Abortion is logical outgrowth of Adventist view of man
Last Friday, August 29, 2019, The Adventist organization announced that it is officially working on an amended abortion statement. In an article entitled “Adventist Church works to clarify its stance on abortion”, the Adventist News Network said, “A diverse group of Seventh-day Adventist medical experts, theologians, healthcare administrators and ethicists are currently engaged in an attempt to clarify the Church’s official stance on the controversial issue of abortion.”
The organization has had “guidelines, but not an official statement on abortion,” the article continued.
In fact, Adventism has had a document since 1992 describing its pro-choice stance in oh-so-compassionate words, but, as has been the case since the first Adventist policy on abortion was approved in 1970, none of its statements has been “official”. Now, however, Adventist leaders have gone back to the drawing board with the intention of producing a document for approval at the Annual Council in Silver Spring, Maryland, this coming October 9–16.
Apparently this document will be “official”.
The preparation of this document has been tortuous. Two years ago, the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference (the BRI) was asked to compile and prepare “a statement that reflects Scriptural principles bearing on the discussion of abortion.”
The BRI has conferred with Adventism’s Health Ministries department and the General Conference’s Bioethics Committee with members from Adventist “hospitals and medical systems, as well as independent Adventist healthcare administrators and practitioners.”
The input of Adventism’s brightest theologians and medical professionals, however, was not enough to produce a satisfactory working document. Just last week on August 27, the “General Conference Administrative Committee established a Working Group on Abortion” comprised of 26 people from a range of Adventist departments and 24 countries including the USA: “Health Ministries, Women’s Ministries, Family Ministries, Education, Children’s Ministries, Ellen G. White Estate, Biblical Research Institute, Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries, Office of General Counsel, Public Affairs, senior administration, the General Conference Communication Department, and the Adventist Review.”
Artur Stele, a vice-president of the General Conference and chair of this Working Group, quoted from “the Committee’s Terms of Reference” and said the group’s responsibility “is to ‘prepare a draft of one unified statement that will clearly be based on biblical principles that underline the sanctity of life and recognize the exceptionally difficult cases/anomalies women can face.’”
During September, the document will go through two more reviews and revisions with representatives from healthcare specialists, bioethicists, and the Writing Committee and the full Working Group before being presented at Annual Council for a vote.
Why this matters
Adventism has increasingly come under scrutiny for its long-standing, “unofficial” pro-choice position which has allowed Adventist hospitals to perform abortions on demand (often under different names) since 1971—two years before the infamous Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion in the United States.
Not only has abortion on demand been available from Adventist health providers since 1971, however, but there have been two sets of guidelines within Adventism for abortion. One set of guidelines has been a “conservative” pro-choice recommendation which has been the guide for members. Since 1971, however, there has also been an internal document which was the guide for Adventist healthcare institutions.
In an article entitled “Abortion In Adventism: Why Seventh-day Adventism Promotes Choice” published in the Summer, 2014, issue of Proclamation!, we reported on the development of Adventism’s abortion policies. The significant thing about this internal document for healthcare providers is that it was “specifically for institutions and not for the general membership.” In fact, the secretary of the committee that submitted the document for approval, C. E. Bradford, “revealed that the Adventist organization was not actually ‘owning’ the statement as an official position paper. He said in his cover letter, ‘I suppose you would say this [document] is quasi official without the full imprimatur of the brethren.’”
In a typical move to avoid being pinned down and held accountable for Adventism’s true beliefs and practices, Adventist leaders deceptively prepared a document that allowed Adventist institutions to profit from on-demand abortions without ever acknowledging the practice as “official”. If they were ever confronted, they could deny responsibility. They never voted to accept the document that was disseminated to all Adventist medical providers.
This document allowed Adventist doctors and hospitals to perform abortions not only for a variety of situations such as rape, incest, or congenital deformities, but also “when for some reason the requirements of functional human life demand the sacrifice of the lesser potential human value.’”
Over the past three decades, however, there has been increasing pressure from concerned Adventists to change the permissive position of the organization to a pro-life position.
In recent years two vocal anti-abortion Adventists have become widely known. Nic Samojluk of Loma Linda, California, maintains a website reporting on abortion news in Adventism, and he also sends links to Adventist abortion news to an email list. Nic openly calls for Adventists to reconsider their liberal stance on abortion and demands that only clear danger to the mother’s health should be admitted as a reason for any abortion.
Even more prolific is Prolife Andrew. Andrew is a native of the Philippines and has a YouTube channel and a Facebook page devoted to videos exposing Adventism’s beliefs and practices of abortion. Andrew openly calls abortion “murder” and calls the Adventist church to abandon it.
In addition to these and other Adventist anti-abortion campaigners, a growing number of former Adventists are talking on social media about Adventism’s abortion policies. In fact, Life Assurance Ministries has shown how the Adventist belief in a purely physical nature of man provides the foundation for the organization’s acceptance of abortion.
Not surprisingly, with the increasing pressure from both members and former members, the Adventist organization is now working to tighten up its abortion guidelines and create some sort of official statement.
The real problem
If the Adventist organization were to respond to the demands of people like Samojluk and Prolife Andrew, many unborn children would be saved. Andrew is right: abortion is murder, and killing the unborn is breaking the sixth commandment as surely as is murdering an adult.
The problem, however, is that a pro-life stance cannot be supported by Adventist doctrines. While I agree with Nic Samojluk and Prolife Andrew that abortion is an evil that should be stopped, I find their positions to be incongruent with their unwavering commitments to Adventism. Both men call for the Adventist organization to change its ways while simultaneously clinging to Adventism’s belief that man is just a body that breathes. This position is inconsistent.
Within Adventism, “a new soul comes into existence whenever a child is born” (Seventh-day Adventists Believe, 2018 ed., p. 93). Prior to birth, the baby that has not yet breathed is not a soul. Destroying a body that has not breathed independently is not, from an Adventist theological perspective, murder.
To my shame, as an Adventist I could not figure out why there was ever any question about having an abortion if pregnancy was “in the way”. I remember wondering why a classmate in college who became pregnant on her honeymoon chose to have her baby and quit school instead of aborting and finishing her classes. I was not flippant about these thoughts; I pondered them often and deeply and could not figure out any reason an unborn human was any different from unborn animals.
Years later after I had left Adventism and had become a born-again believer in Jesus, I realized that humans are not merely bodies plus breath. They have immaterial identities—spirits—that do not cease to exist when the body dies. I finally understood that our true identities are rooted in our immaterial self—and unborn babies have spirits just like born people have. Our humanity does not depend upon the breath in our lungs; rather, our identities are designed by God and given to us when we are conceived (Ps. 139).
In fact, John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit in is mother’s womb (Lk. 1:15), and he leaped when Mary entered the house of his parents carrying his unborn Savior (Lk. 1:41). Neither John nor Jesus were mere “potential”. They were living humans with unique identities from the moment of conception.
When I realized that abortions destroyed real people with unique identities, that those tiny bodies died and their spirits went to be with the Lord, I wept. I finally understood why abortion was murder and unconscionable. Those unborn babies are PEOPLE, not potential.
Today when I listen to Brother Andrew or read Nic Samoljuk, I want to say to them, “You can’t change Adventism! Its position supporting abortion is completely consistent with its doctrine of man. If you are convicted that you must take a stand against the Adventist practice of abortion, you need to consider leaving the organization. You can’t honestly oppose abortion and condone its belief that man is just body plus breath!”
Implications
Adventism is expert at couching its beliefs behind confusing rhetoric and vague wording. If this project to produce a statement on abortion yields a voted document, it will be the first time the organization will have an official abortion policy.
Meanwhile, I am not holding my breath that Adventism will suddenly become pro-life and renounce its practice and condoning of abortion. Because Adventism does not believe a soul exists until a baby breathes, they will have a hard time prohibiting a practice that has yielded huge profits both through income in their hospitals and through gifts from wealthy abortion doctors such as Edward Allred, founder of Family Planning Associates, who funded the Edward C. Allred Center for Financial Literacy and Entrepreneurship on the campus of La Sierra University in Southern California.
The practice of abortion is a logical outgrowth of the Adventist materialist view of man. In fact, it is more consistent for the organization to hold a pro-choice view than not to do so. To the Adventists who rightly oppose the killing of the unborn, I say this: read Psalm 139. Read 2 Corinthians 5:1–9. Examine your own belief system in the light of God’s word.
Each child is personally known and formed by God. Each embryo has its own spirit that is its unique identity. The question of abortion is not merely philosophical. It is a spiritual issue, and the lives of real people are at stake.
Dear Adventist, you cannot logically argue for a pro-life position unless you acknowledge that every pregnancy is a new life before it breathes. In fact, the question you face is deeper than the issue of abortion. The real question you face is this: can you stay in a religion whose worldview denies the truth about your own identity? †
- May 18–24, 2024 - May 16, 2024
- We Got Mail - May 16, 2024
- Should We Leave the “Isms”? - May 9, 2024
I loved the article. Thank you, Colleen.