Ensoulment - what about twins?

[RAR]

My beautiful, dear and much-more-intelligent-than-her-husband wife brought up an interesting point concerning ensoulment that I thought would be right cherry for discussion…

Elsewhere on this board it has been raised that thinkers from Aristotle to Aquinas have puzzled over the question. So now too do I and my wife… not to be confused with either of the previously said thinkers.

Today, the Church and the world understand that life begins at conception, but I think the topic of ensoulment is still very much a point of discussion. For example, many of us might take for granted that God would infuse the fertilized egg with the the soul (at the time of conception), but what about when the embryo splits to make two separate developing human beings… twins?

All thoughts welcome whether they be simple, dull or outlandish.

 

[puzzleannie]

My
Today, the Church and the world understand that life begins at conception, but I think the topic of ensoulment is still very much a point of discussion. .

it is very much a point of discussion. Medical science has not definitively proven when life begins, so the Church has not made a doctrinal pronouncement, but errs on the side of life, so teaches we must assume life may be present from the moment of conception, until science proves otherwise. Since the Church has not pronounced on precisely when life begins, neither has she pronounced on the precise moment or method of ensoulment.

 

[hasikelee]

My beautiful, dear and much-more-intelligent-than-her-husband wife brought up an interesting point concerning ensoulment that I thought would be right cherry for discussion…

Elsewhere on this board it has been raised that thinkers from Aristotle to Aquinas have puzzled over the question. So now too do I and my wife… not to be confused with either of the previously said thinkers.

Today, the Church and the world understand that life begins at conception, but I think the topic of ensoulment is still very much a point of discussion. For example, many of us might take for granted that God would infuse the fertilized egg with the the soul (at the time of conception), but what about when the embryo splits to make two separate developing human beings… twins?

All thoughts welcome whether they be simple, dull or outlandish.

Indeed, this is why I choose to argue on a purely natural or secular level regarding issues such as abortion. Unless someone is of the same faith (and practicing in agreement).

Thing such as ensoulment are things that we can only speculate about. A speculative argument will only aid others in hiding from the issues out there.

All that being said, I think that from the moment of conception there really are two humans present, but our current technology cannot see that yet.

We have come leaps and bounds from our forefathers of medicine. Remember when people couldn’t see germs and didn’t know what caused illnesses? In the time span of a century, we have completely blown through that issue.

 

[JimG]

Medical science has not definitively proven when life begins, so the Church has not made a doctrinal pronouncement, but errs on the side of life, so teaches we must assume life may be present from the moment of conception, until science proves otherwise. Since the Church has not pronounced on precisely when life begins, neither has she pronounced on the precise moment or method of ensoulment.

I’m not quite sure what is meant by the phrase “when life begins.” It seems to me a biological fact that a new individual of the human species exists at conception, that is, a new human being who is genetically distinct from its mother or father.

For that reason, I don’t consider the question of “ensoulment,” which we can’t observe anyway, to be of particular significance.

If a new human being exists at conception, it must have a soul. If twinning occurs, I presume that God creates another soul at that time. Alternatively we might assume that two souls were present from the outset although biologically we cannot observe two individuals until twinning occurs.

 

[rossum]

My beautiful, dear and much-more-intelligent-than-her-husband wife brought up an interesting point concerning ensoulment that I thought would be right cherry for discussion…

Elsewhere on this board it has been raised that thinkers from Aristotle to Aquinas have puzzled over the question. So now too do I and my wife… not to be confused with either of the previously said thinkers.

Today, the Church and the world understand that life begins at conception, but I think the topic of ensoulment is still very much a point of discussion. For example, many of us might take for granted that God would infuse the fertilized egg with the the soul (at the time of conception), but what about when the embryo splits to make two separate developing human beings… twins?

All thoughts welcome whether they be simple, dull or outlandish.

The situation is more complex than just identical twins - one conception giving two people. The opposite can also happen, two separately fertilised eggs merge in the womb and give rise to a single baby, see Human Chimera.

rossum

 

[TOmNossor]

It appears this is still debated. Here is an article from 2006 in response to a critique of the position that two souls exist from the moment of conception.
I find the Hershenovs’ position to be better than Eberl’s, but certainly debate is still possible. BTW the original 2005 article is a lot less fun to read, but it MIGHT offer a little more fruit for the LDS vs. non-LDS discussion. I grew tired of processing words with which I was unfamiliar when I began reading it.
Here is the much easier response to a small subset of the original.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeqon04/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/responsetoeberl.pdf

The chimera issue is naturally radically rare. I am unaware of any discussions on ensoulment in the case of natural chimeras (is that the right plural?).
It seems there has been some discussion on the introduction of human DNA into monkeys and other species. Catholic bio- ethicists certainly universally condemn this, but it seems that this practice and cloning both have the ability to produce a soul. I have not found any Catholic bio-ethicist who argues that cloning (or test-tube fertilization for that matter) produces a non-ensouled human. So that would suggest that the human animal chimera at a certain point could possess a human soul.

If you spend the next 2 months reading about chimera and Catholic bioethics, you could probably produce a viable paper on the subject. With a PhD or a co-author friend you might get it published.

Charity, TOm

 

[RAR]

If a new human being exists at conception, it must have a soul. If twinning occurs, I presume that God creates another soul at that time. Alternatively we might assume that two souls were present from the outset although biologically we cannot observe two individuals until twinning occurs.

Great post Jim and good points… I took a walk earlier with my aforementioned “beautiful, dear and much-more-intelligent-than-her-husband wife” and we talked about similar points.

Maybe it is the presence of two souls at conception that cause a developing zygote/blastocyst/embryo(?) to split and form twins?

RAR

 

[RAR]

The situation is more complex than just identical twins - one conception giving two people. The opposite can also happen, two separately fertilised eggs merge in the womb and give rise to a single baby, see Human Chimera.

rossum

Wow, I hadn’t thought of that! Maybe this would amount to a natural “abortion” and the soul of the twin would go straight to heaven.

RAR

 

[RAR]

It appears this is still debated. Here is an article from 2006 in response to a critique of the position that two souls exist from the moment of conception.
I find the Hershenovs’ position to be better than Eberl’s, but certainly debate is still possible. BTW the original 2005 article is a lot less fun to read, but it MIGHT offer a little more fruit for the LDS vs. non-LDS discussion. I grew tired of processing words with which I was unfamiliar when I began reading it.
Here is the much easier response to a small subset of the original.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeqon04/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/responsetoeberl.pdf

The chimera issue is naturally radically rare. I am unaware of any discussions on ensoulment in the case of natural chimeras (is that the right plural?).
It seems there has been some discussion on the introduction of human DNA into monkeys and other species. Catholic bio- ethicists certainly universally condemn this, but it seems that this practice and cloning both have the ability to produce a soul. I have not found any Catholic bio-ethicist who argues that cloning (or test-tube fertilization for that matter) produces a non-ensouled human. So that would suggest that the human animal chimera at a certain point could possess a human soul.

If you spend the next 2 months reading about chimera and Catholic bioethics, you could probably produce a viable paper on the subject. With a PhD or a co-author friend you might get it published.

Charity, TOm

Thanks TOm, but I’ll keep my mental meanderings to these forums… I struggled through an M.S. in microbiology and have no intent on taking on another project. (BTW, don’t be impressed, my committee wasn’t… )

RAR

 

[hasikelee]

Wow, I hadn’t thought of that! Maybe this would amount to a natural “abortion” and the soul of the twin would go straight to heaven.

RAR

Abortion is deliberately killing a pre-born human and, if applicable, removing the dead body.

I think you are referring to miscarriage, which is the death of a pre-born human for unknown or undesired reasons.

Also, in cases of very early miscarriages, the mother’s body can sometimes absorb the tissue back into her system. There is a current popular hypothesis called “shadow twinning” where scientists wonder if many of us actually began as twins.

As a leftie, I found this study fascinating. One method of twinning from a single zygote or embryo is that of the structures mirroring each other. Left handedness is considered the mirror image of another human.

We have so much to learn about the inside workings of our beginning.

 

[RAR]

Abortion is deliberately killing a pre-born human and, if applicable, removing the dead body.

I think you are referring to miscarriage, which is the death of a pre-born human for unknown or undesired reasons.

Also, in cases of very early miscarriages, the mother’s body can sometimes absorb the tissue back into her system. There is a current popular hypothesis called “shadow twinning” where scientists wonder if many of us actually began as twins.

As a leftie, I found this study fascinating. One method of twinning from a single zygote or embryo is that of the structures mirroring each other. Left handedness is considered the mirror image of another human.

We have so much to learn about the inside workings of our beginning.

Thank you for the clarification, yes, that is what I meant.

Can you comment more on this this “shadow twinning?” Are you saying that “mirror” or symmetrical images are created of the developing zygote/embryo and that because of the shadow twinning (and the early miscarriage of one of the twins) could be the reason some of us are left-handed?

RAR

 

[hasikelee]

Thank you for the clarification, yes, that is what I meant.

Can you comment more on this this “shadow twinning?” Are you saying that “mirror” or symmetrical images are created of the developing zygote/embryo and that because of the shadow twinning (and the early miscarriage of one of the twins) could be the reason some of us are left-handed?

RAR

Oh, yes, it is really an interesting segment of in-utero research. I read about it and for a long time had my interest piqued. Then I managed to watch a segment on it where they showed the single embryo separating into two. (I can’t comment on the morals of this show as I was only able to watch that part of the segment and do not know if it was a representation or real.)

Anyways, one method of twinning is separating along a dividing axis. The two beings mirror each other as they separate. Genetic abnormalities or environmental interruption during this period is what may cause those famous connected twins. The theory of these scientists is that soon after this mirrored division, one human dies, being absorbed by the mother or surviving human.

Right handedness is asssumed to be the primary handedness of humans, yet in the twinning study, they found the left handed human to be stronger and hypothesized that this human survived the twinning while the right handed twin did not. Thus, they wondered if many left handed people were actually of twins.

 

[Nan_S]

many of us might take for granted that God would infuse the fertilized egg with the the soul (at the time of conception), but what about when the embryo splits to make two separate developing human beings… twins?

All thoughts welcome whether they be simple, dull or outlandish.

You’re worrying too much about human scientific knowledge and human understanding.

The answer is really quite simple. Our omniscient God knows, and has always known from all eternity, how many babies will be formed in each pregnancy. Therefore, God always makes the appropriate number of souls part of each pregnancy at conception.

Identical twins share the same genes, but have different personalities because God gave them two souls from the beginning while they still shared the same cells. Same with co-joined twins; they are born in one body with shared and duplicated parts, but have two souls and are two unique people.

God always knows beforehand what will happen.

 

[puzzleannie]

I’m not quite sure what is meant by the phrase “when life begins.” It seems to me a biological fact that a new individual of the human species exists at conception, that is, a new human being who is genetically distinct from its mother or father.

.

yes I agree it would seem obvious, but biological science has not established when in the process of the union of the egg and sperm and beginning of cell division and implantation a unique living organism exists, so science must assume the earliest possible moment until proven otherwise, and the Church must follow that lead. just worked through this issue for a class on the soul with my pastor so it sticks in my mind.

 

[thomasf]

I don’t know that the answer to the ensoulment question needs to be known. I mean, do we really have to know HOW God works all the time? I think sometimes we take things too far. In some cases it comes down to just believing in God’s work, and not having to know how He does it. Frankly, I don’t care how He handles the twin question, just that He does handle it and obviously handles it just fine. He’s the God of creation, there ain’t a whole lot He can’t do, after all.

 

[RAR]

You’re worrying too much about human scientific knowledge and human understanding.

The answer is really quite simple. Our omniscient God knows, and has always known from all eternity, how many babies will be formed in each pregnancy. Therefore, God always makes the appropriate number of souls part of each pregnancy at conception.

Identical twins share the same genes, but have different personalities because God gave them two souls from the beginning while they still shared the same cells. Same with co-joined twins; they are born in one body with shared and duplicated parts, but have two souls and are two unique people.

God always knows beforehand what will happen.

Thanks Nan, but I’m not in any kind of faith crisis over this , I just hadn’t ever thought of it before and find it very interesting. I agree with your assessment… God is pretty big, huh? It’s this sort of stuff that I find interesting because, though science continues to progress and reveal God’s world, there are still some areas that we know little about.

RAR

 

[RAR]

I don’t know that the answer to the ensoulment question needs to be known. I mean, do we really have to know HOW God works all the time? I think sometimes we take things too far. In some cases it comes down to just believing in God’s work, and not having to know how He does it. Frankly, I don’t care how He handles the twin question, just that He does handle it and obviously handles it just fine. He’s the God of creation, there ain’t a whole lot He can’t do, after all.

Thanks thomasf, good point. I agree that we don’t always need to HOW he works all the time, but unfortunately there are many who think that if we don’t know HOW, then God isn’t real (they apparently don’t know that human reason is limited). That is why thinkers from Socrates to today still puzzle over many questions.

RAR

 

[RAR]

Oh, yes, it is really an interesting segment of in-utero research. I read about it and for a long time had my interest piqued. Then I managed to watch a segment on it where they showed the single embryo separating into two. (I can’t comment on the morals of this show as I was only able to watch that part of the segment and do not know if it was a representation or real.)

Anyways, one method of twinning is separating along a dividing axis. The two beings mirror each other as they separate. Genetic abnormalities or environmental interruption during this period is what may cause those famous connected twins. The theory of these scientists is that soon after this mirrored division, one human dies, being absorbed by the mother or surviving human.

Right handedness is asssumed to be the primary handedness of humans, yet in the twinning study, they found the left handed human to be stronger and hypothesized that this human survived the twinning while the right handed twin did not. Thus, they wondered if many left handed people were actually of twins.

Wow, that is really something! I’ve always joked that I’ve already won the lottery because I won the race for life (against a score of other “competitors”). But you won that race and maybe even had to battle in the womb, too! Thanks for the follow-up. It’ll be interesting where this line of research goes (I hope it isn’t one that is destructive).

RAR

 

[Hastrman]

As soon as a unique person exists, he has a soul–which is only the formal part, the “that-which-makes-it-what-it-is”, of a human. Since there’s a human, it has one of those.

Technically, rocks, trees, and gophers have formal parts too–but ours are rational and subsistent (they exist without any other parts).

As for the “we don’t need to know, don’t worry about it” argument: knowledge is really good for us. We ought to seek that which is really good for us.

 

[JimG]

yes I agree it would seem obvious, but biological science has not established when in the process of the union of the egg and sperm and beginning of cell division and implantation a unique living organism exists, so science must assume the earliest possible moment until proven otherwise, and the Church must follow that lead. just worked through this issue for a class on the soul with my pastor so it sticks in my mind.

Well, implantation has no effect on the genetics of the embryo. Fertilization is not an instantaneous event; however, by the time the first cell division occurs, the zygote already has a unique DNA, and is embarked on a process of embryogenesis. It is a ‘unique living organism.’ To place a demarcation line somewhere further down the road must rely on something other than or in addition to, being a unique living organism.