Throughout the three years that our special committee met, we understood our primary task to be twofold: (1) to respond to the mandate of the 200th General Assembly (1988) to " …formulate a new policy statement. .. concerning the issues related to problem pregnancies. ..and abortion" (Minutes, 1988, Part I, p. 1016); and (2) to be an agent of healing in the life of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Our process included attendance at the PC(USA)’s National Dialogue on Abortion Perspectives in 1989; presentations on relevant topics from each member of the committee; presentations by persons outside of the committee with special expertise in areas under discussion; summaries by committee members of all correspondence addressed to our committee, with the letters themselves available to members at each meeting; and open hearings during most of our meetings, with additional hearings in several geographic areas where we were not meeting as a whole committee, utilizing the local presbytery offices and staff to arrange, publicize, and assist with these special hearings. Letters were sent to the moderators of each of the five racial-ethnic caucuses, urging them to make their members aware of the opportunities to share their relevant views and concerns with the members of the special committee.
The special committee also worked with the Presbyterian Panel as a part of our process in an effort to discover the attitudes of the denomination on the issues committed for our consideration. We felt that our task was to discover our church’s thinking on these issues, not simply to agree with the responses of the church. The questionnaire was developed by the Research Services Division of the Stewardship and Communication Development Ministry Unit in consultation with the special committee, and was used as the Presbyterian Panel in June 1990.
The responses to the Panel indicated that a majority of members and elders were either unaware that the PC(USA) had a policy statement regarding abortion or they knew there was a policy statement but were not able to describe it accurately. A large majority of pastors did indicate awareness of denominational policy. Large majorities of all samples thought it appropriate for the denomination to have an abortion policy statement. (For a summary of Panel results, see Appendix A.)
The Panel results indicated a lack of clarity in the church on legal and moral issues surrounding abortion. For example, with regard to legal issues, 64 percent of members and elders and 68 percent of pastors did not wish to see Roe v. Wade overturned. Yet, when asked whether or not it should be possible for a pregnant woman to obtain a legal abortion "if the family has a very low income and cannot afford any more children," only 42 percent of members, 36 percent of elders, and 43 percent of pastors said "yes." Asked if abortion should be legal "if she is not married and does not want to marry the man," only 36 percent of members, 34 percent of elders, and 39 percent of pastors said "yes." Respondents’ conclusions in the specific instances cited would seem to contradict their general position that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned.
Regarding moral issues surrounding abortion, again there was lack of clarity among respondents. There was no agreement, for example, as to when life begins. Panelists were also asked about, and differed on, questions concerning whether abortion is murder, whether abortion is moral under certain circumstances, and whether Christians should try to impose their personal standards of morality on others.
Our committee was faced with a diversity of passionately held views on problem pregnancies and abortion, both within our group and in the church at large. In fact, the struggles of our church over these issues have been reflected in the struggles in our committee. Thus a very vital part of our life has been prayer and worship. We have opened each session with prayer, and have worshiped together at each meeting, including a celebration of the Lord’s Supper at one meeting. Each of our meetings has included intensive study of Scriptures relevant to our topic and to our general spiritual growth. We have sought the work of the Holy Spirit in our efforts to hear and respect each other’s differing voices and opinions. And we have often interrupted our work to enter into times of obedient prayer, asking the Holy Spirit not only to guide us, but also to heal us and to heal our denomination as we work to serve our Lord and our church.
Throughout our deliberations, we have rarely found ourselves to be in unanimous agreement. However, there are two things upon which the special committee has agreed: that the Holy Scriptures are the ultimate authority for faith and practice, and that the church is subject in all things to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Therefore, we submit this paper to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), confessing our sinfulness and imperfection, but affiiming that we have earnestly sought to be obedient to the leading and Lordship of the Head of the church, Jesus Christ. It is our prayer that as the Holy Spirit has united fourteen different persons into one body seeking the glory of God and the proclamation of Christ’s Kingdom, so the same Spirit will unite our church in mission, worship, and work.