![\"Wat](\"https:\/\/www.cogwriter.com\/abortion.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Bas-relief at Angkor Wat, dated circa 1150, depicting a demon performing an abortion by pounding a mallet into a woman\u2019s belly.<\/em><\/p>\n COGwriter<\/a><\/p>\n Christianity Today<\/em> had the following in an article:<\/p>\n September 2, 2008 8:56PM<\/p>\n Radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt said tonight that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s comments on when life begins signified a turning point for religious voters.<\/p>\n Pelosi said on TV last week that “doctors of the church” have not been able to define when life begins.<\/p>\n What about on the Democrats’ attempts to reach out to religious voters?<\/strong> The problem is that if “doctors of the Church” means Roman Catholic leaders (which it is supposed to in this context), Nancy Pelosi is quite correct.\u00a0 While the current Roman Catholic Church has a different opinion, to say that its leaders have had questions about this matter is NOT a distortion.<\/p>\n The truth is that Roman Catholic leaders have endorsed abortion throughout the ages.<\/p>\n Now, as the true Church of God has never done this, as we have always recognized that life begins at conception (please see Abortion, the Bible, and a Woman\u2019s Right to Choose<\/a> ).<\/p>\n While Nancy Pelosi cited Augustine and Thomas Aquinas as proof that the Catholics have had questions about when life begins, there were also other Catholic leaders who were unsure.<\/p>\n The Roman Bishop Callistus<\/a> (as well as later Popes) did allow abortion.<\/p>\n Notice what one Protestant scholar wrote about other Roman Catholic Popes:<\/p>\n Most Catholics are not aware that the infallible Church and popes have changed their minds several times on this topic–unthinkable from today’s perspective.<\/p>\n From the fifth century onward, Aristotle’s view that the embryo goes through stages from vegetable to animal to spiritual was accepted. Only in the final stage was it human. Thus Gregory VI (1045-6) said, “He is not a murderer who brings about abortion before the soul is in the body.” Gregory XIII (1572-85) said it was not homicide to kill an embryo of less than 40 days since it wasn’t yet human. His successor, Sixtus V, who rewrote the Bible, disagreed. His Bull of 1588 made all abortions for any reason homicide and cause for excommunication. His successor, Gregory XIV, reversed that decree. In 1621 the Vatican issued another pastoral directive permitting abortion up to 40 days (Hunt D. A Women Rides the BeastHarvest House Publishers, Eugene (OR), 1994, pp. 519-520).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Quite similarly notice what one former Roman Catholic priest wrote:<\/p>\n Most Catholics assume that the soul is infused at conception…For fourteen hundred years until the late nineteenth century, all Catholics, including the popes, took it for granted that the soul is not<\/em> infused at conception…<\/p>\n From the fifth century, the church accepted without question, the primitive embryology of Aristotle. The embryo began as a non-human speck that was progressively animated<\/em>.<\/p>\n In the fifteenth century, moralists began to ask whether it was not possible in certain circumstances to get rid of the foetus without fault…Some went further. They said it was permissable to save a mother’s life even after<\/em> the foetus was humanized…<\/p>\n Gregory XIII (1572-85) said it was not homicide to kill an embryo of less than forty days since it was not human…His successor, the tempestuous Sixtus V, who rewrote the Bible, disagreed entirely. In his Bull Effraenatum<\/em> of 1588, he said all abortions for whatever reason were homicide and were penalized by excommunication reserved to the Holy See. Immediately after Sixtus died, Gregory XIV realized that, in the current state of theological opinion, Sixtus’ view was too severe. In an almost unique decision, he said Sixtus’ censures were to be treated as if he had never issued them (De Rosa, Peter. Vicars of Christ. Poolbeg Press, Dublin, 2000, p.p 374-375).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Although there is no evidence that any Church of God leader endorsed abortion, sadly some affiliated with the Roman Church have.<\/p>\n Thus, while I remain opposed to abortion, to portray Nancy Pelosi’s comments as inaccurate is not right.<\/p>\n The Roman Catholic Church has changed (and often rechanged) many doctrines.<\/p>\n Several articles of possibly related interest may include:<\/em><\/p>\n Which Is Faithful: The Roman Catholic Church or the Living Church of God?<\/a> Do you know that both groups shared a lot of the earliest teachings? Do you know which church changed? Do you know which group is most faithful to the teachings of the apostolic church? Which group best represents true Christianity? This documented article answers those questions. Bas-relief at Angkor Wat, dated circa 1150, depicting a demon performing an abortion by pounding a mallet into a woman\u2019s belly. COGwriter Christianity Today had the following in an article: September 2, 2008 8:56PM Sarah Pulliam Radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt said tonight that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s comments on when life begins signified […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-607","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-doctrine"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\tSarah Pulliam<\/strong><\/div>\n
\nI think the Nancy Pelosi\u2019s attempt to distort Roman Catholic Church on Meet the Press led to an avalanche of Roman Catholic bishops and cardinals denouncing her attempt to confuse and mislead mass-attending Catholics. That, in turn, triggered a re-evaluation of the Democratic platform and the story about Sen. Obama\u2019s voting against the born-alive infant protection act got a lot of traction because of Sen. Pelosi. It was a turning point in the religious vote, and I don\u2019t see him making significant in roads whatsoever. The evangelical vote is going to turn out and it\u2019s going to be overwhelmingly for McCain. http:\/\/blog.christianitytoday.com\/ctpolitics\/2008\/09\/talk_show_host.html<\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n
\nAbortion, the Bible, and a Woman\u2019s Right to Choose<\/a> Do you know what the Bible teaches on this?
\nShould a Christian Vote?<\/a> This article gives some of the Biblical rationale on this subject. Would Jesus vote for president? Is voting in the Bible? This is a subject Christians need to understand.
\nThere are Many COGs: Why Support the Living Church of God?<\/a> This is an article for those who wish to easily sort out the different COGs. It really should be a MUST READ for current and former WCG members or any interested in supporting the faithful church. It also explains a lot of what the COGs are all about.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"