NEW

Westminster Presbyterian Seminary’s 2022 Conference

Christ’s Mission for the Church  Westminster Presbyterian Seminary’s 2022 Conference Westminster Presbyterian Seminary’s 2022 conference has been scheduled for 20 — 22 October.  Located in Newcastle, the conference will feature presentations by Alistair Begg, Simon...

Chuck Collins: John Day & Foxe’s Book

John Day & Foxe’s Book By the Revd Canon Chuck Collins John Day was the foremost printer/publisher of the English Reformation. He is best known for collaborating with John Foxe in compiling and printing Actes and Monuments of These Latter and Perillous Dayes...

Pilgrim’s Process by the Revd Dr Peter Sanlon

Pilgrim’s Process Broken Hearts We all like to feel good about ourselves. Indeed there is a popular school of thought which suggests that the thing which most holds us back in life is ‘low self-esteem.’ When this outlook is accepted, the Christian message is adapted...

Prudence Dailey’s Commentary: What is the Church For?

Prudence Dailey’s Commentary What is the Church For? Amidst the political intrigue of the 2022 Lambeth Conference, the Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell, addressed the assembled bishops on the topic of evangelism. Whilst unsurprisingly less controversial than the...

Banner of Truth Borders Conference 2022 “Not Ashamed of the Gospel”

Held at the Church of Scotland Chapel in Carlisle, it is a gathering intended particularly to serve those in northern England and southern Scotland with fellowship and faithful biblical teaching. The conference is open to all, whether in full-time ministry in the...

Anglican Futures: Plural Truth, Playing the Cards Right

Anglican Futures Plural Truth: Playing The Cards Right This is the first in a series of three blog posts, examining the concept of 'Plural Truth,' in the light of what has been observed at the Lambeth Conference.  This one looks at how 'Plural Truth' has impacted the...

Orthodox Bishops at the Lambeth Conference Reaffirm Lambeth 1.10 as Anglican Teaching on Marriage & Sexuality

ORTHODOX BISHOPS AT THE LAMBETH CONFERENCE REAFFIRM LAMBETH 1.10 AS ANGLICAN TEACHING ON MARRIAGE & SEXUALITY “Resetting the Anglican Communion Back to Its Biblical Roots” ORTHODOX BISHOPS attending the Lambeth Conference have reaffirmed Lambeth 1.10 as the...

Statement from Anglican Bishops And Primates Who Are Keen to Affirm and Celebrate LGBT+ People

STATEMENT FROM ANGLICAN BISHOPS AND PRIMATES WHO ARE KEEN TO AFFIRM AND CELEBRATE LGBT+ PEOPLE August 2nd 2022 In the interest of full context we reproduce the letter signed by 170 bishops (26%), including five archbishops from across the Anglican Communion in support...

170 Bishops Affirm “Holiness” of Same-Sex Love

170 Bishops Affirm “Holiness” of Same-Sex Love 170 bishops from within the Anglican Communion signed a document supporting same-sex marriage and other issues promulgated by the LGBT community.  This means 480 of those bishops in attendance did not sign.  Over three...

Letter: The Abolition of Female Bishops?

Letter to the Editor The Abolition of Female Bishops? Dear Sir, Following the revelation at General Synod that there is no official definition of a woman, surely a Synod member could ask a further question, namely, ‘How many women bishops have served in the Church of...

Editorial: Lessons to be Learned from the American Pro-Life Movement

Editorial

Lessons to be Learned from American Pro-Life Movement

Friday, 24 June 2022, the Feast of St John the Baptist, will be a date which will live in infamy amongst the supporters of abortion.  On that date, the US Supreme Court, overturned the precedent set by the same court in 1973 known as Roe vs Wade.  Americans proponents of abortion howled with indignation.  UK proponents howled only slightly less so with the chief difference being the accents used to express their “moral” outrage that an immoral ruling had been cast aside.  Dobbs vs Jackson undid Roe vs Wade.

The US Supreme Court’s remit is constitutionally straightforward.  Article 3, Section 2 limits its authority to cases arising from the US Constitution.  In the years leading up to and following the 1973 Court, it had strayed from its constitutional function and started legislating by judicial fiat.

The Court’s ruling on the case in question says in part, 

“Until the latter part of the 20th century, there was no support in American law for a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. No state constitutional provision had recognized such a right. Until a few years before Roe, no federal or state court had recognized such a right. Nor had any scholarly treatise. Indeed, abortion had long been a crime in every single State. At common law, abortion was criminal in at least some stages of pregnancy and was regarded as unlawful and could have very serious consequences at all stages. American law followed the common law until a wave of statutory restrictions in the 1800s expanded criminal liability for abortions. By the time the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, three-quarters of the States had made abortion a crime at any stage of pregnancy. This consensus endured until the day Roe was decided. Roe either ignored or misstated this history, and Casey declined to reconsider Roe’s faulty historical analysis.” US Supreme Court, Dobbs vs Jackson page 3.

The Court stated what had been obvious from the start of the matter. The US Constitution says nothing about abortion—let alone establishing it as a constitutionally protected right.

Gentle Readers might ask, “Why is the English Churchman editorial about a court ruling in a foreign country?”  Because it is instructive regarding situation in which the Church finds itself in this green and pleasant land.  That is why.

Not all our American cousins have completely lost the memory or good sense of their forebears.  The Church there, save for the uber liberals, never accepted that abortion was a good thing.  For almost fifty years they met, they wept, they prayed, they marched—and they voted until a man was elected President who pledged to only nominate people to the Supreme Court who held the strict constructionist position on the US Constitution.  He kept his promise and each of the justices nominated by that president did as they promised. Would-be judicial legislators were excluded.

They objected to abortion not out of a desire to control anyone’s body.  Rather, they objected because of the clear teaching of Scripture.  As Anglicans we should know (if we are passingly familiar with the Articles of Religion) that whilst the “Ceremonies and Rites” aspects of the OT has been fulfilled, the Moral Law still stands (Article VII).  

It is in Exodus 21 that we find the way that God views an unborn child.  In verse 23, we find that if two men in a fight are so careless that they strike a pregnant woman so that she or the child she is carrying is killed—their lives are to be forfeited.  Does it not then stand to reason that God views that unborn life as no less than fully human?  Does not the Scripture record that John the Baptist leapt in his mother’s womb at the approach of his unborn cousin, Jesus, the Messiah? Of course it does. (Luke 1:41)

Our American cousins have shown us that persistence in doing good will result in good things in the here and now—not just eternity.  They “do God.” So should we.

 

Previous

Next