It appears that a report from the Anglican Church of Melbourne has recommended we move to a less-inclusive Church, especially in the case of "foetal abnormality, when abortion was 'the least problematic solution'". Thanks to Scott for drawing this to our attention
The Church of Melbourne's home page features three great articles relating to children and youth. I was particularly struck by the one entitled "Archbishop calls for national inquiry into childhood depression". Hmmm.
Where should one turn at such times for a vision of the inclusive church? Perhaps to those who are the forefront of the move toward "inclusivity":
"Planned Parenthood is an organization that I have always admired and respected. It does such extraordinarily fine work, and I'm very happy to be associated with it."
Rt Rev Gene Robinson, interviewed here.
"...we must challenge the condemnation by the Church throughout the centuries of such things as masturbation, birth control, abortion, and homosexuality."
Rt Rev Michael Ingham, article here.
It's true that we are not a single issue church. It's a worldview. Of course those with "foetal abnormalities" are included as a large subset of the objects of the "extraordinariiy fine work" which is done. You can see that such fine work is done in almost 85-90% of say, foetuses with a diagnosis of Down Syndrome. But don't take my word for it. Such extraordinarily fine work has been detailed elsewhere:
Caroline Mansfield, Suellen Hopfer, Theresa M. Marteau (1999). "Termination rates after prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome, spina bifida, anencephaly, and Turner and Klinefelter syndromes: a systematic literature review". Prenatal Diagnosis 19 (9): 808-812. PMID 10521836 ; David W. Britt, Samantha T. Risinger, Virginia Miller, Mary K. Mans, Eric L. Krivchenia, Mark I. Evans (1999). "Determinants of parental decisions after the prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: Bringing in context". American Journal of Medical Genetics 93 (5): 410 - 416
This is why I find talk of an "Inclusive Church" rather, well, deficient at best and deceptive at worst. I have long known that the Episcopal Church has been active in the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. The latest op-ed from the Rev Anne Fowler celebrates this fact.
I am not convinced. It is precisely those who require of us a sacrificial love, who will lead us into the Kingdom. Of course we don't want to offer such sacrificial love, and so we look for the "least problematic solution". We don't really want to practice Jesus' unconditional love; we just want to use it as a slogan at synods, in church newspapers and in comments on our favorite blogs. Don't let us see what it really looks like.
For some, full "sacramental inclusion" means reaching the baptismal font...