Is the Roman Catechism without any error?

Consider this:

But what surpasses the order of nature and human comprehension is, that as soon as the Blessed Virgin assented to the announcement of the Angel in these words, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done unto me according to thy word, the most sacred body of Christ was immediately formed, and to it was united a rational soul enjoying the use of reason; and thus in the same instant of time He was perfect God and perfect man. That this was the astonishing and admirable work of the Holy Ghost cannot be doubted; for according to the order of nature the rational soul is united to the body only after a certain lapse of time.

If I, as a Catholic, claim that the rational soul is united to one's body at the exact moment of conception, am I a heretic?

Hi Don,


I still pray for your father at times as I remember you and others from this forum I pray for my deceased parents, and deceased loved ones every day along with many others. No prayer is ever without great worth as they are diverted to other causes if they cannot help the one they were intended.

Is Jehanne a heretic for believing that the rational soul is united to one's body at the exact moment of conception? Heavens no ! This is what every Catholic that I have ever discussed with believes. This is what I believe. Unless the church defines and declares this specifically as an article of faith to be believed by all Catholics, I say keep on believing as you do. You probably extracted your quote from the Council of Trent? I mean can you imagine a three year that was baptized and died running to God and his soul yelling to him slow down until I catch up with you. For me that would be hilarious.
The word heretic is a highly over used word normally uttered in a time of frustration or anger. We live in a time where there are certainly heretics amongst us but lets table that for now. You are in my humble opinion a devout Catholic who loves his faith in search of truth.


I love what Pope Benedict XVI said:


"With regard to the embryo in the womb, science itself highlights its autonomy capable of interaction with the mother, the coordination of biological processes, the continuity of development, the growing complexity of the organism. This is not an accumulation of biological material, but a new living being, dynamic and wonderfully ordered, a new unique human being. So was Jesus in Mary's womb, so it was for all of us in our mother’s womb…there is no reason not to consider him a person from conception.

Benedict XVI

First Vespers of the First Sunday of Advent - Homily

November 27, 2010"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++==
I also like this post on Rorate Caeli
"The Roman Catechism is not infallible on each and every point. The opinion it expresses regarding delayed ensoulment was the generally accepted theological opinion and, I believe, the common teaching of the Church, but was never taught infallibly or irreformably. It is based on the infallible teaching that the rational soul is the form of the body. In the past, it was believed that the body was "formless" or "unformed" in its earliest stages of existence, and that therefore the soul could not yet have been infused. (Delayed ensoulment was also based upon how God created Adam -- body first, then "breathing" in the soul after that -- and upon an erroneous Septuagint translation of a passage in Exodus that referred to an "unformed" fetus.) Today, however, we know that the human body is never at any time formless or unformed, but exhibits form from the moment of the fusion of the genetic material of sperm and ovum produces a new human organism (what is normally called conception). Consequently, even though the Church has not defined "soul infused at the formation of pre-embryo" as correct, the old delayed ensoulment opinion has fallen out of favor as logically and philosophically unsupported"

God Bless you,

George

Jehanne wrote:Consider this:

But what surpasses the order of nature and human comprehension is, that as soon as the Blessed Virgin assented to the announcement of the Angel in these words, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done unto me according to thy word, the most sacred body of Christ was immediately formed, and to it was united a rational soul enjoying the use of reason; and thus in the same instant of time He was perfect God and perfect man. That this was the astonishing and admirable work of the Holy Ghost cannot be doubted; for according to the order of nature the rational soul is united to the body only after a certain lapse of time.

If I, as a Catholic, claim that the rational soul is united to one's body at the exact moment of conception, am I a heretic?

Jehanne,

You would be a heretic only if the Church ever formalized this non-infallible doctrine (more the common opinion) of the Catechism of Trent (#1030) as a doctrine of faith, either dogmatically or definitively. In fact, we know she did neither (and could do neither), and with the help of biology would come to the firm belief that "The doctrine of the faith affirms that the spiritual and immortal [rational] soul is created immediately by God." (CCC 382)

Now, if one were to suggest that the soul is not created immediately by God at conception, but only upon quickening, is that person a heretic?

What say you?

It's good to see your acknowledgement that not every single proposition in the Roman Catechism has a de fide ecclesiastica qualifier to it, which means, in fact, that some teachings of that Catechism are, indeed, reformable and have, in fact, been reformed.  To cut to the core of "Feeneyism" (at least as far as the Saint Benedict Centers are concerned), what level of theological certaintity would you attach to the following proposition:

Since the Law of Baptism became obligatory upon all human beings, there are souls in Paradise or Purgatory who lack its character.

1. de fide -- Divine revelations with the highest degree of certainty, considered Divine revelation (and infallibly asserted)
2. fides ecclesiastica -- Church teachings, which have been definitively decided on by the Magisterium in an infallible manner
3. sententia fidei proxima -- Church teachings, which are generally accepted as divine revelation but not defined as such by the magisterium
4. sententia certa -- Church teachings which the Magisterium clearly decided for, albeit without claiming infallibility
5. sententia communis -- Teachings which are popular but within the free range of theological research
6. sententia probabilis -- Teachings with low degree of certainty
7. sententia bene fundata -- A well-reasoned teaching which does, however, not arise to being called probable
8. opinio tolerata -- Opinions tolerated, but discouraged, within the Catholic Church

Jehanne wrote:It's good to see your acknowledgement that not every single proposition in the Roman Catechism has a de fide ecclesiastica qualifier to it, which means, in fact, that some teachings of that Catechism are, indeed, reformable and have, in fact, been reformed.

So, you're not going to respond to my question.  

MRyan wrote:Now, if one were to suggest that the soul is not created immediately by God at conception, but only upon quickening, is that person a heretic?

What say you?

I would place such an assertion in the sententia bene fundata category.

I submit for Mryan's help and comment.

What is sooner than the quickening in light of:

- In pregnancy terms, quickening is the moment in pregnancy when the pregnant woman starts to feel or perceive fetal movements in the uterus.

- God said that " I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb".

_ We hold as sacred and true that life begins at conception

- We say amongst many exchanges with those entering an abortion clinic to please consider your baby's soul.

- A female and male(in this case not practicing Catholics or at least the female is not) take a morning after abortion pill but unknown to everyone but God she is pregnant.

and so we pray,

George

Dueling questions from Mike and Jehanne. That’s like dynamite and with a gasoline sauce.

Mike, George, Jehanne - A blessed Lent to you all.

Mike - owe you an email, bud. Sorry. Will do shortly.

George Brenner wrote:  
I also like this post on Rorate Caeli:

"The Roman Catechism is not infallible on each and every point. The opinion it expresses regarding delayed ensoulment was the generally accepted theological opinion and, I believe, the common teaching of the Church, but was never taught infallibly or irreformably. It is based on the infallible teaching that the rational soul is the form of the body. In the past, it was believed that the body was "formless" or "unformed" in its earliest stages of existence, and that therefore the soul could not yet have been infused. (Delayed ensoulment was also based upon how God created Adam -- body first, then "breathing" in the soul after that -- and upon an erroneous Septuagint translation of a passage in Exodus that referred to an "unformed" fetus.) Today, however, we know that the human body is never at any time formless or unformed, but exhibits form from the moment of the fusion of the genetic material of sperm and ovum produces a new human organism (what is normally called conception). Consequently, even though the Church has not defined "soul infused at the formation of pre-embryo" as correct, the old delayed ensoulment opinion has fallen out of favor as logically and philosophically unsupported"

George, excellent summary - thanks for that.