Traducianism

[Irish_Catholic_1]

In This Rock Magazine, I read:

A child’s soul comes from neither the father nor the mother. Each soul is created directly by God from nothing at the moment of conception.

Some early Christian theologians held the theory that the child’s soul is an offshoot of the father’s. Augustine, for example, regarded this position, known as generationism or traducianism, as possible, though he did not exclude the direct creation of the soul from nothing.

As theologians contemplated the teaching of Scripture and of the Tradition of the Church, they realized that generationism is incompatible with it. Thomas Aquinas went so far as to condemn generationism as heretical (Summa Theologiae I:118:2).

I’m not so sure that I agree. The soul is the animating force of the body. In fact, the Latin word for soul is “anima”, from which we get the word animation. Therefore, ALL living things have this type of souls: Animals, fish, and even trees and flowers. Therefore, in this respect this sort of soul really is naturally generated.

However, in man, I’m not sure if I can accept it or not.The Catechism states that we draw no distinction between spirit and soul in man - that man actually has a “spritual soul”, even though scripture would seem to draw a distinction between the two in a few places. Sooooo, since we believe God creates man’s spirit immediately upon conception, and since there is no differentiation between the two, it may be that God creates our “spiritual soul” and that This Rock is correct, in regards to man that is.

On the other hand, there could be a cooperation between God, husband, and wife in the creation of the spritual soul, God leaning more to the spirit part and man leaning more to the soul part.

Any experts out there care to weigh in?

 

[FightingFat]

Not sure on what your question is here really. The soul is spirit, how could it be created by anything other than God?

 

[Irish_Catholic_1]

Not sure on what your question is here really. The soul is spirit, how could it be created by anything other than God?

Okay. Traducianism is a doctrine about the origin of the soul. Traducianism means that the soul is transmitted through natural generation along with the body, the material aspect of man. That is, an individual’s soul is derived from the souls of the individual’s parents.

The quote from “This Rock” magazine which I quoted shoots that theory down in flames. But if you read further in my post, you will see why I am not so sure that it is totally wrong.

So I am asking what others think or know about it, and if there is any merit to the points I am raising in rebuttle to the quote from “This Rock”.

…

 

[Roman_Army]

Okay. Traducianism is a doctrine about the origin of the soul. Traducianism means that the soul is transmitted through natural generation along with the body, the material aspect of man. That is, an individual’s soul is derived from the souls of the individual’s parents.

The quote from “This Rock” magazine which I quoted shoots that theory down in flames. But if you read further in my post, you will see why I am not so sure that it is totally wrong.

So I am asking what others think or know about it, and if there is any merit to the points I am raising in rebuttle to the quote from “This Rock”.

…

I’m not aware of any definitive statements of the Pope or an Ecumenical Council on the subject and neither am I aware if the bishops are unanimous on it. But, it seems to me that Pope Pius XII has implied that the Catholic faith obliges one to believe in Creationism of the human soul.

**"**36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter – for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God…" (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, 36).

It seems that the Church has adopted the opinion that the soul is created directly and immediately from God at the first moment of conception and that original sin is contracted from the parents at the moment that the zygote is ensouled.

 

[FightingFat]

I’m not aware of any definitive statements of the Pope or an Ecumenical Council on the subject and neither am I aware if the bishops are unanimous on it. But, it seems to me that Pope Pius XII has implied that the Catholic faith obliges one to believe in Creationism of the human soul.

**"**36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter – for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God…" (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, 36).

It seems that the Church has adopted the opinion that the soul is created directly and immediately from God at the first moment of conception and that original sin is contracted from the parents at the moment that the zygote is ensouled.

Roma locuta est, causa finita est!

 

[Eucharisted]

Traucianism is not a doctrine but a theological theory. Nor is it a doctrine that all living things have souls; this, too, is a theological theory. The doctrine of the Church is that the soul is immediately created by God at conception, i.e., the beginning of life. Where the soul comes from - another soul, God directly - is up for theological debate, so long as the theologian stays in the deposit of Faith.

 

[seagal]

Roma locuta est, causa finita est!

Translation please? for those of us not up on our latin.

 

[Roman_Army]

Translation please? for those of us not up on our latin.

It translates: “Rome has spoken, case is closed.” It was spoken by St. Augustine who presided over the Council in Carthage where the Pope sent a letter to the Council fathers to settle some doctrinal dispute that was being discussed at the Council. It has become a popular phrase by Catholics when debating something that has been definitively addressed by the Pope.

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

Some Church Fathers taught this, but it was eventually condemned by a Pope around the 5th century, the article you posted on this seems to be from catholic encyclopedia. newadvent.org/cathen/15014a.htm . Traducianism, like Soul sleep is based on people’s ignorance of Biblical expressions, and taking them as doctrine.

Theologically, corporeal Traducianism is heretical because it goes directly against the spirituality of the soul. As to Generationism, it is certainly opposed to the general attitude of the Church. Froschammer’s book, “Ueber den Ursprung der menschlichen Seelen”, was condemned in 1857, and Ubaghs’s opinion expressed in his “Anthropologiae philosophicae elementa” was reproved in a letter of Cardinal Patrizi written by authority of Pius IX to the Archbishop of Mechlin (2 March, 1866). Moreover, Anastasius II in a letter to the bishops of Gaul (498) condemns Generationism (Thiel, “Epistolae Romanorum Pontificum”, 634 sqq.). In the Symbol to be subscribed to by Bishop Peter of Antioch (1053), Leo IX declares the soul to be “not a part of God, but created from nothing” (Denzinger, 348). Among the errors which the Armenians must reject, Benedict XII mentions the doctrine that the soul originates from the soul of the father (Denzinger, 533). Hence, although there are no strict definitions condemning Generationism as heretical, it is certainly opposed to the doctrine of the Church, and could not be held without temerity.

 

[grannymh]

The soul is the animating force of the body. In fact, the Latin word for soul is “anima”, from which we get the word animation. Therefore, ALL living things have this type of souls: Animals, fish, and even trees and flowers. Therefore, in this respect this sort of soul really is naturally generated.

However, in man, I’m not sure if I can accept it or not.The Catechism states that we draw no distinction between spirit and soul in man - that man actually has a “spritual soul”, even though scripture would seem to draw a distinction between the two in a few places.

As a start, animals consist of a material animal nature; therefore their animating force is material. It does not follow that all living things have this type of soul because not all living things are solely material.

What do you consider is the true and complete nature of a human being?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, ISBN 1-57455-109-4, gives the different usages (differentiation) of spirit in Scripture plus a paragraph on the usage of heart. You may be surprised at the amount of information about the soul. Information that will answer your questions. This can be found on

 

[Roman_Army]

Some Church Fathers taught this, but it was eventually condemned by a Pope around the 5th century, the article you posted on this seems to be from catholic encyclopedia. newadvent.org/cathen/15014a.htm . Traducianism, like Soul sleep is based on people’s ignorance of Biblical expressions, and taking them as doctrine.

Thank you. Yes, I completely agree as is evident by the Catholic Encyclopedia and also Pope Pius XII’s statement in Humani Generis that both generationism and traducianism is heretical.

 

[Nita]

**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: …

 

[Irish_Catholic_1]

**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: …

Ooomph. How could I have missed that.

 

[Irish_Catholic_1]

As a start, animals consist of a material animal nature; therefore their animating force is material…

How can an animating force be material? Can you hold it or measure its mass?

 

[Nita]

How can an animating force be material? Can you hold it or measure its mass?

Altho plant and animal souls are referred to as “material” souls, it does not mean they consist of matter. The following is from “Philosophical Psychology” by D.Q.McInerny, a philosophy seminary professor for the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter.
The point has been made that the soul, be it vegetative, or sensitive, or rational, is, as such, immaterial. Nonetheless, Scholastic philosophy and theology has traditionally maintained that there is a critical difference between a *material soul *and an immaterial soul. Because of this usage, we must take pains carefully to spell out what is meant by these terms. **First of all, and to repeat, all souls, all life principles, are as such immaterial. Secondly, we refer to the souls of plants and animals as material souls, not because they are themselves composed of matter, but rather to call attention to the important fact that they are so related to matter that they cannot exist apart from matter. A material soul, then (i.e., the soul of a plant or an animal), is temporally coextensive with the matter which it informs. What this means, in plain terms, is that when a plant or an animal dies, its vitalizing principle ceases to exist, or, we could say that it lapses once again into the potentiality of primary matter. ** In this respect, the rational soul is in a class by itself, and we indicate this fact by denominating the rational soul an immaterial soul. We mean by this term that the rational soul, unlike vegetative and sensitive souls, is not dependent upon materiality for its existence, and can exist apart from the material body which, hic et nunc, it vitalizes as the substantial form of that body.

Hope this helps explain. (Bolding mine.)

 

[Irish_Catholic_1]

Very interesting.
Thank you