Do identical twins have unique souls at the moment of conception?

[Riley259]

Do identical twins or any other combination where the egg splits sometime (but presumably at the first cell division) after conception have individual souls at the moment of conception? Since the fertilized egg hasn’t split at conception, does it initially have one soul and then following division have more than one (depending upon how many times it splits)? Would this throw into doubt the infusion of the soul immediately upon conception? Does someone have any insights or answers to this apparent contradiction to Catholic teaching?

 

[Melissa]

God knows which conceptions are going to result in identicals instead of singletons (fraternal twins being obvious from the start).

Whether it’s at the moment of sperm-meets-egg or at the moment of twinning, two unique souls for identical twins. Since both are precise moments, I’m not sure where any contradiction would come into play.

 

[LittleRose]

Do identical twins or any other combination where the egg splits sometime (but presumably at the first cell division) after conception have individual souls at the moment of conception? Since the fertilized egg hasn’t split at conception, does it initially have one soul and then following division have more than one (depending upon how many times it splits)? Would this throw into doubt the infusion of the soul immediately upon conception? Does someone have any insights or answers to this apparent contradiction to Catholic teaching?

Why does it have to be a contradiction?

 

[Mannyfit75]

Do identical twins or any other combination where the egg splits sometime (but presumably at the first cell division) after conception have individual souls at the moment of conception? Since the fertilized egg hasn’t split at conception, does it initially have one soul and then following division have more than one (depending upon how many times it splits)? Would this throw into doubt the infusion of the soul immediately upon conception? Does someone have any insights or answers to this apparent contradiction to Catholic teaching?

I’m not a twin but I an an identical triplet. We all have individual souls with very different unique personality and interests…

Any identical set, twin or triplet are like everyone else. They aren’t different from any person who are born normally.

 

[Hudson_Gillette]

Does someone have any insights or answers to this apparent contradiction to Catholic teaching?

Contradiction? I do not believe the church has ever said when a soul goes into a new human life. You could only speculate.

But human life is sacred at any stage from conception forward, regardless.

 

[Riley259]

Contradiction? I do not believe the church has ever said when a soul goes into a new human life. You could only speculate.

But human life is sacred at any stage from conception forward, regardless.

It’s my understanding that the Church has always taught that the soul is infused at the moment of conception.

 

[estesbob]

Do identical twins or any other combination where the egg splits sometime (but presumably at the first cell division) after conception have individual souls at the moment of conception? Since the fertilized egg hasn’t split at conception, does it initially have one soul and then following division have more than one (depending upon how many times it splits)? Would this throw into doubt the infusion of the soul immediately upon conception? Does someone have any insights or answers to this apparent contradiction to Catholic teaching?

I don’t see any contradiction. We are told in Jeremiah that God knew us even before we were formed in the womb . I suspect that the Creator of the Universe would have no problem keeping the souls straight

 

[Philip76]

I think what people are telling you here, Riley259, is that if identical twins are going to form, then there are two souls to start with. They are assigned to (what appears to be, to our technology) a single set of cells at first, but then that becomes two separate embryos with a soul each.

 

[Atreyu]

It’s my understanding that the Church has always taught that the soul is infused at the moment of conception.

Where did you get this understanding from? I believe Thomas Aquinas himself taught contrary to your understanding.

When answering atheists about abortion issues, I tend to focus on what constitutes a human “person” rather than whether or not a particular foetus has a soul.

 

[HoppityRedux]

Where did you get this understanding from? I believe Thomas Aquinas himself taught contrary to your understanding.

When answering atheists about abortion issues, I tend to focus on what constitutes a human “person” rather than whether or not a particular foetus has a soul.

Is it necessary to have a human soul to be a human person?

 

[Riley259]

Where did you get this understanding from? I believe Thomas Aquinas himself taught contrary to your understanding.

When answering atheists about abortion issues, I tend to focus on what constitutes a human “person” rather than whether or not a particular foetus has a soul.

Quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Creationism:

The Catholic Church teaches that souls are created at their infusion into the body" (Sent. II, d. xviii); while St. Thomas is more emphatic: “It is heretical to say that the intellectual soul is transmitted by process of generation” (I, Q. cxviii, a. 2). For the rest, the following citation from the Angelic Doctor sums up the diverse opinions: “Regarding this question various opinions were expressed in antiquity. Some held that the soul of a child is produced by the soul of the parent just as the body is generated by the parent-body. Others maintained that all souls are created apart, moreover that they are united with their respective bodies, either by their own volition or by the command and action of God. Others again, declared that the soul in the moment of its creation is infused into the body. Though for a time these several views were upheld, and though it was doubtful which came nearest the truth (as appears from Augustine’s commentary on Gen., x, and from his books on the origin of the soul),** the Church subsequently condemned the first two and approved the third” (De Potentiâ, Q. iii, a. 9). **

 

[blackrobe]

Is it necessary to have a human soul to be a human person?

Yes. The human person is a substantial union of body and soul. The soul is the form of the body. The human body and human soul are uniquely ordered to one another, which, BTW, is why reincarnation is an absurdity.

The human body is the principle of individuation, that which distinguishes you from every other human, but without the soul the body is a collection of corruptible tissues.

JSA

 

[Hudson_Gillette]

Quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Creationism:

The Catholic Church teaches that souls are created at their infusion into the body" (Sent. II, d. xviii); while St. Thomas is more emphatic: “It is heretical to say that the intellectual soul is transmitted by process of generation” (I, Q. cxviii, a. 2). For the rest, the following citation from the Angelic Doctor sums up the diverse opinions: “Regarding this question various opinions were expressed in antiquity. Some held that the soul of a child is produced by the soul of the parent just as the body is generated by the parent-body. Others maintained that all souls are created apart, moreover that they are united with their respective bodies, either by their own volition or by the command and action of God. Others again, declared that the soul in the moment of its creation is infused into the body. Though for a time these several views were upheld, and though it was doubtful which came nearest the truth (as appears from Augustine’s commentary on Gen., x, and from his books on the origin of the soul),** the Church subsequently condemned the first two and approved the third” (De Potentiâ, Q. iii, a. 9). **

I think this is saying that a soul goes into a body as soon as said soul is created, that it does not hang in a queue somewhere. It does not say how long after conception the soul itself is made.