Seventh Day Adventist Church and Abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maria1212
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tertullian
“In our case, a murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from the other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in its seed” (Apology 9:8 [A.D. 197]).

"Among surgeons’ tools there is a certain instrument, which is formed with a nicely-adjusted flexible frame for opening the uterus first of all and keeping it open; it is further furnished with an annular blade, by means of which the limbs [of the child] within the womb are dissected with anxious but unfaltering care; its last appendage being a blunted or covered hook, wherewith the entire fetus is extracted by a violent delivery.

"There is also [another instrument in the shape of] a copper needle or spike, by which the actual death is managed in this furtive robbery of life: They give it, from its infanticide function, the name of embruosphaktes, [meaning] “the slayer of the infant,” which of course was alive. . . .

“[The doctors who performed abortions] all knew well enough that a living being had been conceived, and [they] pitied this most luckless infant state, which had first to be put to death, to escape being tortured alive” (The Soul 25 [A.D. 210]).

“Now we allow that life begins with conception because we contend that the soul also begins from conception; life taking its commencement at the same moment and place that the soul does” (ibid., 27).

“The law of Moses, indeed, punishes with due penalties the man who shall cause abortion [Ex. 21:22–24]” (ibid., 37).

Minucius Felix
“There are some [pagan] women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels and thus commit a parricide before they bring forth. And these things assuredly come down from the teaching of your [false] gods. . . . To us [Christians] it is not lawful either to see or hear of homicide” (Octavius 30 [A.D. 226]).

Hippolytus
“Women who were reputed to be believers began to take drugs to render themselves sterile, and to bind themselves tightly so as to expel what was being conceived, since they would not, on account of relatives and excess wealth, want to have a child by a slave or by any insignificant person. See, then, into what great impiety that lawless one has proceeded, by teaching adultery and murder at the same time!” (Refutation of All Heresies [A.D. 228]).

Council of Ancyra
“Concerning women who commit fornication, and destroy that which they have conceived, or who are employed in making drugs for abortion, a former decree excluded them until the hour of death, and to this some have assented. Nevertheless, being desirous to use somewhat greater lenity, we have ordained that they fulfill ten years [of penance], according to the prescribed degrees” (canon 21 [A.D. 314]).

Basil the Great
“Let her that procures abortion undergo ten years’ penance, whether the embryo were perfectly formed, or not” (First Canonical Letter, canon 2 [A.D. 374]).

“He that kills another with a sword, or hurls an axe at his own wife and kills her, is guilty of willful murder; not he who throws a stone at a dog, and unintentionally kills a man, or who corrects one with a rod, or scourge, in order to reform him, or who kills a man in his own defense, when he only designed to hurt him. But the man, or woman, is a murderer that gives a philtrum, if the man that takes it dies upon it; so are they who take medicines to procure abortion; and so are they who kill on the highway, and rapparees” (ibid., canon 8).

John Chrysostom
“Wherefore I beseech you, flee fornication. . . . Why sow where the ground makes it its care to destroy the fruit?—where there are many efforts at abortion?—where there is murder before the birth? For even the harlot you do not let continue a mere harlot, but make her a murderess also. You see how drunkenness leads to prostitution, prostitution to adultery, adultery to murder; or rather to a something even worse than murder. For I have no name to give it, since it does not take off the thing born, but prevents its being born. Why then do thou abuse the gift of God, and fight with his laws, and follow after what is a curse as if a blessing, and make the chamber of procreation a chamber for murder, and arm the woman that was given for childbearing unto slaughter? For with a view to drawing more money by being agreeable and an object of longing to her lovers, even this she is not backward to do, so heaping upon thy head a great pile of fire. For even if the daring deed be hers, yet the causing of it is thine” (Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]).
 
Jerome
“I cannot bring myself to speak of the many virgins who daily fall and are lost to the bosom of the Church, their mother. . . . Some go so far as to take potions, that they may insure barrenness, and thus murder human beings almost before their conception. Some, when they find themselves with child through their sin, use drugs to procure abortion, and when, as often happens, they die with their offspring, they enter the lower world laden with the guilt not only of adultery against Christ but also of suicide and child murder” (Letters 22:13 [A.D. 396]).

The Apostolic Constitutions
"Thou shalt not use magic. Thou shalt not use witchcraft; for he says, ‘You shall not suffer a witch to live’ [Ex. 22:18]. Thou shall not slay thy child by causing abortion, nor kill that which is begotten. . . . f it be slain, [it] shall be avenged, as being unjustly destroyed" (Apostolic Constitutions 7:3 [A.D. 400]).
 
I cited the above early Church Fathers to show that the Catholic position is not only supported by Scripture, but also by the early Christians.

**The Catholic position on abortion follows God`s commandment Thou shall not kill. The SDA guidelines, by allowing exceptions, does not. That is the reason I started this thread. **

And Pedja, I agree with you that many women who have had abortions will not “burn in hell.” If people have abortions, or help others have them, and repent, they will be forgiven, for God is merciful.

Let us keep women who have had abortions in our prayers.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
In some of the above posts, some Adventist posters implied that the Catholic Church chooses death by not allowing abortion if it might save the mothers life. Catholics believe that even if a mother tries to justify abortion to save her own life, she is still doing evil (committing abortion) to attain a good (possibly saving her life). This violates St. Pauls commandent that we can never to evil to accomplish good.

Catholics do everything they can to save both lives, but it is not our right to take the life of another. This is based on Scripture and the oral and written teachings of early Christians.

catholic.com/library/abortion.asp

Sincerely,

Maria1212
Yeah, I think that bears repeating: in Catholic moral theology, the ends never justifies the means. From the Catechism, 1753:
A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation.

That last sentence has closely parallels the idea of killing an innocent child the save the life of a mother.
 
I’m not quibbling with God; I’m reflecting the Biblical tradition that free choice is never truly “free” (as if it gives unlimited moral license).
“Free choice” is hardly ever understood in that manner. In the conventional and biblical manner to be frre to choose simply means that you can choose between right and wrong.
 
The Catholic position on abortion follows God`s commandment Thou shall not kill.
The Hebrew means “Thou shalt not murder.” The Israelites were allowed to kill in battle and to have capital punishment–all under God’s control, of course.

By not be willing to abort (when theer is no other choice available) what you are saying is that “you” are willing to kill both the mother and the child.
The SDA guidelines, by allowing exceptions, does not.
We simply recognize that God has given us the power of choice. We will not dictate to an individual’s conscience what they can and cannot do.
 
This violates St. Paul`s commandent that we can never to evil to accomplish good.
It would be greatly appreciated that if one is going to refer to Scripture that one would cite the exact source. I recognize rthat we don’t all have electronic Bibles* and ready memory as to where we read it. But, it would be nice.
  • I have BibleWorks 7.0 and I can’t find any reference to the above because it is too “weak” a citation.
 
…some Adventist posters implied that the Catholic Church chooses death by not allowing abortion if it might save the mother`s life.
might”?!? Have we already been presented any evidence that it wouldn’t?
 
or non-terminal health risks to mother and child.
Hmmm, there seems to be a difference of opinions on abortion within the Catholic church then. Either, no abortion, period under any circumstances, or there are cases where we can only save one–better one than none!
 
If you had already answered it twice then I missed it.
“We would not directly take the life of either” – no, you don’t have the choice: either you abort and the baby dies, or you don’t abort and both die.
And it’s not like there’s any chance that a woman will die from getting an abortion, either directly from the surgical procedure, or from its consequences (you do realize that abortion is the #1 preventable cause of breast cancer, right?). :rolleyes: By performing an abortion, you’re killing the baby and possibly the mother as well. By not performing the abortion, you’re giving both the baby and the mother a chance to live. Many children have been born during difficult and dangerous pregnancies, and both the mother and child were fine. Unless you’re God, you can’t say that you know for sure that not killing the baby will result in the deaths of both the baby and the mother.
 
By performing an abortion, you’re killing the baby and possibly the mother as well.
I’d like to see the stats on the “possibly.”

Heads up to everyone: I have unsubscribed from all forums because it was filling up my email box which I need for my studies. So, if I don’t get here too often don’t think that I have forgotten you. Might be too busy to do much posting–you wouldn’t believe all the work it takes to get an article ready for publication in a scholarly refereed journal (and I have 3 in the fire!).
 
“Free choice” is hardly ever understood in that manner. In the conventional and biblical manner to be frre to choose simply means that you can choose between right and wrong.
Whatever the semantics, if I choose to rape someone, I have chosen erroneously, and will be judged for it. Mine having the free choice to rape someone does not that I can legitimately* rape someone.
 
The Hebrew means “Thou shalt not murder.” The Israelites were allowed to kill in battle and to have capital punishment–all under God’s control, of course.

By not be willing to abort (when theer is no other choice available) what you are saying is that “you” are willing to kill both the mother and the child.
I’m tired of having to repeat myself. if you disagree with our position, then I accept that, and we can move on.
We simply recognize that God has given us the power of choice. We will not dictate to an individual’s conscience what they can and cannot do.
At least on this issue. But Adventists tell us all he time on these forums to observe the sabbath (or moreso, alleged that God tells us to keep the sabbath). Ergo, Adventists have told us what we can and cannot do. As I’ve said again and again, the capacity for free choice does not validate every choice.

But let’s put it this way: do you think it is right to pray to saints? After all, God gives us free choice.
 
Hmmm, there seems to be a difference of opinions on abortion within the Catholic church then. Either, no abortion, period under any circumstances, or there are cases where we can only save one–better one than none!
I meant in obedience to the Law. Is it right to practice circumcision, not for medical reasons, but for religious reasons?
 
The Hebrew means “Thou shalt not murder.” The Israelites were allowed to kill in battle and to have capital punishment–all under God’s control, of course.

By not be willing to abort (when theer is no other choice available) what you are saying is that “you” are willing to kill both the mother and the child.
Alright, I’m tired of repeating myself; this is third or fourth time you’ve made the same accusation (I’ve already responded to it). If you disagree with us on abortion in that situation, then you do, and we can move on.
We simply recognize that God has given us the power of choice. We will not dictate to an individual’s conscience what they can and cannot do.
At least on this issue. Adventists tell us what we can and cannot do all the time.

Question: can I pray to saints? God gives me the free choice to, right?
Hmmm, there seems to be a difference of opinions on abortion within the Catholic church then. Either, no abortion, period under any circumstances, or there are cases where we can only save one–better one than none!
Did you even read my post? The Catholic Church rejects the "“better one than none principle”; there is no “difference of opinions on abortion in the Catholic Church.” All abortion is wrong, period.

I was referencing the fact that Adventists allow abortion for “non-terminal health risks to mother and child”–a fact I find morally repugnant. Adventists countenance abortion when NO life is in danger; that, my friend, is “better one than none.”
 
The Hebrew means “Thou shalt not murder.” The Israelites were allowed to kill in battle and to have capital punishment–all under God’s control, of course.

By not be willing to abort (when theer is no other choice available) what you are saying is that “you” are willing to kill both the mother and the child.

Killing in battle is completely different than murdering an innocent unborn child. Would you like me to cite Scripture showing this?

We simply recognize that God has given us the power of choice. We will not dictate to an individual’s conscience what they can and cannot do.
You are sadly incorrect in your statement that choosing not to kill an unborn child is actually killing the child and mother. Moreover, God gives us free will, and for Catholics, Scripture does instruct us on how to form our conscience. We do not give ourselves the personal option to follow select Scripture while ignoring other parts of Scripture. Perhaps your church is different, from what you have written above.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
It would be greatly appreciated that if one is going to refer to Scripture that one would cite the exact source. I recognize rthat we don’t all have electronic Bibles* and ready memory as to where we read it. But, it would be nice.
  • I have BibleWorks 7.0 and I can’t find any reference to the above because it is too “weak” a citation.
I cited it in my post yesterday (Sunday). . Romans 3:8. It was post #75. (Now, I am really beginning to think you are not reading all of my posts, which is fine, unless you choose to comment on them. Sometimes, I continue my thoughts in a next post due to space limitations. Thus, one should read all of them before commenting, in order to fully understand what I am trying to communicate).

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
Alright, I’m tired of repeating myself; this is third or fourth time you’ve made the same accusation (I’ve already responded to it). If you disagree with us on abortion in that situation, then you do, and we can move on.

At least on this issue. Adventists tell us what we can and cannot do all the time.

Question: can I pray to saints? God gives me the free choice to, right?

Did you even read my post? The Catholic Church rejects the "“better one than none principle”; there is no “difference of opinions on abortion in the Catholic Church.” All abortion is wrong, period.

I was referencing the fact that Adventists allow abortion for “non-terminal health risks to mother and child”–a fact I find morally repugnant. Adventists countenance abortion when NO life is in danger; that, my friend, is “better one than none.”
Hi Adventistnomore,

I explained the same thing to Pedja (Post #75, and others from the same day). Apparently, some posters did not read them.).

I agree that is is one stance where Catholics and Adventists simply disagree. I find it morally repulsive that Adventists make exceptions to the Lords commandment not to kill. I do not understand why it is okay to skip over part of that commandment due to ones personal opinion. Yet Adventists feel we are bound to follow the dietary restrictions of Jews etc. I disagree with their interpration of that as well (but that is best discussed on a different post). But it sounds like Cafeteria Christianity (cutting and pasting) to me.

I agree that this is one of those cases where we recognize the agreement and our differences without trying to rationalize it to death. Our Adventist posters explained they have a different “take” on God`s commandment, but hope they understand the Catholic position is based on Scripture, whether they agree with the Catholic interpretation or not. We each explained our reasoning.

I won`t have time to post forr the next few days due to work but will follow the threads and look forward to continuing to discuss our theological agreements and differences.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
Interesting read. It sounds more like a propaganda cite and it has some simple facts wrong which makes me wonder about the quality of the rest. For instance, there is no “John Hopkins University” it is “Johns Hopkins University”–I learned that one not too long ago when I was sent an email from the former claiming in a “press release” we shouldn’t use plastics in the microwave!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top