Should an interfaith lobby speak for Presbyterians in the public square?

(Reprinted from Presbyterians Pro-Life NEWS, Spring 1999)

Nearly two decades ago, Paul Ramsey, prominent Christian ethicist at Princeton University, objected publicly to the claim by The Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights [now The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC)] to represent the Methodist Church, the denomination in which he held membership. The Coalition had run an ad in the New York Times listing the United Methodist Church among the sponsors.

RCRC is not accountable to the Presbyterian Church (USA)
"I don't want to have to take out ads saying that the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights doesn't speak for the Methodist Church, and so not for me - - and not, perhaps, for you," he said. "Besides, that organization isn't supposed to observe the Discipline. Methodists are, and all our boards and agencies."

Presbyterians would substitute for Ramsey's reference to the Discipline of the Methodists our own confessional statements, and our 1992 policy on problem pregnancies and abortion as the standards for our G.A. entities.

Ramsey's point applies today. When the RCRC issues a public statement or lobbies Congress, it intends to carry the weight of the mainline Protestant denominations. Its intention is to influence the law, not to represent carefully the nuances of each denomination's position.

More importantly, it is not accountable to the Presbyterian General Assembly, as is the General Assembly's Stated Clerk or church entities such as the Washington Office.

RCRC makes no attempt to communicate the nuances of PC(USA) abortion policy
The RCRC is a broad-based political lobby located on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., which claims to represent 40 member organizations, many that are not Christian, and 55 grassroots organizations¹. The goal of the RCRC is to be a voice of the religious community to lawmakers. It asserts that "Abortion can be a moral, ethical, and religiously responsible decision." It makes no effort to communicate to Congress the serious reservations expressed in the PC(USA) abortion policy, such as

Or,

RCRC makes no attempt to recognize the legitimate biblical basis of the pro-life position
The PC(USA) in 1992 adopted an abortion policy that supports the legitimacy of those who "come to diverse conclusions and actions," and "encourages an atmosphere of open debate and mutual respect for a variety of opinions concerning the issues related to problem pregnancies and abortion." RCRC material refers to those with pro-life religious convictions as "anti-choice activists" whose efforts are "insidious."²

RCRC supports partial birth abortion and safe sex
In 1997, the General Assembly expressed its "grave moral concern" regarding partial birth abortions. More than once Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick has communicated the action of the General Assembly to Congress since that time. But RCRC continues to lobby Congress in support of partial birth abortions, apparently lumping the General Assembly's concern with its charges against the Christian Coalition. "The Christian Coalition and other religious political extremists have repeatedly tried to impose their political and religious views on the nation," said Katherine Ragsdale, chair of the RCRC board. "We assure Senators that people of faith will be with them as they vote to sustain the veto [on partial birth abortions]."³

RCRC actively supports contraception use for teens as their strategy for preventing pregnancy.⁴ In contrast, the 1998 General Assembly voiced its commitment to communicating the message of sexual purity to our youth. RCRC lobbies against parental notification laws in cases where teens seek abortions.⁵

We can speak for ourselves as a denomination
The 1999 General Assembly will receive overture 99-44 which argues that the PC(USA) has offices and entities prepared to give public witness to our General Assembly's position on abortion. Those offices and entities are far better able to represent our denomination's position than RCRC. They are responsible to know and communicate accurately the General Assembly actions and they are accountable in ways that RCRC cannot be. Our denomination does not need an interfaith organization to represent us in this area of deep moral conflict.

Endnotes
1. The RCRC webpage, General Information, 10/27/98.
2. The RCRC webpage, 10/27/98.
3. RCRC news release, Sept. 17, 1998.
4. RCRC, Religious Voters Alert, webpage, 10/31/98.
5. RCRC, webpage statement, 4/21/99.

Click here to see a previous PPL NEWS article about RCRC.
To begin receiving Presbyterians Pro-Life NEWS by mail, click here.

© Presbyterians Pro-Life
P.O. Box 11130
Burke, VA 22009-1130

Top