Nostra Aetate and Islam
#31
(08-12-2009, 10:15 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: no i would like to chat about it with others more dense then me.


Lol. It is in Summa somewhere ! quote my post if you like.  I am sure a more learned person than myself would be able to tell you chapter and verse, but I must be off to the land of nod soon.

Night folks, it's been emotional :-*


somewhere around here ......http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1118.htm
Reply
#32
sip sip
Reply
#33
(08-12-2009, 09:45 PM)Psalm26 Wrote:
(08-12-2009, 09:43 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: how can u possibly say what u just said and look yourself in the mirror?
sip sip
St Aquinas may not have had a problem with abortion at an early stage.  Do you need me to quote? ...............

He said that based on earlier works which were not disproved in his life. Being a saint and philosopher does not mean he is scientifically endowed. His ideas are not dogma.

Also, he may have rectified his past error: http://thepracticingcatholic.wordpress.c...ortionist/

St. Thomas is not dead. He, like all humans, has an immortal soul.
Reply
#34
It is chapter 118.

Here is a summary from new advent !

St. Thomas's doctrine is briefly as follows:

•the rational soul, which is one with the sensitive and vegetative principle, is the form of the body. This was defined as of faith by the Council of Vienne of 1311;
•the soul is a substance, but an incomplete substance, i.e. it has a natural aptitude and exigency for existence in the body, in conjunction with which it makes up the substantial unity of human nature;
•though connaturally related to the body, it is itself absolutely simple, i.e. of an unextended and spiritual nature. It is not wholly immersed in matter, its higher operations being intrinsically independent of the organism;
•the rational soul is produced by special creation at the moment when the organism is sufficiently developed to receive it. In the first stage of embryonic development, the vital principle has merely vegetative powers; then a sensitive soul comes into being, educed from the evolving potencies of the organism -- later yet, this is replaced by the perfect rational soul, which is essentially immaterial and so postulates a special creative act. Many modern theologians have abandoned this last point of St. Thomas's teaching, and maintain that a fully rational soul is infused into the embryo at the first moment of its existence.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14153a.htm



And here is the chapter  from summa> http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1118.htm


Quote away knuckles :)


:sleep:

Reply
#35
(08-12-2009, 09:37 PM)Psalm26 Wrote: They permit divorce under certain cirumstances - don't exagerate !
I didn't exagerate. It doesn't matter what the reasons are, it is clearly wrong. They justify it by calling it "mercy".

They allow people who are sacramentally married to remarry, with full knowledge of the state of the marriage.

Quote:I disagree with the Orthodox in their ambiguous stance on divorce, contraception and other modern issues such as stem cell research.  That is why we need a Pope, that is why need a magesterium......still we can learn from them. The only reason why they have problems addressing modern issues is because they believe they can use the early Church Fathers writings in guidance for any modern situation.
They select the ones they want.

They conveniently forget:

Quote:Εἰς μίαν, Ἁγίαν, Καθολικὴν καὶ Ἀποστολικὴν Ἐκκλησίαν.

From way back in the early days of the Church.
Reply
#36
(08-12-2009, 10:45 PM)Psalm26 Wrote: And here is the chapter  from summa> http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1118.htm

Quote away knuckles :)

:sleep:

You said:
Quote:St Aquinas may not have had a problem with abortion at an early stage.  Do you need me to quote? ...............

That is false. St. Thomas was just mistaken on when ensoulment occurred. He says to kill after ensoulment is murder, and we all know now when that happens. He was right about the theology, wrong about the biology.


Reply
#37
(08-12-2009, 10:48 PM)Rosarium Wrote:
(08-12-2009, 10:45 PM)Psalm26 Wrote: And here is the chapter  from summa> http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1118.htm

Quote away knuckles :)

:sleep:

You said:
Quote:St Aquinas may not have had a problem with abortion at an early stage.  Do you need me to quote? ...............

That is false. St. Thomas was just mistaken on when ensoulment occurred. He says to kill after ensoulment is murder, and we all know now when that happens. He was right about the theology, wrong about the biology.

Thank you Ros!
Reply
#38
(08-12-2009, 10:48 PM)Rosarium Wrote: That is false. St. Thomas was just mistaken on when ensoulment occurred. He says to kill after ensoulment is murder, and we all know now when that happens. He was right about the theology, wrong about the biology.

In the fifties I still learned that the are different theological opinions, when and how the individual immortal souls are created.

The only thing what we know for sure, since the Council of Ephesus, that the Personality of the Second divine Person united with
human body at the time of the Annuntiation. We also know that He has separate human and divine intellect and will, and His intellect and
power was guided later by the Second Divine Person through the hypostatic union.

The abortion is considered murder because the zygote is determined to be full human person without any further intentional interruption
If you throw out a piani from the third floor knowing that someone will come a few minutes later to the point where the piano will fall,
is murder, regardless of the fact that the person hit was not exactly below the window in the moment of throwing the piano out. You are responsible for the consequences in the expactable future.

In time of Thomas Aquinas the lack of the Children was issue, not the abundance of the fetuses. Any child was considered the
blessing of God.  Until the modern era, this was so, with a short exception in the Greco-Roman world: every drop of sperm and
every liveable featur was necessary for the moderated multiplication of the human beings. In time of St Thomas the European
population was sharply decreasing due to the epidemics, unlikely that Thomas Aquinas would allow intentional abortion
Reply
#39
(08-13-2009, 03:35 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: Thank you Ros!

???
Reply
#40
(08-13-2009, 05:58 PM)glgas Wrote:
(08-12-2009, 10:48 PM)Rosarium Wrote: That is false. St. Thomas was just mistaken on when ensoulment occurred. He says to kill after ensoulment is murder, and we all know now when that happens. He was right about the theology, wrong about the biology.

In the fifties I still learned that the are different theological opinions, when and how the individual immortal souls are created.

The only thing what we know for sure, since the Council of Ephesus, that the Personality of the Second divine Person united with
human body at the time of the Annuntiation. We also know that He has separate human and divine intellect and will, and His intellect and
power was guided later by the Second Divine Person through the hypostatic union.

The abortion is considered murder because the zygote is determined to be full human person without any further intentional interruption
If you throw out a piani from the third floor knowing that someone will come a few minutes later to the point where the piano will fall,
is murder, regardless of the fact that the person hit was not exactly below the window in the moment of throwing the piano out. You are responsible for the consequences in the expactable future.

In time of Thomas Aquinas the lack of the Children was issue, not the abundance of the fetuses. Any child was considered the
blessing of God.  Until the modern era, this was so, with a short exception in the Greco-Roman world: every drop of sperm and
every liveable featur was necessary for the moderated multiplication of the human beings. In time of St Thomas the European
population was sharply decreasing due to the epidemics, unlikely that Thomas Aquinas would allow intentional abortion

I like the piano analogy.  You are quite  right.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)