Mormon statement on abortion

[majick275]

lest we just wave off arguments with the ad hominem “catholic apologist” here are more quotes showing the change in LDS position on abortion:

John Taylor, the third prophet of the LDS Church, strongly condemned those who provided abortions by calling them “murderers and murderesses.” In this sermon given in 1881, Taylor said such people will “go to perdition” (Journal of Discourses 22:230). Three years later George Q. Cannon said that abortionists “will be damned with the deepest damnation; because it is the damnation of shedding innocent blood, for which there is no forgiveness” (Journal of Discourses 26:14-15).

Joseph F. Smith wrote, ‘It is just as much murder to destroy life before as it is after birth, although manmade laws may not so consider it; but there is One who does take notice and his justice and judgment is sure’ (Relief Society Magazine 3:367-68).

“Abortion must be considered one of the most revolting and sinful practices in this day…” (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p.189). He continued by saying, “Members of the Church guilty of being parties to the sin of abortion must be subjected to the disciplinary action of the councils of the Church, as circumstances warrant. We remember the reiteration of the Ten Commandments given by the Lord in our own time, when he said, ‘Thou shalt not steal; neither commit adultery, nor kill, nor do anything like unto it.’”

now compare that with the current CHI and GBH’s directions.
you will see that at one time the LDS opposed ALL abortions and now they make allowances…a growing list of allowances.

 

[Dauphin]

Dauphin,

If you follow my link you will find that the majority of your statements are well addressed.

Actually, LDS are opposed to abortion even in the cases of rape and incest. You are mistaken to suggest otherwise. That LDS believe God may for the health of the mother approve of abortion in the case of rape and incest does not mean that LDS are not always opposed to abortion. This should have been clear in my statement.
You are in fact correct a Catholic who has an abortion is not a Catholic. I should have been more specific. People who claim to be Catholic have abortions at a significantly higher rate than people who claim to be LDS.

The LDS church is pro-choice when it comes to abortion for rape or incest. They are willing to wash their hands of the atrocity that is abortion if the existence of the fetus threatens or inconveniences another. Don’t bother me with the technicality that the church isn’t “pro-abortion”. The church offers a tacit approval of abortion, which is enough reason to avoid it like poison.

I have discovered zero evidence that any Catholic believed ensoulment occurred at conception >400 years ago.

Do you have any evidence or do you just dogmatically claim this?

This has never been dogmatically claimed. It is, however, the teaching of the universal and ordinary magisterium and all Catholics are bound to believe it. Catholics of the past may have believed many things, but the Church has gradually come to the authoritative position that the soul is created at conception. That it took time to arrive at this conclusion is irrelevant, since it has never approved abortion under any circumstances, nor has it authoritatively denied ensoulment at conception. The Holy Spirt has guided the Church to the appropriate conclusion. Any conjecture of the past is behind us.

And, speaking of “dogmatic or authoritative” to my knowledge there is zero that is irreformable within Catholicism concerning ensoulment today. A council could revert to Aquinas’ late ensoulment position if they chose without scraping declared dogma.

No, they could not. The Catholic Church has drawn its conclusion on when ensoulment occurs.

No, the Catholic Church has not received any supernatural public revelation on ensoulment. The Catholic Church has not dogmatically spoke on ensoulment. The Tradition of the Catholic Church is later ensoulment. And I of course do not believe that the Catholic Church is His Church.

‘Later ensoulment’ is not part of the Sacred Oral Tradition of the Church. If it were, it would be irrevocable.

What other church do you suppose was founded by Christ? Who besides Peter were the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven given?

Only if ensoulment has occurred would abortion contravene the human dignity of the fetus. In the absence of ensoulment, abortion is a horrible sin, but the potential human is not fully human. My personal view is discussed a little more in the link.

Your personal view isn’t of interest to me. I’m sure there are many “personal views” on abortion which attempt to justify the atrocity.

Are you being coy or do you not know what I am speaking about?

The Catholic mother could go to here Catholic doctor and have here fetus (ensouled in modern Catholic thought) removed from her body to die on the table with full approval of the Catholic Church. This is done when an ectopic pregnancy is discovered. This pregnancy will always result in death of the fetus and often result in death of the mother if not treated.

I know precisely what you’re speaking about. The procedure you describe is not a direct abortion.

Coy or misinformed?
The approved Catholic procedure for an ectopic pregnancy is to cut out a section of the fallopian tube and let the fetus die on the table in the fallopian tube. “No direct” action upon the fetus.
It is my opinion that the safer chemical or surgical procedures that involve direct action upon the fetus are preferable to the position dictated by Catholic bioethics. This is the only place my thought differs from Catholic thought because I do not require such legalistic “double effect” in my view.

Where your personal views contradict the teaching of the Catholic Church, you should dispense with them.

 

[Good_Daughter]

Only if ensoulment has occurred would abortion contravene the human dignity of the fetus. In the absence of ensoulment, abortion is a horrible sin, but the potential human is not fully human.

What is the LDS teaching on when ensoulment occurs in human beings?

Can there be life without a soul, according to LDS teaching?

 

[BartBurk]

What is the LDS teaching on when ensoulment occurs in human beings?

Can there be life without a soul, according to LDS teaching?

I don’t think there is a teaching regarding that.

 

[Good_Daughter]

Don’t bother me with the technicality that the church isn’t “pro-abortion”.

The LDS really aren’t pro-abortion, they despise the practice. The problem is that they believe, in rare cases, that God is pro-abortion.

Proof positive that Mormons and Catholics mean two different things when they refer to “God”.

 

[Namesake]

The teaching of the Church is life begins at conception and therefore, ensoulment.

But someone on this site told me that a gamete is a human being. Does the Church teach that?

 

[TOmNossor]

TOm,

Do you mean “rate” or “incidence?” Incidence will be surely higher since the number of Catholics far outnumber the LDS.

And, please explain further, are you trying to say that in centuries past the Catholic Church taught officially that “ensoulment” happened following conception? Or am I misunderstanding? I don’t believe the Church ever used such language, but I am not certain.

There can be no doubt that in modern times the Catholic Church has been the unerring champion of babies right to life. (see Pope Paul VI)

RAR

I mean rate. There are statistics in the link offered.
“Officially” to my knowledge there was no teaching of late ensoulment. That said those who spoke on the issue (most notably Aquinas) believed in late ensoulment others were silent. In addition to this, there were formal canons established (details in the link) that specifically do not equate abortion to murder which demands a non-ensoulment position IMO.

I applaud the Catholic view today and espouse it personally rather than my churches view because I just lack the faith in the human part of the human/God decision concerning rape/incest and ensoulment.

I am certain that God can foresee the results of rape/incest on the mother’s health. This includes things like suicide in the unstable victim. I am certain that the victim of rape/incest has had their free agency taken from them; they are pregnant and did not choose to violate the law of chastity. I am certain that God can choose to both not ensoul a fetus AND communicate His decision to mother/Bishop/Stake President.

I am less certain that said folks can hear the communication from God perfectly AND I believe that God generally speaks to us in ways that will not overwhelm us with His voice (this is important when an omnipotent God wants to be in relation with a human).
I also recognize that non-Christians will be governed by the abortion laws. This is why I embrace the Catholic view.

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

From a practical standpoint if you allow an exception to abortion, no matter how strongly you might be anti-abortion, you have created a situation where the exception will be used to justify the abortion. Some soft-hearted Bishops will be inclined to agree that an abortion is o.k. if the woman has prayed about it and feels she should abort. I don’t really care how strongly you are anti-abortion. I am interested in the official position of the LDS Church which has been outlined in detail above.

As a Catholic you are certainly entitled to a lack of faith in the ability of a Stake President to hear the will of God. As a LDS, I am concerned with human failings even for Stake Presidents.
However, the official LDS position is the position of faith in God, free agency, and God’s foreknowledge. I believe this position is quite defendable, I just choose to err on the side of the potentially ensouled baby.

The Catholic position of early ensoulment is difficult to understand when there is no evidence of it in the early church and yet it is present today without any supernatural public revelation.

I hold the Catholic position for reasons other than immediate ensoulment.
Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

An interesting point… the Catholic Church did seem to be ahead of the LDS in regard to the modern day practice of contraception and abortion. This would seem to argue against the LDS doctrine of continued revelation.

RAR

I do not know which point you are addressing here.
Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

I think not. I’ve read the CHI and been told what it means when I was in a bishopric. I know what SWK taught when I was LDS and I know what GBH taught. your twisting of the words is the problem.

Follow the link. The CA document partially quotes SWK to create this issue.
Charity, TOm

 

[majick275]

be that as it may I have read much more than a CA tract on this and my previous comments on how I know the LDS position still stand

 

[TOmNossor]

People do not have the knowledge about embryology centuries ago like they do today. Whatever was said about ensoulment was based on what they know then. The teaching of the Church is life begins at conception and therefore, ensoulment.
Ensoulment is not something subject to the advancement of embryological science. Today science can no more detect a soul than they could 100 or 1000 years ago.
I have always found this response to the change in Catholic position to be curious. It is not that Aquinas and others had less science than modern Catholics do it is that they held a different view. There is no science in this question.
The teaching of Aquinas and others who commented on ensoulment was that it occurred weeks after conception. The teaching of modern Catholics is that it occurs at conception. That is my point.

cathgal:
Even you use the pro-abort vocabulary…‘potential human’?
Are you saying the embryo might be a monkey, a dog, a cat,… what?
I would term it as ‘a human with potential’. Yep, definitely a human.
I use language sufficient to communicate what a Catholic or LDS would believe to be true about a non-ensouled fetus. That the Catholic Church has changed their position and no longer believes that a fetus can be non-ensouled is the issue, not the language.

The LDS position is that the pre-ensouled fetus is much more than a dog, monkey or cat. It is life and it is to become the vehicle through which our Heavenly Father will provide a Spirit Child the opportunity to return to glorious communion with Him. That being said, LDS do not have a revelation on when ensoulment occurs or even if it occurs at the same time in all instances. God who is active in our lives is surely involved in ensoulment and He is quite a bit smarter than we are.
What are you saying…that the Church approves abortion??
What I said is that the Catholic Church approves of action that 100% of the time results in the death of a fetus in the case of an ectopic pregnancy. This fetus will die anyway 100% of the time anyway. And the Catholic Church has a peculiar stance on how the doctor will affect the killing of the fetus. But the fetus will die to save the life of its mother.

cathgal:
What are you saying…that the Church approves abortion??
Source please.
http://www.cuf.org/FaithFacts/details_view.asp?ffID=57

This source is great because it says (like the CoJCoLDS) that the parents must seek God’s will as they decide to act in a way that will terminate the life of their baby. Of course strict double effect is still preserved (which I reject), and this is a procedure to save the life of the mother when medically it is likely she will die or be badly damaged by the developing fetus (which will die 100% of the time).

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

The LDS church is pro-choice when it comes to abortion for rape or incest. They are willing to wash their hands of the atrocity that is abortion if the existence of the fetus threatens or inconveniences another. Don’t bother me with the technicality that the church isn’t “pro-abortion”. The church offers a tacit approval of abortion, which is enough reason to avoid it like poison.
The Catholic Church is pro-abortion when it comes to ectopic pregnancies. They are willing to kill the fetus. They are also willing to damage the mother’s body beyond what non-Catholics doctors would recommend to preserve a legalistic double-effect. Don’t bother me with the technicality that the church isn’t “pro-abortion.” The Catholic church encourages abortion. In fact since the child is ensouled in Catholic theology (in contrast to LDS theology) that Catholic Church encourages murder just to save another human being from a life threatening injury. This is enough reason to avoid it like poison.

Well, that is not my view, but….

Dauphin:
This has never been dogmatically claimed. It is, however, the teaching of the universal and ordinary magisterium and all Catholics are bound to believe it. Catholics of the past may have believed many things, but the Church has gradually come to the authoritative position that the soul is created at conception. That it took time to arrive at this conclusion is irrelevant, since it has never approved abortion under any circumstances, nor has it authoritatively denied ensoulment at conception. The Holy Spirt has guided the Church to the appropriate conclusion. Any conjecture of the past is behind us.
Sounds a lot like continuing revelation to me. And unlike my sarcastic rant above this is true. I believe that all who spoke about abortion and ensoulment before 300 years ago spoke of late ensoulment and abortion unequal to murder. I agree with you and disagree with some pro-choice Catholic organizations that abortion has always been viewed as a sin, but not as murder.
I do not understand how preservation of Tradition can dictated this change.
Of course the teaching of the ordinary magisterium on this is not irreformable, but it is something that all Catholic are bound to believe. Aquinas did not.
No, they could not. The Catholic Church has drawn its conclusion on when ensoulment occurs.
It is not impossible that I am wrong, but think that until something is declared at a council or via ex cathdra from the Pope, it is reformable.

Dauphin:
‘Later ensoulment’ is not part of the Sacred Oral Tradition of the Church. If it were, it would be irrevocable.
What other church do you suppose was founded by Christ? Who besides Peter were the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven given?
But later ensoulment seems to be the position that abides by the Maxim of St. Vincent de Lerins. The current position is the change.

The reason we are discussing abortion is how it relates to who is the successor of St. Peter. I maintain that the Catholic Pope is not and that the change on the time when ensoulment occurs is problematic for the internal consistency of the Catholic Church.
You maintain that the LDS position is a violation of your Catholic moral thoughts so the CoJCoLDS are not God’s church.
My position that you are internally inconsistent is a better argument than your position that your church disapproves of my churches position. If the CoJCoLDS is Christ’s church then your churches disapproval of our doctrine or your personal disapproval matters not. If the Catholic Church is Christ’s church then you must somehow align the CHANGE in ensoulment beliefs. I do not think this alignment is impossible, but with the emphasis on Tradition and the rejection of continuing supernatural public revelation your position is problematic.

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

What is the LDS teaching on when ensoulment occurs in human beings?

Can there be life without a soul, according to LDS teaching?

There can be life without a human soul. Plants are alive and they do not have human souls. It is acceptable to kill plants in LDS theology.
There is no revelation on when ensoulment occurs. It is clear that post conception ensoulment must be something that can happen, but there is no reason to suggest ensoulment and conception are not things that often occur at the same time.
Charity, TOm

 

[Good_Daughter]

There can be life without a human soul. Plants are alive and they do not have human souls. It is acceptable to kill plants in LDS theology.
There is no revelation on when ensoulment occurs. It is clear that post conception ensoulment must be something that can happen, but there is no reason to suggest ensoulment and conception are not things that often occur at the same time.
Charity, TOm

I didn’t ask if there can be life without a human soul, I asked if there can be life without a soul period. If there is life in any being without a soul, what is the animating force? How do we know it is alive?

Only humans have human souls. Couldn’t animals have non-immortal animal souls and plants non-immortal plant souls? Without some animating force how else would we know they are alive?

With no revelation on ensoulment, how do you know that a new born baby has a soul? What would stop someone from praying about killing a newborn that resulted from incest or rape?

 

[Namesake]

I didn’t ask if there can be life without a human soul, I asked if there can be life without a soul period. If there is life in any being without a soul, what is the animating force? How do we know it is alive?

Only humans have human souls. Couldn’t animals have non-immortal animal souls and plants non-immortal plant souls? Without some animating force how else would we know they are alive?

With no revelation on ensoulment, how do you know that a new born baby has a soul? What would stop someone from praying about killing a newborn that resulted from incest or rape?

Respectfully, I think you have gone from the sublime to the ridiculous. Your reasoning is nonsensical, but entertaining nevertheless.

 

[mark_a]

From the 1983 Handbook of General Instructions:

“The Church opposes abortion as one of the most revolting and sinful practices of this day. Members must not submit to, be a party to, or perform an abortion. The only exceptions are the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or health of the woman is in jeopardy or the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape. Even then, the woman should consider an abortion only after counseling with her husband and bishop or branch president, and receiving divine confirmation through prayer.”

More on the LDS Church and abortion:

religioustolerance.org/lds_abor.htm

Just curious- what does LDS have to say about the abortificient effects of some artificial contraceptives??

I hope they are saying more than the deafening silence we hear from the other non-Orthodox/Catholic Christians.

 

[mark_a]

Only humans have human souls. Couldn’t animals have non-immortal animal souls and plants non-immortal plant souls? Without some animating force how else would we know they are alive?

I heard Jimmy Akin say this same thing today.

 

[Good_Daughter]

Respectfully, I think you have gone from the sublime to the ridiculous. Your reasoning is nonsensical, but entertaining nevertheless.

I’m not reasoning, I’m asking questions. While I’m glad I’ve entertained you I can’t help but notice you have no answers.

 

[BCPoulsen]

The policy of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints concerning abortion is compassionate and is in harmony with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It has also been consistant thoughout the history of the Church.

“The Church opposes abortion as one of the most revolting and sinful practices of this day. Members must not submit to, be a party to, or perform an abortion."

The exceptions cited are best viewed through the perspective of a Bishop or Stake President in his role as judge or counsellor. Abortion is listed as a “Serious Trangression” and would normally require the convening of a disciplinary council (Church Court).

Imagine a young couple who is anxiously anticipating the birth of a new child when the mother finds herself with complications in her pregnancy. They rush to the hospital and, with the wife just clinging to life, the doctor recommends an emergency abortion to save her live. The husband consents through concern for his wife. Imagine their grief after the emergency has passed and they mourn the loss of their unborn child. As they turn to their Bishop for comfort and counsel, does it really seem right for him to condemn them and drag them before a church court to reherse the terrible ordeal and face severe penalties. Of course not. The Lord would have us put our arms around them and mourn with them. He would want us to remind them of the price He paid and the way He prepared so that we can make it through those seemingly impossible times, To truly feel His love.

The Church wholeheartedly opposes abortion. On those rear occasions when it might seem appropriate to have an abortion, the church warns members to seek counsel from their Bishop and to turn to the Lord.