Religion and the Discomfort of Biology?

[edwest2]

Who bringing whomself back to life?

Jesus raised people from the dead.

Jesus raised Himself from the Dead.

No science or technology was involved. Do you believe these things actually happened? If so, why do you believe it?

Peace,
Ed

 

[grannymh]

Originally Posted by grannymh forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
There is more to real science and real theology than what the mainstream media promotes. In other words, there is more to real religion and real biological sciences which can be quite discomforting to both sides of the “poofing” theory which you mentioned.

For example?

It is my intention to post in accord with: : Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads

Blessings,
granny

Adam and Eve are Catholic theologically real by the grace of God.

 

[Doc_Keele]

I believe part of the problem is a “God of the gaps” theology. Life is still mysterious. The Church says human life is the gift of God. This has potential problems, as well as being a particular application of occasionalism. This idea of human life as the gift of God is used to justify objections to IVF, which also poses problems. If only God could create life, then IVF wouldn’t work. If God makes the gift of life on an individual basis, why does he grant this gift when someone does something “immoral” like IVF (or incest)?

 

[StAnastasia]

I believe part of the problem is a “God of the gaps” theology. Life is still mysterious. The Church says human life is the gift of God.

All life is the gift of God. The whole universe is the gift of God.

 

[ricmat]

I believe part of the problem is a “God of the gaps” theology. Life is still mysterious. The Church says human life is the gift of God. This has potential problems, as well as being a particular application of occasionalism. This idea of human life as the gift of God is used to justify objections to IVF, which also poses problems.

It’s one of many objections, not the only one. The Catholic Church teaches that any form of human procreation that separates the procreative part (the mechanics so to speak) from the unitive part (the marital embrace) is immoral.

God is love. The Trinity is love. God the Father eternally begets/loves the Son, who reflects the love in return to the Father, and the love that flows between them is a “new person”, the Holy Spirit. Earthly marriage (and earthly creation of “new persons”) is intended to emulate the love of God in the Trinity, and create new persons out of love. IVF is a mechanical production process in which no marital embrace is involved. It is a manufacturing process, not a loving process.

If only God could create life, then IVF wouldn’t work.

Only God can create life. IVF manipulates life that already exists. Other than God, no one has taken a bucket of chemicals and created life. Other than God, no one started with nothing and created the bucket of chemicals.

If God makes the gift of life on an individual basis, why does he grant this gift when someone does something “immoral” like IVF (or incest)?

God gives us the ability to cooperate with him in the creation of new persons. With God’s help, and in love, we create the bodies for this new person, and God infuses it with a soul. Think about this…if God refused to provide a soul to a human body brought into the world from rape or incest or IVF, there would be 2 classes of persons - one made in the image and likeness of God, and one that has no divinely inspired soul. What chaos that could/would lead to. God probably has a better explanation, but the one above works for me.

.

 

[StAnastasia]

Jesus raised Himself from the Dead. Peace,
Ed

Ed, where did you learn that Jesus raised himself from the dead?

 

[StAnastasia]

Could you define, and give an example of what you mean by theologically necessary? I’m not sure what you mean by theologically unnecessary.

Theologically God is necessary in two senses:

(1) God cannot not exist

(2) If there were no God there could be no theology

 

[StAnastasia]

IVF is a mechanical production process in which no marital embrace is involved. It is a manufacturing process, not a loving process.

Sometimes, but not always. I know of a woman born with ovaries but without a uterus. Through IVF and using her own eggs and her husband’s sperm, twin embryos were conceived and implanted in the womb of her twin sister (who already had children of her own). The twin carried her sister’s babies, who were born and are now growing up in the family of their biological parents. It was a very loving act by a sister, with a very happy ending for all concerned.

StAnastasia

 

[ricmat]

IVF is a mechanical production process in which no marital embrace is involved. It is a manufacturing process, not a loving process.

Sometimes, but not always. I know of a woman born with ovaries but without a uterus. Through IVF and using her own eggs and her husband’s sperm, twin embryos were conceived and implanted in the womb of her twin sister (who already had children of her own). The twin carried her sister’s babies, who were born and are now growing up in the family of their biological parents. It was a very loving act by a sister, with a very happy ending for all concerned.

StAnastasia

The situation you describe above involved no marital embrace - that’s what I meant by “loving process”. Therefore it is immoral according to Church teaching. In addition to IVF being used, this also involved the use of a surrogate mother, which is also immoral according to Church teaching.

People do many things “out of love.” Another example contrary to church teaching is euthanasia. Out of love, people are put out of their misery.

You claim to be a Catholic Theologian teaching at a university. You should not be promoting IVF or surrogate motherhood. And if you don’t understand why it’s wrong, you should find out why.

.

 

[edwest2]

Ed, where did you learn that Jesus raised himself from the dead?

John 10:17 "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 “No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.”

Peace,
Ed

 

[ricmat]

Who bringing whomself back to life?

Jesus raised people from the dead.

Jesus raised Himself from the Dead.

No science or technology was involved. Do you believe these things actually happened? If so, why do you believe it?

Peace,
Ed

Ed asked a reasonable question above. And we wait with bated breath for StA’s response…

(crickets chirping)…

.

 

[StAnastasia]

The situation you describe above involved no marital embrace - that’s what I meant by “loving process”. Therefore it is immoral according to Church teaching. In addition to IVF being used, this also involved the use of a surrogate mother, which is also immoral according to Church teaching.

You’re wrong – the marital embrace was very much present, even though God had biologically denied the woman the opportunity to become pregnant. They were a married couple who had 'embraced" for a number of years. And so what if a surrogate was involved? The surrogate was the woman’s own sister, for heaven’s sake, setting aside for nine months her needs and her time to bring babies to term for her own twin sister. It was a selfless act.

I can’t imagine many actions more loving and self-sacrificing that this. A theology that would deny a woman the opportunity to have her own biological children, and would deny her sister the opportunity to volunteer in this self-sacrificing manner is not a theology worth entertaining for one second. In fact such a “theology” is hateful, life denying, and despicable.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

John 10:17 "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 18 "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father."Peace, Ed

**
Acts 2:22-24.**

22 You men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth…

24 Whom God has raised up,

**Acts 2:**32.

32 This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Acts 3:14-15.

14 But you denied the Holy One and the Just, …

15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God has raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

Acts 4:10.

10 Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, ;;;

Acts 10:37-40

39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: 40 Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly;

I Peter 1:18-21.

21 Who by him do believe i, God who raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

 

[Doc_Keele]

All life is the gift of God. The whole universe is the gift of God.

Yes and no.

 

[ricmat]

You’re wrong – the marital embrace was very much present, even though God had biologically denied the woman the opportunity to become pregnant. They were a married couple who had 'embraced" for a number of years. And so what if a surrogate was involved? The surrogate was the woman’s own sister, for heaven’s sake, setting aside for nine months her needs and her time to bring babies to term for her own twin sister. It was a selfless act.

I can’t imagine many actions more loving and self-sacrificing that this. A theology that would deny a woman the opportunity to have her own biological children, and would deny her sister the opportunity to volunteer in this self-sacrificing manner is not a theology worth entertaining for one second. In fact such a “theology” is hateful, life denying, and despicable.

StAnastasia

I’m not denying the selfless attitude of the sister, but there is no fundamental “right” to have children. Perhaps God wanted them to adopt, or focus their energies in other areas.

You say above that God had biologically denied the woman the opportunity to become pregnant. But then go on to describe how to “get around” God’s will, and how loving and great that is.

The theology I describe is Church teaching. If you truly believe it is hateful and despicable, then perhaps you should leave the Church and not advertise yourself as Catholic. But rather, I suggest that you figure it out and “come around” instead.

Of course, you’ll have to accept Church authority instead of your own.

.

.

 

[Fran65]

A theology that would deny a woman the opportunity to have her own biological children, and would deny her sister the opportunity to volunteer in this self-sacrificing manner is not a theology worth entertaining for one second. In fact such a “theology” is hateful, life denying, and despicable.

I’m very surprised. Those are very strong words and appear uncharacteristic of your posts.

My understanding is that the Catholic Church teaches that IVF is wrong and that surrogacy is wrong. They teach that for good reason.

What about the embryos that are not implanted or fail to implant because they have been fertilised outside the natural process? What about the children born as a result and their needs? Who is their mother? What if the sisters fall out? When and how will the children be told? If they are not told then what about the deception involved? What about the sister’s feelings having carried and given birth to these children? What about the sister’s feelings who has seen someone else carry her husband’s children - even if if they are her eggs and it was IVF. I could go on… Things are never as easy and straightforward as some assume.

I can understand non Catholics with little guidance going ahead with this kind of decision - but I find it difficult to understand you, as a Catholic justifying it. Wanting something is not a good enough reason to engage in acts that are contrary to God. You know that as well as I do!

Very off topic, but I had to respond.

 

[grannymh]

Acts 2:22-24.

22 You men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth…

24 Whom God has raised up,

**Acts 2:**32.

32 This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Acts 3:14-15.

14 But you denied the Holy One and the Just, …

15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God has raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

Acts 4:10.

10 Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, ;;;

Acts 10:37-40

39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: 40 Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly;

I Peter 1:18-21.

21 Who by him do believe i, God who raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

Catholic theology is that Jesus is true God.

 

[Doc_Keele]

It’s one of many objections, not the only one

I never said it was the only one, did I?

The Catholic Church teaches that any form of human procreation that separates the procreative part (the mechanics so to speak) from the unitive part (the marital embrace) is immoral

Which is just begging the question!

Only God can create life. IVF manipulates life that already exists

That’s a moot point.

God gives us the ability to cooperate with him in the creation of new persons. With God’s help, and in love, we create the bodies for this new person, and God infuses it with a soul. Think about this…if God refused to provide a soul to a human body brought into the world from rape or incest or IVF, there would be 2 classes of persons - one made in the image and likeness of God, and one that has no divinely inspired soul. What chaos that could/would lead to. God probably has a better explanation, but the one above works for me.

Why does God allow the gametes to fuse if he is the source of life, it’s his gift?

 

[ricmat]

Why does God allow the gametes to fuse if he is the source of life, it’s his gift?

Why not?

The child is a gift, whether or not a product of rape, incest, etc.

 

[Doc_Keele]

Why not?

The child is a gift, whether or not a product of rape, incest, etc.

A gift may not be wanted - is that a gift to be celebrated? What about the infamous white elephant?

When a 7 year old conceives after being raped by her step-father, will she consider that a gift?