Mormons and Catholics

Steve asks:

On this feast of the Immaculate Conception I thought it might be a good time to ask if the Mormon Church has any official doctrine on the events surrounding Mary’s conception of Christ? That, and I just wanted to see if people still visit this site.

I am glad to see at least some people still visit this site, although I think it only gets about half the traffic that it got when it first started up. I am excited to field a new question in addition to some other posts I have planned.

Any discussion of the events surrounding Christ’s conception in Mormonism starts with the details given about it in the Bible, which I suspect that Catholics are thoroughly familiar with. I will spare everyone the recap and concentrate on what Mormon doctrine adds to the New Testament narrative that we all know and love.

The Book of Mormon is remarkable in the coverage that it gives to Christ’s birth well before it actually happened. For example, the name of Christ’s mother is given and as is the general area of birth (Bethlehem was a suburb to Jerusalem) in Alma 7:10:

And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.

Another example is when a prophet named Nephi experiences the following vision (1 Nephi 11):

9 And it came to pass after I had seen the tree, I said unto the Spirit: I behold thou hast shown unto me the tree which is precious above all.

10 And he said unto me: What desirest thou?

11 And I said unto him: To know the interpretation thereof—for I spake unto him as a man speaketh; for I beheld that he was in the form of a man; yet nevertheless, I knew that it was the Spirit of the Lord; and he spake unto me as a man speaketh with another.

12 And it came to pass that he said unto me: Look! And I looked as if to look upon him, and I saw him not; for he had gone from before my presence.

13 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the great city of Jerusalem, and also other cities. And I beheld the city of Nazareth; and in the city of Nazareth I beheld a virgin, and she was exceedingly fair and white.

14 And it came to pass that I saw the heavens open; and an angel came down and stood before me; and he said unto me: Nephi, what beholdest thou?

15 And I said unto him: A virgin, most beautiful and fair above all other virgins.

16 And he said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God?

17 And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things.

18 And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.

19 And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and after she had been carried away in the Spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!

20 And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms.

21 And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father! Knowest thou the meaning of the tree which thy father saw?

22 And I answered him, saying: Yea, it is the love of God, which sheddeth itself abroad in the hearts of the children of men; wherefore, it is the most desirable above all things.

I apologize for that lengthy quotation, but there are so many fun observations to make about this passage, some of which is better described as non-doctrinal speculation rather tangential to the conception. It is interesting to note that the first edition of The Book of Mormon did not have the “Son of” phrases in verses 18 and 21 which Joseph Smith later added for clarity. In this chapter, and indeed through out the first edition Book of Mormon Jesus is referred to as “God” and “Son of God.” Such terms have rather flexible usage in Mormonism. Still one Book of Mormon scholar sees the original translated phrasing as portraying ancient thought patterns in Monotheism, Messiah, and Mormon’s Book.

The surrounding context of the vision of Mary is arguably culturally significant. Nephi asks his guide, the Holy Spirit (or “Holy Ghost” as KJV-reading Mormons are more familiar with), the meaning of the Tree of Life symbolism. No words are spoken and yet Nephi understands its interpretation after the vision of a divine mother is shown to him. Daniel C. Peterson suggests that the angel used a Canaanite/ Israelite folk religion symbol to reveal a divine truth in Nephi and His Asherah. I am not suggesting, though, that the goddess reverence of the ancient folk religions is what modern Mormonism embraces. Somehow this never comes up in Sunday School doctrine classes.

1 Nephi 11:11 is a significant scriptural proof-text often used in conjunction with D&C 130:22. For example, James Talmage, a Mormon apostle wrote uses both texts in rapid succession in his doctrinal book Articles of Faith:

That the Spirit of the Lord is capable of manifesting Himself in the form and figure of man, is indicated by the wonderful interview between the Spirit and Nephi, in which He revealed Himself to the prophet, questioned him concerning his desires and belief, instructed him in the things of God, speaking face to face with the man. “I spake unto him,” says Nephi, “as a man speaketh; for I beheld that he was in the form of a man; yet nevertheless, I knew that it was the Spirit of the Lord; and he spake unto me as a man speaketh with another.” (1 Ne. 11:11) However, the Holy Ghost does not possess a body of flesh and bones, as do both the Father and the Son, but is a personage of spirit. (D&C 130:22)

Much of the confusion existing in human conceptions concerning the nature of the Holy Ghost arises from the common failure to segregate His person and powers.

Official doctrine in Mormonism does not endorse an exact mechanism by which the conception was brought about. The Holy Spirit appears to enable Mary to withstand the Father’s glorious presence. The result of the union was that Jesus is literally “the Firstborn of the Father, the Only Begotten Son in the flesh.” (This last quote is from The Living Christ, a recent document which is classified as official doctrine in my proposed schema.) There is a history of Mormon speculation about the means this happened, as we have not always been wise as a former Mormon prophet, Harold B. Lee, would wish:

We are very much concerned that some of our Church teachers seem to be obsessed of the idea of teaching doctrine which cannot be substantiated and making comments beyond what the Lord has actually said.

You asked about the Immaculate Conception of the birth of the Savior. Never have I talked about “sexual intercourse” between Deity and the mother of the Savior. If teachers were wise in speaking of this matter about which the Lord has said but very little, they would rest their discussion on this subject with merely the words which are recorded on this subject by Luke 1:34-35:

“Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

The reference to being the Firstborn Son also has significance in Mormon doctrine of the pre-mortal existence of all the Father’s children. Briefly stated, we have always existed and are or were given choices to go through various creative processes to become more like the most intelligent being in the universe. (Abraham 3) The Proclamation of the Family affirms that “Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny.” A second birth marks the beginning of a mortal testing period and couples a physical body with the spiritual one from the first. A third birth is symbolized by baptism, whereby those worthy become a son or daughter in an adopted sense (on top of a literal, spiritual sense.) Those who keep baptismal covenants can be sanctified by grace to become joint-heirs with Christ, the birthright, Firstborn Son that was the first to advance through these stages (D&C 93), show us how it should be done, and provide redeeming grace when we fall short.

I was going to write some about the theory that Jesus was born on April 6th to coincide with the 1830 founding of the LDS Church, but Kevin Barney at By Common Consent has beat me to the punch.

The New World events surrounding the birth of Christ are very dramatic in the Book of Mormon. The prophets had prophesied of signs in the heavens to signify Christ’s birth. However the non-believers were persecuting believers and threatening to put them to death if the signs didn’t appear by a certain deadline (no pun intended). The day before his birth, Christ’s voice consoled the faithful (3 Nephi 1:13):

Lift up your head and be of good cheer; for behold, the time is at hand, and on this night shall the sign be given, and on the morrow come I into the world, to show unto the world that I will fulfil all that which I have caused to be spoken by the mouth of my holy prophets.

Christians believe that Christ was able to navigate the fallen condition of mortality without sin in order to atone for our sins. For Mormon Christians, all infants enter the world not accountable for any parental, personal, or environmentally inputed sin as in (Moroni 8), yet all inherit death that was introduced into the world as a result of Adam’s sin. Christ’s atonement universally will break the bands of physical death, and will conditionally heal the spiritual death (separation from God, a stoppage in one’s progress to become more like God) caused by personal sinning. Given this premise, there isn’t a theological need in Mormonism to assert Mary’s Immaculate Conception to guarantee Christ’s sinlessness. The Catholic Encyclopedia article shows that there is much more complexity and tradition to this belief than I can do justice to and I apologize if I have been unfair.

It is interesting to me how contemplating Christ’s birth in both our faiths intricately, yet quickly, links to other central doctrines. This is a good question to reflect more on this Christmas. Thanks for helping me get more in the holiday mood and I would welcome a post that can answer Steve’s question from a Catholic perspective.