Viruses: do they have souls?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FiveLinden
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FiveLinden

Guest
I’m posting this here because it is a ‘life’ issue.

I understand the traditional Catholic view is that all living biological things have souls but that only humans have immortal souls.

I have been reading up on the science of whether viruses are alive in the sense that, say, bacteria and cows are. There’s a debate about it, depending on definitions.

So I wondered: have any theologians addressed this from the Catholic point of view? Or is it in the ‘don’t know’ basket?
 
No, it is an entirely serious question. Catholic tradition hold that all living things have souls.

See Jimmy Akin at 1:08.

 
Last edited:
This is a bait topic, doesn’t it? Reported as spam.

Only humans have immortal souls prepared for everlasting holy life with God in Heaven
See my answer above. And see my OP. It says what you said about humans.
 
I understand the traditional Catholic view is that all living biological things have souls but that only humans have immortal souls.
No, that’s not true. Plants, animals, humans have souls. Single-celled organisms have never been posited to have souls.
Catholic tradition hold that all living things have souls.
I think you’re pushing it too far.
See Jimmy Akin at 1:08.
Can’t watch it; it shows up as “video unavailable” and “restricted”.
 
Single-celled organisms have never been posited to have souls.
That;s really the point. Because of their lack of cellular structure, among other things some see virus as ‘not life’ or ‘almost life’.
 
JamesV.Cameron:
If they are alive in the same sense as bacteria, then I’d say yes. Plants and animals both have souls, just not souls as we have them
….Since when has the Catholic Church taught that plants have souls?
Since at least Aquinas. Not magisterially “the Church”, as such, but it’s generally accepted.
 
See my other link. Or Google.
OK. So, let’s play with the idea, then: what practical effect does that have? Are you looking to go with a “right to life” idea here? That would run contrary to Catholic teaching, inasmuch as it applies to humans, not animals. Humans are given the earth to care for and steward it responsibly. If it’s morally acceptable to kill animals for reasonable needs (food, clothing, to protect oneself against getting killed by the animal), then we’d say the same thing about virii.
 
OK. So, let’s play with the idea, then: what practical effect does that have? Are you looking to go with a “right to life” idea here? That would run contrary to Catholic teaching, inasmuch as it applies to humans, not animals. Humans are given the earth to care for and steward it responsibly. If it’s morally acceptable to kill animals for reasonable needs (food, clothing, to protect oneself against getting killed by the animal), then we’d say the same thing about virii
No I was just interested in the belief about souls and how it related to the understanding of life.
 
No I was just interested in the belief about souls and how it related to the understanding of life.
OK. So, then, if you want to say that virii have “the principle of life” in them, then cool. That makes sense. They “live”, inasmuch as we’d use that term in a strictly biological sense. However, that doesn’t mean that it rises to the level of even what we’d think of as “animal life”, on a multi-cellular level.

Think of it this way: each of your cells is alive. Are you one living entity, or a ‘Borg’ of millions? I can’t think of anyone who’d suggest the latter.
 
If they are alive in the same sense as bacteria, then I’d say yes. Plants and animals both have souls, just not souls as we have them
Yeah, this.

…I think when you get down to the levels of plants and bacteria though, it becomes clearer that we are hardly looking at “soul” in the same sense of a rational human soul. Like, they are so distinct it doesn’t even seem necessary to put any practical emphasis on non-human “souls”, specifically. As I understand it the soul is just the “animating principle” of a living thing. It’s a lot easier to see the human soul as a separate “thing” when it has implications in everyday life, even if that’s not strictly a correct understanding (I don’t know if it is).
 
OK I know that the Church tradition holds that human souls are different! That’s not what I am asking about! I am asking if there has been any research/discussion/speculation about whether viruses have souls of the ‘animal’ type. The reason I am asking i the science discussion over whether they should be classified as ‘alive’. I wondered if there was a Catholic view on this.
 
I think there’s probably a Catholic approach (or approaches) to determining if something is alive, if that’s what you mean. I guess most would tend to just default to what science has to say and then go from there - in which case viruses probably have souls if they are alive in the way bacteria are.
 
Last edited:
I think it is an open issue among scientists even. The major question is that it lacks independent movement and energy production/respiration. Motion is debatable, but respiration is probably what would determine it theologically. That is one meaning of the Creed’s ”the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life.”
 
I understand the traditional Catholic view is that all living biological things have souls but that only humans have immortal souls.
Not exactly. All living things have a material soul, a life force.

Only people have a soul that is also a spirit.
So I wondered: have any theologians addressed this from the Catholic point of view? Or is it in the ‘don’t know’ basket?
No, there is no Catholic teaching on what category a virus fall in. That is a scientific question, not a spiritual one.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top