Why do we as Catholics believe that life begins at conception?

[clem456]

God said to Jeremiah:

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
and before you were born I consecrated you;…”

Jeremiah 1:5

Since God is outside time, or eternal, the word “before” has a meaning different than what we normally perceive. In his “time-less-ness”, God has always known us.

I what sense does God know?
What does he know, who does he know?

Doesn’t knowing in this sense entail a relationship? If God, who is a divine person, knows someone, isn’t that other also a person. by definition of “knowing”?
It doesn’t say
“I thought about human beings generally speaking as inanimate creatures or abstract thoughts”,.,.,.

A person being known by God in eternity must say something about the intrinsic value of personhood, who it applies to, and what we are asked to believe about our “beginning”.

 

[Ender]

What’s the difference between conception and fertilization? Is there a difference?

This could seem like another “Who’s buried in Grant’s tomb” question, but it raises a point that should be addressed. Quite often debate on this subject is muddied by word games about just such questions. To me there is no difference at all between conception and fertilization, but it is possible there is a distinction to some.

I am aware there is some difference of opinion about when pregnancy occurs, whether it is at conception or later when the zygote attaches itself to the wall of the uterus. This distinction matters because the “morning after” pill is sold as a contraceptive, not an abortifacient. The pill works by preventing the zygote from attaching to the uterus, thus eliminating the problem. This particular “contraception not abortion” charade is based on defining the beginning of pregnancy to be implantation, and of an abortion as something that terminates a pregnancy.

Anyway, it is always necessary to understand the precise meaning of the words being used, especially on this subject where deception is such a large part of the debate.

Ender

 

[Micosil]

When else would it begin?

This brings up a question. What’s the difference between conception and fertilization? Is there a difference?

I don’t think there’s a difference.

I believe fertilization and fecundation are more technical, medical/biological terms, whereas conception is the more ‘layman’ term, so to speak.

 

[jschwartz]

Of course, at conception, there is a human life in formation. But is it the same as a full fledged human being that exists outside the womb as an independent being?

 

[Micosil]

Of course, at conception, there is a human life in formation. But is it the same as a full fledged human being that exists outside the womb as an independent being?

Here’s the crux of the question. “The same” in what sense? If you mean functionality, of course not – but what about a person born with cerebral palsy? Can they also function the same as you and I in society? Or a person with mental disabilities?

Most people wouldn’t think of killing people with these disabilities if they’re already born. What then makes a fetus, which is most of the time, just temporarily not as functional as the rest of us, different?

 

[clem456]

Of course, at conception, there is a human life in formation. But is it the same as a full fledged human being that exists outside the womb as an independent being?

What about any person who is deemed “less than full fledged”? (which is a fuzzy way of saying defective or deficient) There are many examples of persons who have been deemed “deficient”, from individuals to whole races.

The most important word in “full fledged human being” is the word being.

To be human means to have being, to exist as a person.
Stages of development and various traits are subordinate to the value of being. Having being is not a matter of independence or dependence on others. There is no person who is completely autonomous. That is an illusion.

As God says “I Am”, we are made in his image, and so at conception “we are” also.

 

[Micosil]

What about any person who is deemed “less than full fledged”? (which is a fuzzy way of saying defective or deficient) There are many examples of persons who have been deemed “deficient”, from individuals to whole races.

The most important word in “full fledged human being” is the word being.

To be human means to have being, to exist as a person.
Stages of development and various traits are subordinate to the value of being. Having being is not a matter of independence or dependence on others. There is no person who is completely autonomous. That is an illusion.

As God says “I Am”, we are made in his image, and so at conception “we are” also.

 

[petra22]

Of course, at conception, there is a human life in formation. But is it the same as a full fledged human being that exists outside the womb as an independent being?

Ah, but that wasn’t the question, was it? Did the heart start to beat the moment it was born and existed OUTSIDE the womb? Did blood begin to flow through its veins when it was born? Was the color of its eyes, skin, hair decided the day it was born. Did its DNA arrive with the help of a delivering doctor? It’s all in there at the moment of conception, or fertilization, if you will.

 

[ynotzap]

Hello!
I am passionately and intensely pro-life, not just for religious but also secular reasons. In my advocacy, I’ve come across the question of why we as Catholics believe that life does begin at conception. I understand and accept the scientific reasoning for it, which is that at no other time does it make sense that life begins, but I was wondering what the theological argument was for life beginning at conception.
Thanks!

The sign of life in the conceptus (fertilized ovum) is that special immanent activity (coming from within ) that manifests it’s presence by the physical effects it is causing, eg. the growth and development of the conceptus. Human beings beget human beings, and that is a self-evident truth and doesn’t need to be rationalized. It should go without saying that a human being is not all he can be at one time, he is a creature of time and change, he matures. Life perfects man’s existence by fulfilling his potentials for maturity The principle of life activates the programming found in the DNA that will determine all that the human will be physically. The principle of the immanent activity in the human being is the spiritual soul with all the capabilities of it’s vegetative and sentient , and intellectual powers.

 

[openmind77]

The question of when life begins is answered by science, not theology. It is not a Catholic “belief” any more than it is doctrine that the Earth circles the sun. And science is not at all ambivalent on the matter.The development of a human being begins with fertilization… (Langman’s Medical Embryology)

Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.…(Human Embryology and Teratology)

*“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.” *(Patten’s Foundations of Embryology)
Ender

Actually it is a theological question rather than a scientific one. It is obvious scientifically that the fetus is a living organism from the time of conception. But theologically the fetus can only be considered to be a human being, if it has a human soul. Opinions regarding when this ensoulment occurs vary considerably.

An excerpt from the wiki page on this topic:

“In the time of Aristotle it was widely believed that the human soul entered the forming body at 40 days (male embryos) or 90 days (female embryos), and quickening was an indication of the presence of a soul. Other religious views are that ensoulment happens at the moment of conception; or when the child takes the first breath after being born; at the formation of the nervous system and brain; at the first brain activity; or when the fetus is able to survive independently of the uterus (viability).”

 

[JimG]

Actually it is a theological question rather than a scientific one. It is obvious scientifically that the fetus is a living organism from the time of conception. But theologically the fetus can only be considered to be a human being, if it has a human soul. Opinions regarding when this ensoulment occurs vary considerably.

An excerpt from the wiki page on this topic:

“In the time of Aristotle it was widely believed that the human soul entered the forming body at 40 days (male embryos) or 90 days (female embryos), and quickening was an indication of the presence of a soul. Other religious views are that ensoulment happens at the moment of conception; or when the child takes the first breath after being born; at the formation of the nervous system and brain; at the first brain activity; or when the fetus is able to survive independently of the uterus (viability).”

Ensoulment has nothing to do with it. Ensoulment is not obserable. We know from embryology when a new individual of the human species begins: every human being begins at conception. It is human from conception till death.

 

[openmind77]

Ensoulment has nothing to do with it. Ensoulment is not obserable. We know from embryology when a new individual of the human species begins: every human being begins at conception. It is human from conception till death.

Any being without a soul can not be said to be a human and as the wiki page explains there great differences in opinion about when this takes place, some believe it happens “when the child takes** the first breath **after being born; some at the formation of the nervous system and brain; some at the first brain activity; or some when the fetus is able to survive independently of the uterus”.

These are four different possibilities completely different from it being at conception, which is just one opinion.

 

[Rau]

Any being without a soul can not be said to be a human and as the wiki page explains there great differences in opinion about when this takes place, some believe it happens “when the child takes** the first breath **after being born; some at the formation of the nervous system and brain; some at the first brain activity; or some when the fetus is able to survive independently of the uterus”.

These are four different possibilities completely different from it being at conception, which is just one opinion.

So according to one’s opinion on the timing of ensoulment, a mother may act against her offspring before that time, but not after - is that the implication?

 

[openmind77]

So according to one’s opinion on the timing of ensoulment, a mother may act against her offspring before that time, but not after - is that the implication?

The implication is that we do not know at what point ensoulment occurs. That means we have no right to tell the woman what she can or can not do. It is entirely her decision whether the fetus remains inside her body of not. However, if the fetus can survive independently of the mother, I think it should be saved.

 

[jilly4ski]

Any being without a soul can not be said to be a human and as the wiki page explains there great differences in opinion about when this takes place, some believe it happens “when the child takes** the first breath **after being born; some at the formation of the nervous system and brain; some at the first brain activity; or some when the fetus is able to survive independently of the uterus”.

These are four different possibilities completely different from it being at conception, which is just one opinion.

“Some believe”? Fine, Catholics believe that anything alive has a soul. Animals have a mortal soul and humans have an immortal soul. Since we have discovered the scientific fact that an organism of the homosapien species are alive at conception, then ensoulment must have already occurred.

 

[openmind77]

“Some believe”? Fine, Catholics believe that anything alive has a soul. Animals have a mortal soul and humans have an immortal soul. Since we have discovered the scientific fact that an organism of the homosapien species are alive at conception, then ensoulment must have already occurred.

So if doctors take a few cells from your body and keep them alive in some frozen state, do those cells have a separate soul of their own (because they are alive)? What makes a fetus separate from the mother and at what point?

 

[jilly4ski]

So if doctors take a few cells from your body and keep them alive in some frozen state, do those cells have a separate soul of their own (because they are alive)? What makes a fetus separate from the mother and at what point?

You are confused about the science involved in reproduction. Taking a few of my cells (differentiated cells, that will never grow) and keeping them “alive” is not the same as a blastocyst or embryo that is alive, that has the code to grow and develop. There is a scientific definition of “life” which frozen eggs or sperm do not meet, but a frozen embryo does.

 

[openmind77]

You are confused about the science involved in reproduction. Taking a few of my cells (differentiated cells, that will never grow) and keeping them “alive” is not the same as a blastocyst or embryo that is alive, that has the code to grow and develop. There is a scientific definition of “life” which frozen eggs or sperm do not meet, but a frozen embryo does.

We are not talking about ability to grow, we are talking about the presence of a human soul.

I understand that you think a fertilized cell immediately acquires a soul (even if fertilization takes places outside a woman’s body). However, there are many different views regarding this - many don’t believe there is a soul in this single cell. But even scientists will not call a single fertilized cell, ‘an organism’.

 

[Rau]

The implication is that we do not know at what point ensoulment occurs. That means we have no right to tell the woman what she can or can not do. It is entirely her decision whether the fetus remains inside her body of not. However, if the fetus can survive independently of the mother, I think it should be saved.

You misunderstand. You’ve outlined the various belief’s attached to timing of ensoulment. If a woman believes one on these, then for her, it would be immoral to act against the offspring after that time point - do you agree?

 

[Rau]

So if doctors take a few cells from your body and keep them alive in some frozen state, do those cells have a separate soul of their own (because they are alive)? What makes a fetus separate from the mother and at what point?

Basic science. A few cells of my body remain part of me. The product of conception is not part of me, but is life.