| Christian writers from the first-century author of the Didache, to the late Pope Paul VI in his Humanae Vitae, to Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae ("The Gospel of Life") have maintained that the Bible forbids abortion. Although the Roman Catholic Church has always considered abortion a grave offense, it has at times punished the offense differently depending on the stage of pregnancy in which the abortion was performed. For example, under Pope Gregory XIV excommunication was prescribed only for those aborting a "quickened" child. "Quickened" refers to the stage of pregnancy in which the child can first be felt to move. Excommunication is a formal recognition of the reality that a person is no longer in communion with the Roman Catholic Church's teachings, and is no longer eligible to receive the various sacraments. The person excommunicated can contritely confess the sin (material cooperation in an abortion) to a priest and be received back into the Roman Catholic Church.
The Roman Catholic Church today firmly holds that "the first right of the human person is his life" and that life is assumed to begin at fertilization. The equality of all human life is fundamental and complete, any discrimination is evil. Therefore, even when a woman's life appears jeopardized, choosing her life over her child's is no less discrimination between two lives - and therefore morally unacceptable. However, the Roman Catholic Church does make a clear distinction between direct abortion & indirect abortion. Direct abortion as a means or an end is always viewed as a moral evil. Indirect abortion occurs when treatment used to save the life of the mother has the secondary side effect of killing the unborn child. An example of indirect abortion is seen in cases of ectopic pregnancy where the fallopian tube would be removed with the unborn intact, saving the life of the woman, but resulting in the indirect death of the unborn. The Roman Catholic Church only recognizes very rare cases where indirect abortion is permissible and views the vast majority abortive procedures to be the result of procuring a direct abortion.
Catholics who procure or participate in an abortion suffer ipso facto latae sententiae (automatic, literally by that very fact the sentence is incurred) excommunication under Canon law, provided that the person knows of the penalty at the time the abortion occurs. The Roman Catholic Church also considers the destruction of any embryo to be equivalent to abortion. The following practices are considered immoral because they are likely to involve the destruction of an embryo: any birth control method that potentially may prevent implanation (IUDs, Emergency contraception, Hormonal contraception, i.e. "The Pill" ); embryonic stem cell research or therapy; and in vitro fertilisation (which almost always involves the discarding of a fertilized embryo and is also considered immoral for other reasons). However, the Roman Catholic bishops in the U.S. state that it is moral to provide the "Morning After Pill" or Emergency Contraceptive if fertilization has not occurred to victims of rape or incest. Further, Roman Catholic women may use hormonal birth control methods if they remain celibate during the course of treatment.
In sum, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that direct abortion is always a grave evil. The Second Vatican Council in 1965 referred to abortion as "an unspeakable crime" in the document Gaudium et Spes (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World): "[F]rom the moment of its conception life must be guarded with the greatest care while abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes." A conciliar Constitution is the most authoritative expression of Catholic faith that exists because they are only issued with the affirmation of a vast majority of all the bishops in the world in union with the pope. Roman Catholic leaders often explain that modern advancements in scientific and medical knowledge of DNA and pre-natal development have simply affirmed the Roman Catholic Church's understanding of the beginning of human life.
Eastern OrthodoxWhile not all the Orthodox share Roman Catholicism's objections to all contraception, they agree that life begins at conception, and that abortion (including the use of abortifacient drugs) is the taking of a human life. This view is reflected in their observance of the Feast of the Annunciation, when Jesus was conceived, and also of the feast of the conception of the Virgin Mary and the feast of the conception of John the Baptist, the Forerunner. Today, many Orthodox leaders have also spoken out against euthanasia and human cloning as related practices that reflect a devaluation of human life.
ProtestantProtestant views on abortion vary considerably. However, the general consensus is that the use of birth control methods is not prohibited, except for "morning after pills" or other forms which are considered abortifacient (a substance that induces abortion), where the views are more divergent and are often based on the general view of abortion held by the group or person. There is no instrument by which a formal definition of doctrine can be declared for all Evangelical and Fundamentalist movements and churches. Therefore, the teaching held in general by these groups must be discerned sociologically. Especially in the United States, the view is widely held that abortion is a form of infanticide. The groups are substantially united in the view that "abortion for convenience" (abortion where there is no mortal danger to the woman, or where the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest) is always wrong and should be banned. However, there is no consensus within these camps as to whether exceptions should be allowed when the woman's life is in mortal danger, or when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. Some argue that the lives of both woman and child should be given equal consideration, in effect condemning all abortion, including those performed to save the life of the woman. However, others argue for exceptions which favor the life of the woman, perhaps including pregnancies resulting from the corner cases of rape or incest.
Increasingly, in recent elections since the 1970s, many Evangelical and Fundamentalist churches have encouraged their congregations to vote based on the pro-life agenda, and preach that it is a religious duty to seek legislation restricting or eliminating access to abortion, and for laws requiring parental consent for minors and more complete disclosure of the risks involved.
The "mainline" Protestant churches continue to be divided over the issue. While generally tending to be reluctantly supportive of legal abortion in limited circumstances, most of the mainline denominations have factions of both the pro-life and the pro-choice movements active within them. As a result, the mainliners are usually not officially, institutionally aligned with either side of the debate. The Southern Baptist Convention is the notable exception, having reversed its prior 1970's position of being reluctantly in favor to its current position in substantial opposition (however, stances issued from the national level are not necessarily reflective of state and local associations or individual Baptist congregations). In addition, most Anglican bishops hold and teach that abortion is grave sin, as do most Lutheran bodies.
According to CBS News, U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama's track Record May Be Gold Mine For Critics: President Obama "voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. He supported allowing retired police officers to carry concealed weapons, but opposed allowing people to use banned handguns to defend against intruders in their homes. The list of sensitive topics continues:" Read More...
Abortion and Evangelical ChristiansWhile a woman's right to abortion is accepted by many Christians, particularly those of Catholic, Evangelical and Fundamentalist faiths, actively oppose both the legal right of a woman to undergo an abortion and its practice within the wider community. This opposition is at odds with many people who support a woman's right to abortion. Evangelical and fundamentalist christians have opposed abortion mainly because of their belief in the Bible as the unchanging and inspired Word of God, as well as the interpretive framework that is used to understand and apply it. Through this belief and process of interpretation, Evangelical and fundamentalist Christians have come to the conclusion that abortion is morally wrong. Moreover, many of them see the termination of a human embryo in pregnancy or in a test tube as murder.
The Bible and HermeneuticsEvangelicals generally believe in both the divine inspiration of the Bible (the idea that in the Bible, the Christian God clearly speaks) and the fact that it was written by people. The Bible is therefore believed to be both a divine and a human document, with God (as the Holy Spirit) supervising his direct work through the people who wrote it. It is believed that because of this divine supervision that any errors in fact or thinking are not present in the Biblical text. Both Evangelicals and Fundamentalists hold to the belief that the Bible is the perfect, "Spirit-breathed" words of God to all who read it. Classic evangelical Biblical interpretation (Christian Hermeneutics) holds also to the idea that the Biblical text should be interpreted via the Historical-Grammatical method of interpretation. Put simply, this method of interpretation seeks to understand the human genre of the text and place it in its historical context. "Reading it the way the author intended it to be read" is one way of explaining this.
The result of this dual interpretive structure - that the author of the Bible is ultimately God (The Word) / The Bible should be read like any other text - is that certain passages, when understood in this light, result in a belief and attitude that abortion is morally wrong.
Thus any attempt by non-evangelicals to argue that "the Bible is no longer relevant", or that "the Bible doesn't have to be interpreted that way" runs into problems at a very basic level. Modern philosophical bases for textual criticism, including deconstruction theory and postmodernism, are generally not held by these Christians.
See also:
Quoted Biblical passagesThe practice of abortion is not mentioned explicitly in either the Old Testament or the New Testament. For the Evangelical, however, enough Biblical material exists to believe strongly that abortion could be classified as murder. Psalm 139:13-16 [10] 13 For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. 14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. 15 My frame was not hidden from you,when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them. These four verses are perhaps the most quoted part of the Bible when dealing with Abortion. In these verses, the Psalmist speaks of God creating the his very own fetus in the womb of his mother. The language he uses indicates clearly that a fetus is considered to be a human being.
Evangelicals would argue strongly that if God sees a fetus as a human being, then any termination would result in the death of a human being. Because this death was deliberate and indiscriminate, the argument would then focus upon abortion as a form of murder.
It could be pointed out that God only recognised the Psalmist as a human being while he was still a fetus, and that making the correlation that God therefore sees all fetuses as human as being a logical fallacy. This is typically countered by the argument that such a belief is not present anywhere else in scripture, and that other verses support the original assertion.
Jeremiah 1:5 [11]
God speaks to Jeremiah and says that he "knew" Jeremiah not only before he was born, but before he was even conceived. This verse, although specific to Jeremiah, suggests that God recognised Jeremiah as human before birth. This verse supports the argument outlined in Psalm 139:13-16[12] above.
Luke 1:41[13]
The Greek word for baby, brephos (βρεφος), is used interchangeably for both the fetus and a newborn baby in these two verses. In Luke 1:41[13] it is used to describe the fetus, while in Luke 2:12 [15] it is used to describe a newborn. Furthermore, the child mentioned in Luke 1:41 (John the Baptist) is said to have leaped in his mother's womb on hearing the voice of the Virgin Mary with child. This attribution of human actions to fetuses by the author(s) of this verse is seen as refuting any suggestion that the embryo or fetus is not a living human being with a soul.
The evangelical argument against abortion is supported by the two different uses of brephos. It indicates that the fetus is synonymous with a newborn - not in development, but in terms of its value.
Evangelical teaching on specific situationsThe Evangelical position on the following situations is founded on their assertion that human life is created at the time of conception. It follows, therefore, that they view abortions at any stage of pregnancy to be an act of the taking of a human life. It should be noted that Evangelical Christians are not the only religious group to hold this view, and agreement among Evangelicals on this viewpoint does not necessarily constitute an agreement among them on the proper position to take on these specific situations.
The inability of the woman to care for a childDue to physical or psychological state, or simply due to socioeconomic background, some pregnant women are unable to care for a child. Some would counsel these women to have an abortion.
Evangelicals would argue that the life of the fetus or embryo should not be ended simply because the woman cannot look after a child. Their argument would be that the woman in question be cared for during pregnancy, and that she be supported in every way to ensure that she is able to care for the child in her own way. Alternatively, they would not be against giving the baby up for adoption.
As a means of providing practical help to encourage women to not abort, Evangelicals have established crisis pregnancy centers to provide free pregnancy tests, information on adoption and against abortion, referrals to social service agencies, and baby-related items such as furniture, baby and maternity clothing, and supplies such as food and diapers.
Pregnancy as a result of rapeThis issue is much more difficult for Evangelicals to agree on because the woman is a victim. The argument given by the Pro-choice movement is that the woman should be able to choose whether or not to abort the fetus because she did not choose to engage in sexual activity. It is also suggested that compelling a woman to bear her rapist's child would add to the harm of the original rape.
The Evangelical argument is that the woman's lack of consent to the pregnancy and the fetus's (assumed) lack of consent to its own termination are not morally equivalent. The fetus must be shown preference, since the existence of one life overrides the violated consent of another.
It is commonly speculated, and indirectly supported by statistics, that many self-identified Evangelicals would support restricting abortions with exceptions allowed for rape, incest and maternal mortal endangerment. The purpose would be to prohibit abortion as a method of birth control, which is sometimes pejoratively referred to as a "convenience abortion." As a consequence, those who choose to have sex and face an unwanted pregnancy would be forced to carry it to term.
Pregnancy as a result of incestSimilar to rape (above), this situation is problematic because of the genetic problems that are caused by incestual pregnancy. Yet Evangelicals would still argue that the pregnancy be brought to full term because it is, in their opinion, a human being. But as with pregnancy as a result of rape, some Evangelicals do not hold to this view and would allow this as an exception in any legislation that would outlaw abortion in all other situations.
Severe physical and/or intellectual disabilityFoetal abnormalities can often be picked up early in a pregnancy, detecting severe physical and/or intellectual disabilities that would afflict the child, should the pregnancy be carried to term. The option many women have is to abort the pregnancy early to prevent the creation of a child who will suffer. The logic of this action is similar to euthanasia in that it seeks to prevent suffering. Evangelicals reject this notion, and would argue that mercy killings are nowhere sanctioned in the Bible. In this case, abortion is rejected and support is prescribed for the parents as they bring up a child in difficult circumstances, for as long as it survives.
Social stigmaIn many cultures pregnancy outside of marriage is a social stigma that can sometimes bring great shame and embarrassment upon the woman.
Evangelicals argue that the preservation of human life is of greater importance than the avoidance of culturally informed shame and embarrassment and that the woman must therefore continue her pregnancy despite the stigma that she feels.
Ectopic pregnanciesThis is one area where the vast majority of evangelicals would agree that termination is the only option. An ectopic pregnancy, where the fetus "implants" in the fallopian tubes instead of the uterus, will inevitably result in the death of the woman unless the affected fallopian tube is removed. This necessarily results in the death of the embryo, but is permitted because of the theological principle of double effect. Other pregnancies in which the woman will clearly die unless the embryo or fetus is terminated could fit into this category.
Embryonic Stem Cell ResearchThis is a relatively new science and a majority Evangelical position on it has yet to crystalize. In general, the fundamental assumption of the aliveness of the embryo informs the stances that Evangelicals take regarding old and new developments in this field.
Human CloningEvangelicals are generally opposed to human cloning because it may result in the manipulation and subsequent death of an embryo. If cloning does not result in the death of any human embryos, Evangelicals may support it.
Theraputic cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer is the creation of multiple copies of a single molecule, cell, or virus. Evangelicals are not opposed to this.
Biblical law and Christian ReconstructionismReformed churches have historically taught that the "moral law", which is binding on all people by their creator, was republished on Mount Sinai as the Ten Commandments. Other laws were given to the Jews, which set them apart from other people, some of which also elucidate the principles of the moral law but are not obligatory for other nations in their given form. Westminster Confession of Faith, 19:5, for example, reads The moral law doth forever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof; and that, not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it ..
Beginning in the mid-1960s, led by Rousas John Rushdoony, a minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (who later left that denomination), a small movement of Reformed scholars began to exercise influence within conservative Reformed denominations, and in the wider circle of the evangelical movement. Rushdoony's movement, called Christian Reconstructionism, built on the traditional Calvinist view of the general applicability of the moral law. The Reconstructionists expanded upon the "general equity" of the statutes and sanctions of the Mosaic system of case law in rather unprecedented detail, suggesting specific applications of the Biblical law to modern practice of law and offering a pointed critique of modern culture, society, and statecraft.
After World War II until Roe v Wade, evangelicalism was largely apolitical. The landmark Supreme Court decision was an important factor, however, in awakening evangelical conscience; coinciding with the maturation of the Reconstructionist thesis, among other Evangelical responses to the religious and social developments of the 1960s youth culture, feminism and the sexual revolution. By no means alone, Reconstructionism is one influence that added to the formation of a new political activism, which first began to be noticed in the "born-again" Presidential campaign of Jimmy Carter, and then in the formation of the Christian Right with the founding Christian Voice in 1977 Moral Majority in 1981, and the Christian Coalition in 1989.
Because of its radical nature, Reconstructionism (dubbed Dominion theology by critics) has been of particular interest to sociologists. Its influence has been traced as a formative influence of the Religious Right, to Evangelical leaders such as Dr. James Dobson. Dobson himself is a member of the Church of the Nazarene, drawing from the rich social activism of the Wesleyan heritage and the Holiness movement. However, writers have found connections also from the Reconstructionists, or other Reformed writers and activists, such as Francis Schaeffer, not only to Dobson but also to other leaders of the Religious Right. The aim of these writers is to explain, by evidence of connection to Reconstructionism, how the Christian Right developed its moral objectives, which it in turn is trying to impose upon the rest of society. Abortion is, naturally, one of those issues. In the view of some critics, the influence of Reconstructionism is very wide indeed.
On the basis of principles drawn from Biblical law, and the belief that it is an abiding moral standard for all people, many Evangelicals not only believe that abortion is wrong, but actively work to remove any law that allows it. Abortion therefore stands as a rallying point for many Evangelicals, as well as a standard by which to judge politicians and political parties.
Christian Reconstructionism is rejected by practically all Evangelicals, and by far the majority know nothing about it. As noted, this movement did not originate the idea that the moral law found in the Bible (the Ten Commandments) is in some way an obligation for all people, or that the issue of abortion is implicated in this belief. Roman Catholicism also holds this view, and the Catholic argument of the popes, especially John Paul II, are much better known than that of Reconstructionism. Nevertheless, the connections to some important leaders of the Evangelical political movement are documented.
The Evangelical movement continues to be averse to tying political action to the mission of the churches. However, in the case of abortion and euthanasia, a strong argument has been found for the necessity of unified action, which has been instrumental in forging alliances that would have been unlikely in earlier generations, such as Evangelicals and Catholics Together.
An earlier Evangelical and Fundamentalist disinterest in politics is eroding, in large measure in response to the social acceptance of abortion and euthanasia. However, many Evangelicals still argue that, while all sin is wrong, the church is only responsible for its own people. When it comes to abortion, these separationists naturally expect their members to follow their religious teachings, but those outside the church and in general society - "unbelievers" - cannot have God's laws imposed upon them by political means, including prohibiting abortion. Separation of church and state, interpreted as avoidance of politics, is still held by many, such as the Mennonites, Seventh-day Adventists and many Baptists and others, to be a crucial and traditional religious principle, leading some to withdraw also from voting on the issue, in addition to disapproving of political activism centered on abortion. Their answer to abortion is not to impose God's laws on unbelievers, but preach the Gospel to them in the belief that God will use the message to bring them to a change of heart and into the church. Once they have become "believers", then they become subject to God's laws. Of course, the same principle applies for a political separatist, in issues such as adultery, murder, battery and theft.
This idea is backed up by 1 Corinthians 5:9-13[16], where Paul excoriates the Corinthian church for allowing sexual adultery to go unhindered in their midst. He commands them to expel the offending church member and to have nothing to do with sexually immoral people. But Paul then goes on to point out that such a command only applies to sexually immoral people within the church, not in society generally. In verse 12-13, Paul concludes by pointing out that God judges those outside the church, while (the church) should judge those inside. Reconstructionists themselves also, while believing that the state ought to implement biblical law, warns that politics is not a primary instrument of social reform. Instead, they emphasize reform of the Christian family, as the basic building block of human society.
Neoliberalism and evangelicalismThe link between conservative Christian faith and market economics has been around at least since the Cold War, when the atheistic communists openly attacked the influence of religion on public life, actively restricting freedom of religious expression across Russia, China and Eastern Europe.
Support of small government by evangelicals in the pro-life movement strikes critics as contradictory, on the assumption that larger government could alleviate some pressures toward abortion, and could improve the lives of unplanned children.
References
- «www.lifenews.com Oklahoma becomes the 22nd State to File Lawsuit Against Pro-Abortion Healthcare Steven Ertelt Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Exodus 21:22-23 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Genesis 1:26-27 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Genesis 2:7 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Genesis 9:6 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Genesis 38:27 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Isaiah 49:1,3 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Psalm 139:13 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «Pro-Lifers: A Call to Unite. AbortionAbout.com
- «BibleGateway.com Psalm 139:13-16 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Jeremiah 1:5 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Psalm 139:13-16 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Luke 1:41 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com Luke 2:12 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
- «BibleGateway.com 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 English Standard Version Retrieved 4/21/2010
see also: Timeline of Christianity |