Defining miscarriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter TotusTuusForever
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TotusTuusForever

Guest
I’ve heard people say they have “x amount of kids on earth and 1 in heaven”. But I’m wondering if I qualify to say that considering my scenario. My husband and I have had several chemical pregnancies. Online some health sites say that since the sperm and egg met but an embryo didn’t form that these don’t technically count as miscarriages.But, when the sperm meets the egg a soul is formed right? Or is it only when an embryo is formed?
 
A new human being exists when the sperm and egg unite. It is at this point that the new soul is infused and a new person exists. Therefore if one has a miscarriage the new person has died and has met God.

Pax
 
I’m so sorry for your losses :cry:❤️:pray:t2:

I, for one, despise the term “chemical pregnancy”. It’s a pretty meaningless phrase, often used as a weapon to minimize the grief of a couple who miscarried.

A sperm cell fertilizes an egg. New DNA forms before the fertilized cell can divide.
New DNA=new person= new soul.

And yes, throughout our entire lives, growth and development can be thwarted, or interrupted, maybe even fatally, but that doesn’t take away from the humanity of the person, whether they live only a few hours in Mom’s Fallopian tube , or if they live to be over 100.

You might be interested in this CGI animation. The art is gorgeous.
 
That’s what I’ve understood too. We don’t know, in the case of very early miscarriage, if ensoulment took place or not. However, if it did, I think we can trust in the mercy of God.
 
I am sorry TotusTuusForever.

What is a chemical pregnancy?

To form a new human being, the cells of the spermatozoa need to fused with the egg to form a new entity.

Miscarriage is something else often undesrtand as the lost of a embryo that had been implanted in the uterus.

The ensoulment debate is not closed in the Church. The current position seems that as we don’t know when it happened, and as we can’t say firmly that it does not happened since the conception (=fertilization), we have to respect the human being since the beginning.

I will not go into the bioethical debate of when an embryo is formed, and the concept of pre-embryo (before implantation). It does not seems the right track to answer your questions.
 
Catechism of the Catholic Church:
2270 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.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.” (Jer. 1:5)

“My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth” (Ps. 139:15)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yes. A human person is formed. The Church has not defined when that human receives their immortal soul. It could take place anywhere during the 40 weeks of development.
 
It is the soul (spiritual, immaterial part of our human nature) that gives life to the material part (zygote/embryo/fetus) of our human nature. If there is no soul present the material part is dead, not alive. The zygote would not multiply cells and grow.

The Catechism quote equates life with the moment of conception –
“Human life…from the moment of conception.” The moment of conception is when a sperm and ovum unite.

I should add, there are only 2 basic parts to our human nature – body (material) and soul (immaterial). You will sometimes read of body, soul, and spirit – but spirit is included in soul (immaterial), just as when we say body and blood, blood is part of the body (material part). (See CCC 367)

Here is an article from CatholicCulture.org titled " Church Teachings and the ‘Delayed Personhood’ Ruse". It contains a whole list of Church documents (list starts partway down) regarding life in the womb – short quotes from some of them.

Hope all of this will help. It’s so frustrating to discover one has been fed a lie. I remember the rude awakening I had some years ago. Had never even occurred to me that leaders in our church and schools would promote falsehoods. But, it got me digging, searching out the Church’s official documents/encyclicals/ etc. – and learning all the beautiful true teachings of our Church.
 
Last edited:
JGD said:
The Catechism quote equates life with the moment of conception –
“Human life…from the moment of conception.” The moment of conception is when a sperm and ovum unite.
Click to expand...
Human life, yes, but does this imply ensoulment?

The Church has never defined precisely when ensoulment occurs. We just don’t know. Or has the CCC “gone all the way” and declared that ensoulment occurs at the instant of conception?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not have the authority to create doctrine that didn’t already exist. No catechism ever did.
 
Hmm I never realized that this was under debate in the church. I have read before that when the sperm and egg meet scientists have seen a flash of light. I wonder if this is ensoulment considering that scientists have recently realized that UV light was needed to put the image on the shroud of Turin when Jesus resurrected. Obviously just my thoughts but it does get me curious.

In any case I’m confident that I have at least one baby in heaven since I had one miscarriage that felt like a mini version labor but I digress. I do wonder about the others though. I have gotten multiple positive tests that have later turned negative. I wish I could know for certain how many are in heaven.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
Human life, yes, but does this imply ensoulment?

The Church has never defined precisely when ensoulment occurs. We just don’t know. Or has the CCC “gone all the way” and declared that ensoulment occurs at the instant of conception?
Click to expand...
Yes, it implies ensoulment.
There is no human life without the presence of a human soul - the soul is the source of our physical life. Death is when the soul separates/departs from the body.

CCC 365 The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body:234 i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.

CCC 369 The first Adam was made by the last Adam, from whom he also received his soul, to give him life. (If you click on the 365 link, you’ll note the CCC is quoting from Pius XII, Enc. Summi Pontificatus 3;)

1005 …In that departure which is death the soul is separated from the body. …
The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not have the authority to create doctrine that didn’t already exist. No catechism ever did.
Click to expand...
Correct. And the current Catechism of the Catholic Church did not create any new doctrine – what it does is present the doctrines and teachings of the Church that do exist, so people can read and learn them; have a reference to check whether something is in fact what the Church teaches.

This catechism is different from the various catechisms produced for use in schools for various grade levels. It’s officially promulgated by the Pope (Pope John Paul II) for the whole Catholic Church. Please read his letter which is printed on the very first pages of the book. Among other things, he says "…its purpose of being presented as a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, enabling everyone to know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life. " and “The Church now has at her disposal this new, authoritative exposition of the one and perennial apostolic faith, and it will serve as a “valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion” and as a “sure norm for teaching the faith,” as well as a “sure and authentic reference text” for preparing local catechisms”
The previous such catechism was put out by the Church about 500 years ago - after the Council of Trent. It’s called the Council of Trent Catechism

Could you please supply a link to where you’re getting the false information stating the Catholic Church does not teach when ensoulment takes place. It’s obviously false since it’s in conflict with the Catechism.
 
Last edited:
JGD said:
Yes, it implies ensoulment.
There is no human life without the presence of a human soul - the soul is the source of our physical life.
Click to expand...
I agree that there is, indeed, DNA unique to one newly created human person in even the one cell that is created when the male and female gametes join together. This is, truly, “human life”, in its absolutely most basic form. Undifferentiated, one single cell (which will immediately start dividing into two, four, eight, sixteen…), but still human life. What else could it be?

I do not, however, see how any of the quotes you cited state, or even imply, that this one cell (or two, or four…) has an immortal human soul, the same soul it will have for all eternity, and that this soul is created at the very instant of conception. That may be true, but we do not know that.

My “source” is countless instances of this teaching (or rather, lack of teaching) in 40+ years of being a Catholic. I’ve done a lot of reading, and 40+ years is a long time. I don’t memorize the exact place where I read everything. Are you suggesting that the Church, via the CCC, has finally declared it to be a doctrine (or even dogma) that the soul is infused at that very instant of conception? Can other CAF readers confirm this?

I mean no hostility or confrontation. I grant your good faith, and I hope you will grant mine. I concede that it very well may be true, but that we cannot prove it, the Church cannot prove it, no one can prove it. And I certainly don’t suggest that abortion is ever acceptable because “it probably doesn’t have a soul that early”. The doubt, if there is one — and there is — has to be settled in favor of life and ensoulment.
 
I’ve been a Catholic twice as long as you (take away the +). Yikes!!
You say " That may be true, but we do not know that." It all depends upon who you’re trusting to give you the correct knowledge. Science will never give you the answer of course since the soul is immaterial and there’s no way it can observe, test, … Neither will dissenting or improperly educated teachers.
The Church, guided by the Holy Spirit - God - is my source.
The sources I gave certainly teach that the soul is the source of life for the material part of our being - from the moment of conception. If I understand correctly, you’re saying that "we do not know " if this soul is the one we will have for all eternity - like at some point God might take that one away and infuse another one.???

We have only one body - that develops and grows according to its material nature.
We have only one soul - that develops and grows (hopefully) according to its immaterial AND spiritual nature. We’ll be in real trouble on judgement day if it hasn’t – just as physically we’d be in real trouble if our body didn’t grow and develop.

But all that growth and development is contingent on a body and soul being present previously for growth - a contingency you can trace all the way back to the original zygote and human soul.

Isn’t it absolutely awesome that God lets humans have a role in bringing a new human being into existence.

BTW, I’m so sorry for the lack of catechesis after Vatican II. I lived before it, through it, (and needed to be hit over the head by a 2x4 before I recognized the dissent & false teaching), and praise God, I’m living to see the truth come shining thru again. It won’t happen overnight, but happen it will - for those who care enough to do the studying required. God IS truth.
 
Last edited:
A chemical pregnancy is a very early pregnancy loss.

It is when there is a positive pregnancy test, but no tissue to identify, or no images in a sonogram.

It’s a newer term due to the availability of early pregnancy tests. In the past women might not have even known. I dislike the term. It makes it seem that the pregnancy wasn’t real, just a chemical reaction.
 
A Franciscan friar who uses to post here referred to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, how Mary was conceived without sin. That implies that Mary’s soul was sinless at conception.
 
JGD said:
BTW, I’m so sorry for the lack of catechesis after Vatican II. I lived before it, through it, (and needed to be hit over the head by a 2x4 before I recognized the dissent & false teaching), and praise God, I’m living to see the truth come shining thru again. It won’t happen overnight, but happen it will - for those who care enough to do the studying required. God IS truth.
Click to expand...
If you are implying that my catechesis has been faulty, then all I can say is, you don’t know me very well. I cannot even begin to name all of the books and articles I have read about the Catholic Faith. I have read the entire Bible, cover-to-cover, word-for-word (Douay version). I have spent countless hours with my nose in books about Catholicism. And I did much of this precisely because catechesis was faulty, and I had to seek out traditional, orthodox sources on my own. In the horrible years of the 1970s and 1980s, I had to put everything I read or heard through the filter of traditional Catholic teaching — sermons, articles in the liberal Catholic press, half-baked “new Catholic” ideas that heterodox priests tried to palm off on unsuspecting faithful. I have fought many a battle (figuratively speaking) with material heretics who tried to introduce a new religion. So don’t imagine that I don’t “get it” about ensoulment at conception because my education was lacking in some way.

Below are a couple of sources that agree with my contention (and it is not just “my contention” — I didn’t invent it) that we cannot know with certainty when the soul enters the body. These are just the top searches from Google — no doubt there are hundreds more.

https://www.ncbcenter.org/files/3914/7018/8754/MSOB033_Do_Embryos_Have_Souls.pdf

F_Marturana said:
A Franciscan friar who uses to post here referred to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, how Mary was conceived without sin. That implies that Mary’s soul was sinless at conception.
Click to expand...
Actually, the Immaculate Conception is a very strong indication that the soul is, indeed, infused at conception. I have even wondered if there has been a development of doctrine, such that we can arrive at a point where the Church can infallibly teach that the soul enters the body at the moment of conception. If the Church would ever teach this at the highest level — up to and including ex cathedra infallibility — I would be the first in line to affirm it without question. It may be time for the Church to do precisely that.

Not that it matters — the truth is what it is, regardless of what anybody says, thinks, likes, or dislikes — but an ex cathedra infallible proclamation such as this would really throw a spanner into the works of those women who rely upon abortifacient contraceptives, or even contraceptives that can be abortifacient. Just putting that out there.
 
I’m just going to throw this in here and I’m making no claims regarding it…you do know that even conception is a process? Once the sperm has entered the egg, there are several hours while the haploid DNA from each unwinds and then recombined to form the new unique DNA. So, there isn’t some specific point in conception…it takes hours for what we would consider a new life.

I don’t see how anyone could try to declare the moment ensoulment takes place when it’s a process to begin with. I guess you could declare it takes place in the first day…but, not a moment?
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
If you are implying that my catechesis has been faulty, then all I can say is, you don’t know me very well. … And I did much of this precisely because catechesis was faulty, and I had to seek out traditional, orthodox sources on my own. In the horrible years of the 1970s and 1980s, I had to put everything I read or heard through the filter of traditional Catholic teaching — sermons, articles in the liberal Catholic press, half-baked “new Catholic” ideas that heterodox priests tried to palm off on unsuspecting faithful. I have fought many a battle (figuratively speaking) with material heretics who tried to introduce a new religion. So don’t imagine that I don’t “get it” about ensoulment at conception because my education was lacking in some way.
Click to expand...
When I say “catechesis” I am referring to religious instruction provided in the Catholic schools and CCD programs. As you yourself note in your post, it “was faulty”. I don’t know your age, but when you said 40+, I assumed you were probably in school or CCD during those "horrible 1970s and 1980s receiving some of that faulty instruction. I was not referring to any of your private studying and research.
And I do feel sorry for those who weren’t catechized properly; they deserved more.

I also have done tons of reading and studying on my own, read the Bible, read the Catechism, read papal encyclicals and books, some ECF’s, … - but I don’t consider that catechesis. I think catechesis is receiving instruction from someone as opposed to self study. But perhaps it has a broader meaning.

Sorry you were offended; that certainly was not my intent.
 
TotusTuusForever said:
My husband and I have had several chemical pregnancies. Online some health sites say that since the sperm and egg met but an embryo didn’t form that these don’t technically count as miscarriages.
Click to expand...
This information doesn’t sound quite accurate. In order for you to know you had a chemical pregnancy (i.e., a very early miscarriage) you had to have had a positive home pregnancy test, right? And in order for a pregnancy test to show a positive, an embryo had to have formed and implanted in the uterus long enough to have been producing HCG, which is of course what makes the test turn positive.

So it certainly is a human body albeit a very tiny one in its earliest, most primitive stages. And if he/she is a human body, then it stands to reason that he/she has a human soul, because body and soul are not separate things (except at death, when they are separated to be united later at the Resurrection).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top