TOmNossor:
I believe properly understood LDS views on contraception are identical to those of the Catholic Church, only when the LDS chooses to prevent child birth, “non-natural” methods are available to them.
In just the same way, Dr. Kevorkian’s views on euthanasia are identical to those of the Catholic Church, only when it comes to letting people die, Dr. Kevorikian offered a “non-natural” way.
Again in practice there is less contraception in the CoJCoLDS. My Catholic mother who grew up in Catholic schools was somehow unaware that non-natural contraception is forbidden.
I don’t know what your sources are, but supposing you are exactly right, it means nothing. A lot of Catholics disagreeing with the Church doesn’t make the Church wrong, and it most certainly doesn’t change what the Church teaches.
Divorce is also quite discouraged in the CoJCoLDS. That we do not have absolute doctrinal prohibitions in the way that Catholics do is true.
I understand and acknolwedge that all of the things I mentioned are discouraged by the CoJCoLDS. But in my view things that are intrinsically evil need to be absolutely prohibited.
As some of my Catholic friends IRL have observed these prohibitions tend to hurt those who are already hurting. Seldom in practice do Catholic choice to stay married in the face of profound marital strife that would drive non-Catholics to divorce. Then at the time of their extreme pain the Catholic Church informs them that their divorce was a sin.
The Church does not prohibit separation as a last resort. However, the spouses are still spouses. What God has joined together, man cannot put asunder.
You take the negative, legalistic view of Church teaching, but that’s like saying it’s bad for the Church to inform an alcoholic that his habit is a vice. Sin is unfortunate, but it’s the Church’s job to make people’s lives holy, not to make their lives easy.
My Catholic friends hope that there can be a better way. I do not know what it is, but Home Teachers and communal Christianity seem to be part of the solution.
Both would be nice, and the Church offers both in various capacities and various places, but I don’t understand what it has to do with the subject.
On abortion, I think this thread says most of what I have to say.
The Catholic Church’s position has developed from a position more in line with the LDS position to its current position.
I didn’t have time to read all of that. I’ll look at it later if you’d like to discuss it.
As Tmaque pointed out, in practice LDS are more pro-life. While there (unfortunately in my opinion) are some instances such as incest were it is not impossible for the CoJCoLDS to believe God has/will allowed the evil of abortion, this is pretty rare and from talking to family services I know that rape and incest babies are born and I know of no abortions (but I expect they occur on occasion).
Again, IMO if Catholics don’t practice the strictly pro-life teaching, it doesn’t mean the Church is wrong to teach it; if LDS do practice it, it doesn’t make it okay for the LDS church not to teach it.
Anyway, I guess it is not inappropriate to teach that there are differences between the Catholic and LDS view on family and abortion (in their absolute doctrinal / official practice stances). I do however believe that it is inappropriate to set up the comparison as it has been set forth in this thread by Brad Haas and not acknowledge the many complexities I mentioned above.
Well, I have to disagree: I think complexities exist only because of sin. Before the Redemption, God allowed things like divorce because of the hardness of heart of fallen mankind, but Jesus has made it possible for us to be set free, to go back to “the beginning” when “it was not so.” All of the Church’s teachings on these matters stem from the love with which God loves us - free, total, faithful, and fruitful self-giving.
Forgive my short statements - it’s a busy day. I look forward to more dialogue with you, TOm.
