We all must be well-informed, active citizens. We must remind ourselves of the founding principles of our nation, and embrace them afresh. We must proclaim to all the sanctity of human life. We must advocate for its full protection under law. More concretely, we must urge the SCOTUS to do its duty: to implement the 14th Amendment and protect the right to life of all Americans, including the unborn, the handicapped, and the aged. Failing that, we must advocate for a Personhood or Human Life Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, thereby compelling the SCOTUS to do its duty.

I am deeply concerned. As a retired pastor and pro-life activist for over 40 years, I feel compelled to respond to President Trump’s new position on abortion and related life issues. In what follows I will largely address my brothers and sisters in Christ, but also all Americans who cherish our great experiment—that we should live together as one nation under God.
What exactly did President Trump say? In essence, it was this: “In the Dobbs decision, the SCOTUS got it right. The justices saw that the Constitution says nothing about abortion. Therefore, in accordance with the 10th Amendment, they sent this matter back to the states. And I myself believe that’s where we should leave it.”
Here are some of the President’s exact words: “We have abortion where everyone wanted it . . . The states will determine [their position] by vote or legislation, or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land: in this case, the law of the state. Many states will be different. Many will [permit abortions after] a different number of weeks . . . At the end of the day, this is all about the will of the people.”
In so speaking, a historically pro-life President, who previously accomplished great things for the unborn and their moms, has effectively become pro-choice. He is personally opposed to abortion; but if elected as President, he will not seek to restrict it by means of federal law or judicial decision.
In the face of rising criticism from pro-life leaders who expected more, the President seems unmoved. When asked if he would sign any kind of national ban on abortions, he simply said, “No.” Also, he expects—and apparently welcomes—electoral and legislative challenges to the kind of restrictive abortion laws we see in Arizona and Florida. He said, “So Florida’s probably going to change. Arizona is going to definitely change, everybody wants that to happen. And you’re getting the will of the people. It’s been pretty incredible when you think about it” (here).
Yes, it truly is pretty incredible.
A Stone of Stumbling, a Rock of Offense
I reckon this new states’ rights approach to abortion law to be an exceedingly dangerous error. Among other things, it places a spiritual and moral stumbling block before all Americans. It tempts us to accept the new status quo; to give up the fight for universal legal protection for unborn human beings; and to settle for a politically popular but spiritually lethal compromise, a compromise that will leave multitudes of unborn babies and their moms exposed to painful injury and death, and America exposed to the wrath and judgment of  a holy God.
Already, many have succumbed to the siren song. Kari Lake, a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Arizona, has publicly declared her agreement with President Trump. Accordingly, she has voiced her intention to oppose a recent Arizona State Supreme Court decision proscribing all abortions, except to save the life of the mother (here). Many other GOP hopefuls are falling in line with the President’s new stance (here). To judge from articles and comments appearing on conservative websites, multitudes of conservative Americans are doing the same (here). Doubtless many of my fellow Christians are in agreement. Even the leaders of longstanding pro-life ministries seem uncertain about how to proceed (here, here, and here). The Bible teaches that we are to be imitators of God (Eph. 5:1). President Trump now tempts us to become imitators of man.
Why So?
Why is the states’ rights approach to the life issues (abortion, in vitro fertilization, euthanasia, etc.) such a dangerous stumbling block? Here, to my mind, are a few of the most important reasons.
First and foremost, it ignores the will of God. Or rather, it actually seeks to replace the will of God with the will of man. God says, “You shall not commit murder” (Ex. 20:13). But President Trump and his followers say, “Well, personally we don’t agree with committing murder, but legally and constitutionally we must leave it to the people in the states to decide. Some will allow murder after 6 weeks, others after 15, others later still. At the end of the day, it’s all about the will of the people.” But this, as Roman Catholic leaders recently reminded us in Dignitas Infinitas, is simply another concession to the age-old temptation that fallen man should become his own god (here).
Secondly, this approach misunderstands the proper role of government. Biblically, government does not exist to implement the will of the people; it exists to implement the will of God. This is the thrust of Romans 13. Rulers are servants of God. They are given to us by God for our good. Their job is to commend those who do what is right, and to bring God’s wrath and retribution upon those who practice evil. In short, the purpose of government is to administer God’s holy law, not the wishes of fallen man, which are often sinful and unlawful. When God first instituted human government in the earth, he gave but one command: “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God he made man” (Gen. 9:6). Similarly, on the second table of the Ten Commandments, the very first “Thou shalt not” is: Thou shalt not commit murder. Let every human ruler understand and tremble.
Thirdly, this approach misreads the nature and purpose of America’s founding documents. Like the Ten Commandments, these writings laid down the fundamental principles by which the nation as a whole covenants to live together. According to the Declaration, all Americans enjoy a God-given right to life, bestowed upon them by their Creator. That is the principle. The 14th Amendment gives us the principle put into practice: No state may deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall it deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I am all too aware of those who try to argue that the unborn are not (yet) persons. For biblical Christians, this position is completely untenable, for Scripture everywhere depicts the unborn child as fully human, as a spiritual soul (person) united with a physical body. (Gen. 2:7; Ex. 21:22-25; Psalm 139; Luke 1:41-44; James 2:26).
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Jesse T. Jackson |
Thursday, September 23, 2021
A professor from the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary, Christopher B. James, gave his thoughts as to why he believes the trend of pastors leaving ministry is occurring. James said, “In addition to being a hard job with mediocre pay, many pastors don’t think it’s worth it to try to maintain dying churches and are curious what Christian life & leadership might look like outside the clergy role. It’s part of a wider unraveling and reconfiguration of church.” White replied to Prof. James, “I think you’re on to something.”

High numbers of pastors leaving ministry are an an exodus that’s concerning to pastors‘ coach and co-founder Dan White Jr. of The KINEO Center, a place focused on offering healing for tired and traumatized leaders. On May 3, 2021, White posted on Twitter that he knows 28 pastor friends who have resigned this year, most of whom are leaving pastoral ministry altogether. White coaches approximately 70 to 80 pastors a year in his circle of about 500 or so.
Why Are Pastors Leaving Ministry?
White, a former pastor himself, asked “What is occurring?”
It doesn’t seem to be in any particular denomination as White shared that his friends come from a mix of denominations including Baptist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, Anglican, Methodist, Mennonite, and Christian Reformed. Only nine of them were Evangelical pastors and just 10 out of the 28 he mentioned were bi-vocational.
“I’ve been coaching for about 10 years, never seen this kind of disruption.”- Dan White Jr.
White replied to a follower’s question about the average age and lifestyle of those he has seen transitioning out of pastoral ministry, saying in his experience they’ve been between the ages of 35 to 50. Some have served as many as 25 years in the pastoral ministry. “I do think it’s some kind of inner crisis with ‘what are my desires, really?’ coupled with a pain threshold ‘the attacks and loss are just too much; I’m miserable,’” he wrote.
He revealed that about half the 28 pastors he referred to were “People of Color” when someone asked if the majority of those who have left the ministry were African American pastors. He also stated that all of the 28 left by their choice; they weren’t forced out or fired.
A professor from the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary, Christopher B. James, gave his thoughts as to why he believes the trend of pastors leaving ministry is occurring. James said, “In addition to being a hard job with mediocre pay, many pastors don’t think it’s worth it to try to maintain dying churches and are curious what Christian life & leadership might look like outside the clergy role. It’s part of a wider unraveling and reconfiguration of church.” White replied to Prof. James, “I think you’re on to something.”
The active Twitter thread contains a handful of pastors currently in ministry and some who have left the ministry. One pastor told White, “As a minister struggling with whether to stay in parish ministry, I’m so hurt by all the replies that blame clergy for quitting. I’ve given my life to the Church, asked my family to sacrifice & ended up with my a** kicked. American church is broken.”
A former pastor of 30 years also wrote, “I’m one of those. After 30 years I felt God was calling me out of paid ministry into the marketplace. I’m convinced that many, many pastors have lost the ability to speak the same language of those outside of the church.”
Read More

I remember when John Chalmers, clerk of the General Assembly stated: “We had a debate which made very clear that we were not interfering with our theological definition of marriage and were not going to the place where ministers or deacons could themselves conducting same sex marriages.”. He lied.  Plain and simple.  He knew that this was a step on the road to conducting same sex marriages, and that the theological definition of marriage was being changed. And no one called him out on it.  Although yours truly tried – and was roundly castigated for being ‘unChristian.’

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
It’s a joy to be back in my native land – the most beautiful country in the world!  But there is also a sadness and sorrow.  Not just because I tested positive for Covid on landing – and now have the most miserable man flu!  The main sorrow I had was reading the following in The Courier on arrival – as the Church of Scotland prepares to hammer the final nail into its own coffin.
“Just this week, the Church of Scotland announced that 29 of its presbyteries were in favour of ministers and deacons conducting the ceremonies of same sex couples should they so wish. The Church is a democratic institution so the final word will go the General Assembly next month. But assuming it’s a Yes, the words “I do” could be said by same sex couples in churches by the summer….” These were part of an article written by Kezia Dugdale, former Labour leader in Scotland.  She went on to exult “That is absolutely phenomenal social progress by any measure.” 
That’s an interesting but not unsurprising perspective from an atheist, who has no love for the Gospel.  However, the truth is precisely the opposite.  This is not progress.  This is the Church of Scotland aiding and abetting Scottish society as it reverts, not just to pre-Reformation days, but to pre-Christian days.  My beloved nation is regressing back into the pagan world.  What used to be the National Church is meekly following whatever path the Regressives lead us – it would be inaccurate to say that they are leading – they have neither the initiative nor courage to lead.
I am not surprised at the Church of Scotland going this route – despite all the lies from leading clergy about how this would not be the case.  I remember when John Chalmers, clerk of the General Assembly stated: “We had a debate which made very clear that we were not interfering with our theological definition of marriage and were not going to the place where ministers or deacons could themselves conducting same sex marriages.”. He lied.  Plain and simple.  He knew that this was a step on the road to conducting same sex marriages, and that the theological definition of marriage was being changed. And no one called him out on it.  Although yours truly tried – and was roundly castigated for being ‘unChristian’ – https://theweeflea.com/2016/05/23/a-rubicon-has-been-crossed-the-church-of-scotland-assembly-decision-on-saturday/
I always thought that it was the deceit and misleading the Lord’s people that was unchristian – not pointing out that deceit.  Indeed, Christ himself was not averse to pointing out to some religious leaders that they belonged to their father the devil, when he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44)
Kezia’s Perspective
Kezia Dugdale also confirmed what we all, (except some gullible evangelicals), knew – that the purpose of the C of S leadership all along was to recognise same sex marriage – but to fool as many evangelicals as possible into thinking that we were being listened to, so that they could keep us on board. (I use ‘us’ because I identify with evangelicals as my brothers and sisters – whatever the denomination).   Dugdale speaks about how she had conversations with Rev. Lorna Hood moderator of the General Assembly in 2013, who promised her that SSM would come.
 “I just couldn’t understand it, especially as all the Christians I knew supported it. They believed in marriage as a union of two people rooted in love, respect and commitment and wanted it for everyone.”  This shows both the limited understanding of Christianity and of marriage.    If marriage is for everyone why limit it to two people?  And does that include incestuous marriage – if for example two sisters love, respect and commit to one another, why shouldn’t they get married?  It is telling that Lorna Hood was unable to help Kezia with her understanding – except to point out that some people were more ‘traditional’.  No, Lorna – it has nothing to do with tradition – and everything to do with Scripture.   But therein lies the problem for the Church of Scotland – it has rejected the Bible as its authoritative standard.  I recall sitting in the Assembly as the Bible was openly and publicly mocked – to laughter from the commissioners and not a word of rebuke from the leadership.
A Lost Battle
I have been involved with this issue for many years.  And I have to say that I now feel completely vindicated. But it is a battle that has left many wounds.  I think of Dominic Smart – a Church of Scotland minister who paid a massive price for his faithfulness.  He was truly a prophet without honour in his own land.  I miss him. I recall an amazing anonymous letter from 15 Glasgow presbytery ‘evangelicals’, who attacked me – and Willie Phillip – another faithful minister who paid the price. I think of Jeremy Middleton who gave the best speech I have ever heard at any Assembly and gave me a faint hope that things might be turned around – only to have that hope dashed by a couple of evangelicals running round, persuading others to play the political game and go along with the establishment. I think of Albert Bogle’s ‘compromise’ motion, which was not a compromise at all – and which gave the progressives everything they wanted. I think of John McPake promising me that the evangelicals had a plan – and that if I just kept quiet, I would see them work it out.  Part of that plan was for Angus Morrison to become an evangelical moderator.  That worked – in that he became moderator. But he ended up being honoured by the University of Glasgow for ‘changing attitudes to same sex relationships in the Church of Scotland”.
Read More
Related Posts: