Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cicero
Similarly, St. Thomas and other theologians spoke about life beginning at the moment of quickening or ensoulment, taken to be when the baby is first felt to move in the womb. But we now know that life begins earlier, at the beginning, and that therefore ensoulment must also be earlier.

St. Thomas and St. Augustine knew that life itself began at conception. They simply didn't believe it had advanced to the point of having a soul until it had developed to the point of movement. Nor was there any scientific evidence that changed the mind of the Church. It was "decreed" in the 1850s that life and soul began at conception. It was thought by some to be as much a political decision by the Pope as a theological one.

6 posted on 12/02/2006 3:07:17 PM PST by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: MACVSOG68
While St Augustine did subscribe to the Aristotlean view vis a vis animated and unanimated unborn babies, the Churchs position from the Didache on was that abortion is wrong. Eg. “The hairsplitting difference between formed and unformed [ensouled and unensouled fetus] makes no difference to us. Whoever deliberately commits abortion is subject to the penalty for homicide.” 4th Century St Basil.

St Augustines views on early development of the fetus were not what one would call biologically apt.

Life begins at conception. God says He knew us before we were in the womb. God deals in souls. Ergo, ensoulment and conception go hand in hand.

10 posted on 12/02/2006 4:54:33 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: MACVSOG68

I'm not entirely sure of that, although I may be mistaken. It was a fairly common view that life could come from non-living matter. The best known instance is Nile mud, which was thought capable of yearly giving birth to all sorts of living creatures. That one was still current in the Renaissance.

I suppose it depends what you mean by soul. It was commonly thought, from ancient times through medieval to the Renaissance, that plants had a single soul, which governed growth and reproduction; animals had a second soul, which included the senses and locomotion, and humans had a third soul, which involved reason, will, and memory. Some also speak of a higher spiritual soul, but this is not a firmly established idea.

But etymology, both Hebrew and Greek, suggest that life, breath, wind, and spirit are related concepts (ruach and pneuma). God breathes into Adam to give him life, and when the breath leaves the body we die.

Further, the soul is not only spiritual. The Catechism of the Catholic Church still includes a formulation that goes back to Aristotle, that the soul is the form of the body. The body lives only when it has a soul. So, I would think this was a development of doctrine, not a change of doctrine.


17 posted on 12/02/2006 6:19:45 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson