Where did Aquinas condemn abortion from conception onward?

[JSRG]

So the argument sometimes gets tossed around that Aquinas did not regard abortion as murder prior to the first several weeks of pregnancy. Now, Catholic Answers did address that claim here:

https://www.catholic.com/qa/did-st-...0-or-80-days-after-conception-making-abortion
https://www.catholic.com/qa/was-st-thomas-aquinas-wrong-about-when-human-life-begins

Here’s the problem I have. They assert that Aquinas, while not apparently considering early abortion murder, still thought it was still a mortal sin and therefore wrong. But in neither of those two articles do they offer any citation or quotation from Aquinas to support that claim. Anyone know where he stated this this?

 

[Vico]

… Anyone know where he stated this this?

S.T. II, Q64, A8:

Reply to Objection 2. He that strikes a woman with child does something unlawful: wherefore if there results the death either of the woman or of the animated fetus, he will not be excused from homicide, especially seeing that death is the natural result of such a blow.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3064.htm#article8

 

[Rau]

Does not the reference to “animated” child refer to a child from some point after conception? After the “quickening” or some such term?

 

[po18guy]

The brilliant Saint Thomas Aquinas was neither Pope nor Council.
So, what’s their argument again?

 

[Bithynian]

So the argument sometimes gets tossed around that Aquinas did not regard abortion as murder prior to the first several weeks of pregnancy

It’s not explicitly stated in the ST, which is not unsurprising because abortion - as a whole - is only examined very indirectly (and never from the perspective of intended abortion) in three instances throughout the entirety of the ST.

But the understanding that Aquinas condemned abortion at fertilisation largely derives from a systematic analysis of his work. If you have access to a university library, a very good article is “Aquinas on human ensoulment, abortion and the value of life” by John Haldane and Patrick Lee in Philosophy (2003), vol. 78.

A quote from the authors: “Had the blow been delivered prior to animation, then the abortion would be sinful but the sin would in effect be that of contraception…”

If you wish to investigate further, I would advise a very large cup of coffee as much of the analysis is structured around the metaphysical/philosophical “embryology” that prevailed at the time of Aquinas, which is all very bizarre, complex and inconsistent with modern medical understandings of embryonic development (e.g. they thought that menstrual fluid and sperm formed an foetus).

 

[poche]

The reason he might not have considered it murder is because their medical and scientific knowledge was 13th century. Today we live in the 21st century and are better able to see the development of the child in the womb. Even during the time of the Supreme Court decision of Roe vs Wade, there was a meeting of scientists who were deliberating on when human life actually begins in the womb. Their conclusion was that it began within the hour.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The reason he might not have considered it murder is because their medical and scientific knowledge was 13th century. Today we live in the 21st century and are better able to see the development of the child in the womb.

^^ This.
Also, St. Thomas Aquinas is a saint and a great theologian, but he is not the teaching authority for the whole Church and he was capable of error.

An interesting story that was reported in the news:

Abortionist Quits After St. Thomas Aquinas Visits Him in a Dream| National Catholic Register

 

[JSRG]

JSRG:

… Anyone know where he stated this this?

S.T. II, Q64, A8:

Reply to Objection 2. He that strikes a woman with child does something unlawful: wherefore if there results the death either of the woman or of the animated fetus, he will not be excused from homicide, especially seeing that death is the natural result of such a blow.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3064.htm#article8

Thanks! The problem is that this refers to the “animated fetus” which indicates it only became animated at some point after conception, and it was at that point it becomes murder.

 

[JSRG]

The brilliant Saint Thomas Aquinas was neither Pope nor Council.
So, what’s their argument again?

The reason he might not have considered it murder is because their medical and scientific knowledge was 13th century. Today we live in the 21st century and are better able to see the development of the child in the womb. Even during the time of the Supreme Court decision of Roe vs Wade, there was a meeting of scientists who were deliberating on when human life actually begins in the womb. Their conclusion was that it began within the hour.

poche:

The reason he might not have considered it murder is because their medical and scientific knowledge was 13th century. Today we live in the 21st century and are better able to see the development of the child in the womb.

^^ This.
Also, St. Thomas Aquinas is a saint and a great theologian, but he is not the teaching authority for the whole Church and he was capable of error.

The thing is, the argument that was made there wasn’t simply “Aquinas was in error” or “Aquinas was making his statements based on outdated medical ideas.” The argument made by the articles I linked to on Catholic Answers was that Aquinas, while not considering early abortion to be murder, still asserted it was mortal sin but for different reasons. But where he asserted this is not stated by the articles. I want to know where, as the article claims, he asserted that pre-animation/ensoulment is a mortal sin for different reasons than murder.

 

[JSRG]

JSRG:

So the argument sometimes gets tossed around that Aquinas did not regard abortion as murder prior to the first several weeks of pregnancy

It’s not explicitly stated in the ST, which is not unsurprising because abortion - as a whole - is only examined very indirectly (and never from the perspective of intended abortion) in three instances throughout the entirety of the ST.

But the understanding that Aquinas condemned abortion at fertilisation largely derives from a systematic analysis of his work. If you have access to a university library, a very good article is “Aquinas on human ensoulment, abortion and the value of life” by John Haldane and Patrick Lee in Philosophy (2003), vol. 78.

A quote from the authors: “Had the blow been delivered prior to animation, then the abortion would be sinful but the sin would in effect be that of contraception…”

If you wish to investigate further, I would advise a very large cup of coffee as much of the analysis is structured around the metaphysical/philosophical “embryology” that prevailed at the time of Aquinas, which is all very bizarre, complex and inconsistent with modern medical understandings of embryonic development (e.g. they thought that menstrual fluid and sperm formed an foetus).

This looks useful. I’ll check it out.

 

[po18guy]

When did the Church teaching develop into “the soul is created immediately” by God? The crux of the matter, no?

 

[Vico]

Vico:

JSRG:

… Anyone know where he stated this this?

S.T. II, Q64, A8:

Reply to Objection 2. He that strikes a woman with child does something unlawful: wherefore if there results the death either of the woman or of the animated fetus, he will not be excused from homicide, especially seeing that death is the natural result of such a blow.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3064.htm#article8

Thanks! The problem is that this refers to the “animated fetus” which indicates it only became animated at some point after conception, and it was at that point it becomes murder.

St. Thomas Aquinas thought that the moment is not known; refer to the Summa Theologiae. III.q27.a.2.ad.3. where he states:

Reply Obj. 3: Although the Church of Rome does not celebrate the Conception of the Blessed Virgin, yet it tolerates the custom of certain churches that do keep that feast, wherefore this is not to be entirely reprobated. Nevertheless the celebration of this feast does not give us to understand that she was holy in her conception. But since it is not known when she was sanctified, the feast of her Sanctification, rather than the feast of her Conception, is kept on the day of her conception.

 

[Elf01]

I want to know where, as the article claims, he asserted that pre-animation/ensoulment is a mortal sin for different reasons than murder.

I would guess he would class it with contraception but have nothing to back that up.

 

[tafan2]

I would interpret it as “ensouled”. Indeed “soul” in Latin is “anima”. Aquinas had no idea about fetal development, when the baby was moving, it was a person, body and soul. If one applies Aquinas’s logic with modern scientific logic, abortion is murder at a very early stage if pregnancy, actually conception.

 

[Wesrock]

This may be an oversimplification, but (given Aquinas’ inadequate knowledge of gestation) abortion, though not as he understood it murder, would still have been a type of contraception and a perversion of the natural ends of a human being.

 

[Wesrock]

St. Thomas writes on a topic pertaining to contraception in Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 3, Chapter 122. (The section on the whole is regarding why “simple fornication” is a sin and matrimony is natural.)

[9] Nor, in fact, should it be deemed a slight sin for a man to arrange for the emission of semen apart from the proper purpose of generating and bringing up children, on the argument that it is either a slight sin, or none at ail, for a person to use a part of the body for a different use than that to which it is directed by nature (say, for instance, one chose to walk on his hands, or to use his feet for something usually done with the hands) because man’s good is not much opposed by such inordinate use. However, the inordinate emission of semen is incompatible with the natural good; namely, the preservation of the species. Hence, after the sin of homicide whereby a human nature already in existence is destroyed, this type of sin appears to take next place, for by it the generation of human nature is precluded.

From this and knowing his general position on contraception it easily follows why he still would have believed early abortion would have been gravely immoral.