Catholic ping!
So is SanFranNan’s position going to be “who ya gonna believe, me or that lying [choose one:] Bishop / Cardinal / Pope?”
She has no idea of where she is going. The Church has not defined when ensoulment takes place. (See Declaration on Procured Abortion, footnote on page 4), but that is not the same as saying there is no human life. St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Plato and Aristotle would describe the life as having a human animal soul. The “quickening” part was an understanding of the science/philosphy at the time of when the RATIONAL soul develops and has no pertinence to the question at hand anyway. (In her case, you could argue the rational soul still hasn’t developed.) Most abortions occur after quickening, and Roe allows abortion for all nine months.
When St. Augustine or St. Thomas Aquinas suggest not having a civil penalty for an early abortion, that might be related to the fact that miscariages often happen early on with no intent, and there’d be no way to sort the whole thing out.
When you're in a hole, stop digging!
So what if the speaker has 5 kids. That doesn’t tell us if she ever aborted any. Just saying she has 5 kids, like that makes her a “good” Catholic doesn’t prove anything.
St. Jerome avoided the error, presumably because he was translating directly from the Hebrew text.
The Vulgate of Exodus 21.22-23 reads:
22. si rixati fuerint viri et percusserit quis mulierem praegnantem et abortivum quidem fecerit set ipsa vixerit subiacebit damno quantum expetierit maritus mulieris et arbitri iudicarint.
23. sin autem mors eius fuerit subsecuta reddet animam pro anima.
The Douay translation reads:
22. If men quarrel, and one strike a woman with child and she miscarry indeed, but live herself he shall be answerable for so much damage as the woman's husband shall require, and as arbiters shall award. 23. But if her death ensue thereupon, he shall render life for life.
For instance, here is another one of Augustine's gems, which Pelosi is now obligated to support:
15. Can it ever, at any time or place, be unrighteous for a man to love God with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his mind; and his neighbor as himself? [74] Similarly, offenses against nature are everywhere and at all times to be held in detestation and should be punished. Such offenses, for example, were those of the Sodomites; and, even if all nations should commit them, they would all be judged guilty of the same crime by the divine law, which has not made men so that they should ever abuse one another in that way. For the fellowship that should be between God and us is violated whenever that nature of which he is the author is polluted by perverted lust.
- Confessions, 3:8:15
Where’s Laura Ingraham? She can’t stand it when Pelosi goes off on her mother/grandmother rants... “I’m a mother and a grandmother”... How many times are we going to hear that?
LOL. She keeps getting better and better. I wish the Pope would fly over here and smack her with his fist.
This is preposterous. It was based on ancient, outdated theories of the nature of the soul and mind, of ensoulment. If she really believes that, then obviously she would want Augustine and other dead western males studied in schools, but she doesn't. And they don't. Does she realize that women were also considered the property of men in ancient times? That slavery was permitted? That the state could murder live, adult human beings by crucifixion?
The sanctity of human life is not based on "sentience" or "quickening" in Catholic ethics. Even pagans in antiquity opposed abortion. It was prohibited the Hippocratic oath. That they did not know anything about embryos and did not have Ultrasound then seems to have escaped her notice.
Follow-up Ping! The slapdown part II.
Let's cut her some slack (a lot) and agree with her position that it is uncertain when life begins and it may not begin at conception. Even if this is the case, the sensible position is to err on the side of caution and presume that it does begin at conception, lest in aborting unborn children we inadvertently dispose of human life. Uncertainty over when life starts can not in any sense be used as a reason to say "yeehah.... out with the knives and onward with the abortions".
If the soul is not infused at conception as some claim, there is certainly no concrete evidence that it is infused at a later time. Ergo, in the absence of any such evidence and in obedience to the Church and out of respect for human life and fear that we destroy it if abortion occurs, we accept that it begins at conception as the Church teaches.
Based on this, the absolute best possibility for Pelosi is that she is an unthinking, reckless fool. At worst, she is a callous accomplice to murder.
It simply does not matter what Pelosi thinks about life.
What matters is the Church has spoken and the answer is not negotiable.
If Ms. Pelosi chooses to voice her personal opinion, she can.
What she cannot do is voice an opinion that is antithetical to the Catholic Church.
She’s Protestant.
Glad you posted this. I was going to, but now don’t have to!!