AskThePriest.org

Abortion and Forgiveness

A reader writes in:

“Hi there. I’ve got something to ask that I think I already know the answer to, but it’s something I want to say anyway. about 10 years ago, I was in a relationship with a girl who fell pregnant. We hadn’t been together long, were both young, and totally unprepared financially or mentally, and so it came as a massive shock. She told me she didn’t want to keep it, and I said I’d support her decision, so she had an abortion, which I understand to be a major sin. At the time, I had no interest in religion, but over the years I’ve become more and more interested in Christianity, to a point I’ve started asking questions about life and wondering about our meaning. I consider myself a good person, who’s kind, caring and moral, and anyone who knows me would say the same, only I know deep inside that because I allowed this to happen, that my soul is likely to go to hell. Again, I never used to believe in hell, but I’m beginning to think it’s an apt place for me due to what I did. I know it wasn’t my own decision, but the fact I agreed to it makes me just as responsible as my ex. Our relationship fell apart weeks later, she got involved with another guy and I was dumped, and I convinced myself that if we’d had the child, it would either have had to be adopted, or I would have had to look after it on my own and maybe even resent it, which would have been again, terrible to even do to an innocent, but the fact remains that almost 10 years after this event, not even my family know of it, and it’s beginning to eat away at my insides because I’m not convinced no matter how ashamed I am, and no matter how deep I regret it, that I’m going to be punished for it. Is there anything I can do to try to earn God’s forgiveness in this matter, or should I just accept my fate, live a good life, and then take my punishment? It feels kinda good to be able to try to confess this to someone religious, and I can only hope you don’t judge me too harshly in your reply. If I am to suffer God’s wrath, believe me, I’ll accept it, but I really hope there’s something I can do to try to earn redemption.”

I’m going to divide this into two responses, the moral theology response and the pastoral response.  In the moral theology response, I will address the issue of Abortion and the Episcopal church’s stance.  In the pastoral response, I will discuss forgiveness.

Moral Theology

Abortion is a complex question morally, as it has two sets of  goods in conflict.  One set is the woman involved.  In some cases, her life and/or health may be threatened.  Beyond that, there is always the question of her right to self-determination.  The other set are the rights  of the fetus - obviously a question of life.  Many people with pro-life opinions consider this an easy dilemma, as a fetus is a human being with a soul from conception.  Pro-choice people also sometimes consider this decided, as the rights of a woman to self-determination is the core principle.

But neither of these positions are as obvious as some make them out to be.  Who determines that a fetus is a human being from conception, rather than at some other point of development?  Jewish tradition from early times seems to be that a fetus is not a human being from a legal standpoint and there are varying ideas as to when “ensoulment” happens.  Christians have had varying ideas about when a fetus changes from being a part of the mother to a distinct human being.  And even if the fetus IS a human being, in the case of risk to the mother, is it moral to endanger a viable human life (the mother) in order to preserve the possibility of new human life?  Likewise the principle of self-determination is not so obvious.  If the fetus IS a fully human life, does not the right to life trump self-determination, at least as a matter of reproductive choice?  

Beyond the issues of individual morality, there are issues of how to deal with this as a society.   If we do wish to prohibit abortion, are there exceptions?  Does the answer change the further along a pregnancy gets?  Can we really force a woman, against her will, to carry a child to term?  Will legal prohibition actually stop abortion, or will it simply mean that the rich will have access by going to where they can get them while the poor return to the dangerous providers they had before Roe vs. Wade?

None of these are easy questions to answer.  And despite some opinions, there is no unified consensus as to how to answer these questions in either Judaism or Christianity.  Therefore, the Episcopal Church has a nuanced opinion, as reflected in the resolutions of our General Convention.  A good summation of them can be found in an article at Pew:

While the Episcopal Church recognizes a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy, the church condones abortion only in cases of rape or incest, cases in which a mother's physical or mental health is at risk or cases involving fetal abnormalities. The church forbids "abortion as a means of birth control, family planning, sex selection or any reason of mere convenience."

We tend to be pretty down to earth with moral issues.  While we recognize the moral problems with purely elective abortion, we also recognize that a woman’s body is her own and that legal prohibition is unlikely to resolve the underlying issues.  While legislating against abortion might make us feel better, there are good questions as to whether it would actually stop abortion, or simply make it more risky for the poor.  Decisions such as these are ones that should be made in consultation with a local pastor, who understands the people involved and the specifics of the case.

Pastoral Response

I’m not going to get into whether what you did was a sin, because it does not matter, you experience it as sin, that is, something that separates you from God.  Blame is not the point, the question is, is this keeping you from a full relationship with God?  The answer from you seems to be, “Yes.”

There is nothing you can do to earn redemption, because redemption is not earned, it is a gift freely given from God.  It was given to you before you were born through the life, death and resurrection of Christ.  There is no sin that cannot be forgiven (Except perhaps “Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.”  See Blasphemy Challenge.)  If you confess your sin, you are forgiven.  Most of the time, WE are the barrier to forgiveness, being convinced we are too unworthy to be forgiven.  But God is quick to forgive.  If your shame and guilt has become a stumbling block to your restoration to relationship with God, I would suggest finding a minister and making a confession to him or her.  Sometimes, another person is able to convince us better than we can ourselves. (See To Confess or Not To Confess)

Confess your sin, your shame, your guilt, and lay it at the foot of the cross.  God loves you, and God forgives you.

David+

For further reading see: Acts of General Convention regarding Abortion

Anastasis

A very interesting video from Trinity Cathedral in Phoenix about the "Anastasis" or "Harrowing of Hell."

The Bible and Chronological Accuracy

A Reader writes in:

Many Christians have told me that the bible is without Error and this below statement from your website seems to imply that you would agree with this tradition of understanding. Especially since many Bible verses state that God's word is perfect.

"1. The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the revealed Word of God."

This statement would to me imply that no Error can be found in any translation of bibles if they are a perfect written reflection of god breathed words or any historical event that transpired.

He then provides a link to a site that shows a chronological error in Exodus and Numbers.

It all comes down to what is meant by "without error." The idea that the Scriptures are the revealed Word of God does not imply that everything in the Bible is scientifically or even historically true (in a modern sense). Most Episcopalians would say that the Word of God is "inspired" rather than "dictated." This means that the authors of the books of the Bible left the imprint of their worldview and value systems upon the writings. While the scriptures DO contain truth, it is not of the scientific or modern historical kind, of which the methods simply did not exist at the time the books were written. The version the American Episcopal church passed of the first part of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral is this: "The Holy Scriptures, as containing all things necessary to salvation." In other words, all things that are needed to be reconciled to God are to be found within the Bible. Not all things, not even all knowledge about God, but those necessary to salvation. To try to subject the scriptures to the criteria of scientific rationalism or modern historical method would be kind of like taking a poem about a tree and criticizing it for not using modern botanical taxonomy.

Yes, there are some Christians who believe that for the Bible to be inerrant it would have to not be contradicted in any aspect, but that only shows how compromised their understanding of the historic Christian faith is by rationalism. Theologian Ruth Tiffany Barnhouse has remarked that literalism is to be regarded as "the bastard child of science and religion."

Therefore, please excuse me if I don't spend time with the analysis between Exodus and Numbers. I'll gladly grant that point. Yes, there are places where there are scientific inaccuracies in the Bible. Yes, there are places where different chronologies don't match up. But that is not the truth that the Bible holds, and to hold it to modern ideas of historical accuracy is to misuse the text.

I've written on this at a couple of places:

The Heresy of Literalism

How to Read a Story

David+

What do Episcopalians Believe?

A reader writes in:

Over a number of years, through a number of Episcopalian friends, I've come to learn a fair amount about the Episcopal Church. The most important knowledge of all, however, however, has so far eluded me. I haven't been able to find out the core tenets of the Episcopal faith--those things, in other words, that must be believed by those who call themselves Episcopalians, and that distinguish the Episcopal faith from other faiths.

The answers I've received when I ask my Episcopalian friends about their faith are varied. One friend has told me "The three-legged stool"--which, I understand, is the basis for forming tenets of faith, but not the tenets themselves. Another has said "We aren't a doctrinal faith, since doctrine so often proves a stumbling block." (I don't know if I'm mistaken in receiving the impression that this is tantamount to saying "You can believe pretty much anything you want, so long as you enjoy going to church services together with us.") Still another asserts that "Most of us can recite the Nicene Creed without talking out of the side of our mouths...."

Responses like these have made the Episcopal faith sound like a moving target to me. I'd be glad to know what the faith tenets are that are both essential and unique to Episcopalianism.

It is indeed sometimes confusing for people outside the Episcopal Church to put their finger on who we are. The confusion comes from our self-definition, which is that we are a creedal, rather than a confessional church. What this means is that we do not have foundational doctrinal statements other than the Nicene and Apostles Creeds. Most other Christian denominations have some sort of confessional document, like the Ausburg confession for Lutherans or the Greater Catechism for Roman Catholics, that lays out exactly what the teaching of the church is on most matters. Instead, our central document is the Book of Common Prayer, which defines worship rather than doctrine as a unifying principle. The mark of an Episcopalian is that he or she attends Episcopal services, which includes recitation of the creeds. However, there are no requirements that a layperson believes particular doctrine in order to become an Episcopalian. This is why the friend who says, "You can believe pretty much anything you want, so long as you enjoy going to services together with us" is largely correct. My experience as a priest is that as people participate in the liturgy over the years, the doctrine included in our regular worship becomes part of them by an osmotic process.

So what is it that sets us apart? In some ways, it's the fact that we insist that we are NOT set apart from or superior to other Christians. Episcopalians consider themselves one part of the universal catholic church, of which all baptized Christians are members. We like the way we do things, but do not insist that ours is the only or even the best way. This is why we have been leaders in the Ecumenical movement to reconcile the various denominations of Christianity. At one point in our history, we asked ourselves, "What is the minimum amount of agreement needed in order to re-unify the church?" William Reed Huntington articulated the answer in what we now refer to as the "Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral," which is a basis for ecumenical work:

1. The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the revealed Word of God.

2. The Nicene Creed as the sufficient statement of the Christian Faith.

3. The two Sacraments,--Baptism and the Supper of the Lord,--ministered with unfailing use of Christ's words of institution and of the elements ordained by Him.

4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of God into the unity of His Church.

The Theologian Robert Hughes III has remarked that if we talk in terms of dogma (which are core beliefs that are non-negotiable) as opposed to doctrine (on which different positions may be held) there really are only two for Anglicans: the doctrines of the Trinity, and of the two natures in one person in Christ. All the rest, while important, are not core to Episcopal identity. (Note that other doctrines, such as the Resurrection, are implied by those two.)

Therefore, your observation that our doctrine is a "moving target" is pretty apt. I often say that looking at the Episcopal Church is like looking at the universal church in miniature. There are Episcopalians who believe in Transubstantiation in the eucharist and ones who are Calvinistic. Some of us are more like Eastern Orthodox in our piety and others are more like Presbyterians. We have Anglo-Catholics who sing Latin hymns in worship and charismatics who speak in tongues. We are unified not by doctrinal uniformity, but by the Book of Common Prayer, the creeds, and a common belief that there are many ways to Christ.

David+

---

Related posts on AskThePriest:

Anglican Dogma?

William Reed Huntington - a man of our time?

Why am I an Episcopalian?

Jesus Said ... Love.

Find an Episcopal Church near you.

New Podcast Item - Desmond Tutu, Insisting we are "Made for Goodness"

New Podcast Item

From NPR's Morning Edition on March 11th.

------

Our occasional series with people of broad experience turns this week to a man characterized by his faith — and his willingness to fight.

In the era of apartheid, Archbishop Desmond Tutu railed against the injustice and inhumanity of South Africa's government, and his passionate advocacy helped make the change that came to that country in the 1990s.

The original article can be found here.

The podcasting feed can be found on the sidebar or at: http://podcast.askthepriest.org and is listed in the iTunes, Odeo and podcast.net directories.

More information & podcasting software can be found at http://www.ipodder.org

What is Salvation?

A Reader writes in:

"I am curious as to how Episcopals view salvation. What does it take to go to Heaven?"

When Episcopalians talk about Salvation, it is not primarily about heaven - it is about restoring right relationship with God.  FrCharles writes:

The Episcopal Church's catechism is (among other things) meant "to provide a brief summary of the Church's teaching for an inquiring stranger."  The "Outline of Faith" from the Book of Common Prayer has a section entitled "Sin and Redemption."  It reads:

Sin and Redemption

Q. What is sin? 

A. Sin is the seeking of our own will instead of the will of God, thus distorting our relationship with God, with other people, and with all creation.

Q. How does sin have power over us? 

A. Sin has power over us because we lose our liberty when our relationship with God is distorted.

Q. What is redemption? 

A. Redemption is the act of God which sets us free from the power of evil, sin, and death.

Q. How did God prepare us for redemption? 

A. God sent the prophets to call us back to himself, to show us our need for redemption, and to announce the coming of the Messiah.

Q. What is meant by the Messiah? 

A. The Messiah is one sent by God to free us from the power of sin, so that with the help of God we may live in harmony with God, within ourselves, with our neighbors, and with all creation.

Q. Who do we believe is the Messiah? 

A. The Messiah, or Christ, is Jesus of Nazareth, the only Son of God.

Charles+

Synod, ACNA and the FCE - A narrowly-avoided theological misstep

 In its Synod Wednesday (2/10/10), the Church of England (CofE) voted to "recognize and affirm the desire of those who have formed the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) to remain within the Anglican family."  I am encouraged by the fact that the language used here is "Anglican Family," which is novel and rather vague, and may simply mean people who use a BCP and drink Sherry.  However, I'm not sure that the members of Synod understand how close they came to a theological misstep by considering full communion by ACNA.  This misstep revolves around an incomplete understanding of just who ACNA is, which is apparent from the motion itself.  In the first resolve, the synod states that they are, "aware of the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America and Canada."  The implication here is that ACNA is made up completely of former members of the The Episcopal Church (TEC) and the Anglican Church of Canada who have left recently over issues of human sexuality.  This is a false implication.  Some of the member churches of ACNA have been separated from the Anglican Communion for decades over issues having nothing to do with human sexuality.  Many members and clergy of ACNA congregations have NEVER been members of TEC or the Anglican Church of Canada.  Creating a state of full communion would have endorsed groups whose theology could have created problems for the CofE.

A primary example is the Reformed Episcopal Church (REC).  The REC was formed in 1873 by the Assistant Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Kentucky, George David Cummins (I wrote a blog entry on this last year). Its theology denies the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and Baptismal Regeneration.  The REC is a founding member church in ACNA, existing alongside the ultra Anglo-Catholic former TEC Diocese of Fort Worth.  Speculations on how that can possibly work is outside the pale of this post. But that's an American problem, right?  Well, it might be, if the REC had not joined into full communion with a disaffected splinter of the CofE in 1927, the Free Church of England (FCE).  The REC performed a “boundary crossing” and intruded into the sphere of the CofE by consecrating FCE bishops into Apostolic Succession.

Now, Ecumenical agreements do not necessarily extend to other partners, so it is not correct to say that if the Synod of the CofE extended full communion to ACNA, they would be extending full communion automatically to FCE.  However, by entering into full communion with ACNA, they would be signaling that the major theological differences with mainstream Anglicanism that has kept the REC apart from TEC for over a hundred years are negligable to them.  These differences are major enough and the separation long enough that TEC was in an ecumenical dialogue with REC until the formation of ACNA – each considered the other a separate denomination.  If the CofE endorsed REC theology, it would be implicitly endorsing FCE theology.  (Confused?  Enough abbreviations yet?)

How could this be overlooked?  Probably because many members of Synod consider this an "American problem" and don't understand the history of Anglicanism in America well enough.  Many more are probably unaware of the ACNA-REC-FCE connection. In any case, it is good that synod declined to act on full communion until they had more information.  I hope that this issue can be brought to light. The idea that ACNA is made up completely of Episcopalians who have recently left the church is simply a convenient untruth. 

David+

The Churches in Europe

Europe presents a bit of an anomaly within Anglican ecclesiology:  It does not exist as its own province, but is served by a few different Anglican sources:

• The Episcopal Church (headquartered in the United States) established a presence in Europe during the 19th century in order to serve American Episcopalians who were spending significant amounts of time in Europe.  The roots of the American Cathedral in Paris (pictured at left) extend back to a group of Americans who gathered for worship in the 1830s. They were given official membership in the Episcopal Church by the General Convention of 1859, when a canon was authored to admit churches in foreign lands.  The canon encourages such outreach, while prohibiting the establishment of churches within the bounds of another Anglican jurisdiction.  In 1971, the Convocation of American Churches in Europe was established. Today it is headed by Bishop-in-charge Pierre Whalon.  Read more about its history here.  (The 'America' in its title has now been changed to 'Episcopal' in order to recognize that TEC is not a "national" church.)  

• The Diocese of Europe:  In 1633, the growing number of Anglicans living outside of England were considered to be under the care of the Bishop of London.  Groups of Anglicans developed around the world, including along the southern edge of Europe.  In 1842, the Diocese of Gibraltar (a British territory) was formed to oversee the chaplaincies and congregations serving Anglicans in southern Europe.  By 1833, the bishop of London added a suffragan (assisting) bishop to oversee Anglicans in northern and central Europe.  By 1970, those areas were served by a single bishop, and in 1980, they were given status as the 44th diocese of the Church of England known as the Diocese of Europe.  

• In 1880, an Episcopal bishop who had been appointed as Bishop to Mexico, helped establish the Spanish Episcopal Reformed Church.  By 1894, a Spaniard was serving as bishop and by 1963, the SERC was in full communion with the Church of England.  It was granted full membership in the Anglican Communion in 1980.

• The (Portugese Episcopal) Lusitanian Church, which formed in 1880 through a partnership between the Episcopal Church, the Church of Ireland, and local Roman Catholics, was also admitted to the Anglican Communion in 1980. 

In addition to those Anglican bodies, the Churches in Europe have a rich ecumenical history, especially visible in the Porvoo Statement, which encompasses 11 Anglican and Nordic and Baltic Lutheran churches, including the Church of Denmark as who accepted the statment in December 2009.  The Anglican Communion is also in full communion with the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht.

From time to time, Anglican Europe's odd setup is singled out as an example of the Episcopal Church's participation in 'overlapping jurisdictions', and the existence of the Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe is used to make an argument that parallel Anglican jurisdictions could be seen as a legitimate ecclesiological structure.  As a new fellowship of Christians claiming Anglican heritage (but not desiring membership in the Episcopal Church) finds a voice in North America, and as bishops from other Anglican provinces allow affiliation from American soil, the question of 'overlapping jurisdiction' comes into focus. 

Christians have long held to the idea that there should be 'one bishop, one diocese', a maxim that traces back to Canon 8 of the Council of Nicaea (325): "for in one church there shall not be two bishops." (Canons 15 & 16 come into play as well.)  So, the question goes, if Americans can violate this by having a bishop in Europe, why can't we have a bishop in America?' Such a characterization oversimplifies the history of Anglican jurisdiction in Europe.  There was no existing Anglican diocese in Europe* when TEC or the CofE sent bishops to provide oversight for their nationals living there. The 'overlapping' jurisdictions grew up alongside each other organically rather than as the result of any division or intentional competition. As the world becomes smaller, though, these European Anglican bodies have begun a conversation about how they might go forward together.  The European Consultation and European Partners in Mission dialogued from 1998 to 2004, when they issued a statement saying that while a unified structure was not yet workable, the development of deeper collegiality and networked ministries was needed and encouraged.   

Bishop Pierre Whalon, Bishop-in-Charge of the CoECiE, also wrote about this topic here.  

Amy+

*Why Anglicanism was not represented in continental Europe would mean writing a post on the various streams of reformation that altered the course and structure of Western Christianity. I'd like to address that, but for now Wikipedia has this fairly helpful article on 'the Protestant Reformation'.

Father Matthew Presents - The Shields of the Apostles

Every apostles has their own shield symbol. Which is which? This video is an introduction to the meaning of the shields of the apostles presented by an Episcopal priest, the Rev. Matthew Moretz and his friend, Jehosephat. This video also discusses the needlepoint kneelers and their use in worship at Christ's Church in Rye, New York. This is part of the "Father Matthew Presents" series of videos, presenting the treasures of Christianity one video at a time. www.fathermatthewpresents.com

A trustworthy avenue for Haitian relief is "Episcopal Relief and Development" www.er-d.org

Father Matthew is a priest at Christ's Church in Rye, New York. www.ccrye.org

To support this ministry, the new DVD "Father Matthew Presents: Volume Two" is available for purchase here:
https://www.createspace.com/275556