Can aborted babies go to heaven?

[Willing_Spirit]

I think the next person who has a Marian apparition should ask.

Lol, gotta get a list of questions out there because you never know who is next! They’ll need to be prioritized too, because I dont want to learn Jesus’s favorite color before getting an answer to this.

 

[jzea1992]

I sure am hoping so.

 

[MiserereMeiDei]

Some, if I am understanding correctly, would say that all children are saved if they die before the age of reason (ca. age 7 in Catholic theology, ca. age 12 in evangelical theology, what they call “the age of accountability”)

This is an extremely dangerous idea and makes abortionists and other child killers to be more effective than Christ’s own church at saving souls. It’s an evil and pernicious idea piggybacking on sentimentality…as they so often do.

 

[LovelyLadybug]

Me too!!!

 

[Willing_Spirit]

Perhaps that is exactly why it has not been revealed to us.

 

[MiserereMeiDei]

Even entertaining the idea is pernicious.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Some, if I am understanding correctly, would say that all children are saved if they die before the age of reason (ca. age 7 in Catholic theology, ca. age 12 in evangelical theology, what they call “the age of accountability”)

I quite agree.

Our modern American society would be strongly taken aback, though, by the suggestion that any unbaptized baby could go anyplace other than heaven. It’s a disliked concept, therefore, it’s not embraced. I don’t like it myself — who would? Modern religious sensibility is all about finding something that is pleasant to believe.

Once again, the tail wags the dog.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Of course, this would also happen if a woman used an abortifacient method of contraception, and had a “silent abortion”. Let this soak in, when you contemplate a modern, dissenting Catholic woman who uses one of these methods, yet maintains she is in “good conscience” and receives the sacraments without repenting of this — because she doesn’t believe it’s a sin. How sure is she, that she is not killing a newly conceived baby?

This bothers me because it might dissuade women who really need to use these medications.

Just doing nothing around 50%of conceptions will fail to implant. The primary action of hormonal medication is to suppress ovulation. Therefore there will be far fewer miscarriages on the meds than off.

The secondary effect is to thin the uterine lining. For women who start out with a thick lining it’s a very good thing. It can mean being able to leave the house, not being anemic, not having to wake up in a pool of blood, spend the night in the ER getting a transfusion and possibly avoid hysterectomy.

These are points very well made. Spontaneous abortion, most often before anyone knows, are just part of nature and there is nothing we can do about it. If everyone were to abstain from relations because of the possibility that a child would be conceived and spontaneously aborted, the human race would die out in one generation. Clearly that is not God’s will.

There is no problem whatsoever with a woman taking anovulants to correct uterine problems and the like. If ovulation is suppressed, there can be no pregnancy. I am all in favor of women using such medications solely in the interest of improving their health, without contraceptive intent. And as you point out, a woman using these medications is actually less likely to miscarry.

And it is not only contraceptive pills that have a potentially abortifacient function — other methods do as well, including the IUD. Mirabile dictu, even The Washington Post (!) admits this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...f080be-886a-11e3-a760-a86415d0944d_story.html

However, some physicians and researchers stand firm on the pre-1970 view that pregnancy begins at the moment of conception, when a sperm unites with an egg. From that perspective, any method that prevents implantation of that fertilized egg (essentially, everything except barrier methods such as condoms) is abortifacient.

 

[Kei]

I think the next person who has a Marian apparition should ask.

I think apparitions adding to revealed doctrine is one of those red flags that marks apparitions as suspect. Some thing we just don’t know.

 

[Leek]

Could also add on having a short Lutal phase, and any number of other medications/ medical conditions that affect implantation and hormone levels.

I see the need for some of the language to improve to reflect what women are going through. Having a medication seen as abortive (most horrible thing ever) but suddenly you need to take it and it’s fine is confusing to say the least.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Could also add on having a short Lutal phase, and any number of other medications/ medical conditions that affect implantation and hormone levels.

I see the need for some of the language to improve to reflect what women are going through. Having a medication seen as abortive (most horrible thing ever) but suddenly you need to take it and it’s fine is confusing to say the least.

Where a medication has a potentially abortifacient function, I would recommend (a) finding out whether it makes conception and/or miscarriage more likely, less likely, or about the same, and (b) consulting one’s confessor and sharing the scenario and this information. There is no “one size fits all” scenario.

 

[Dan123]

Where a medication has a potentially abortifacient function, I would recommend (a) finding out whether it makes conception and/or miscarriage more likely, less likely, or about the same, and (b) consulting one’s confessor and sharing the scenario and this information. There is no “one size fits all” scenario.

Yeah a blanket rule would be difficult, while birth control may be the most commonly cited one, there’s a lot of drugs that can affect fertility and implantation, things like anti-depressants which help people with chemical imbalances literally go about their day all the way down to things we don’t even think about taking like ibuprofen.