Hilton Head religious leaders may not agree about abortion, but they disagree respectfully

As much as we listen to the bickering between political parties and the narcissism in candidate debate forums leading up to the upcoming midterm elections, there are still groups of communal leaders who are trying to discuss differences on public policy and remain respectful of each other.

In a recent podcast called “Forefront,” I had the chance to interview three female religious leaders from Hilton Head Island who serve our community and our region. They gathered together to discuss their faith traditions regarding abortion.

The Rev. Robin Dease is the senior pastor of St. Andrew By-The-Sea Methodist Church. Sister Pam Smith is a Roman Catholic nun who has devoted her life to ecumenical relations represented the Roman Catholic position on abortion. She is the senior ecumenical officer for the Diocese of Charleston. The last panelist was The Rev. Therese Lee from the Unity church which meets on Hilton Head.

All three religious leaders demonstrated how one can address a position on abortion that is true to their faith and still do so in a kind and considerate manner. They stayed true to their faith traditions and still engaged each other in a way that would not diminish their working relationship as religious leaders in this community.

As the moderator of the discussion, I believe that the clergy panel came away with hope from this program and with more knowledge about each other’s positions on reproductive rights, even though they do not agree with those theological positions of their colleagues.

I cannot think of a better and more important group of communal leaders like these women from our houses of worship to demonstrate how one takes the high ground on volatile issues in the public square in our society.

They quote Scripture and post biblical traditions of law and lore that inspire them and comprise the faith traditions they represent be it for or against abortion. I appreciated the tone that my colleagues took to express themselves as thoughtful but passionate about their beliefs that women do or do not have the right to make decisions when it comes to terminating a pregnancy. No question the fact that women made up the panel also gives us a unique and personal perspective when trying to clarify a stance on reproductive rights.

The fact that so many clergy today in America’s religious denominations are, in fact, women contributes greater exposure to a female clergy leader’s perspective. The panel gave examples of inspiring moments such as participating in a pro-life march. On the other hand, in an article on the subject of abortion reported in The Washington Post, one pastor described her reaction when she decided to have an abortion and then walked into a Planned Parenthood center. She said she had “never felt more known and heard and loved by God when I entered the doors of the Planned Parenthood center.” Clearly that kind of reflection resonated for the pro-choice panelists.

The beauty of the dialogue is how colleagues listen to each other tell their stories and seeing how these stories affected them. Even though they may have not agreed with them on a theological basis, and it still created greater bonds of understanding. That is exactly what we need more of between religions today.

It is not just about agreeing or disagreeing or winning the argument. That kind of competition dialogue does not lead us anywhere that is constructive. The subjects of abortion and reproductive choices require a much deeper understanding that may even go beyond the particular theology of any one religion. In the case of our panel discussion, three Christian religious leaders hold different ideas about when human personhood begins inside the womb, however, they all agree to their absolute commitment to the sanctity of life for a fetus.

In the same article from the Post, Archbishop Elpidophorous from Orthodox Christianity may have found an interesting middle ground. He said at a March for Life rally that “we do not march for coercion.” There are even Roman Catholic priests who hold the view that while abortion is a “tragedy,” it should still be up to the woman to make that choice.

The point is that clergy in the field have a way of carving out a pliable and humanistic position without diminishing their faith tradition’s stand or their own personal position. They understand that being realistic and listening to all sides of this complicated issue is required to have the moral authority to teach what they believe is the truth.

The Rev. Dease said, ’My job is not only to teach my interpretation about abortion. Rather it is my position to teach what I believe God says.’

I suppose the rest is up to the parishioner to make their decision. Clergy understand that having a “this is what my religion says and if you don’t like it then don’t come back” will only diminish their faith community. Clergy and volunteer leadership should think hard before banning other clergy or condemning them for holding a position different than their own. By doing so it does not set an example of interfaith cooperation.

The irony about this topic is how some religious leaders can be so secure in their own beliefs and so intolerant in other people’s beliefs.

When clergy stand on the moral high ground they show a light that inspires others. When they almost blindly adhere to institutional dictates they risk risk alienating many of their followers.

We may not solve the problems of how we can all get along on the abortion issue, but gathering together in a mature and respectful way goes a long way towards lowering the temperature and getting people to listen, which is the ingredient we need more of in this society.