On June 5th many pro-life groups from across the United States were represented at a meeting—at The Columbia School of Law of Catholic University in Washington, DC— called by the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family. From Rome, Father Frank Pavone (who directs Priests for Life), Monsignor Di Felice, and Monsignor Elliott were present. Also, Lifewatch was there. We were well represented by Rev. Dan White of Chantilly, VA, Rev. Kris Meyer of Kenly, NC, and your friendly scribe. (An introduction of Lifewatch to the assembly went this way: "Representing John Wesley today are the representatives of Lifewatch..." The laughter evoked was more than polite.)

The stated purpose of the meeting was to present the continuing work of the Pontifical Council for the Family; pass the word about the Second World Meeting of the Holy Father (that is, John Paul II) with Families, which will take place in Rio de Janeiro on October 4th - 5th of this year; and hear what the various organizations are doing and accomplishing these days. The theme of the meeting was unity of the various pro-life organizations in the United States.

In his opening remarks, Fr. Pavone noted the historic nature of the occasion: this meeting was the first time that a delegation from the Vatican had met with such a large gathering of pro-life groups in the United States. The Vatican delegation made no secret of its desire for unity among the various pro-life groups in the US. Why this push for unity? Because the social solution to the problem of abortion might well lie in the discovery of unity among the many pro-life groups, according to Fr. Pavone. Monsignor Elliott spoke of the pro-life movements having one goal (protection of each and every member of society, especially the most vulnerable, is one way to state it) and many strategies (from pro-life education to internet ministries to rescue operations at abortion clinics to legislative efforts). For this unified work, new organizational structures are not necessary; rather, what is needed is for the message and the mission of the many pro-life organizations to be renewed

Well into the meeting, a crucial statement came from Monsignor Elliott. Responding to those who disapproved of the "exceptions clause" in legislation (that is, no abortion allowed except in the cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother), he argued that there is not one and only one way to legislate, in conformity with the Gospel, on abortion. Indeed, as a counter to pro-life utopianism, he declared that there would never be a "knock-down piece of legislation" that would destroy the culture of death in America. Rather, in line with John Paul II's "Gospel of Life" encyclical, Monsignor Elliott argued that "imperfect legislation" protective of life will always be bound to a commitment to take future legislative steps toward further protection of life. He concluded with this bold command Bury this division [regarding the exceptions clause]."

An important truth proclaimed that day was that the pro-life position is pro-woman. Therefore, pro-life groups would be wise to depict abortion as an anti-woman act. As Monsignor Elliott movingly noted, "many women's lives have been twisted up and broken by the choice of abortion."

Interestingly, Ms. Kathy DiFiore of New Jersey spoke of her new website ministry, in which she attempts to encourage teens toward a way of life that is respectful of human life. Recently, she said, she engaged a Methodist teen in computer conversation for over forty-five minutes. Through the conversation, she changed his mind to understand premarital sex as immoral.

All in all, it was a memorable, productive, and hopeful meeting. (PTS)

"Let's just get along with each other."

"What we want is a peaceful church."

"All we need to do is love each other and everybody."

These words are commonly repeated in The United Methodist Church today. What holds our denomination together is understood, by some laity and clergy of the church, to be so fragile that they take it upon themselves to work hard at holding the denomination together

That is, of course, a mighty big job Indeed, it is an impossible job For the Church is held together or unified, and can be unified, only by God. The Triune God—working especially through His Word, Sacraments, and Spirit— brings the Church to Himself. But that involves truth. Indeed, that involves the Truth who is named Jesus Christ, the Truth of God's Gospel, the Truth of God's loving Trinitarian life, the Truth of God's loving mission to the world.

Unfortunately, any talk of truth today makes more than a few United Methodists very uneasy. Instead of truth, they prefer pluralism. But actually, some do not really care that much for pluralism, for authentic pluralism requires an active and honest engagement of various positions. So they drift toward tolerance—an easy-going tolerance. A live- and- let- live tolerance. A happy- go- lucky tolerance. A let's- assume- there- is- no- truth- and just- get- along- with- each- other tolerance. This form of denominational tolerance tolerates almost everything—except truth, and except those who claim that truth exists. When truth, or the possibility of truth, raises its head, our denomination's tolerance can turn downright mean and nasty and repressive.

But most of the time United Methodism's tolerance is just plain nice. We seem to have an unspoken, unwritten, unarticulated agreement not to talk about unpleasant topics in public, at church meetings, or in conference sessions. We want to be polite. We strive not to offend. We want to be positive. So abortion is not brought up. And if it is, it is courteously dismissed as quickly and as quietly as possible.

The following remarks on truth are appropriate to United Methodism's ethos of tolerance. They remind us that truth is not just for our more fundamentalist brothers and sisters. Rather, truth is truly a Church thing. "Truth indeed is not a thing which we can possess like a book which may be opened or closed at will. We can possess truth only in an act of recognition, which no willfulness of our own can affect. To recognize truth is to feel its compulsion; and this yielding to the compulsion of truth is faith... [V\/lhat binds Christians into a oneness that transcends individuality is the objective force of that truth in which we, through faith, come to have a share...

"Since faith and truth are so closely linked, whenever truth is obscured faith is imperiled, and with it our membership [in] the Church of Christ is imperilled also. We must, therefore, allow ourselves no communion with error: truth and error can enter into no concordat. When truth is involved there must be no compromise. The early councils were right in appending a rejection of error to the positive clauses in which they expressed and acknowledged the truth. Not infrequently, perhaps, they failed to distinguish rightly between the true and the false; still, they did believe in truth, even though they discerned it only in part. They knew that truth is no child of this world: that truth betokens its presence, as Kierkegaard said, by a challenge. There can be no recognition, no confession of truth without a recognition and rejection of error. To say this is not to demand a heresy hunt. We love those who err, as our Lord and Master loved them. But unless we would deny the truth, we must combat their errors

"The task laid upon the Church to discern between the true and the false becomes more complicated as the centuries pass on. History evolves ever new forms of error which seek to disguise themselves in the luminous garb of truth. This is a process which we are unable to reverse, nor can we silently evade the problems which it creates..." (from "The Call to Unity," by Werner Elert [1885-1954], of the Lutheran Church of Bavaria and a professor at the University of Erlangen [Faith and Order: Proceedings of the World Conference, Lausanne, August 3-21, 1 927j and Lutheran Forum [Spring 1997])

So what?

Well, let's get out there in our congregations, in our districts, in our conferences, and in our general church, and serve the Truth named Jesus Christ. With love, to be sure. But also with a willingness to resist the intellectual laziness (if not cowardice) called tolerance. And with a willingness to combat error. All under the real and living Lordship of Jesus Christ. (PTS)

In his July 14th letter to Bishop Joe Wilson of the Ft. Worth Area, Rev. Marc Rogers [of First United Methodist Church /P O. Box 709/ Wortham, TX 76693] wrote these powerful words: "In your address to our conference, reprinted in the Reporter, you said: 'First of all, we are facing a time when moral and ethical truth are taking a back seat to expediency I am incensed when I see major decisions made in the corporate and political world by men who lack moral and ethical fortitude. It has invaded every dimension of our society, and has caused a large percentage of our population to skip over immorality with a wink or a shrug... We must raise up a new generation of courageous men who act upon the principles of Christ.'

"I agreed with those forceful words, and I tried to offer my resolution ['In Opposition to the General Board of Church and Society's Stand on Partial-Birth Abortion'] in that spirit: of wanting us to act forthrightly on the principles of Christ.

"After watching 'Schindler's List' again this year, I was strongly moved to ask myself, 'What great moral evils are we allowing today, in the same way the Germans allowed and even approved of anti-Semitism and the Holocaust?' I realized that it's both easy and inexpensive for us to condemn the Nazis and the Germans; moral hindsight is always perfect, and it costs us nothing

"What's harder for us to see is where we have failed to defend and uphold the dignity of all human life in our own church and society today And what's harder for us to do— and much more costly—is to do what the Confessing Church did then: to witness and act against such abuse and violence committed against God's children even when it is approved by the influential and powerful within our churches and culture.

"During this time of reflection, God convicted me strongly about the practice of abortion and partial-birth abortion in America, and our easy tolerance of it. I know that it is not identical in kind to the genocidal evil of the Holocaust. But surely on no other issue is a more important 'moral and ethical truth' (that children should not be killed while they are being born) taking such a back seat to 'expediency' (the practice of abortion as a form of birth control in a time of great sexual confusion, irresponsibility, hurt, and pain). Surely on no other issue is such a profound moral wrong being treated with such a 'wink or a shrug.'

"I am also 'incensed' when I see this happening in the 'corporate and political' worlds. But I am far more incensed, and much more deeply saddened, when I see it happening in a church that claims the story of Jesus: the One conceived by the Holy Spirit in Mary's womb, and growing to become a 'fetus,' infant, child, and man. A church that claims this story as its own story—the Incarnation of God as a 'fetus,' infant, child, and man—must always stand for the sacredness of all human life in God in all stages of development, and especially for the life of the unborn, infants, and children, who are among the 'least of these' in the world...

"It seems to me that a church which suffers from the inability to face, or even to discuss, such a crucial issue is guilty of the same moral cowardice you so strongly decried in your speech. We should examine the log in our own eye before we look for it in the world of business and politics.

"Such a church may find approval in certain quarters of the world, but it is in danger of losing its own soul. I would have to say that all of our previous talk at conference (about how much we cared for children) seemed hollow to me after the vote [which failed to pass the aforementioned resolution]. it seemed as hollow as the bishops' letter on children was shallow in its failure to mention the strong causal link between 'the culture of death' sanctioned by abortion on demand, and the overall abuse and neglect of so many children in our country and the world. ."

Rev. Katherine Ragsdale, Episcopal priest and president of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, recently declared: "In the second trimester, prior to fetal viability, difficult decisions about abortion must be left to the woman and her doctor. And we do support a woman's constitutionally guaranteed right to choose an abortion if that's—I would not say not only a constitutionally given right, but God-given responsibility to make the difficult ethical decisions, and in fact to choose an abortion if that's what seems best" ("Firing Line" transcript, from the 3/20/97 show, communique, 5130197).

Recently, while doing some sermon preparation on the "unpardonable sin," this pastor ran across the word blaspheme Blasphemy, of course, is simply speaking badly or falsely or poorly of God. Blasphemy describes the taking of God's name in vain, as the Third Commandment indicates. But also, blasphemy concerns the false and wrongful association of God and God's name with evil. "It is also blasphemous to make use of God's name to cover up criminal practices, to reduce peoples to servitude, to torture persons or put them to death... Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and his holy name. It is in itself a grave sin." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2148)

It sounds harsh, but we think that, in her quoted statement above, Rev. Ragsdale is committing blasphemy. After all, she is using the name of God to help justify the taking of innocent human life. she is using the name of God as a cover for evil. (PTS)

BABY MEMORIAL QUILTS

• By switching your long-distance telephone carrier to LifeLine (which has very reasonable rates) and by designating 10% of your long-distance charges to Lifewatch, you will support our ministry. To accomplish this, just call 1-(800)-493-2002, and tell LifeLine that you would like 10% of your monthly bill given to Lifewatch, which can be identified with this number: NPO#56333. We thank you for your positive response to this notice.

• At the recent Global Gathering, which was sponsored by the General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM), Ms. Nancy Pereira, a Methodist theologian from Brazil, held forth on the plight of children and related theological matters. Ms. Pereira stated, among other highly questionable things, that "we have to look at Jesus' cross as a tragedy, a human episode without any sense of meaning." In rapid response, Bishop Dan E. Solomon, the President of GBGM! and Dr. Randolph Nugent, the General Secretary of GBGM, issued a joint statement on May 13,1997. In it, they were quick to distance GBGM from Ms. Pereira's theology: "The theological views which she expressed were her own... The General Board of Global Ministries neither subscribes to her theological views nor agrees with the theological perspectives which she expressed..." It is very good to see leaders of our denomination paying some doctrinal attention.

• in Twisted Cross: The German Christian Movement in the Third Reich (University of North Carolina Press), Doris L. Bergen Concludes: "Issues of race and church doctrine reveal the nihilism at the core of the German Christian vision of the people's church. The anti-Jewish church was ultimately non-Christian; the church without rules was no church at all" (emphasis added). The underlined principle surely applies to today's United Methodist Church, which has no rules with regard to abortion. (Books & Culture, March/April 1997)

• Think, for a minute, about that organization's name: Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC). The outfit's religion is highly questionable—at least when it is evaluated by the traditional standards of Christianity and Judaism. It is not interested in advancing a reproductive agenda; if anything, it stands against reproduction. (And by the way, reproduction is not a very elegant way of speaking about God's gift of children to parents, to the world, and to the Church and the Synagogue. Reproduction sounds so very mechanical as in assembly line.) And choice, as understood by RCRC, is not real choice. RCRC's choice is one and only one choice, the one that involves an alienated, frightened woman standing alone at the front door of an abortion clinic. Of the four descriptive words in the title of this organization, only the word coalition makes sense; after all, RCRC is a political lobby, and so it is best described by a political term. Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. An odd name for an odd organization. it is a shame that The United Methodist Church remains affiliated to it.

• Back in February of this year, Reverend James M. Lawson, a leader in the civil-rights movement of a generation ago and the pastor of the Holman United Methodist Church in Los Angeles, keynoted a convocation of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC) in Washington, DC. In his address, Rev. Lawson declared that "the nation has not yet decided that women are endowed with certain unalienable rights—endowed by their Creator—that among these are life, liberty and pursuit of happiness." Sad to say, here is a United Methodist pastor who is more interested in the rights-regarding language of democracy than the truth-regarding teaching of the Church through the centuries. Furthermore, he said that "God expects of us the pursuit of justice," and he was clear that his understanding of justice includes the absolute freedom to abort. Indeed, Rev. Lawson is generally correct. God does demand of us the pursuit of justice. But it seems to this pastor that authentic justice must especially love the weak and the voiceless—and that includes the unborn. Rev. Lawson also attacked the advocates of a religious dogma "that demands that all the rest of us accept the dogma whether we can stomach it or not." Seems that Lawson is advancing a secular dogma of choice, that is oblivious to its victims (both women and their unborn children), that has been formulated and protected by the United States Supreme Court, and that most Christians cannot accept. in so doing, Rev. James Lawson is providing religious cover for a death-dealing secular dogma. (UMNS, 2/26/97)

• Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger of the Vatican recently addressed the dogma of choice with these words: "What is life? Does it mean having the most possible? Or being able to do anything? Or not having any limitations on our desires?... The splendor of choice is an illusion of the devil... He is opposed to truth, because he presents man as like a god, but like a false god, who does not know love but only himself..." (communique, 414/97)

• on October 27-29, 1997, Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon will lead a potentially wonderful conference, "Can Resident Aliens Survive," at Duke Divinity School. The promotional brochure for this conference states that Hauerwas and Willimon "have provided a viable alternative to liberal Protestantism and to the church growth movement through their vision of 'Resident Aliens."' How true it is. For more information on this conference, write to: Center for Continuing Theological Education/Duke Divinity School/Box 90966/Durham, NC 277080966.

• A couple of other notable conferences will be taking place this fall. On October 1-5 the Second World Meeting of the Holy Father with Families will be held in Rio de Janeiro. Information on this event can be obtained from Mr. Rick McCord /US Catholic Bishops' Secretariat for Family, Laity, Women, and Youth/phone (202)-541 -3040/fax (202)-541 -3176. On October 8-12 you are invited to the American Life League's celebration of life, "Praising God, the Author of Life," in Tampa, FL. For more information, call Ms. Bridget Carroll at (540)-659-4171.

• Planned Parenthood comes up on the United Methodist screen every once in a while. For example, recently a Planned Parenthood facility was discovered to be housed at Central United Methodist Church in Detroit. Then we are reminded that the Kentucky Conference has reappointed one of its clergy to direct a Planned Parenthood clinic. Why are these problems? Because Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in the United States. Seems to us that The United Methodist Church could find better partners for mission and ministry.

• The 1997 session of the Kentucky Annual Conference approved a resolution which states, in part: "The Kentucky Conference of The United Methodist Church, when studying, discussing, and implementing the Episcopal Initiative on Children and Poverty, will understand children to include the unborn Children." That only makes sense.

• The 1997 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) adopted a statement which offers "a word of counsel to the church and our culture that the procedure known as intact dilation and extraction (commonly called partial-birth abortion) of a baby who could live outside the womb is of grave moral concern and should be considered only if the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy" (The Presbyterian Lavman, July/August 1997). This makes the Presbyterian Church (USA) the first oldline Protestant denomination to denounce partial-birth abortion.

Name: _____________________________

Street: _____________________________

City: ______________________________

State: _____

Zip: ______________ Phone: ____________________________

Please mail to:

Lifewatch
512 Florence Street
Dothan, AL 36301