Abortion, Catholic Church, and CSI

  • Thread starter Thread starter axolotl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And don’t forget, even the theologians that thought conception/ensoulment occured at forty days, or something like that, they still thought it was a grave sin to try to prevent the pregnancy *before *that time-- at least as far as I know.
 
Lately, there hasn’t been a show that doesn’t knock the Catholic Church or pro-lifers. Or at least it seems that way. They’ll be hearing from me, that’s for sure.
 
40.png
axolotl:
On last night’s CSI, one of the character’s said some 16-17 century pope said that the fetus wasn’t human until the 40th day and you could feel movement.
Click to expand...
I can’t find any papal pronouncement which backs the claim on CSI.

The Church has always opposed abortion. At times in the penitential practices within Catholicism, early-term abortion was less penalized than later abortion because of the Church’s uncertainty with regard to ensoulment. However, abortion was always a sin. It was either killing a human or potentially killing a human, both of which are sins.
 
As for the doctrine of the Church on ensoulment…

From the 1974 Declaration from the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith:
This declaration expressly leaves aside the question of the moment when the spiritual soul is infused. There is not a unanimous tradition on this point and authors are as yet in disagreement. For some it dates from the first instant; for others it could not at least precede nidation. It is not within the competence of science to decide between these views, because the existence of an immortal soul is not a question in its field. It is a philosophical problem from which our moral affirmation remains independent for two reasons: (1) supposing a belated animation, there is still nothing less than a human life, preparing for and calling for a soul in which the nature received from parents is completed, (2) on the other hand, it suffices that this presence of the soul be probable (and one can never prove the contrary) in order that the taking of life involve accepting the risk of killing a man, not only waiting for, but already in possession of his soul.

(SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Declaration on Procured Abortion, 12-13: AAS 66 (1974)) 738.
Click to expand...
Why does it reamain a philosophical problem which Catholic affirmation remains independent? Because there exists no unanimous tradition and authors are as yet in disagreement.

Referencing the above 1974 instruction, Cardinal Ratzinger in 1987 affirms, with Pope John Paul II approval:
Certainly no experimental datum can be in itself sufficient to bring us to the recognition of a spiritual soul. Nevertheless… how could a human individual not be a human person? The Magisterium has not expressly committed itself to an affirmation of a philosophical nature, but it constantly reaffirms the moral condemnation of any kind of procured abortion. (Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and teh Dignity of Procreation Replies to Certain Questions of the Day)
Click to expand...
Why does the moment when the spiritual soul is infused in the human body remain a philosophical problem which remains a matter of free opinion? Because “the Magisterium has not expressly committed itself to an affirmation of a philosophical nature.”

When one appeals to delayed ensoulment theories so as to imply the Church was not opposed to abortion, they either deliberately intend to misinform, or they are ill-informed themselves.
 
I have emailed my objections about the CSI episode to the CBS email address provided by Catholic League (see link in post below). This is an excerpt from my email:
“Human life is sacred in ALL of its stages. While it is debated just when a human soul comes into existence, many of us believe that this happens at the moment of conception because the Mother of God stated, in a Church-documented apparition, “I am the Immaculate CONCEPTION,” meaning that at the moment of her conception, she was without sin on her SOUL.”

I would also like to add that the Immaculate Conception is the Patroness of the United States of America. I think that this is no mere coincidence…that God knew well in advance how our society would be plagued by abortion, and that in His wisdom He appointed His Mother, under this particular title, to be our intercessor.
 
40.png
oldfogey:
The Church hasn’t definitively ruled that life begins at conception?
Click to expand...
Of course she has. Look at the CCC sections 2258-2274.

[2258](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2258.htm’)😉 “Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.”

[2270](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2270.htm’)😉 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
 
40.png
oldfogey:
The Church hasn’t definitively ruled that life begins at conception?
Click to expand...
There is no need for the Church to do this. That life is present at conception is not a theological datum. It is a scientific fact.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
K C said:
“I am the Immaculate CONCEPTION,” meaning that at the moment of her conception, she was without sin on her SOUL."
Click to expand...

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia (1909),
". . .in the first instance of her conception . . ." The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents… Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.
Click to expand...
Thus, the moment of her Immaculate Conception was the moment of her ensoulment, whenever that may have been. That moment is speculative according to Catholic doctrine, as supported in the magisterial texts quoted in post #25 .
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
As for the doctrine of the Church on ensoulment…

From the 1974 Declaration from the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith…:
Click to expand...
Thanks for the great resource, Dave. I’ll be keeping it for future reference.
 
K C:
While it is debated just when a human soul comes into existence, many of us believe that this happens at the moment of conception because the Mother of God stated, in a Church-documented apparition, “I am the Immaculate CONCEPTION,” meaning that at the moment of her conception, she was without sin on her SOUL."

This is very illuminating. Thank you for this, KC.
Click to expand...
 
There is an interesting article on the historical beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church here. You can see that opinions varied widely from age to age - even some popes were swayed by the sophism and secular culture of the Greek philosophers. Here are a few quotes:
Pope Innocent III (?-1216) wrote a letter which ruled on a case of a Carthusian monk who had arranged for his female lover to obtain an abortion. The Pope decided that the monk was not guilty of homicide if the fetus was not “animated.”

Early in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of “quickening” - when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. After ensoulment, abortion was equated with murder; before that time, it was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human life, not human life.

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) also considered only the abortion of an “animated” fetus as murder.

Pope Sixtus V issued a Papal bull “Effraenatam” in 1588 which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty. Pope Gregory XIV revoked the Papal bull shortly after taking office in 1591. He reinstated the “quickening” test, which he said happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).
 
40.png
LutheranStudent:
Pope Innocent III (?-1216) wrote a letter which ruled on a case of a Carthusian monk who had arranged for his female lover to obtain an abortion. The Pope decided that the monk was not guilty of homicide if the fetus was not “animated.”
Click to expand...
Is this ex cathedra? No. Plus, I don’t see any quote about the letter? Without evidence to back up the claim, it is false.
40.png
LutheranStudent:
Early in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of "quickening
Click to expand...
" - when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. After ensoulment, abortion was equated with murder; before that time, it was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human life, not human life.

Again, is this ex cathedra according to Vatican 1’s definition? Don’t know because there’s no quote cited from the so called document.
40.png
LutheranStudent:
St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) also considered only the abortion of an "animated
Click to expand...
" fetus as murder.

Was St. Thomas Aquinas Pope? He wasn’t even a Bishop. Plus, where’s the proof? I see no quote from his writings.
40.png
LutheranStudent:
Pope Sixtus V issued a Papal bull “Effraenatam”
Click to expand...
in 1588 which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty. Pope Gregory XIV revoked the Papal bull shortly after taking office in 1591. He reinstated the “quickening” test, which he said happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).

Again, where’s the proof? It is my understanding that the unwritten universal rule of debate is that the challenger bring the evidence to the table. Plus, again is this ex cathedra according to Vatican 1? I don’t know. So, these claims are worthless.
 
Please, check the thread “Abortion question”. The following posts are from there.

“It is unnecessary to discuss the soul with reference to the abortion question. In fact, it is detrimental to an effective condemnation of abortion to discuss the soul. Mark L. Chance”.

“It is necessary to repeat again that abortion has nothing to do with religion. Abortion is an anthropological issue, not a religious one. Barsapp”

“uffl.org/vol12/conley12.pdf Catholic 2003” (very interesting article on delayed animation).
 
40.png
LutheranStudent:
There is an interesting article on the historical beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church here. You can see that opinions varied widely from age to age - even some popes were swayed by the sophism and secular culture of the Greek philosophers. Here are a few quotes:
Pope Innocent III (?-1216) wrote a letter which ruled on a case of a Carthusian monk who had arranged for his female lover to obtain an abortion. The Pope decided that the monk was not guilty of homicide if the fetus was not “animated.”

Early in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of “quickening” - when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. After ensoulment, abortion was equated with murder; before that time, it was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human life, not human life.

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) also considered only the abortion of an “animated” fetus as murder.

Pope Sixtus V issued a Papal bull “Effraenatam” in 1588 which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty. Pope Gregory XIV revoked the Papal bull shortly after taking office in 1591. He reinstated the “quickening” test, which he said happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).
Click to expand...
I see these exact same references, word for word, all over the Internet (down to the mispelling of the name of the Papal Bull). As presented, there are several problems with them.
  1. These attributed statements are not presented in any real context that either does not indicate the source or even specific document that gives any indication what the context of the original statement or teaching was meant to convey. For example, there is a large difference between a casual statement by a Pope, and an encyclical. The statements are just left to hang there with the implication they speak for themselves. Like any passage taken out of textual or historical context, they do not.
  2. As pointed out above, Aquinas was a theologian, not a Pope or even a bishop. His statements are not authoritative.
  3. Also as stated above, it is an undeniable fact that there has been a progressive understanding of human physiology. To point this out is to state the obvious while implying it means something larger than that. It merely sidesteps the real issue: that the Catholic Church has ALWAYS condemned abortion. The fact that we now know life begins at conception adds more culpability to modern man, not less.
 
**That site: religioustolerance.org/ **

Is not credible. They don’t cite their sources sufficiently and they don’t post the context of the documents. They don’t even mention the name of the documents many times. For all we know they could be making it all up, nevermind exaggerating or misinterpereting. Plus, the very fact that they have an anti-catholic agenda further decreases what little credibility they have.
 
LutheranStudent,

I think you are missing the point. No matter the varying penalties for the sin of abortion throughout Church history, it is has always been a sin.

Pro-abortion arguments such as these miss the mark. Pointing out that killing an unborn child has at times been less penalized than killing a newborn doesn’t make killing a unborn child any more permissable.

For example, 1st degree murder has a more harsh sentence than 2nd degree murder. But that fact does not therefore mean that 2nd degree murder is somehow acceptable to our community.
 
All this is well and good, but you are also arguing against yourselves. That is, abortion has never been spoken about ex cathedra in Catholic Theology. Therefore, it is not a closed issue for you and it would be wrong to speak about it as wrong. (I am not saying this because I am in favor of abortion, I just want to point out a degree of hipocracy.)
 
40.png
LutheranStudent:
All this is well and good, but you are also arguing against yourselves. That is, abortion has never been spoken about ex cathedra in Catholic Theology. Therefore, it is not a closed issue for you and it would be wrong to speak about it as wrong. (I am not saying this because I am in favor of abortion, I just want to point out a degree of hipocracy.)
Click to expand...
It is a common misconception that something must be decreed ex cathedra in order to be a closed issue. There is no hippocracy about it. For example, the Resurrection has never been declared ex cathedra. But it is an irreformable and essential doctrine. The truth of a doctrine does not depend on its narrow proclamation ex cathedra. The ordinary Magisterium is entirely authoritative and infallible.
 
Hhmm,
Seems kinda contradictory to what others were saying above.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top