage may vary.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

The worst thing is that, as you know, pastors and their families have mandatory abortion coverage.

[PennsylvaniaMom]

PBA is actually a more dangerous procedure than a c-section...but performing a c-section is an act recognizing that there are two patients...(woman and baby).

I am an OB/GYNE RN...I can think of no circumstance when a PBA would be the preferred treatment as opposed to an emergency section. None.

I am not Presbyterian, but the logic escapes me of affirming Christ as Saviour, yet PCing around the topic of partial birth abortion.

"Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers (in my interpretation the unborn) that you do unto me."

[Dr. Scarpetta]

The sermon stated that Christ came to earth to bring homosexual marriage (you heard me right).

That was a very odd and shocking thing for a pastor to say. Is this church declining in attendance?

[Artist]

"The worst thing is that, as you know, pastors and their families have mandatory abortion coverage."

It's an outrage. It pays for abortions, without restrictions, through its own medical benefits plan.

The PCUSA also supports financially the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (formerly the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights, RCAR) and Presbyterians Affirming Reproductive Options (PARO).

Anyone that is interested can read more about the PCUSA and abortion HERE.

[power2]

And you some people actually thought the reformation was a good thing.