How Catholics Got the Mistaken View of Fertilized Egg=person Posted: 11-30-07 08:34am
How The Catholic Church got the mistaken
view of fertilized egg=human being:
The article explains how previous
Catholic thought on abortion was very
different from the view held today.
Catholic identity and the abortion
debate.
Early, first trimester abortion was not
considered homicide because the embryo or
fetus did not yet have a soul.
Quote:
St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine, did
not propound the view that is now
standard. They thought there was a marked
difference between the early and late
stages of fetal life, and the confidence
of the contemporary view of the early
fetus as "a human person" would surely
have struck them as unfounded. Augustine
refers to the early fetus in vegetative
terms and Aquinas held that "ensoulment"
could not occur in the early processes of
gestation when a merely vegetative and
then animal soul were involved. It
required a later divine intervention to
provide the developing living matter with
a rational human soul., Aquinas places the
crucial point at 40 days for a male and 90
days for a female. Making due allowance
for equality of the sexes, this would
plausibly indicate something like the end
of the first trimester.
Abortion was still considered immoral,
though, because it was connected to their
view of non-procreative sex as immoral.
Quote:
But his most considered judgment on the
immorality of early abortion condemns it
on the grounds of its connection with
sexual license. He does not call it
homicide but married adultery. Aquinas
likewise considers early abortion in the
context of sexual perversity. Their
outlook was determinative of the church's
standard teaching until the 17th century.
So how does the Church justify or explain
the fact that it didn't always consider
abortion to be homicide?
How did the view change from a soul not
being in a fetus until after the first
trimester, and the current view of
ensoulment at fertilization?
The usual response to this intellectual
history by the church's moral majority
(when they don't ignore it altogether) is
to point out that Augustine and
Thomas were operating with outdated
science. Modern science places, or puts
theologians in a position to place,
ensoulment at the beginning of fetal life
and hence to treat early abortion as a
form of homicide.
[T]he church's shift away from the
Thomistic/ Augustinian positions began
with confusions generated by new
scientific developments. As Dombrowski and
Deltete point out, the invention
of the microscope and some misobservations
made with it led scientists in the 17th
century to the profoundly mistaken theory
of "preformationism" whereby it was
supposed that every organism starts off
with all its parts already formed. The
theories of procreation known as ovism and
homunculism gave different spins to this
outlook in projecting the idea that tiny
humans were somehow wholly present in the
female egg or in the male sperm.
The concept of a homunculus
(Latin for "little man", plural
"homunculi"; the diminutive of homo,
"human being") is often used to illustrate
the functioning of a system. In the
scientific sense of an unknowable prime
actor, it can be viewed as an entity or
agent.
“Preformationism,” a
theory of heredity, claimed either
the egg or the sperm (exactly which was a
contentious issue) contained a complete
preformed individual called a homunculus.
Development was therefore a matter of
enlarging this into a fully formed
being. In the days of
preformationism, genetic disease was
variously interpreted: sometimes as a
manifestation of the wrath of God or the
mischief of demons and devils; sometimes
as evidence of either an excess of or a
deficit of the father's “seed”;
sometimes as the result of “wicked
thoughts” on the part of the mother
during pregnancy. On the premise that
fetal malformation can result when a
pregnant mother's desires are thwarted,
Napoleon passed a law permitting expectant
mothers to
shoplift.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2509 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 11-30-07 22:33pm
futureshock I am catholic and you need to
know that the majority of catholics (over
90%) and me included we use birth control
even if the pope don't like it. Can you
understand that? Second you need to
understand that pro-life not necessarily
equal catholic. There is plenty of
agnostic pro-lifers out there, so why you
concentrate in the catholic religion only?
In fact there is many catholic pro-choice
too. People view of abortion goes beyond
religion. It is value of life and you
don't need to be catholic for that.
I suggest you leave the catholic church
alone.
|
Verizon-y
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 3291
Thanks: 2
Thanked:0
Posted: 12-01-07 00:27am
The Catholic Church is a very large player
in the abortion debate. The article I
posted does not say anything derogatory
about the church.
|
Jincks013
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 1173 Location: ,
Thanks: 22
Thanked:8
Posted: 12-01-07 07:25am
NA the church makes itsself centeral to
the abortion debate and If you want the
church left alone in the debate then
perhaps it would be best to write letters
to other catholics and church officals
telling them to stay out of the abortion
issue.
In the meantime leaving them out of the
debate is not conducive to a real debate
since you are effectively silencing a
large portion of the relgious debaters and
their reasoning... in my country that is a
no-no..
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2509 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 12-01-07 10:34am
okay ladies you can continue talking about
the church since I can see you actually do
care very much about what the Holy Church
has to say.
Saint Thomas Aquinas leapt to mind-and
therein crept the irony.
What does a thirteenth-century saint have
to do with contemporary temporary debates
over abortion? O ye of little faith: we
need look no further than the
controversial Supreme Court case of
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services.
The Webster case, you recall, questioned
the constitutionality of certain statutes
regulating abortions in Missouri. The
restrictions upon abortions (for example,
public facilities may not be used for
abortions even if no public funds are
spent) were upheld by a five-to-four
Supreme Court vote. Media coverage of the
dissenting votes focused around Justice
Harry Blackmun's cryptic "I fear for the
future" sermon. But the key passage in the
Missouri law was quietly and persistently
targeted by Justice John Paul Stevens. The
crucial passage-actually contained in the
preamble of the Missouri statute-set forth
"findings" which stated that the life of
each human being "begins at conception"
and that "unborn children have protectable
interests in life, health, and
well-being." In other words, zygotes are
people too.
Justice Stevens argued that the Missouri
"findings" were unconstitutional, and he
appealed to a remarkable (yet little
noticed) argument. At first, his reasoning
seems rather academic-indeed, this is
undoubtedly why the media centered on
Blackmun's more dramatic comments. Had we
given Stevens' "illustrational" argument
closer examination, however, we would have
found it to expose the irony lurking just
beneath the surface of pro-life ideology.
And guess who Stevens appeals to in his
subtle dissent? Why, Saint Thomas Aquinas,
of course.
The irony,
quite simply, is this: how many
clinic-blocking, doctor-harassing,
"pro-life" Roman Catholics know that the
entire history of their church denies that
the zygote is a person? Since
history can be so painfully embarrassing,
I suppose we should all be thankful for
that most soothing of afflictions, the
short memory.
The current official position of the
Catholic church is published in the 1987
Vatican-issued Instruction on Respect for
Human Life in Its Origin and on the
Dignity of Procreation. In the
Instruction, it is stated that "every
human being" has a "right to life and
physical integrity from the moment of
conception until death. . . ." Now
contrary to most writers and readers of
abortion-related discourse, I am not going
to line up on either side of this
insoluble question (sorry to disappoint
the simple-minded dichotomy purveyors). In
fact, to leap in at this point, boldly
asserting or denying the personhood of the
zygote and then weighing that conviction
against the woman's personal rights, is
precisely the move that has consistently
clouded the clear argument of thinkers
like Justice Stevens. What I wish to point
out, as Stevens subtly attempts to do, is
that the official position of the
church-from the church's very conception
up until Pope Pius IX's 1869 decree-held
that the fetus did not become a person
until late in the course of gestation. And
this tradition (lasting almost two
millennia) of church "findings" should
give the modern Catholic some pause over
the "eternal veracity" of their current
findings.
Ask almost any Roman Catholic if the
saints believed in personhood at
conception, and they will scoff, "Of
course." But they would be wrong.
I wish to focus primarily on Saint Thomas,
but even earlier church fathers held that
"personhood" developed late in the
pregnancy. Saint Augustine and
Saint Jerome, for example, both believed
that destruction of a fetus could not be
considered homicide until the fetus had
fully formed. Prior to this "full
formation," the fetus held no greater
moral significance than an irrational
animal. That is not to say that the fetus
held no moral status, for all living
things, according to the faithful, are
products of God's handiwork and
consequently deserving of reverential
respect. But this line of thinking (which
Ronald Dworkin, in his new book Life's
Dominion, finds more intelligible than
other abortion-related arguments must be
understood as quite different from the
"personhood argument." It is different
because the criteria for moral respect
widens radically from the sanctity of
"persons" to the sanctity of "life."
Moreover, such a broadening of the
criteria for moral respect opens the door
too widely for the pious believer, who
must now sin nightly as he devours his
sacred sirloin.
In dredging up the uncomfortable past
creeds of Augustine, Jerome, and Aquinas,
I am not suggesting that changes in dogma
automatically manifest church fallibility.
Rather, to expose the irony - indeed, the
contradiction - in church doctrines is a
crucial first premise in a wider and more
important argument about the relation
between church and state. It is for this
reason that we must visit the embarrassing
saint.
Thomas
Aquinas has been the official Catholic
theologian for the past 600 years.
Aquinas was given the thankless job of
making the potentially heretical ideas, of
Aristotle (then only newly discovered by
European intellectuals) consistent with
church doctrine. Anyone who doubts his
current influence on Christianity need
only visit a Catholic college campus,
where the mandatory core-curriculum is
drenched in Thomistic ideas, or simply ask
any priest to recite one of Aquinas'
proofs for the existence of God (he will
no doubt be able to recite five). The pope
himself, in his October 1993 encyclical,
cites Aquinas no less than six times.
In the Thomist-Aristotelian
tradition,
it is the faculty of "reason" that
distinguishes humans from all other
animals. Reason, then, is the defining
essence of what it means to be a human
person.
Aquinas draws out this principle to its
conclusion when he observes that, if the
"bodily and sense faculties" do not
develop until the eighth week, then
"reason and free will" also do not develop
until that time. Consequently, if reason
and free will are the defining properties
of human persons, then in the first eight
weeks of pregnancy no human person per se
exists
The "levels" of soul, according to the
Thomist position, develop from lower to
higher through the course of fetal
development. This temporal development
follows the basic embryological
law of epigenesis (which Aristotle argued
for and which modern biology currently
affirms). Epigenesis means that
embryological development occurs in a
pathway from the less specific to the more
specific. In other words, in the
chronological order of gestation, I was
alive (a nutritious blob) before I was an
animal (capable of sensation and
self-movement), and I was both these
things before I developed into a human
being (having the faculty of reason). The
more "specific" (species-defining) traits
develop last in the order of time. Now all
this may sound quite antique in tone, but
it is only a different way of stating what
current biology asserts. Human capacities
develop at different times in the course
of embryological growth; the finished
product is not all there at the outset.
Regarding the powers of soul, Aquinas
states that "the more imperfect powers
precede the others in the order of
generation, for the animal is generated
before the man."
Human
ensoulment occurs, according to the saint,
not at conception but at six or eight
weeks. This discrepancy - between
classical and contemporary Catholic
theories of personhood-development - is
enough to make the pope cringe.
The Renaissance church even codified the
saint's "findings" into laws at the
Council of Trent, stating that an
individual would not be committing
homicide if he or she aborted a fetus
prior to its human ensoulment (six to
eight weeks). Justice Stevens makes note
of the Trent council in his dissenting
Webster opinion and uses this embarrassing
chapter of Catholic theology to make the
crucial point about the separation of
church and state.
to read the rest click the link in the
title.
|
Jincks013
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 1173 Location: ,
Thanks: 22
Thanked:8
Posted: 12-02-07 07:15am
nightangel73
wrote:
okay ladies you can continue
talking about the church since I can see
you actually do care very much about what
the Holy Church has to
say.
As it pertains to the debate only. A
debate requires two opposing views (at
minimum) so leaving out one of the
opposing views would not be conducive to a
good debate even though it raises more
debatable point in and of itsself.
As long as the church tries to control
politicians they remain a part of many
different debates; including the ongoing
one about their tax exempt status because
they are trying to control policy and
policy makers.
Abortion is just one issue they are hock
deep in and like I said.. I'll leave them
alone when they bow out.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 12-02-07 13:13pm
nightangel73
wrote:
okay ladies you can continue
talking about the church since I can see
you actually do care very much about what
the Holy Church has to
say.
Yes we do; because it is trying to remove
our rights as women. We care very, very
much.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2509 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 12-06-07 23:26pm
Okay then let us pray..
Prayer for life by Pope John Paul II
O Mary, bright dawn of the new world,
Mother of the living,
to you do we entrust the cause of life:
Look down, O Mother, upon the vast
numbers
of babies to be born,
of the poor whose lives are made
difficult,
of men and women who are victims of brutal
violence,
of the elderly and the sick killed
by indifference or out of misguided
mercy.
Grant that all who believe in your Son
may proclaim the Gospel of life
with honesty and love to the people of our
time.
Obtain for them the grace
to accept that Gospel as a gift ever new,
the joy of celebrating it with gratitude
throughout their lives
and the courage to bear witness to it
resolutely,
in order to build,
together with all people of good will,
the civilization of truth and love,
to the praise and glory of God,
the Creator and lover of life.
~~ Pope John Paul II
Encyclical Letter "The Gospel of Life"
Given in Rome, on March 25,
the Solemnity of the Annunciation of the
Lord,
in the year 1995.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 12-07-07 02:11am
(sings) Nooooot Chriiiiiistiaaaan.....
|
Jincks013
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 1173 Location: ,
Thanks: 22
Thanked:8
Posted: 12-07-07 07:23am
Why are you doing that NA? I am not
christian, catholic and follow none of the
abrahamic belief systems as you are fully
aware. There are many posters here who are
not believers in the abrahamic systems.
This in unnecessary and is being used
simply as a means of harassment.
|
Verizon-y
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 3291
Thanks: 2
Thanked:0
Posted: 12-07-07 10:50am
Why do Catholics pray to Mary instead of
God?
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3963 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 129
Thanked:12
Posted: 12-07-07 11:30am
(Sorry NA, couldn't help myself)
Prayer for life by Pope Birch I
O Mary of the Unstained Vagina,
Mother of entity with no record of
existence,
to you we do entrust our great insecurites
and fear of death and loneliness.
Look down, O Mary of Perfect Hymen, upon
the vast numbers
of babies born,
of the poor whose lives are made difficult
by the conservatives,
of men and women who are victims of
wantonless wars for profit,
of those knocking at death's door with no
health insurance
and the sick mercifully by their own
choice let unto thine arms.
Grant that all who believe in the sky
fairy
may proclaim their delusions
with honesty, but only to the point that
it will help the religion get it's
propaganda across.
Obtain for them the ability
to see the Gospel as an excellent
brainwashing technique of yore,
the joy of celebrating it at the detriment
of humankind
throughout all their lives
and the courage to bear witness to it
resolutely, despite logic,
in order to build
together with all people of questionable
higher brain function,
a civilization of truth as only we see
it.
to the praise and glory of the Purple
Unicorn,
the Creator of large clumps of manure and
lover of oats.
~~ Pope Birch I
Encyclical Letter "Prayer for Manure"
Given in English, on December 6,
in the year 2007
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 12-07-07 12:16pm
And people say I have no respect for other
people's religions
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3963 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 129
Thanked:12
Posted: 12-07-07 13:48pm
Ah, Eiri, I could have written the
funniest thing in the world that had you
in stitches and you would've been stoic
about it on this forum.
|
meblonde01
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 2123 Location: ,
Thanks: 6
Thanked:2
Posted: 12-07-07 14:45pm
futureshock
wrote:
Why do Catholics pray to
Mary instead of
God?
I don't know futureshock.. I don't
understand any of the Catholic religion.
They tell other christains they can not do
things because they are not Catholic. I
don't understand it and choose not to have
any part of it. Sometimes I feel like
Catholics think they are God over other
Christian and thier religion is the only
"right" one. Confusing to me!
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 12-07-07 15:03pm
Birch
wrote:
Ah, Eiri, I could have
written the funniest thing in the world
that had you in stitches and you would've
been stoic about it on this forum.
No, I chuckled XD It's just that someone
was demanding I have respect for other
people's religions on another thread and
then I see this heheh.
|
sociable_recluse
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Nov 2007 Posts: 88 Location: , UK
Posted: 12-07-07 15:18pm
meblonde01
wrote:
futureshock
wrote:
Why do Catholics pray to
Mary instead of
God?
I don't know futureshock.. I don't
understand any of the Catholic religion.
They tell other christains they can not do
things because they are not Catholic. I
don't understand it and choose not to have
any part of it. Sometimes I feel like
Catholics think they are God over other
Christian and thier religion is the only
"right" one. Confusing to
me!
True that! Most Catholics i know think
that they are the "real" christians and
everyone else is just faking it.
|
Verizon-y
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 3291
Thanks: 2
Thanked:0
Posted: 12-07-07 19:51pm
Birch, that poem was
AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
Darkmoon
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Dec 2007 Posts: 380 Location: ,
Thanks: 72
Thanked:43
Posted: 12-08-07 06:42am
I feel very sorry for any female that
attempts to follow the present Catholic
doctrine. Doomed to constant pregnancy or
refusing her husband his "husbandly
rights" and thus losing him due to the
male tendency to equate sex with
love...Catholic women are "screwed" no
matter what they choose. If you don't put
out he'll find someone that will. The
women are the ones done the worst by this
"have sex to breed or don't do it at all"
crap.
