The Council of Vienne, 1312 & Ensoulment

[Urbs]

Hello, this is my first time posting on Catholic Answers Forum, I would like an explanation to a question of mine. This topic is often related to abortion, but my question doesn’t relate to abortion but to ensoulment.

I have always been taught that the Catholic Church teaches that our souls are created immediately for us on conception. Now, I am also aware that the Church, its doctors, saints and teachers haven’t always agreed on this and some have said that it occurs afterwards.

However, someone I know has accused the Church of changing doctrine, or changing her mind, on ensoulment; that the Council of Vienne, 1312, taught that ensoulment occurs after conception and what the Church currently teaches, that ensoulment occurs at conception, contradicts the Ecumenical Council.

Is this true? Does the Council of Vienne, 1312, teach that ensoulment occurs after conception? Does the Church contradict itself?

Thank you for your time!

 

[Urbs]

I mean to say that, in the second paragraph, there hadn’t always been consensus upon when ensoulment occurs.

 

[ELCore]

I have consulted Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma and Denzinger’s Compendium of Creeds, etc., and it does not seem to me that the Council of Vienne taught anything whatsoever about this.

Moreover, I am fairly sure there is no dogma concerning this issue. I don’t think there is even doctrine about it, but, rather, a general theological consensus. IOW, I think there is no formal, official teaching about this. But I might have overlooked something.

 

[Todd_Easton]

The National Catholic Bioethics Center’s 2008 (pdf) article, “Do Embryos Have Souls?” discusses the Church’s lack of a definitive teaching on the subject of ensoulment.

 

[CRM_Brother]

The Council of Vienne was almost primarily concerned with the dissolution of the Knight Templar, not ensoulment. All theological discussions were done in committee, not at the plenary sessions and these records have almost all been lost. There is only secondary testimony which states that ensoulment was discussed at one of these committees, but no statement was voted upon at the plenary sessions. Thus ensoulment was never endorsed by the Council.

God Bless,
Br. Ben, CRM

 

[MPat]

However, someone I know has accused the Church of changing doctrine, or changing her mind, on ensoulment; that the Council of Vienne, 1312, taught that ensoulment occurs after conception and what the Church currently teaches, that ensoulment occurs at conception, contradicts the Ecumenical Council.

Does the Council of Vienne, 1312, teach that ensoulment occurs after conception?

Read the documents of that Council: Under Clement V Council of Vienne. Looks like they do not have the words “ensoulment” or “conception”.

You can give that link to your acquaintance.

As you can see, the documents are rather long. Thus next time, if someone tells you that some ecumenical council has taught something suspicious, ask which is the document where it is written so, perhaps even which part.

If there actually is a document like that, it will be easier to look for the precise quote and its context. And if there is not, that will be a sufficient answer.

 

[Urbs]

Thank you all very much, you’ve all been very helpful! God bless you.

 

[Gorgias]

@Urbs,

Welcome to CAF!

Now, I am also aware that the Church, its doctors, saints and teachers haven’t always agreed on this and some have said that it occurs afterwards.

However, someone I know has accused the Church of changing doctrine, or changing her mind, on ensoulment; that the Council of Vienne, 1312, taught that ensoulment occurs after conception

So, it seems you’ve gotten some good answers on the council, but there’s still one facet of the question that your friend might continue to press upon you. It’s the whole “does ensoulment occur at conception” issue, as it was understood in the early centuries of the past millennium. Even if a council in the 14th century didn’t address it, there’s still a question to be asked.

That question centers around understandings of human biology. The question, which we would answer much differently today than they would have, back then, is “when does a baby in the womb become a ‘human’?” (Well, we still ask that question, but usually in terms of issues of the right to life, not with respect to ensoulment, per se.)

Aquinas got hung up on this issue, too, and many try to make a big deal about it. Aquinas argued that a fetus doesn’t become human until it “quickens” in the womb (i.e., it moves in a way perceptible to its mother). Therefore, Aquinas would assert, it has a vegetative soul and a sensitive soul at the moment it’s conceived (since it’s a living creature), but it doesn’t receive its rational soul – and therefore, becomes ‘human’ – until the time of the quickening.

This is an error in biology moreso than theology. The notions of that time were a theological conclusion based on faulty scientific knowledge. So, your friend might tell you “the Church didn’t think that souls were infused at conception”, but the proper response is “the Church has always believed that souls are created when a human is created!”

Hope that helps…

 

[Genesis315]

The Council of Vienne defined the soul as the form of the body (see below). I’m guessing the person the OP was speaking with is misunderstanding what is meant by “form” (in fact, this definition is more supportive of ensoulment at conception, since where there is a new living body, there is a new form).

Moreover, with the approval of the said council, we reject as erroneous and contrary to the truth of the catholic faith every doctrine or proposition rashly asserting that the substance of the rational or intellectual soul is not of itself and essentially the form of the human body, or casting doubt on this matter. In order that all may know the truth of the faith in its purity and all error may be excluded, we define that anyone who presumes henceforth to assert defend or hold stubbornly that the rational or intellectual soul is not the form of the human body of itself and essentially, is to be considered a heretic.