M
mominne
Guest
I’m not defensive, I’m debating!I agree, but why do I sense defensiveness?.
- Status
M
mominne
Guest
Rob’s Wife said:
Well, good, I’m glad you were there. I think parents should be required to be there and I think they should see a circumcision and understand the procedure before they agree to have it done. I perceived it to be worse than you apparantly did. It seems two people can see things very differently!
K
kamz
Guest
Whether Christ should have been circumcised?
Objection 1. It would seem that Christ should not have been circumcised. For on the advent of the reality, the figure ceases. But circumcision was prescribed to Abraham as a sign of the covenant concerning his posterity, as may be seen from Gn. 17. Now this covenant was fulfilled in Christ’s birth. Therefore circumcision should have ceased at once.
Objection 2. Further, “every action of Christ is a lesson to us” [Innoc. III, Serm. xxii de Temp.; wherefore it is written (John 3:15): “I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you do also.” But we ought not to be circumcised; according to Gal. 5:2: “If you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” Therefore it seems that neither should Christ have been circumcised.
Objection 3. Further, circumcision was prescribed as a remedy of original sin. But Christ did not contract original sin, as stated above (14, 3; 15, 1). Therefore Christ should not have been circumcised.
On the contrary, It is written (Luke 2:21): “After eight days were accomplished, that the child should be circumcised.”
I answer that, For several reasons Christ ought to have been circumcised. First, in order to prove the reality of His human nature, in contradiction to the Manicheans, who said that He had an imaginary body: and in contradiction to Apollinarius, who said that Christ’s body was consubstantial with His Godhead; and in contradiction to Valentine, who said that Christ brought His body from heaven. Secondly, in order to show His approval of circumcision, which God had instituted of old. Thirdly, in order to prove that He was descended from Abraham, who had received the commandment of circumcision as a sign of his faith in Him. Fourthly, in order to take away from the Jews an excuse for not receiving Him, if He were uncircumcised. Fifthly, “in order by His example to exhort us to be obedient” [Bede, Hom. x in Evang.]. Wherefore He was circumcised on the eighth day according to the prescription of the Law (Leviticus 12:3). Sixthly, “that He who had come in the likeness of sinful flesh might not reject the remedy whereby sinful flesh was wont to be healed.” Seventhly, that by taking on Himself the burden of the Law, He might set others free therefrom, according to Gal. 4:4,5: “God sent His Son . . . made under the Law, that He might redeem them who were under the Law.”
Reply to Objection 1. Circumcision by the removal of the piece of skin in the member of generation, signified “the passing away of the old generation” [Athanasius, De Sabb. et Circumcis.]: from the decrepitude of which we are freed by Christ’s Passion. Consequently this figure was not completely fulfilled in Christ’s birth, but in His Passion, until which time the circumcision retained its virtue and status. Therefore it behooved Christ to be circumcised as a son of Abraham before His Passion.
Reply to Objection 2. Christ submitted to circumcision while it was yet of obligation. And thus His action in this should be imitated by us, in fulfilling those things which are of obligation in our own time. Because “there is a time and opportunity for every business” (Eccl 8:6).
Moreover, according to Origen (Hom. xiv in Luc.), “as we died when He died, and rose again when Christ rose from the dead, so were we circumcised spiritually through Christ: wherefore we need no carnal circumcision.” And this is what the Apostle says (Colossians 2:11): “In whom,” * “you are circumcised with circumcision not made by hand in despoiling of the body of the flesh, but in the circumcision of” our Lord Jesus “Christ.”
Reply to Objection 3. As Christ voluntarily took upon Himself our death, which is the effect of sin, whereas He had no sin Himself, in order to deliver us from death, and to make us to die spiritually unto sin, so also He took upon Himself circumcision, which was a remedy against original sin, whereas He contracted no original sin, in order to deliver us from the yoke of the Law, and to accomplish a spiritual circumcision in us–in order, that is to say, that, by taking upon Himself the shadow, He might accomplish the reality.
I found this at EWTN and thought it was very insightful
*
Objection 1. It would seem that Christ should not have been circumcised. For on the advent of the reality, the figure ceases. But circumcision was prescribed to Abraham as a sign of the covenant concerning his posterity, as may be seen from Gn. 17. Now this covenant was fulfilled in Christ’s birth. Therefore circumcision should have ceased at once.
Objection 2. Further, “every action of Christ is a lesson to us” [Innoc. III, Serm. xxii de Temp.; wherefore it is written (John 3:15): “I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you do also.” But we ought not to be circumcised; according to Gal. 5:2: “If you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” Therefore it seems that neither should Christ have been circumcised.
Objection 3. Further, circumcision was prescribed as a remedy of original sin. But Christ did not contract original sin, as stated above (14, 3; 15, 1). Therefore Christ should not have been circumcised.
On the contrary, It is written (Luke 2:21): “After eight days were accomplished, that the child should be circumcised.”
I answer that, For several reasons Christ ought to have been circumcised. First, in order to prove the reality of His human nature, in contradiction to the Manicheans, who said that He had an imaginary body: and in contradiction to Apollinarius, who said that Christ’s body was consubstantial with His Godhead; and in contradiction to Valentine, who said that Christ brought His body from heaven. Secondly, in order to show His approval of circumcision, which God had instituted of old. Thirdly, in order to prove that He was descended from Abraham, who had received the commandment of circumcision as a sign of his faith in Him. Fourthly, in order to take away from the Jews an excuse for not receiving Him, if He were uncircumcised. Fifthly, “in order by His example to exhort us to be obedient” [Bede, Hom. x in Evang.]. Wherefore He was circumcised on the eighth day according to the prescription of the Law (Leviticus 12:3). Sixthly, “that He who had come in the likeness of sinful flesh might not reject the remedy whereby sinful flesh was wont to be healed.” Seventhly, that by taking on Himself the burden of the Law, He might set others free therefrom, according to Gal. 4:4,5: “God sent His Son . . . made under the Law, that He might redeem them who were under the Law.”
Reply to Objection 1. Circumcision by the removal of the piece of skin in the member of generation, signified “the passing away of the old generation” [Athanasius, De Sabb. et Circumcis.]: from the decrepitude of which we are freed by Christ’s Passion. Consequently this figure was not completely fulfilled in Christ’s birth, but in His Passion, until which time the circumcision retained its virtue and status. Therefore it behooved Christ to be circumcised as a son of Abraham before His Passion.
Reply to Objection 2. Christ submitted to circumcision while it was yet of obligation. And thus His action in this should be imitated by us, in fulfilling those things which are of obligation in our own time. Because “there is a time and opportunity for every business” (Eccl 8:6).
Moreover, according to Origen (Hom. xiv in Luc.), “as we died when He died, and rose again when Christ rose from the dead, so were we circumcised spiritually through Christ: wherefore we need no carnal circumcision.” And this is what the Apostle says (Colossians 2:11): “In whom,” * “you are circumcised with circumcision not made by hand in despoiling of the body of the flesh, but in the circumcision of” our Lord Jesus “Christ.”
Reply to Objection 3. As Christ voluntarily took upon Himself our death, which is the effect of sin, whereas He had no sin Himself, in order to deliver us from death, and to make us to die spiritually unto sin, so also He took upon Himself circumcision, which was a remedy against original sin, whereas He contracted no original sin, in order to deliver us from the yoke of the Law, and to accomplish a spiritual circumcision in us–in order, that is to say, that, by taking upon Himself the shadow, He might accomplish the reality.
I found this at EWTN and thought it was very insightful
*
K
kamz
Guest
I witnessed all three of my sons circs and none cried for more than a second or two and I was allowed to hold them right away and comfort them. My dad is 68 and was never circ’d he has had over 10 yrs of problems from not being circd so it can cause problems in later life. I agree each of us views things differnt.
This has been debated many, many, many times before on Catholic answers and the thing it boils down to is personal choice for the parents, you are neither right or wrong if you choose to or don’t choose to circumsise your son, we all win, its a win win situation
This has been debated many, many, many times before on Catholic answers and the thing it boils down to is personal choice for the parents, you are neither right or wrong if you choose to or don’t choose to circumsise your son, we all win, its a win win situation
B
BLB_Oregon
Guest
Perhaps they’re literally in the camp that would rather have part of their own genitals surgically removed than go through the experience of talking the issue to death.
We have put some reflection into it. It is a minor surgery. But it is surgery, and it is irreversible. It is something that can be done early with little impact (or is it so little?), or later, after some problems are encountered that men themselves find worth the price of heading them off (but which they may never have). It is like wisdom teeth… wouldn’t you rather just have them out? No, it is like tonsils… they are there for a reason, even if a few people have problems with them. It can make the sex better to have it done. It can make the sex better to leave it undone. God had his chosen people do it, how can it be bad? God doesn’t require it of us, we aren’t trying to be Jews, so leave it alone! And on and on the discussion goes, as we see… and every man has a different experience, so there is no definitive answer to give from the perspective of adulthood.
I had never thought of it this way, but perhaps that is why there have almost always been cultural norms on this question. It prevents the greatest suffering that men attach to circumcision of infants: that is, when we mothers make the men in our lives suffer needlessly merely from having to talk endlessly about the pros and cons of penile surgery!
Speaking of talking to death, I should stay off the forums and get some work done. See y’all after Lent! (And I mean it this time. Really.)
B
bear06
Guest
We’re not Jewish. The medical risks of not doing it really haven’t been proven. It seems to cause trauma to the baby (I think most men would agree!). My mother-in-law told us we should do it because “it looks funny” if you don’t. To this we had to laugh because the reality is, if we stopped and stared, it looks funny either way. 
And the “it won’t look like his dad” always cracks me up too. We all look different in many ways. This is just one more. Besides, do we really stand there and compare all day? I left it up to my husband and he chose not to.
And the “it won’t look like his dad” always cracks me up too. We all look different in many ways. This is just one more. Besides, do we really stand there and compare all day? I left it up to my husband and he chose not to.
K
kamz
Guest
my sister in law is an RN and she has witnessed 1000+ circumcisions, she said, it causes more trauma to the parents than to the baby, the baby cry’s for under five minutes and that is just some babies, others don’t cry at all.
As I’ve stated many times before, my dad is 68 and has been having problems due to not having been circd as an infant, why doesn’t he go have it done now… the doctor said that infants have a much higher pain tolerance than an adult and what you can easily deal with as an infant can take several weeks if not longer to deal with as an adult, my dad still works full time in construction and the doctor said that this would put him out of work for at least one month and no jeans etc. as it would irritate him…my dad simply says “I wish my mom would not have had me at home” that is the only reason he wasn’t circ’d, his mom had him at home and her other son’s later on in hospitals and they all were circ’d, but when my dad was born my grandparents were too poor to go to the hospital so my great grandma delivered my dad at home. So, we can tell ourselves that it will never be a problem or that our adult sons can make that decision but boy, don’t tell that to my dad who now has terrible irritation but can’t stand the idea of not working for a month so he can heal, the doc said it is a very, very painful thing for an adult man.
As I’ve stated many times before, my dad is 68 and has been having problems due to not having been circd as an infant, why doesn’t he go have it done now… the doctor said that infants have a much higher pain tolerance than an adult and what you can easily deal with as an infant can take several weeks if not longer to deal with as an adult, my dad still works full time in construction and the doctor said that this would put him out of work for at least one month and no jeans etc. as it would irritate him…my dad simply says “I wish my mom would not have had me at home” that is the only reason he wasn’t circ’d, his mom had him at home and her other son’s later on in hospitals and they all were circ’d, but when my dad was born my grandparents were too poor to go to the hospital so my great grandma delivered my dad at home. So, we can tell ourselves that it will never be a problem or that our adult sons can make that decision but boy, don’t tell that to my dad who now has terrible irritation but can’t stand the idea of not working for a month so he can heal, the doc said it is a very, very painful thing for an adult man.
J
jrabs
Guest
I am not sure most men would agree.
K
kamz
Guest
Really, if I ask my sons 2, 7 and 10, do you remember the trauma from your circumcision, they would think I was crazyI am not sure most men would agree.
I was just thinking about it and some things my kids have had to endure (stitches in the E.R.) and the thought of them saying "mom, remeber when you had me circumcised, ouch, mom, why’d you do it to me)
it just cracks me up.
B
bear06
Guest
I personally don’t care what people do but my dad is 78 and hasn’t had any problems not being cut. I’m sure it is easier to heal when you are an infant because the skin cells are growing so rapidly. I’m sure you’ll find people who have been who have had problems and I’m sure that you’ll find people who haven’t who have problems. Hygienne is important either way.
K
kamz
Guest
Of course, there is two sides to every story and that is all I’m pointing out, as I have said in every post (and boy this one comes up often here at Catholic.com) this is a win win discussion, you win if you circ and you win if you don’t, either way, its right, we as parents get to make this choice for our kids and we need to support all parents and pat them on their backs just that they care so much about their kids they make well informed, thoughtful decisions
J
jrabs
Guest
I also agree that there are few males out there carrying lingering effects of trauma if circumcised as babies. It may be traumatic for the parent to watch - but then I don’t even like to watch my children get immunizations.Really, if I ask my sons 2, 7 and 10, do you remember the trauma from your circumcision, they would think I was crazy
What ever decision made by the parents - that is the correct one. It seems highly unchristian to insinuate that only one decision is correct. What works in your family may not work for others.
K
kamz
Guest
Exactly :clapping: :yup:
A
apricot_yogurt
Guest
Wow guys, I had no idea that circumsision is so widely practiced in the states. It is not something ever mentioned over here (UK), I’m sure it is common among Jews etc.though. I have never seen a circumcised penis (although, I haven’t seen that many, myself).You learn something new everyday! I shall have to ask my pal in the states about it!
S
sarcophagus
Guest
Well, I don’t know what to think on this one. Should I have a boy someday, it would be a toss up. I’ve never seen an uncircumsized penis since DH is. He’d prefer our son to “look” like him, but I don’t know if it’s necessary. One thing I do know is that my dad got circumsized when he was 69…not sure why, I didn’t ask .
.
M
mominne
Guest
K
kamz
Guest
M
mominne
Guest
apricot yogurt:
There certainly are a lot of problem penis stories going on in this thread. I don’t know how such a significant portion of the world’s male population is functioning!
K
kamz
Guest
Your dad probably had the same troubles my dad has had, of course my dad doesn’t know that I know, ya know he would about die of embarassment, my mom told me in strictest confidence and I am only sharing since ya’ll don’t know themWell, I don’t know what to think on this one. Should I have a boy someday, it would be a toss up. I’ve never seen an uncircumsized penis since DH is. He’d prefer our son to “look” like him, but I don’t know if it’s necessary. One thing I do know is that my dad got circumsized when he was 69…not sure why, I didn’t ask
I think once my dad retires and is willing to stop “moving” for two seconds, he will have the circumcision done, he just doesn’t want to go through the pain and the waiting right now, he had hernia surgery two years ago and he went about nutso when the doc said he had to take it super easy for two weeks, the man does NOT like to sit still, he is always on the go.
But, I hope he does whatever he feels is best for him and I pray he won’t have too much pain, I love him dearly
M
mominne
Guest
mominne:
I do respect you & I’m glad we’re on the same side. I just don’t agree with your line of reasoning here! But this certainly is an interesting, thread, isn’t it?
- Status