How could a human individual not be a human person?

[BlackFriar]

The soul is immediately created by God…

Have you any significant tertiary level theological training?
You do not seem to understand what this means and the ancient “heresy” it opposes.

 

[Monica83]

I’m not sure what your aim is, but the earliest Christians(Didache) were opposed to abortion. Science tells us when the creation of a new human being occurs. We do not tell by quickening anymore.

 

[BlackFriar]

I am not sure whom you are addressing?

Noone here denies abortion is a grave evil.
Why do you think that is important to say?

but the earliest Christians(Didache)…

This has been discussed above.

 

[Cathoholic]

The Church teaches us that every soul is “immediately” created by God, and a body apart from a soul is “dead”.

We also know God does not “shelve” souls.

Biochemists tell us from the earliest stages of human life, this living devoloping human is . . . well, “alive”.

If the soul is created immediately, and the small human person is NOT DEAD . . . .

. . . Yet a body apart from the soul IS dead . . . .

. . . And God does not shelve souls . . .

I think you can confidently conclude this LIVING PERSON IMMEDIATELY has a SOUL.

(There is other information too, but this syllogism alone seems very reasonable, and I have not heard a good reason presented here or elsewhere to doubt this conclusion).

.

Cathoholic . . . .

The soul is immediately created by God…

BlackFriar . . . .

You do not seem to understand what this means and the ancient “heresy” it opposes.

OK. I am open to you teaching me this BlackFriar.

 

[Ghosty1981]

Immediately refers to the fact that God creates the soul Himself, without a mediator. This is opposed to the notion that lesser beings, perhaps angels, make the souls on their own or at God’s behest. It also refers to the fact God creates the souls ex nihilo, rather than forming them from some pre-existing matter.

 

[Cathoholic]

Cathoholic . . . .

The soul is immediately created by God . . .

.

Ghosty1981 (emphasis mine) . . .

Immediately refers to the fact that God creates the soul Himself, without a mediator . . .

.

Thanks Ghosty1981.

Certainly it is not unreasonable for me to think that “created by God” . . . “refers to the fact that God creates the soul Himself, without a mediator” is it?

The soul is immediately created by God. . .

.

(The “ex nihilo” created aspect I get and again thank you.)

 

[Ghosty1981]

Certainly it is not unreasonable for me to think that “created by God” . . . “refers to the fact that God creates the soul Himself, without a mediator” is it?

Right, it is literally “without mediator”. It isn’t expressing immediacy in the sense of timing.

 

[Cathoholic]

Ghosty1981 (with parenthetical addition mine for context) . . . .

(Immediately) is literally “without mediator”. It isn’t expressing immediacy in the sense of timing.

.

Could it be “immediately” in BOTH senses? (As in “right now” especially since the biology CLEARLY shows new “life” “right now” in relation to a body that is NOT “dead” AND an “im” and “mediate” sense too?)

.

CCC 366 The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not “produced” by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection.235

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1B.HTM

.

docet unamquamque animam spiritualem a Deo esse immediate creatam

Latin to English . . .

teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God

.

CCC 366 Ecclesia docet unamquamque animam spiritualem a Deo esse immediate creatam 249 — illa non est a parentibus « producta » —; ea nos etiam docet illam esse immortalem; 250 illa non perit cum a corpore separatur in morte, et iterum corpori unietur in resurrectione finali.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism_lt/p1s2c1p6_lt.htm#I.%20«%20Ad%20imaginem%20Dei%20»

 

[Benadam]

because he BREATHED on his disciples, saying, “Receive the Holy Spirit” (John 20:22).

7 then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being

 

[BlackFriar]

I am pointing out it is perhaps good to teach yourself before posting personal interpretations of the CCC that have little to do with what it is actually saying and in fact do not support your seemingly mistaken view that the Church definitively teaches spiritual souls are infused at conception.

 

[Cathoholic]

BlackFriar . . .

I am pointing out it is perhaps good to teach yourself before posting personal interpretations of the CCC that have little to do with what it is actually saying and in fact do not support your seemingly mistaken view that the Church definitively teaches spiritual souls are infused at conception.

.

Why don’t you tell me WHEN spiritual souls ARE infused BlackFriar?

What would you say to someone who complains about your “seemingly mistaken view that the Church definitively teaches spiritual souls are infused” by say . . . two years old?

I want to know your answer in PRINCIPLE BlackFriar, because I am going to apply that same principle (if it is valid) to conception.

BlackFriar. You said . . .

I am pointing out it is perhaps good to teach yourself before posting personal interpretations of the CCC that have little to do with what it is actually saying . . .

What do you mean?

What “interpretations” do YOU have that are NOT “personal”?

What is it about my interpretation of the CCC do you see as wrong?

.

Also BlackFriar. You said . . .

You do not seem to understand what this means and the ancient “heresy” it opposes.

And I said . . . .

OK. I am open to you teaching me this BlackFriar.

.

I am still waiting for this too please.

 

[BlackFriar]

Why don’t you tell me WHEN spiritual souls ARE infused BlackFriar?

The Church has no set teaching on this point other than that it is some time before quickening.
You ought to have picked that up from your alleged reading of all posts above where the relevant text was provided numerous times.

What do you mean?

Its fairly clear.
Your CCC quote doesn’t seem to have anything to do with assisting re the topic of this thread and I am at a loss to see its relevance.
Perhaps I missed something - by all means explain.

 

[Cathoholic]

BlackFriar . . . .

The Church has no set teaching on this point other than that it is some time before quickening

What do you think “quickening” means?

 

[Cathoholic]

BlackFriar. You said . . .

I am pointing out it is perhaps good to teach yourself before posting personal interpretations of the CCC that have little to do with what it is actually saying . . .

.

What is it about my interpretation of the CCC do you see as wrong?

 

[Cathoholic]

BlackFriar (emphasis mine). . . .

You ought to have picked that up from your alleged reading . . .

I’ll just ignore that BlackFriar.

 

[Cathoholic]

BlackFriar. You said . . .

You do not seem to understand what this means and the ancient “heresy” it opposes.

And I said . . . .

OK. I am open to you teaching me this BlackFriar.

.

Would you mind addressing this please?

 

[BlackFriar]

Its been well defined in the above posts you allegedly read.

How about answering questions before asking new ones…

 

[BlackFriar]

BlackFriar (emphasis mine). . . .

You ought to have picked that up from your alleged reading . . .
I’ll just ignore that BlackFriar.

Then by all means allow me to return the favour.
Do come back when you are prepared to answer reasonable questions and explain relevance.

 

[Benadam]

Could it be “immediately” in BOTH senses? (As in “right now” especially since the biology CLEARLY shows new “life” “right now” in relation to a body that is NOT “dead” AND an “im” and “mediate” sense too?)

.

artical 3

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4006.htm#article1

if we suppose that it was first of all created, but not at once joined to the Word, since it would follow that this soul once had its proper subsistence without the Word; and thus, since it was assumed by the Word, either the union did not take place in the subsistence, or the pre-existing subsistence of the soul was corrupted. So likewise it is not fitting to suppose that this soul was united to the Word from the beginning, and that it afterwards became incarnate in the womb of the Virgin; for thus His soul would not seem to be of the same nature as ours, which are created at the same time that they are infused into bodies. Hence Pope Leo says (Ep. ad Julian. xxxv) that “Christ’s flesh was not of a different nature to ours, nor was a different soul infused into it in the beginning than into other men.”

Edit: The bolded doesn’t mean created at conception. my confirmation bias.

 

[JimG]

Since conception is by definition and embryology the beginning of a new individual of the human species, it seems impossible that ensoulment could occur at any later time. If it did, we would have a new, genetically distinct individual of the human species who is not human because he is soulless! It is not possible. “Delayed ensoulment” is no longer a sustainable possibility. A new human being has a soul.