Abortion

[lil_flower_luv]

I happen to be one of those. I have an older half brother/sister that was never allowed to live.

And yes…I do judge my mother for killing my dear sibling. Although, she has a whole host of other problems that has driven us apart anyway.

I’m so sorry about that.

And yes…Abortion only cause’s more problems. It doesn’t “resolve” anything.

 

[WillieWonka]

First, it makes logical sense considering that the essence of a human exists from the beginning. However, I would prefer to say that the soul and body are united as one being.

Second, our own observation tells us that there is something intangible existing within us which had to be there from the beginning.

Third, Catholicism teaches that we are made up of body and soul from the very beginning.

Keep the questions coming.

1. My quetsion was exactly when body and soul form a composite. I think your logic is taking that as an assumption when you say, “the essence of a human exists from the beginning.” Fix earlier defined that essence as the composite of body and soul.
2. The only observation I can make is my own introspection that idntifies my own self-consciousnes. The other observation I can make is other people telling me they are self-conscious. Given my own experience, it seems reasonable to accept theirs. However, this awareness tells me nothing of my state as a single cell.
3. Could you point me to an official Catholic teaching that explicitly says we are made up of body and soul from conception?

 

[WillieWonka]

Seems preety clear to me-Ensoulment takes place at conception, it is from God, not the parents and our Soul will be re-united with our bodies at the ressurection of the dead. What else matters?

Are you ngetting ready to challenge us with"what about indentical twins"?

I have carefully read 362 through 367. None says body and soul form a composite at conception. Can you tell me which numbered para does say that?

 

[WillieWonka]

And quickening was an opinion. Big difference.

If there isn’t an explicit official Church doctrine that says body and soul form a composite at conception, isn’t that idea an opinion, too?

 

[WillieWonka]

This is from DECLARATION ON PROCURED ABORTION :

So, the soul enters at conception. Any other time proposed is arbitrary.

I’d say this document says they don’t know when the soul and body form a composite. I have pasted the second para from your post from the Sacred Congregation For The Doctrine Of The Faith below with the pertinent lines bolded.

*"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."

The very first sentence of the para says the Declaration **leaves aside **the question of the moment when the spiritual sould is infused. So, I don’t think it can support conception as that moment.

At the end of the para it says, “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.” Here it is dealing with the possibility that there is a belated ensoulment. If the Church taught ensoulment happened at conception, it would hardly be dealing with the possibility of a belated ensoulment.

At the end of the para it says, “it suffices that this presence of the soul be probable,” Church teaching apparently only goes as far as **probable **in dealing with ensoulment at conception.

 

[WillieWonka]

We have a “life force” within us. When our body shuts down to the extent organs no longer work to support “life”, the spiritual part of us, call it soul, or life force, leaves. The life force is the spiritual part of our existence. Without it, the body decays. New age folks claim there is an aura of light which surrounds each of us, the strength and color of which varies depending on our state of being. Animals and plants also have this “aura”. That has been scientifically proven. Don’t know about the human aspect of this claim as to whether it has been “seen” by scientific machines, or not.

All I can glean from observation, is this life force can sometimes become weaker with individuals until it fades out in death. Or it could be gone in a heartbeat.

Have you ever seen a person die? From one nanosecond to the next, there is life, then nothingness. No life force.

What you need Lim., is Faith. Ask for it.

I’ve actually had my Kirlian photo taken. It shows a huge white and blue aura. I have absolutely no idea what it is or what it means, but it does look great on my wall. The other five people in our group had various sized and colored auras, but I was truly spectacular. From time to time, I lean back in my chair and point behind me to the picture as proof I am right and the other guy is wrong.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

I happen to be one of those. I have an older half brother/sister that was never allowed to live.

And yes…I do judge my mother for killing my dear sibling. Although, she has a whole host of other problems that has driven us apart anyway.

God bless you, dear one. I’m so sorry for your pain, and I will pray for you and you dear mother for the suffering she must be enduring from the loss of your brother or sister and now the loss of her relationship with you. Remember that forgiveness and peace are only a prayer away. May His comfort and infinite mercy be with you and your family. Know that you are LOVED!:hug1:

 

[estesbob]

1. My quetsion was exactly when body and soul form a composite. I think your logic is taking that as an assumption when you say, “the essence of a human exists from the beginning.” Fix earlier defined that essence as the composite of body and soul.
2. The only observation I can make is my own introspection that idntifies my own self-consciousnes. The other observation I can make is other people telling me they are self-conscious. Given my own experience, it seems reasonable to accept theirs. However, this awareness tells me nothing of my state as a single cell.
3. Could you point me to an official Catholic teaching that explicitly says we are made up of body and soul from conception?

Why does it matter? It is irelevant from moral or theologic standpoint.

 

[WillieWonka]

Why does it matter? It is irelevant from moral or theologic standpoint.

The Church leads a billion people. I think it is important for everyone to know what the Church actually teaches on questions related to controversial social issues. While many may have a certain personal conviction a composite of body and soul takes place at conception, that certainty is not supported by Church doctrine as stated by the Sacred Congregation.

Such knowledge may also lead some folks to realize their opponents are not all acting out of malice and bad faith. When something is probable, it leaves room for reasonable contrary opinion.

Likewise, a probable ruling in no way precludes people from maintaining their own personal opinion that the composite absolutely takes place at conception.

There’s more wiggle room on the question than many realize.

 

[estesbob]

The Church leads a billion people. I think it is important for everyone to know what the Church actually teaches on questions related to controversial social issues. While many may have a certain personal conviction a composite of body and soul takes place at conception, that certainty is not supported by Church doctrine as stated by the Sacred Congregation.

Such knowledge may also lead some folks to realize their opponents are not all acting out of malice and bad faith. When something is probable, it leaves room for reasonable contrary opinion.

Likewise, a probable ruling in no way precludes people from maintaining their own personal opinion that the composite absolutely takes place at conception.

There’s more wiggle room on the question than many realize.

There is no wiggle room whatsoever. To say there is shows a profound ignorance of the Churchs teaching on abortion. Your lack of understanding does not make it so

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

There’s more*** wiggle*** room on the question than many realize.

Maybe what you are trying to say, is that the question of ensoulment in unborn, living beings makes you*** squirm***, a little more than you’d like, because the very thought of aborting a living, soul/body composite, while he or she rests and eats and grows peacefully in their mother’s womb, is completely*** horrifying***. You are right to squirm.

 

[WillieWonka]

There is no wiggle room whatsoever. To say there is shows a profound ignorance of the Churchs teaching on abortion. Your lack of understanding does not make it so

It’s quite clear from Fix’s post of the Sacred Congregation document that the Church finds composition of body and soul at conception to be probable rather than certain.

I’m sure there are folks who disagree with the Sacred Congregation, and that is their right. Perhaps these peope are right and the Sacred Congregation is wrong. However, they do not speak for the Church in that regard.

Wiggle room refers to the belief that body and soul composition occurs at conception. Since the Church says it is only probable, that leaves room for it not being the case. In fact, the Sacred Congregation even deals with that case.

 

[WillieWonka]

Maybe what you are trying to say, is that the question of ensoulment in unborn, living beings makes you*** squirm***, a little more than you’d like, because the very thought of aborting a living, soul/body composite, while he or she rests and eats and grows peacefully in their mother’s womb, is completely*** horrifying***. You are right to squirm.

I have been dealing with determining the Church’s position on composition of body and soul at conception. The Sacred Congregation has stated that position very clearly. Learning about the Church’s position does not make me squirm.

 

[elts1956]

Our knowledge of death? We don’t know any more about death than we do about ensoulment! We have been told things, and I have been told that I’d better believe them or else. The whole set-up is unsatisfying for a person who needs more than “The bible tells me so” or “it’s all there in the Catechism.”

Limerick

grannymh;5406787:

**Well, this is a mighty unilateral and fluffy view of life. Does the soul that God creates in the extortionist reflect back to Him clouds and purple mountain majesties? How about the soul of the man who shoots the abortionist to death? What does his soul reflect back to God? For that matter, what does the soul of a woman who has had an abortion reflect?

I’m betting God knows before we are ensouled who we are, every grave sin we will commit, and every hateful, selfish thing we will ever do. Then He goes on to step back and let it happen, knowing full well the sorrow, the misery, the trauma, the bewilderment, the hatred that will be caused by some delicate little souls. I just don’t get it. I don’t think I want to. Arguments on this forum are insufficient to address these things because no one knows. We read, we believe, we suspect, but no one truly**

knows.

Limerick

I’ve actually had my Kirlian photo taken. It shows a huge white and blue aura. I have absolutely no idea what it is or what it means, but it does look great on my wall. The other five people in our group had various sized and colored auras, but I was truly spectacular. From time to time, I lean back in my chair and point behind me to the picture as proof I am right and the other guy is wrong.???

Everything that lives has an aura, according to the New Agers. I don’t know what the church’s position is on this science. But if the aura is present now, then when did it appear? At conception? Life begins there. Perhaps Science will one day prove when the soul joins the body at conception. Think about it.

 

[fix]

The very first sentence of the para says the Declaration **leaves aside **the question of the moment when the spiritual sould is infused. So, I don’t think it can support conception as that moment.

It says you cannot prove the contrary. It is a philosophical issue. That we cannot know the exact instant with metaphysical certitude does not mean we get to act anyway we desire. In fact, logically, claiming any other point besides conception is arbitrary. If you do not know when the soul is present why would any person simply choose to kill that life?

At the end of the para it says, “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.” Here it is dealing with the possibility that there is a belated ensoulment. If the Church taught ensoulment happened at conception, it would hardly be dealing with the possibility of a belated ensoulment.

It points out it is a human life no matter the instant the soul enters and must be protected. Do you claim it is just to kill such a life and deprive that life of a soul? By what authority?

At the end of the para it says, “it suffices that this presence of the soul be probable,” Church teaching apparently only goes as far as **probable **in dealing with ensoulment at conception.

Sure, that does not mean the life can be killed. It does mean it must be protected and treated with dignity.

One can even make the argument to kill a human before the soul enters is even more immoral.

 

[estesbob]

It’s quite clear from Fix’s post of the Sacred Congregation document that the Church finds composition of body and soul at conception to be probable rather than certain.

So?

I’m sure there are folks who disagree with the Sacred Congregation, and that is their right. Perhaps these peope are right and the Sacred Congregation is wrong. However, they do not speak for the Church in that regard.

And why does it matter whether ones agrees with the Sacred Congreagation or not?

Wiggle room refers to the belief that body and soul composition occurs at conception. Since the Church says it is only probable, that leaves room for it not being the case. In fact, the Sacred Congregation even deals with that case.

So? What possible difference could the ensoulment taking place sometime after conception make?

 

[WillieWonka]

limerick;5406819:

Everything that lives has an aura, according to the New Agers. I don’t know what the church’s position is on this science. But if the aura is present now, then when did it appear? At conception? Life begins there. Perhaps Science will one day prove when the soul joins the body at conception. Think about it.

And perhaps we will discover the aura that appears in the photo is simply a ultraviolet reflection of body heat. I don’t know.

 

[WillieWonka]

It says you cannot prove the contrary. It is a philosophical issue. That we cannot know the exact instant with metaphysical certitude does not mean we get to act anyway we desire. In fact, logically, claiming any other point besides conception is arbitrary. If you do not know when the soul is present why would any person simply choose to kill that life?

It points out it is a human life no matter the instant the soul enters and must be protected. Do you claim it is just to kill such a life and deprive that life of a soul? By what authority?

Sure, that does not mean the life can be killed. It does mean it must be protected and treated with dignity.

One can even make the argument to kill a human before the soul enters is even more immoral.

I was dealing with a narrow issue of what the Church teaches about the time body and soul form a composite. . Many people claim the Church teaches body and soul form a composite at conception. Your Sacred Congregation post shows the Church does not support this as a certain position.

 

[WillieWonka]

So?

And why does it matter whether ones agrees with the Sacred Congreagation or not?

So? What possible difference could the ensoulment taking place sometime after conception make?

1. Many people are mistaken in their view of what the Church teaches. For those who want to accurately relate Church teachings to others it is important. For those who wish to have accurate information about Church tecahing, it is important. But, for lots of others, it doesn’t matter.
2. It really doesn’t matter if one agrees with the Sacred Congretation. But it is invalid for someone who does not agree to put forth his personal belief as official Church doctrine.
3. Knowing the Church allows for the possibility of delayed ensoulment is a surprise to many people, and many Catholics. Knowing it makes a difference to those who are interested in being well informed about the truth of Church teachings. It’s the differnce between being mistaken and being informed.

 

[estesbob]

I was dealing with a narrow issue of what the Church teaches about the time body and soul form a composite. . Many people claim the Church teaches body and soul form a composite at conception. Your Sacred Congregation post shows the Church does not support this as a certain position.

Again in a discussion about abortion who cares? You are talking about a mundane philosophical dicsussion that hasno impact on Church Techings. Perhaps we discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Like you obesssion with ensoulment it would br intersting to talk about but have no impact whtasoever on Cucrh tecahings or the morality of abortion.