Abortion hypothetical

[Davidnic]

I don't know if the unborn's soul is with the Lord in a miscarriage, do you?

Does the Church teach that a miscarried embryo, the soul is in heaven?

Take your time finding the answer to that one.

The Church makes no call in sure knowledge on the disposition of any soul aside from the known Saints but She states that we have every justifiable hope and reason to believe they are in heaven through a Baptism of desire:

"The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Being Baptized."

A quote from this document:

Our conclusion is that the many factors that we have considered above give serious theological and liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptized infants who die will be saved and enjoy the beatific vision. We emphasize that these are reasons for prayerful hope, rather than grounds for sure knowledge. There is much that simply has not been revealed to us. We live by faith and hope in the God of mercy and love who has been revealed to us in Christ, and the Spirit moves us to pray in constant thankfulness and joy.

What has been revealed to us is that the ordinary way of salvation is by the sacrament of baptism. None of the above considerations should be taken as qualifying the necessity of baptism or justifying delay in administering the sacrament. Rather, as we want to reaffirm in conclusion, they provide strong grounds for hope that God will save infants when we have not been able to do for them what we would have wished to do, namely, to baptize them into the faith and life of the Church.
​

So She comments on it far more than She will or the disposition of your or my soul. And the comment is we have every reason to believe they are in heaven because of Baptism of desire.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The Church makes no call in sure knowledge on the disposition of any soul aside from the known Saints but She states that we have every justifiable hope and reason to believe they are in heaven through a Baptism of desire:

"The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Being Baptized."

A quote from this document:

Our conclusion is that the many factors that we have considered above give serious theological and liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptized infants who die will be saved and enjoy the beatific vision. We emphasize that these are reasons for prayerful hope, rather than grounds for sure knowledge. There is much that simply has not been revealed to us. We live by faith and hope in the God of mercy and love who has been revealed to us in Christ, and the Spirit moves us to pray in constant thankfulness and joy.

What has been revealed to us is that the ordinary way of salvation is by the sacrament of baptism. None of the above considerations should be taken as qualifying the necessity of baptism or justifying delay in administering the sacrament. Rather, as we want to reaffirm in conclusion, they provide strong grounds for hope that God will save infants when we have not been able to do for them what we would have wished to do, namely, to baptize them into the faith and life of the Church.
​

So She comments on it far more than She will or the disposition of your or my soul. And the comment is we have every reason to believe they are in heaven because of Baptism of desire.

I understand this teaching David. My point to Bene is that the Church makes no definitive call on a miscarried embryo, as having a soul in heaven or not.

Anyway, I'm off until 2011.

Have a Happy New Year All

Jim

 

[benedictaoo]

benedictaoo



And we don't baptize a dead person because the soul is not present and Baptism requires faith.

And what infant has faith Jim? It's the faith of the parents, is why it can be baptised.

and a fetus has a soul, when it dies and /or is murdered through an abortion- it does not have a soul, it went on to be with the Lord but it HAD one.

I don't know if the unborn's soul is with the Lord in a miscarriage, do you?

I can surly piously believe it is and I do... why? because it did have soul since conception before it's death and is a human being that based on my intent to baptize, received a baptism of desire. So the soul can go to God or to a place of bliss.

Does the Church teach that a miscarried embryo, the soul is in heaven?

It teaches it may be, it teaches us to entrust them to God's Mercy... do we usually entrust almost people, but not all the way people, who have no souls to God's Mercy?

Take your time finding the answer to that one.

Really?

 

[Davidnic]

Yes it is and I got the answer from Priest for Life. If the action you take is the cause of the fetus death, its an abortion.

Only If it is the direct and intended cause. Totally different than accidental cause, indirect unforeseen cause or indirect foreseen cause. Moral Theology does not call abortion on the accidental, indirect unforeseen or indirect foreseen. Only in the direct foreseen. Since there is no such thing a direct unforeseen in this situation.

Notice I do not say desired cause, but intended cause. That is the difference. To go in and directly kill, even if you really don't want to, killing is still the intent..the free willed choice.

No matter if you are doing it to save a life...saving the life is not the intent it is the circumstance that required (in the dr. opinion) the action and intent of killing the fetus.

Because the action is directly taking a life by aspiration and curating or dilating and curating...which are the two methods used in this situation. And if the Bishop called it an abortion...then it was one of those.

This is why it is a direct abortion. Different from an ectopic.

 

[Davidnic]

I understand this teaching David. My point to Bene is that the Church makes no definitive call on a miscarried embryo, as having a soul in heaven or not.

Anyway, I'm off until 2011.

Have a Happy New Year All

Jim

Happy new year Jim. The Church makes no definitive call on the disposition of any soul other than a declared Saint. So reliance in the hope of God's mercy is what we all get. We have the added positive of the normative process of a sacramental Baptism, but in the end...the mercy of God, thankfully, is what we all (miscarried and born) get. And thank God for that.

 

[benedictaoo]

Why would the Church teach that we can entrust them to God's mercy if A) it was a almost person, but not all the way one and B) it never had a soul?

Take your time trying to answer that one Jim...

And all you have done is just deflect from my original question that remains on the table.

If it is not a person, then what is it?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Why would the Church teach that we can entrust them to God's mercy if A) it was a almost person, but not all the way one and B) it never had a soul?

Take your time trying to answer that one Jim...

And all you have done is just deflect from my original question that remains on the table.

If it is not a person, then what is it?

Its a human life in its earliest stages of development. Is it a person? I will be, but in its current state, its not certain and being its going to die because the mother is going to die, I don't know for sure.

Is a miscarried embryo a person in your opinion?

Anyway, I understand the Church's position on the issue. I don't like it, and although I can wrap my mind around it, I can't yet wrap my heart around it.

So, I'm going to give it a rest and pray about it. Nothing is being accomplished by continuing the debate in this forum.

Jim

 

[benedictaoo]

its not certain

what? It's still thinking about it? If it will be a person or something else? what is the other option? What else could it be?


Good for you Jim, but upon reflection try to understand that the baby is fully a person who has a soul. It's just a smaller version - but not any less a version.

Jim, The things you said are not what the Church has taught and will always teach. The life in the womb from second one of conception is sacred and we can not just suck it out and throw it away.

Just know that in order for you to justify your opinion on this, the baby HAS to be less or not have a soul.

But here's the thing... it isn't any less of a person and it has a soul. Wonderfully made, created by God, beloved by God. The baby in the womb is also God's child... The baby also gets consideration.

I understand that it has little hope to survive, but you have to still treat it with love and dignity.

There was a saying years ago I heard, that we all need someone else to help show us our value, no matter how small- no matter how old.

 

[_Shannon_]

Nope--still can't directly kill the baby. With PIH and HELLP--the gestational age is often much older, usually past viability. The baby can just be born if the momma's life is in danger. That;s where things like this break down for me. The complications we're talking about, occur much later in pregnancy than 11 weeks.

I have some stories of a couple very brave women I know who have pre-existing heart conditions, were in danger of dying, and chose life anyway.

 

[_Shannon_]

Is a miscarried embryo a person in your opinion?

If you have ever held your miscarried "embryo" in your hands, I think you can have no doubt at all that he or she is a person.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

If you have ever held your miscarried "embryo" in your hands, I think you can have no doubt at all that he or she is a person.

Yeah, I suppose you're right.

Jim

 

[benedictaoo]

And Jim I want it to be made crystal clear.. I did not accuse you of being pro abortion-- I ASKED you if you believe a woman is free to have one if she feels she needs to? and you did not answer as far as I know.

and I went on to just FYI you, just so you know, you can not be Catholic and be pro abortion.

I did not accuse you of anything, I ASKED you a question.

 

[_Shannon_]

Yeah, I suppose you're right.

Jim

Even an 11 week old baby has little hands and feet, precious little lips. You can tell if the baby was a boy or a girl. Even when a miscarriage occurs before a baby is developed enough to hold- if a woman knows she is pregnant, she will grieve and feel the loss of a person. Not just a glob of cells.

I think this is a pretty cool site:
The 9-Week Fetus in Motion

 

[_Shannon_]

This is all at 9 weeks:

Motion and Sensation

 

[JimR-OCDS]

This is all at 9 weeks:

Motion and Sensation

But the question still remains.

In the case of the mother in Arizona, did the fetus's life trump the mothers in that she must die with the fetus?

Like I said, I can wrap my head around the teaching, but not my heart, at least not yet.

No way could I sit in that hospital room and watch the mother die when she could be saved.



Jim

 

[_Shannon_]

Well--you can allow a baby to be born, without having to kill the baby first. It's just a technological issue that the baby's life cannot be furthered outside the womb, but it is not killing. Birth the baby, and do all you can to lengthen his or her life. Then there is no direct kiling. Yes the birth of the baby prematurely causes the baby's demise, but his or her death is an unintended side effect.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Well--you can allow a baby to be born, without having to kill the baby first. It's just a technological issue that the baby's life cannot be furthered outside the womb, but it is not killing. Birth the baby, and do all you can to lengthen his or her life. Then there is no direct kiling. Yes the birth of the baby prematurely causes the baby's demise, but his or her death is an unintended side effect.

Allow the baby to be born? You mean induced labor?

Thats an abortion according to the Church.

If inducing labor causes the death of the fetus, its an abortion and morally illicit.

Jim

 

[_Shannon_]

Inducing labor doesn't cause death. Insufficient gestation and technology causes death.

When we are talking about early labor induction--and double effect intent really, really matters.

Early labor induction for fetal anomalies is not licit. Early labor induction because there is grave risk to the mother caused as a direct result of pregnancy--is licit. In this case the momma staying pregnant is going to kill both momma and baby. Birthing the baby, is an attempt to save the life of the child, even though the current technology we have doesn't allow for that.

http://catholicinsight.com/online/bioethics/article_884.shtml

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Shannon

Inducing labor doesn't cause death.

On a previable fetus is does. My daughter went through it at 20 weeks.

Early labor induction for fetal anomalies is not licit. Early labor induction because there is grave risk to the mother caused as a direct result of pregnancy--is licit.

Priest for life told us differently. If inducing labor, causes the death of the fetus, its an abortion and illicit, even when done to save the mother.

In the case of the mother in Arizona, we don't know how the pregnancy was terminated.

I doubt it was a C-section, being she had pulmonary hypertension, they would not have done surgery on her.

Jim

 

[_Shannon_]

That is not my understanding of it. All attempts to bring baby to viability ought to be attempted. But the death of a baby being born early is not morally evil. In cases where death is likely or imminent, double effect applies here. Same as it does in the case of an ectopic pregnancy.