Posted on 07/19/2013 2:58:02 PM PDT by NYer
Ms. Julie Taylor works in the office of Children, Youth and Family Advocacy of the United Methodist Women, and Ms. Amee Paparella is the new Director and Organizer for Women’s Advocacy at the General Board of church and Society of The United Methodist Church. On January 18, they posted their article, “Clearly More to Be Done,” on the General Board of Church and Society website.
Co-written, their article serves as their personal response to the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. But given their positions in denominational agencies, their article also functions like an official response of The United Methodist Church to Roe’s anniversary.
The United Methodist Reporter suggests as much by publishing “Clearly more to Be Done” in its February 8th issue. (The Reporter is to be heartily commended for also carrying, in the same issue, a thoughtful critique of their article by Rev. Teddy Ray.)
Unfortunately, the article by Ms. Taylor and Ms. Paparella does not accurately represent what The United Methodist church teaches about life and abortion. In fact, the article distorts United Methodist teaching on this crucial matter.
This is how “Clearly more to Be Done” distorts United Methodist teaching on life and abortion.
As is well known, The United Methodist Church’s official teaching on life and abortion is found in Paragraph 161J (pp. 112-114) of The Book of Discipline (2012). Paragraph 161J indeed contains the one sentence from the Discipline that the Taylor-Paparella article quotes:
“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 by certified medical providers.”
Relying heavily on that one sentence from Paragraph 161J, the article makes its case that there is “clearly more to be done” to realize “reproductive justice” in American society and throughout the world.
However, Paragraph 161J says much more about life and abortion than the one sentence quoted above.
First, Paragraph 161J speaks explicitly about the little one carried by the mother. It refers to “the sanctity of unborn human life” and to “the unborn child.” In contrast, the article under review does not mention, even once, the unborn child. Given the fact over 55,000,000 unborn children have been aborted, since Roe v. Wade was handed down by the United States Supreme Court in 1973, that is a blatantly obvious oversight. That oversight distorts United Methodist teaching.
Second, Paragraph 161J, in one degree or another, stands against birth-control abortions, gender-section abortions, eugenic abortions, and partial-birth abortions. It also stands in favor of parental notification, “diminishing high abortion rates,” and aiding ministries that “help women find feasible alternatives to abortion.” The article under consideration overlooks these claims of Paragraph 161J, which aim to protect the unborn child and mother from abortion. Therefore, in a second way, this article distorts United Methodist teaching.
The article under critique is dedicated to seeking “reproductive justice” for women. All United Methodists are for justice for women. However, true justice for women is never reached by neglecting or supporting massive, ruthlessly violent injustices against unborn children, half of whom are little women. True justice for women does not turn pregnant women over to an abortion industry that frequently harms them.
Roe v. Wade is one of the most morally problematic, legally contested, and societally unsettling United States Supreme Court decisions in American history. On its 40th anniversary, The United Methodist Church deserved a more thoughtful response, that more accurately reflects denominational teaching on life and abortion, than “Clearly more to Be Done.
LifeNews Note: Rev. Stallsworth is the editor of “Lifewatch” a pro-life Methodist publication. This originally appeared at NRL News Today.
Ping
Please don’t throw me in that briar patch. Methodists are liberals. It is just that simple.
Do you know what percent if any of your tithes and/or offerings go toward the liberal causes of the UMC?
I was born and raised in the UMC. My mother was active in United Methodist Women almost until she died. I can’t imagine that she and the ladies she served with would condone any of the liberal/commie stances of the UMC these days. I left it long ago and have had friends who actually got up and walked out of the church in the middle of the sermon, vowing never to go back!
why would a Christian belong to the UMC?
Of course they’re going to lose members if they abort them. All the churches I’ve been in kept their members before they were born.
does your church send funds to the UMC ?
Left UMC a while back because of the national office liberal positions.
You realize that some of the collection plate goes to the national office?
Need contact info for this person. I want to tell her something.
Sent;
Dear Ms. Taylor,
The good book says that God knew people before they were born. “While you were in the womb”. So,in God’s eyes,someone yet unborn is KNOWN to Him. Therefore,to abort a PERSON is to interfere in God’s purpose. Also,to kill a PERSON.... is a crime. Specifically it is MURDER.
Reconsider your stance,in light of scripture, which says Do Not Murder.
There is a world of difference between old time traditional Methodists and the new Methodists.
>>Do you know what percent if any of your tithes and/or offerings go toward the liberal causes of the UMC?
To the liberal causes? About 4%, depending on your definition of a liberal cause. I wish it didn’t, but it does. Of course, we have some liberals in the church, so we could say that my part of apportionments goes to good causes and their portion goes to liberal causes.
>>why would a Christian belong to the UMC?
The same reason a Christian would be a Roman Catholic, Episcopal, Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Baptist. See Phil 1:18 for the reason.
That only holds for those who know nothing about how the denomination works.
There IS NO CENTRAL AUTHORITY that represents United Methodism. There is NO bishop in charge. There is NO agency in charge. There is NO board in charge.
The United Methodist Church is made up of geographic areas with presiding bishops, none of whom have any authority over any of the others. The East Ohio bishop has absolutely nothing to do with the Kentucky bishop beyond maybe having lunch together at times.
The United Methodist General Board of Church and Society has no authority to order anyone to do anything. They don't even speak for the denomination. They are a committee that is supposed to be tasked to encourage United Methodists to get involved in the world around them.
They can't call me up and tell me diddly-squat.
There is only ONE denominational voice, and that is the General Conference meeting that takes place for about 2 weeks every 4 years. The statement you read above from our Book of Discipline is the only authoritative statement about the UMC position on abortion. It is authoritative because it was written after voting approved it at the every 4 year General Conference.
It is very weak. It is an improvement over time from what it was back in the 70's.
It would be fully life-oriented if conservative Methodists in the USA and in Africa, Asia, and South America had their way. They are the INCREASING number of Methodists, so presumably, theirs is the voice that will eventually win out.
But, only 2 weeks to change things only once every 4 years makes for very slow going.
So what, exactly, is “reproductive justice”?
Like I have stated before. A woman has the right to choose. When she chooses to have sex and gets pregnant she uses up that right. She doesn’t have the right to commit murder.
if they abortion they shouldnt be called Christian
You left out the Council of Bishops which meets regularly and oversees the work and positions of the denomination. They are a distinctly liberal bunch who routinely interfere in the activities of the local church.
No, I didn’t forget the Council of Bishops. It is not a body that can set or change the direction of the denomination. That can only be done by the 4 year General Conference. There is no presiding bishop, there is no authority regarding the law of the denomination, so they are free to do whatever they want despite any meetings of the council of bishops. It’s a slight bit more than a coffee-klatch, and a world less than a board of directors.
It is the language of liberals, bhf. Liberals throw the word "justice", like sheisse, everywhere and hope it sticks somewhere.
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.