Only in obama's world.
Posted on 06/01/2015 4:08:25 PM PDT by Morgana
Pro-choice Methodist minister John M Swomley who was the subject of a LifeNews article in May, attempts to refute the claim that preborn babies are “innocent.” The argument appeared in a book over a decade old, but it is so strange and disturbing that I’m writing about it now that it has come to my attention.
The gist of Swomley’s argument is that preborn babies are not “innocent” as pro-lifers claim, but are actually guilty – guilty enough, he implies, to justify aborting them.
Swomley first tries to refute the baby’s claim to innocence using theology:
The first claim is that society should protect innocent human life that is unable to protect itself. The term “innocent,” originally used by various popes, refers to fetal life which has committed no sin. Yet the Roman Catholic Church has proclaimed only one person, Mary, the Mother of Jesus, as having an immaculate conception and hence free from original sin. In any event, public policy cannot be founded on theological claims to innocence.
It seems unusual to see a Protestant arguing from a Catholic standpoint. Although I don’t know that many Catholic theologians who would say that because a preborn baby has been conceived with Original Sin, her life should not be protected. Our society does not enforce the death penalty lightly, and condemning a preborn baby to die for having Original Sin goes against both the Christian “Golden Rule” and the physicians’ ethic “Do No Harm.”
Swomley’s argument would also justify infanticide. A baby outside the womb would still be considered to have “Original Sin” until baptism, in many faith traditions. Therefore, prior to the moment when the priest or pastor pours water on the child’s forehead (or baptizes him some other way) it would be permissible to kill the child.
Also, unless we single out Original Sin as the only type of sin that justifies murdering the sinner, no one would have a right to life because by the standards of modern Christianity, all human beings are sinners. Even by the standards of common sense, if the baby cannot be considered innocent, the rest of humanity certainly cannot be considered innocent either.
Finally, Swomley says that “public policy cannot be founded on theological claims to innocence.” Yet he has no problem justifying abortion with his own theological claim to guilt. His argument is self-refuting because he starts out by making a theological argument and then says that theological arguments should not be used in the abortion debate, at least not to condemn abortion. Perhaps he is claiming that theological arguments can only be used by the pro-choice side. This is inconsistent, arbitrary, and unfair.
Swomley has another argument against regarding preborn babies as innocent:
There is another meaning of “innocence” which comes from two Latin words, in (not) and nocere (to harm), and therefore means “not harmful or dangerous.” However, it is precisely the fact that some pregnant women (and their physicians) view the fetus as harmful or threatening to their health or welfare and hence leads them to consider abortion.
Very few pregnancies are a serious risk to a woman’s health, to the extent that her life is in danger. In fact, abortionist Dr. Don Sloan, who has performed for the 20,000 abortions, has said:
If a woman with a serious illness- heart disease, say, or diabetes- gets pregnant, the abortion procedure may be as dangerous for her as going through pregnancy … with diseases like lupus, multiple sclerosis, even breast cancer, the chance that pregnancy will make the disease worse is no greater that the chance that the disease will either stay the same or improve. And medical technology has advanced to a point where even women with diabetes and kidney disease can be seen through a pregnancy safely by a doctor who knows what he’s doing. We’ve come a long way since my mother’s time….The idea of abortion to save the mothers’ life is something that people cling to because it sounds noble and pure- but medically speaking, it probably doesn’t exist. It’s a real stretch of our thinking.
There are specialists who can get a woman through pregnancy even when they have a serious illness. The number of women who need to abort to save their lives is minuscule. Legalizing abortion across the board because of this tiny group of women does a great injustice to the vast majority of babies killed for less serious reasons, including convenience.
In the court case Doe vs.a Bolton, the Supreme Court defined the term “health” in abortion law extremely broadly to include emotional distress. The presence of a preborn baby in her womb may be upsetting to a woman, but that does not mean that the baby, (placed there, in fact, by her own actions) is guilty of a capital crime. Some women may be emotionally upset by their pregnancies, but we do not allow people to execute those who upset them.
Swomley’s arguments are disturbing, perhaps even shocking, considering he is a Christian pastor. But they, like most pro-choice arguments, can be refuted with little effort by any ethical person who has common sense.
I wouldn’t be surprised. Just glancing over a few things, I saw he opposed U.S involvement in Europe while Hitler and Stalin were still pals, and he was against the New Deal because it didn’t go far enough.
I am not familiar with the Methodist Theory of Salvation, but the term “Original Sin” is more in tune with Catholic Theology.
Protestants of the Calvinist tradition call the concept of the inherited sin of Adam “Total Depravity”, and Less TULIP-y Evangelicals call it the “Sin Nature”. All three of these concepts assume the need for Salvation, either by Infant baptism or a profession of Faith (Conversion, being Born Again, or getting “Saved”).
In NONE of these faith traditions is the pre-born infant considered worthy of murder because he or she is still in “Original Sin”.
To deny a baby the opportunity to become a Child of God by snuffing her out in the womb, and then using “Original Sin” as the excuse, is mind-bogglingly EVIL.
Indeed. Perhaps I used too many words to say the same thing.
Suffice it to say that I was raised United Methodist, and left nearly thirty years ago when that church was already teaching Matthew Fox's heresy in Bible studies back then, so this current bit of heresy doesn't surprise me. IMO the key phrase in the article is the UMC pastor's assertion that unborn babies are "guilty enough" of Original Sin so as to justify killing them. Wouldn't that justify (in this pastor's mind) the killing of any unsaved person, born or unborn?
There is nothing good to say about this dead heretic, his bizarre theology, or the theologically liberal world out of which he comes. Nor will I defend my denomination which has provided haven for heretics and heresy. Nonetheless, I know of many individual churches which are Godly places where lost souls can find salvation. For now I believe God has me continue on their behalf the fight to resist the darkness. I do not discern a much longer ministry there, though. I sense a soon to come line of demarcation.
Psalm 106
37 Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils,
38 And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood.
39 Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions.
40 Therefore was the wrath of the Lord kindled against his people, insomuch that he abhorred his own inheritance.
41 And he gave them into the hand of the heathen; and they that hated them ruled over them.
Deuteronomy 19:10
That innocent blood be not shed in thy land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and so blood be upon thee.
You have fought and continue to fight well. We are all fighting from the ruins of Christian civilization to restore it.
You have fought and continue to fight well. We are all fighting from the ruins of Christian civilization to restore it.
What I posted in #49 also applies to Alex Murphy. You and I have differences in theology but we are joined in the defense of Christianity. God bless.
Needless to say, we Catholics join you and other good Protestants in determined opposition to the notion that original sin justifies the killing of the innocent unborn. God bless you and yours!
It’s the people I know in the pews who make it hard to let go. I don’t know Alex’s reason for leaving, but I wouldn’t give him a hard time for leaving the UMC. (I don’t know Mathhew Fox’s heresy) Many others have left, and I’ve not personally met one who didn’t have a good reason.
read this: http://goodnewsmag.org/2015/05/connectional-table-proposes-dramatic-change/
Thank you for your kind blessing...and to you and yours as well!
:-)
Matthew Fox left the Catholic Church for the California Diocese of the Anglican Church about two inches from the sharp boot of then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (later to become Pope Benedict XVI who should never have resigned) who then headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under St. John Paul II.
Fox made many joint appearances with a self-proclaimed "witch" named Starhawk in which they demonstrated a mutual admiration society before soft-headed and spaghetti-spined audiences and other heathens.
I earnestly yearn for you to cross the Tiber but I also understand and admire your steadfast lashing yourself to the mast on behalf of those willing to be saved within UMC. We need talented and devout reinforcements for the forces of genuine Catholicism. Your church needs good pastors, however, as do all churches. Wherever you come down, I have every confidence that you will continue to be a great force for good and for God in your work on His behalf.
You ought to read (if you have not already) Imitation of Christ by the medieval (14th century?) monk and hermit Thomas a Kempis (second best-selling religious book of all time, surpassed only by the Holy Scriptures themselves).
The book is in four tightly written sections: Interior Conversation (with God), Spiritual Warfare, the Mass and the Sacraments.
I humbly submit that most Catholics have lost touch with their heritage of Interior Conversation and Spiritual Warfare and many Reformed Christians either have lost touch with the Mass and the Sacraments as we Catholics understand them or have rejected them altogether although they are powerful conduits for God's graces.
Thomas a Kempis suggested reading no more than 2-3 pages per day and pondering them. At 3 pages a day, it would take about three months to carefully complete reading Imitation of Christ.
Pastor, please keep in your prayers the continued restoration of my health and add prayers for Henry Poulson who is a 58-year old Texas pipefitter who crushed his pelvis in an awful vehicular accident, is confined in a nursing home as I was until recently and whose lovely daughter is my youngest daughter's roommate, and faces reconstructive surgery if his internal infections can be controlled, followed by long convalescence. He is a Southern Baptist and his daughter assures me that Scripture reading is the highlight of every day for him.
Anyone out there, of whatever faith, please keep those intentions in your prayers. I have never met Mr. Poulson and probably never will in this life since he and I are both unlikely to be doing any long-distance traveling between northern Illinois and Texas or vice versa.
Sorry. I meant to ping you to #55 and also to draw your attention to the prayer request at the end.
I have read the linked article from your post. My mother’s very best friend was a woman named Hilda who was a Methodist of the old school (born in about 1903). Hilda was about nine years older than my mom. Hilda was a magnificent example of what a wonderful Christian can be. For you, for Hilda (she is no longer with us of course) and for each and every good Methodist who has fought and is fighting for what is good and true and beautiful, I pray for your success in Jesus’s holy Name.
Nobody is innocent but that does not justify in the least murdering anyone for convenience, or any other reason.
There’s a world of difference between capital punishment for crimes committed and giving the death penalty because of *original sin*.
This guys *theology* is from the pit of hell.
And when I read stuff like this I think "Not soon enough", and pray "Come Lord Jesus, come!"
Prayers up for Mr. Poulson.
And, of course, prayers up daily for the Right to Life!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.