circumcision & Catholic teaching ?

[jess7396]

When these cosmetic things are the removal of a normal (God given) healthy functioning body part that will not grow back, yes, that is wrong, period.

As for God commanding this (at one time, not now, as we all know), I posted on the last circ. thread here (feel free to do a search) about how the circ. done at that time was nothing like the complete foreskin removal done today. Comparing the circ. God commanded to the circ. done by OBGYNS and Pediatricians in American hospitals today is like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Ana]

jess7396:

How many of the things you consent to are the surgical removal of a healthy functioning body part? That is what I am arguing to be sinful, not more benign choices one makes for their minor child.

Are you actually trying to make the argument that one’s decision to have their child circ’d is sinful? Has the Church declared it to be so?

jess7396:

The second section you quoted was aimed at those people on this thread who have admitted that their reason for doing it was to “look like daddy”, and many people here have admitted that.

So they are sinning too? I think to make that observation we would have to go deeper and find out why they want ds to look like daddy, and no one has stated such.

jess7396:

If your reasons were “medical”, do you realize that there is not a single major medical organization which recommends routine infant circumcision?

Because it is not NECESSARY perhaps, but that doesn’t mean to do so would be sinful.

 

[Karin]

jess7396:

When these cosmetic things are the removal of a normal (God given) healthy functioning body part that will not grow back, yes, that is wrong, period.

.

Wrong in your eyes…it is not wrong in my eyes.
What works for you and what you find morally wrong may not be viewed the same by other people.
Now if the Pope came out and said this was a SIN & MORALLY WRONG than I would listen…but as of yet he has not done this so I will keep on getting any sons I may have circ’d .

 

[Ana]

jess7396:

When these cosmetic things are the removal of a normal (God given) healthy functioning body part that will not grow back, yes, that is wrong, period.

Could you please site a reputable Catholic source that points to circumsion as sinful?

 

[Princess_Abby]

Ana:

Could you please site a reputable Catholic source that points to circumsion as sinful?

There are plenty of priests and religious who have a wide variety of OPINIONS based on interpretation. These opinions fall all over the spectrum. We can consider these opinions but they are certainly not the end all of authority.

There is NO official Church teaching whatsoever that circumcision specifically is sinful in all circumstances. The Church has not decreed that the subject of circumcision is a moral issue. Therefore no one can speak to it as being a moral issue nor categorize it as “sinful.”

To post on this board that circ’ing is “sinful” is remarkably inapproriate and Jess has no moral authority whatsoever to be imposing her personal interpretation upon the rest of us as absolute truth. No one is equipped to judge the culpability of another unless they happen to be a priest in the sacrament of reconciliation. It is entirely wrong and judgemental to make such an assertion for anyone other then herself.

 

[leaner]

jess7396:

When these cosmetic things are the removal of a normal (God given) healthy functioning body part that will not grow back, yes, that is wrong, period.

.

Playing the sides against the middle here,

So does that make having a skin tag removed sinful? I’m serious here, b/c a friend of mine had a skin tag removed from her ds’s ear b/c she was concerned about the teasing he’d endure as a kid…so she had it removed when he was 2. A skin tag is a normal, God given healthy functioning (blood running thru it, cells functioning etc.) part that will not grow back, right? I don’t see anything wrong with that, I can totally understand why she did it, and so long as there’s some sort of numbing procedure used, why is it different than a circ, where the same reasons are given?

 

[jess7396]

First, I made it clear from my first post that this is my opinion, luckily for me, I am in good company:

Benedictus:

From the Council of Florence, Session 11:

“Therefore [the Church] strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christian, not to practise circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation.”

It’s not exactly a de Fide teaching, but it’s something to think about.

I believe many things are sins that are not necessarily outlined in the catechism but fall under an umbrella of other sins (in this case, vanity)

Surely, I am not bold enough to determine the “sins” of another person posting on an internet forum, but- if a person truly has read a small bit on the medical issues involved (which are clear that is it not needed and in fact can be harmful), and maintains with their own words that they did it “because it was important to us that he look like daddy” than, yes, I would say that is IMNSHO sinful.

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

jess7396:

I firmly believe that it is sinful to cut off any healthy, functioning part of another person’s body without their consent.

I do not feel I have sinned in having my sons circ’d and neither does the Church.

---

Did God make all little boys in need of immediate surgical correction? I think not .

I don’t know about others, but I do not do it immediately and believe that some boys, for various health reasons, should never have it done. We do lots of things to these blessings as soon as they are born that the vast majority do not need. (vit k shots or pku testing for example) They are done as prevention for all babies for the sake of the slim number of children who do need them.

I understand for those who are unaware on the issue (I was once, hence my first son is circ.ed),

I must say I really resent the notion that because I don’t make the same choice as you, I must just be ignorant of the issue. I am not. I have looked at the issues and feel having our sons circ’d is the best choice.

---

but those who would have it done for cosmetic reasons, I just don’t “get” that on a Catholic.

**Please refer to my post #7 about that. I really don’t think it’s just cosmetic (at least not for us) and it might be clearer to others if this is rephrased. Fwiw, I come from a family where none of the men are circ’d. They thought it was rather odd we did the boys, but didn’t seem to care either way. I’ve never had, and don’t plan to ever have, a conversation about how satisfied they are with their penis. **

---

…do you realize that there is not a single major medical organization which recommends routine infant circumcision?

I don’t think anyone on the board so far as recommended it be routine?

---

**All of those same medical organizations also state the chance of problems are very slim (very near the same chance as problems for uncirc’d) when parents do decide to have their sons circ’d. The major deciding factor for problems is the method used and general health. Just like the major deciding factor for problems in uncirc’d infants is the care of the penis and general health. **

 

[jess7396]

leaner:

Playing the sides against the middle here,

So does that make having a skin tag removed sinful? I’m serious here, b/c a friend of mine had a skin tag removed from her ds’s ear b/c she was concerned about the teasing he’d endure as a kid…so she had it removed when he was 2. A skin tag is a normal, God given healthy functioning (blood running thru it, cells functioning etc.) part that will not grow back, right? I don’t see anything wrong with that, I can totally understand why she did it, and so long as there’s some sort of numbing procedure used, why is it different than a circ, where the same reasons are given?

It does appear you are playing . I am not up for a game of semantics here, I think we can all see the difference between a foreskin (something God gives all males, and actually does serve a function) and a skin tag.

I can take part in a debate about the issue, but I can’t argue semantics through and through.

 

[jess7396]

I must say I really resent the notion that because I don’t make the same choice as you, I must just be ignorant of the issue. I am not. I have looked at the issues and feel having our sons circ’d is the best choice.

There is no need for you to resent that, I didn’t say “Rob’s wife is unaware of the issue”, but surely, some people are, I was once myself, and I firmly believe the majority of people who have their sons circ.ed in the US have not throught far beyond, “Of course he’ll be circ.ed, his daddy is”.

I circ.ed my first b/c I truly believed that there was medical reasoning (mostly from anecdotes from a couple of health care professionals I know), but once I actually read the research and found out that it is unnecessary medically, I got very angry that I didn’t research further before doing it to my first son.

BTW- when I say “routine infant circumcision” I mean “done without medical reasoning”, not that you are suggesting everyone must do it, just that you do it as a matter of “routine” not b/c of a “need”.

 

[leaner]

jess7396:

It does appear you are playing . I am not up for a game of semantics here, I think we can all see the difference between a foreskin (something God gives all males, and actually does serve a function) and a skin tag.

I can take part in a debate about the issue, but I can’t argue semantics through and through.

hey, it meets your definition, that’s all I’m saying, and many people look at the foreskin as the same thing; cosmetic, blood running thru it, but not serving much other purpose – I’m not just trying to goad someone into an argument, I’m seriously asking the question here b/c I see a link between how many people view the foreskin and how many people view a skintag – just b/c it might make your argument less valid does not mean it’s “arguing semantics” – if you don’t want to lend any credence to the opposing viewpoint, I can understand tho

 

[jess7396]

It’s not that I don’t want to talk to opposing viewpoints, it is just that it is simply untrue, just b/c “many people believe” the foreskin is nothing more than a skintag does not make it true, I would think even the most die hard pro-circ. person could see that it does, in fact serve a purpose.

 

[CatholicSam]

Princess_Abby:

CS,

I was merely replying and pointing out that one person’s reasoning based on experience does not invalide someone else’s reasoning based on a different experience. I’m not sure where the rest of what you said concerning me being offended and this not being a place to discuss circumsicion came from.

PA, that’s the problem with communicating through typing You can’t get the full meaning of the other person’s communications Even if you use expressive little faces Anyway, I sense you’re a little tense (whether you are or not), and I’m saying a Hail Mary for you right now. I know it is tough to be pregnant AND a princess on top of that! And I regularly remember you in my Rosary intentions.

Ok, now something to validate this post being on this thread… um… circumcision?

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

jess7396:

As for God commanding this (at one time, not now, as we all know), I posted on the last circ. thread here (feel free to do a search) about how the circ. done at that time was nothing like the complete foreskin removal done today. Comparing the circ. God commanded to the circ. done by OBGYNS and Pediatricians in American hospitals today is like comparing apples to oranges.

No one here, so far, as argued they are doing it for biblical reasons.

God commanded they be circ’d. It is more likely the lack of medical ability available to them determined the use of what would be called the equal to the the modern day “clamp” method than an actual mandate from God on the details of how to do it. Are you saying that if we did it the way they did back then, it would be okay to you?

---

I take my boys to a urologist for theirs. I would not let a ob or ped dr. do it - not nearly as experienced and I don’t want it done the day after delivery.

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

jess7396:

it is simply untrue, just b/c “many people believe” the foreskin is nothing more than a skintag does not make it true, I would think even the most die hard pro-circ. person could see that it does, in fact serve a purpose.

It would seem the question parents ask themselves is: does the keeping the foreskin or does having the boy circ’d serve a better purpose.

---

When put that way many parents are going to feel their child, for whatever reason, would be better served with a circ. Just as many or more may also feel their child, again for whatever reason, is better served uncirc’ed.

---

Boils down to the same thing: It’s a personal decison for each family.

 

[Princess_Abby]

CatholicSam:

PA, that’s the problem with communicating through typing You can’t get the full meaning of the other person’s communications Even if you use expressive little faces Anyway, I sense you’re a little tense (whether you are or not), and I’m saying a Hail Mary for you right now. I know it is tough to be pregnant AND a princess on top of that! And I regularly remember you in my Rosary intentions.

Ok, now something to validate this post being on this thread… um… circumcision?

Thank you for the prayers. I’m sorry if I was too intense for you. I tend to speak very matter of factly even in person but I’m usually smiling…which of course all non-verbals are lost on here.

 

[Princess_Abby]

It would seem the question parents ask themselves is: does the keeping the foreskin or does having the boy circ’d serve a better purpose.

When put that way many parents are going to feel their child, for whatever reason, would be better served with a circ. Just as many or more may also feel their child, again for whatever reason, is better served uncirc’ed.

Boils down to the same thing: It’s a personal decison for each family.

I think this is a very fair and reasonable way to put it for either side. We all have a variety of reasons that some share and others do not. But each are valid and based on personal experiences, preferences and interpretation of resources on the subject.

 

[jess7396]

****
Boils down to the same thing: It’s a personal decison for each family.

I can see that you think that, I, of course, disagree . I don’t think the unnecessary removal of a functioning healthy body part is a choice, or personal decision for anyone other than the person it is being done to.

Did you start this thread just for the debate? As I re-read your OP, I assume that is the purpose of the thread, and since I have done that “debate” many times here on CA, I’ll bow out now, unless someone directs something to me. I prefer to talk about this when someone is actually looking for information, as these debates (the circ. debate, the BFing debates, etc.) rarely serve any purpose beyond everyone deciding these are all “personal choices” that hold no moral implications whatsoever.

 

[Ana]

jess7396:

I prefer to talk about this when someone is actually looking for information, as these debates (the circ. debate, the BFing debates, etc.) rarely serve any purpose beyond everyone deciding these are all “personal choices” that hold no moral implications whatsoever.

You mentioned a few times on this thread that there is a definite purpose to the foreskin (“even die hard pro-circ people know this”).
Well, I must plead ignorance , would you mind enlightening me as to the purpose of this?

Although I understand, that not every little thing is morally evaluated in the CCC, the fact that the Church has not spoken on this, when it is a factor that will effect many male children … to me says this is a non-issue (of morality.) I was wondering on what basis you think “sin” could be imputed to the decision, whether or not to have your child circumsized? You mentioned that it would be umbrellad under vanity in a previous post (but only if the purpose was to look like daddy) If that were not the reason, but if it was for cultural or medical reasons … what categories of sin would these fall under.

Also, for an example, my husband who was not circ’d, insisted on his son being circ’d. The fact that he was saying this from the perspective of one circumsized carried a lot of weight and to me was very powerful. Not able to be classed under vanity, because it was not a matter of “looking like daddy”, but more a matter of “loving him enough to,” in his opinion.

What if he took the opposite perspective and decided to not have his son circ’d because he wanted to look like daddy … would that also be sinful and be umbrellad under vanity?

I am not trying to bait you. I sincerely want to know your perspective. I certainly understand that people may choose or not to circ, but you are the first I have encountered that claims circ is a sin. Frankly, I am intrigued.

 

[frogman80]

It always amazes me that women have harder time with this than men do. My opinion… let your husband make the decision on whether or not to circumcise a son.