The Episcopal Church
The Episcopal Church, a church of Bishops, can be found in both America and Scotland. The American and Scottish Episcopal churches are directly related to the Anglican Communion. It’s important to remember that this flow of ideas dramatically affects the particular stance of chapters of it, like the American Episcopal Church. The theological framework for the Episcopal Church’s stance on abortion, then, can be just as readily understood through the eyes of a Scottish theologian as an American one. The first source in this exhibit is one such source; it provides context for American Episcopal doctrine by spelling out the thought process behind that doctrine. This source is followed by the official stance of the American Episcopal Church, which relies on the justification of sources like Bishop Holloway’s. Both provide a kind of support for the pro-choice movement in America and see abortion, while a moral issue, as a dramatically different kind of moral question. For the Episcopal Church, morality was not just a question of seeing women as moral agents–though this, too, plays a role–but in seeing this as a way of testing one’s ability to love one’s neighbor.
By framing it as a question not of whose life matters–or doesn’t–but of whose morals matter–or don’t–the issue of morality takes a bit of a backseat. Other authors, including Rebecca Todd Peters, have seen it as an issue of whether women should or should not be trusted; Holloway and the Episcopal Church instead demand a different variety of moral clarity. There are problematic aspects of abortion and there are certainly Episcopalians who see it as murder and fight to protect the lives of the babies in question. That isn’t the point, though, that the church or Holloway are trying to make; instead, they class this as an issue of loving one’s neighbors. Can you still, he asks, love your neighbor and protect his moral agency when it differs from your own? Does loving your neighbor extend to seeing value in virtues that differ drastically from your own? The Episcopal Church, it seems, would say yes.
The second source included here comes from the American Episcopal Church and formally lists out the stance of the church. Importantly, despite the frequent theological overlaps between Catholicism and Episcopalianism, the two differ dramatically both on the ideas concluded and the methodology used to reach that conclusion on several major issues, including abortion. The American Episcopal Church meets in a General Convention every three years where a conference of half laity and half clergy discuss the most important issues of the church at hand, including the development of new theology. Like the other two religions discussed in this exhibit, many Episcopalians determine their political views from their religious ones. However, the official church stance does not represent the view of every Episcopalian and, like in most religious traditions, there will be those who identify with the faith and its theology but differ in the practical implementation of that theology.
Negotiating the Ethical Minefield, Politics of Abortion (1981)
In 1981, the Bishop of Edinburgh wrote a theological consideration of the ethics of abortion. His nuanced take offers an insight into the kind of deep, critical thinking that was going on even among the clergy to see abortion not as a simple, cut-and-dry issue, which is reflected in the stance of the church itself. Later sources will emphasize the practical reality of the Episcopal position: what does the church say we can or should believe? How do those beliefs call us to act? But, this theological justification provides the theoretical basis for asking those questions in the first place. Here, Holloway answers the first questions: what does the Christian God call His people to consider? What moral tools are we offered with which to consider? How do these moral quandaries reflect back on first principles? How can we act with love toward our neighbor and what does it mean to truly love one’s neighbors and enemies?
Bishop Holloway addresses abortion as a moral issue, certainly, but more importantly, as an opportunity to reflect on the value of cultural and religious pluralism. He sees it as the moral duty of Christians to embrace the importance of values different than one’s own, rather than attempting to convert someone to their own perspective. Whether an individual Christian, then, sees abortion as moral or immoral should not relate to how they advocate for abortion access; the fact that there are those of different moral traditions who see it as a moral choice means that the loving, Christian thing to do is support them. And, for Bishop Holloway, supporting others’ right to make pluralistic moral choices means ensuring their ability to do so legally.
This theological attitude, from a high-ranking Scottish member of the Episcopal Church, not only had far-reaching effects, but was represented in official church doctrine in the United States. Holloway’s organization and clarity make this source the best representation of the theological thought processes of the time, but he is by no means the only Episcopal theologian considering the ramifications of the Episcopal abortion position or where the abortion position takes its grounding from, in terms of Biblical backing and Christian history.
Reaffirm the Church's Guidelines on the Termination of Pregnancy (1982)
The Episcopal theological framework for abortion demands consideration of the following moral conflicts. First, that the power to conceive as to give birth are both bestowed by God and God alone. Therefore, this 1982 statement asserts, the responsibility for the care and termination of life are not to be taken lightly. Second, that that moral responsibility includes thoughtful family planning and the use of contraception. Third, that to terminate a life–even an unborn one–can only be the morally responsible choice under particular circumstances. Scholars have referred to these circumstances as “PRIM” or: Prenatal health, Rape, Incest, Maternal health. These four categories all constitute permissible abortions in the Episcopal tradition, which specifies that a mother’s mental health is as important a deciding factor as her physical. Fourth, Episcopalians are called to consult with a priest, consider all other options before terminating a pregnancy, and, where necessary, to repent and seek forgiveness.
This document reflects the reaffirmation of the American Episcopal stance on abortion and contraception. Originally, the General Conference had declared where they stood in 1967, six years before the Roe v. Wade decision. This position was reflective of a history of Episcopal priests participating in the “Clergy Consultation Service on Abortion,” which was a group that spread across multiple states after starting in New York, through which Jewish and Christian pastors helped women access abortions when they were not legal. These pastors ensured that the abortions were as safe as they could be and provided counseling to the women–and their partners or family members–to make sure that they were making informed decisions with an eye to the personal emotional and spiritual conflicts they might face. This version of pastoral care and Christian ethics is consistent with Bishop Holloway’s theology, but it also considers the possibility that there are morally responsible times for women to have abortions.
While the General Convention is half-clergy and half-laity (and, therefore, represents both perspectives in its conclusions), it does not capture the perspectives of all the clergy nor laity within the church. It’s important to remember that the flexibility of the Episcopal stance on this issue allows for individual Episcopalians to identify as more–or less–pro-choice politically. Many were activists, as we saw in the NOW/NARAL packet, but a firm belief in the letter of the Episcopal stance would have friction with the views of many of the activists leading the more political charge to reduce laws about abortion nationally.
Who Wrote the Episcopal Page?
Hi! I’m Isabel Gerard and I curated the Episopal portion of this exhibit. I’m a Cradle Catholic and have served on the Davidson Catholic Campus Ministries leadership board for four years. I have a minor in Religious Studies and a major in Biology. Researching this topic has taught me how two similar religions can start with the same documents and teachings and reach drastically different conclusions. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask, or, if they come up later, reach out to me! My email is isgerard@davidson.edu.