Questions about souls and conception

[LivingWordUnity]

I agree. How does this answer my questions?

I agree with Michie's answer in post #6.

 

[Meowzltov]

I agree with Michie's answer in post #6.

So you don't know. Thats okay.

 

[Michie]

Do you really expect anyone but the Lord God to know? Why do we follow the faith which is unseen? Let God be God. Are you seriously expecting a solid infallible answer?

So you don't know. Thats okay.

 

[MikeK]

So you don't know. Thats okay.

That's the only answer, though. Anyone who claims to know, doesn't.

 

[Meowzltov]

That's the only answer, though. Anyone who claims to know, doesn't.

Sure. But many are willing to take a stab at it, you know, hypothesize. Much church doctrine began that way and was reasoned through.

 

[Meowzltov]

Do you really expect anyone but the Lord God to know? Why do we follow the faith which is unseen? Let God be God. Are you seriously expecting a solid infallible answer?

I asked to get people's ideas. You are not one to hypothesize. Others are. Both ways are okay.

 

[Michie]

Then you need to stop saying your questions aren't answered if you are simply looking for ideas.

I asked to get people's ideas. You are not one to hypothesize. Others are. Both ways are okay.

 

[Meowzltov]

Then you need to stop saying your questions aren't answered if you are simply looking for ideas.

I said it was okay for them not to have answers. There was nothing wrong with my post. I think you just took it the wrong way.

 

[Michie]

This doesn't answer any of my questions, though.

.

 

[Michie]

I agree. How does this answer my questions?

.

 

[Michie]

Not sure how else to take it. You won't get answers.

 

[Meowzltov]

.

Okay, sorry if this came across the wrong way. It's okay if you don't have any answers. I never meant to imply that you HAD to answer my questions. Like I said, some people are the sort to speculate and others aren't, and both ways are fine. However, it IS puzzling to me that people replied who did not have answers to offer.

Can I ask a question in earnest? Did my post come across like a rhetorical question? IOW did it seem like I had a hidden agenda that embryos didn't have souls, and here were some tricky unanswerable questions to prove it? Because that's really not where I'm coming from at all. My questions were quite real. I'm just thinking that maybe I got posts about the basics in souls being received at conception because it was in doubt about whether I believed it or not.

 

[Meowzltov]

Not sure how else to take it. You won't get answers.

I'm sure I'm not the first Catholic to ask the questions. Others have found ways to deal with it. I'd like to know how they do. It will help me. Are you opposed to me asking the questions?

 

[MoonlessNight]

I'm sure I'm not the first Catholic to ask the questions. Others have found ways to deal with it. I'd like to know how they do. It will help me.

Thomas Aquinas thought that it was a sign of spiritual immaturity to expect to have answers and understanding in all situations. Spiritual maturity included an acceptance that there will be things that we do not understand. Note that he wasn't alone in this sort of position in the philosophical tradition, Socrates also stressed that we must be honest with the limitations of our knowledge and not be ashamed of our ignorance, if the alternative is pleasing but false explanations.

In the Christian tradition there are many questions of this nature. The trinity would be a big one. We can understand aspects of it, but no one understands it in full (indeed it is the position of most theologians that we cannot possibly know it in full). We know that it is true through divine revelation, but not necessarily why or how. The why and how are far less important questions though when it comes to our purpose in life.

I don't want this to come across as insulting. It's only very recently that I've come to see the wisdom in this position, before this was one of the positions of Aquinas that bugged me the most. I also don't want this to come across as anti-rationalist. There are plenty of things that we can understand and understanding them is worthwhile. There are also many things that may at one time seem impossible to understand, but later developments in some area of knowledge of other make them easier to understand. For example in the time of Aquinas it was thought impossible to know whether the world had a beginning or whether it was eternal through reason and observation alone. Aquinas certainly believed that it was created, but only because it had been revealed, and he thought that was the only way that someone could be sure of the conclusion. Now that modern physics and cosmology have revealed much more about the grand history of the universe, we have much more evidence to point in the direction of a creation, so that a non-Christian could accept such a conclusion (though I don't think that we have enough to be sure of the conclusion, since after all we cannot observe whether there was a "before" the big bang or not).

The issue of ensoulment is a difficult area. It is clear that humans have rational, eternal, and individual souls, and that the matter that they are made of does not before they are created (i.e. an embryo will be made of individual atoms that were previously part of its mother or father, but before conception that collection of disparate atoms wouldn't have had a soul of any type). Understanding exactly how a soul comes to be is far more difficult. It may be that some future advances will give us more insight, as indeed embryology has already let us say far more about the matter than previous generations could. Or it could be that the matter is indeed a mystery in the theological sense. Either way there do not seem to be clear answers at this moment.

 

[Michie]

Not at all. But I think it is rude imo if like you say, we are just spitballing ideas and sharing thoughts to ask others that participate how that answers your questions. So what is it? Thoughts and ideas or answers?

I'm sure I'm not the first Catholic to ask the questions. Others have found ways to deal with it. I'd like to know how they do. It will help me. Are you opposed to me asking the questions?

 

[Michie]

I think David provided as close of an answer as far as operating under our faith and what the Church thinks. I do not know how anyone can answer such a question until we can learn how to identify a soul and measure when it comes and goes. I believe a scientist already tried that experiment if I remember correctly.

Okay, sorry if this came across the wrong way. It's okay if you don't have any answers. I never meant to imply that you HAD to answer my questions. Like I said, some people are the sort to speculate and others aren't, and both ways are fine. However, it IS puzzling to me that people replied who did not have answers to offer.

Can I ask a question in earnest? Did my post come across like a rhetorical question? IOW did it seem like I had a hidden agenda that embryos didn't have souls, and here were some tricky unanswerable questions to prove it? Because that's really not where I'm coming from at all. My questions were quite real. I'm just thinking that maybe I got posts about the basics in souls being received at conception because it was in doubt about whether I believed it or not.

 

[MoonlessNight]

I think David provided as close of an answer as far as operating under our faith and what the Church thinks. I do not know how anyone can answer such a question until we can learn how to identify a soul and measure when it comes and goes. I believe a scientist already tried that experiment if I remember correctly.

The soul is immaterial, so it can't be directly measured by trying to weight for it, or by examining spectrums of light or anything like that.

The soul is the first principle of life, so we can verify the presence of a soul by determining whether it is alive or dead. If it's alive it has a soul, if it's dead it does not. (Even this is actually easier said than done).

Of course, what we are really interested in is whether something has an immortal soul. A human soul is immortal because of its intellectual powers. Therefore we can verify that anything that has the power of intellection has an immortal soul. However it is possible to possess a power without using it; indeed most of the time we don't use most of the powers that we possess. This means that it is much more difficult to verify that something does not have an immortal soul, and as such it is difficult to tell exactly when it is gained.

Because of these problems I do not believe that science will ever be able to determine when an immortal soul is gained, but philosophy might be able to solve the problem eventually.

 

[Michie]

I personally think everything in Christianity points to a soul upon conception. Just from reading Scripture and our belief in the sanctity of life. Whether the child is carried to term is another question as far as the souls going back to its creator whether we knew it or not. After that? I have no idea.

 

[Meowzltov]

I think David provided as close of an answer as far as operating under our faith and what the Church thinks.

And other people had other ideas, which I thought were very insightful and helped me.

 

[Meowzltov]

Not at all. But I think it is rude imo if like you say, we are just spitballing ideas and sharing thoughts to ask others that participate how that answers your questions. So what is it? Thoughts and ideas or answers?

I asked questions and asked for peoples ideas. I did not ever question that God gives us our souls at conception, so I was confused when I received more than one post that informed me of this. Some I just didn't reply to, and some I was like, Okay, yeah of course, but what about my questions?

So we did have that misunderstanding, but I thought that was cleared up. I don't know why you are still upset. I honestly don't.

I like you Michie. I look forward to reading your news articles every day with my cup of tea! You make this forum what it is in a big way. I don't want problems with you. For whatever part I've played in irritating you, I apologize. I hasn't been my intent, but sometimes we do things without knowing it, and I know I'm not perfect. Sorry.