Planned Parenthood in the Pulpit
While abortion is commonly addressed from pulpits around the world, it is seldom addressed the way Rev. Rebecca Todd Peters did at the Community Church of Chapel Hill last July. The title of her sermon was, “Reproductive Justice: Beyond the Abortion Imaginary. How Three Imaginaries, or Myths, Shape the Conversation about Abortion.”
Striding to the pulpit in her black clerical vestments, Rev. Peters’ clerical collar and bright pink Planned Parenthood stole arrested the eyes of those who came to hear her sermon. Before Peters uttered a single word, the congregation knew what she came to say. Peters came to defend and celebrate abortion, and the bright, hot pink stole announced her celebration with ghoulish glee. In Peters’ maleficent mind, abortion is not sinful. It is not wrong. Abortion is a matter of justice.
Evangelicals, Catholics, the Bible, and Abortion
The entire abortion debate has been twisted by Evangelicals and Catholics through a misreading of Scripture, Peters argues. The idea that God decreed that abortion is sinful is, for her, an anathema. Believing abortion is sinful, “. . . has colonized our minds, traumatizing many people with its toxic theology and shaping a culture of stigma and shame that has silenced millions of women and people who have had abortions . . . ” [1]
The Bible, Peters argues, says nothing about abortion. In her estimation, then, using the Bible to defend the pro-life position is not only wrong but dangerous.
Peters: Abortion is a Blessing
Psalm 139
Derived from Psalm 139, Peters’ sermon is about God’s presence. The audacity in choosing Psalm 139 is deliberate. Psalm 139:13-14 reads, “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well . . .” Because pro-life believers often reference that text in arguing for the sanctity of life, Peters wanted to show it was not a pro-life text and consistent with being pro-abortion. Her reading of the text is so fanciful as to make believing in green goblins living on the dark side of the moon seem sane by comparison. The plot of Home Alone 2 is more plausible.
In the sermon, Peters focuses on God’s presence. As a mother of 2, she notes that she felt God’s presence with her when she had abortions on two different occasions. Peters felt, she said, no guilt, shame, or sense of sin. Her feelings while having her abortion are not so much a reason to trust her judgment but a reason to suspect her capacity to feel correctly has been badly damaged.
Adventures in Missing the Point
Preaching, at its best, is the announcement of the Kingdom of God. Preaching announces the story of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It invites people to receive the Gospel by repentance and faith. Even when speaking of important social and moral issues, the pastor should point to Jesus.
Peter’s stole was the first notice that she was not preaching the Gospel. It was a warning about the wickedness that proceeded from her lips. The stole is not just an indiscretion. It is not just a mistake by an overzealous partisan. The hot pink stole emblazoned with the Planned Parenthood logo announces that whatever the text, whatever the agenda of worship should be, her pro-abortion agenda trumps it. The stole, then, is idolatrous.
More than that, the stole announces not just a different agenda than the Gospel. It announces an agenda contrary to the Gospel. Despite Peters’ objections, the Bible has plenty to say about life and its nature. True, the Bible does not say the word abortion. It does not say “crack cocaine” or “assault with nunchucks” either. It does not have to. The Bible’s message is clear without saying the word.
Abortion in the Bible
If humans are fearfully and wonderfully made and are put together by God, then they are humans before birth. The Bible reflects the personhood of John the Baptist before his birth. God tells Jeremiah that before he was born, the prophet was set apart. There is no coherent reading of the Bible that can lead to Peters’ conclusions.
The Early Believers
The earliest believers were consistent in their objections to abortion as well. The Didache, written probably between 70-100 AD says, “You shall not procure an abortion or destroy a newborn child.” If the dating of the Didache is correct, it was written contemporary with the Revelation most likely written around 95-96 AD.
The Epistle to Barnabas, written in the same era says, “. . . You shall not slay the child by procuring an abortion. . . ”
The early Christian apologist Athenagoras says that women who use drugs to induce on abortion commit murder and will have to give an account to God for their abortion.
Tertullian, the early Christian theologian who coined the word “Trinity,” argues, “. . .we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb . . .”
Basil the Great writes, “Let her that procures abortion undergo ten year’s penance . . .”
John Chrysostom, the great preacher of the early Church writes, “Why then do you abuse the gift of God, and fight with his laws, and follow after what is a curse as if a blessing, and make the chamber of procreation a chamber of murder. . .”[2]
Peters is not only misreading the Bible, she is ignoring the unified voice of the Christian tradition. When one is so far outside the tradition, self-reflection is needed. Peters does not do that here. No, she only glories in her shame.
Preaching is Dangerous
Most new preachers get very nervous about their role. Stage fright and nervousness abound. Most of them, however, are nervous about the wrong thing. One should not be afraid to stand in front of a group of people to speak, necessarily.
One should stand with fear and trembling when speaking on behalf of God. It is a fearsome thing to say ” . . . Thus saith the Lord . . .” The mere thought ought to fill the mind with dread and make the knees weak with worry. If one says stands in the pulpit speaking on behalf of God, he had better be right. If not, it risks violating the Third Commandment.
The Third Commandment is quite familiar to those who grew up in the faith. It reads, “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain . . . ” Growing up in church, most get the impression that the commandment meant to avoid saying profanities attached to God’s name. It does mean that, in part. The force, however, is much more.
To use God’s name to bless something God curses is the paramount meaning. When Nazi soldiers wore emblems saying “Gott mit uns,” “God [is] with us,” that was blasphemous, and when a pastor strides to the pulpit to say God was with her (by implication to comfort her) when she had two abortions, that is blasphemy. When Peters steps to the pulpit to utter the gobsmackingly inane phrase, ” . . . Prenates are not yet human beings . . . ” from the pulpit, that is blasphemy. God will not allow His name to be used to condone evil. Tread carefully, pastor.
God as Judge
If there was a truth spoken in Peters’ collage of words masquerading as a sermon it is that God is always present. God is always with us as the Psalm says, but God’s presence is not always a comfort. The Psalmist articulated his desire to hide from God but found no place. One only needs to hide from God’s presence if sin is present. In other words, God’s presence is often a threat. God is love, but God is also the judge. God sees us, loves us, and judges wickedness.
[1] Giatti and Reporter, “PCUSA Pastor Teaches on Psalm 139, Says She ‘Felt God’s Presence,’ ‘no Sin’ after 2 Abortions.”
[2] “Abortion.” All the above quotes are taken from this article: https://www.churchfathers.org/abortion
[3] Sermon quotes come from the Christian Post article
Also by Layne Wallace
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In