CSI knows when life begins?

  • Thread starter Thread starter candicami
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

candicami

Guest
Ok, I couldn’t resist looking into this at least a little further. I was watching CSI tonight, and they had a brief argument about when life begins. One woman claimed that the Church had the official position for years that life didn’t begin until a woman felt the child in her womb move. Now I have no idea where they got this and honestly think that they just came up with this on the fly. She mentioned that a 16th century Pope made this statement. Is this true? I will do some looking around myself, but wanted to see if anyone here had some information.

They also quoted a bible verse from Leviticus (17:11), saying ‘for the life of the flesh is in the blood,’ again trying to say that life didn’t begin until at least 18 days after conception when blood is infused into the baby.

I don’t agree with anything they claimed, and know there are probably several of bible verses that can show otherwise (not to mention science). I welcome any comments or thoughts on these claims, especially regarding this 16th century Pope’s supposed statement.

Thanks,
candicami
 
Many Church theologians speculated about ensoulment and some thought that conception was a process that lasted many days and thought about the moral ramifications of abortion in that period. THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS despite the lame argument in that CSI epidsode is that the Church has always authoritatively condemned abortion.

Scott
 
Yes, there were times in church history when there was argument about the time of ensoulment. This was because they knew nothing of embryology at the time, and so didn’t think their was life in the womb until it could be felt by the mother.

Even so, the Church still condemned abortion, regardless of the ensoulment question! The only question then, was whether it was equivalent to murder, since nobody knew whether the embryo was alive before movement can be felt. Nevertheless, abortion was still condemned.

Now, of course, we know a lot about embryology. There is no longer any doubt about when a new human being begins. Every human individual begins when the sperm and egg unite to form a new genetic individual.

Since CSI purports to be scientifically based, one would think this fact might have been mentioned.
 
Gee, I just saw that a couple of minutes ago on TV.

That’s the problem with shows like that. People think that CSI is very factual, when in reality, they can take facts and twist them in order to fit the storyline. :banghead:
 
While abortion has always been considered a sin, it used to carry different penalties before and after the quickening. As been mentioned, it was because we didn’t have the knowledge then that we have now, and the benefit of the doubt goes to the sinner.
 
Thanks for your replies. I do appreciate the information. I can understand how there may have been argument about ensoulment and it is too bad that they twisted this to mean that the Church had officially declared when life began before it was even fully understood.

It really is sad how this ‘scientific’ based program would completely disregard that aspect of life in order to try and promote the acceptance of ebryo research and destruction by putting doubt in people’s minds about when life begins. Just another example of how entertainment and popular media is used to promote evil.
 
Last night’s episode was a rerun. When it first aired, my wife and I were pretty upset about it. Not because of her statement, but because viewers take everything on CSI (et al) at face value, believing in its accuracy.

So my wife and I sent a letter of complaint to CBS (knowing full well it would do no good).

Before writing the letter, I did some research and discovered what the woman claimed was actually pretty accurate:

(From From catholicintl.com/catholicissues/1973.htm)

“In 1588, Pope Sixtus V wrote an edict titled “Effraenatam” which enforced excommunication for those who performed abortions at any stage of gestation. Three years later, Pope Gregory XIV, revoked Sixtus’ decree. He reinstated the “quickening” test, which did not inflict a penalty up until 116 days into pregnancy (16-1/2 weeks).”

Even so, it’s just ridiculous that in order to make her point, she needed to reference a document more than 400 years old, completely negating all other historical documentation that clearly states the Church’s official stance: that life begins at the moment of conception. That’s a pretty weak basis for an argument, if you ask me.
 
Visiting the “Moral Theology” section of this forum, I noticed the very same discussion taking place there, and found a post by Della to be rather insightful and enlightening on the matter.

Here’s the link to that particular thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=99460

And here’s what Della posted (thank you, Della):

There is a basic misunderstanding of what the popes cited here may have been doing (if the info is correct). They were not ruling on the rightness or wrongness of abortion, but making pastoral decisions regarding when abortion could be done without endangering a living soul.

Early in the Church most people believed that ensoulment didn’t take place until “quickening,” which the doctors of the day decided was at 40 days from conception. They didn’t know anything about how conception happened or anything about genetics. You will recall that when Mary visited Elizabeth, when Elizabeth was 3 months pregnant, that her baby “leapt” in her womb. Apparently, this was the first evidence Elizabeth had that she was carrying a living child–one with a soul.

As medicine advanced later popes made revised pastoral decisions regarding when abortions could be performed without endangering a living soul. Now days we know that the instant the sperm and egg join a unique individual has been created. We still don’t know if the zygote has a soul at this point in the process of development, but that is precisely why in these modern times it has been decided that abortion cannot be performed (except under very prescribed circumstances best discussed in another thread). The reasonings is that since we cannot know the exact instant in which the fertilized egg has a soul, abortion cannot be done lest it mean killing a living soul.

So, abortion has always been seen as an evil, but now the Church has come to see that it is an intrinsic evil since at any point in the development of a fetus it may destroy a living soul.

It is easy to take potshots at this issue in sound bytes meant to deceive the unwary, as the writers of CSI did. It takes much more time and effort to explain the reality of what the popes were and weren’t doing in their decisions on this matter, which no screenwriter is going to bore his audience with. Add to that the desire to debunk the teachings of the Church and we get misinformation, as we can see on so many of our TV programs and movies written by pro-abortion writers and performed and directed by pro-abortion actors and directors. No surprise at all.
 
40.png
cenpress:
Last night’s episode was a rerun. When it first aired, my wife and I were pretty upset about it. Not because of her statement, but because viewers take everything on CSI (et al) at face value, believing in its accuracy.

So my wife and I sent a letter of complaint to CBS (knowing full well it would do no good).

Before writing the letter, I did some research and discovered what the woman claimed was actually pretty accurate:

(From From catholicintl.com/catholicissues/1973.htm)

“In 1588, Pope Sixtus V wrote an edict titled “Effraenatam” which enforced excommunication for those who performed abortions at any stage of gestation. Three years later, Pope Gregory XIV, revoked Sixtus’ decree. He reinstated the “quickening” test, which did not inflict a penalty up until 116 days into pregnancy (16-1/2 weeks).”

Even so, it’s just ridiculous that in order to make her point, she needed to reference a document more than 400 years old, completely negating all other historical documentation that clearly states the Church’s official stance: that life begins at the moment of conception. That’s a pretty weak basis for an argument, if you ask me.
Click to expand...
May I add here that we also know a lot more about conception scientifically than we did in 1588 - which supports that life begins at conception!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top