Nostra Aetate and Islam
#41
(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.

Good, you are blunt !  Indeed St Aquinas would have had a problem with abortion,, my use of language was poor.  However he would not have considered abortion before the infusion of theSoul to be actual murder of a human being.  He would have classed it as mortal sin - perhaps a form of contraception ?

Reply
#42
Back on track..........what was the point of Nostra Aetate ?
Reply
#43
to sow confusion and dull the wits of the faithful and to allow the smoke of satan to enter the fold
Reply
#44
(08-13-2009, 06:22 PM)Psalm26 Wrote: Good, you are blunt !  Indeed St Aquinas would have had a problem with abortion,, my use of language was poor.  However he would not have considered abortion before the infusion of theSoul to be actual murder of a human being.  He would have classed it as mortal sin - perhaps a form of contraception ?

No, it all depending on when "ensoulment" occurred. He believed, based on past works, that it was 40 days after conception. At this time, they didn't really know about the biology beyond the acts needed and the man's seed being necessary.

I mean, for them, the question about conception could have been answered by "at the time of ejaculation" because they had no way of knowing what a sperm was or how it worked. It can be compared to a computer. Ask an average person, "when does Windows start?". They may answer when you turn on the computer, when you hear a beep, when you see something on the screen, or when you see the Windows logo. Most people do not know how the boot process works so they can't really answer that question. Same with pre-biological knowledge of reproduction. In actuality, conception takes place a significant time after ejaculation.

So, St. Thomas's views were the exact same as the Church's now as far as I know, he just didn't know the biological processes. He would have condemned interfering with conception (contraception), and killing after ensoulment, now know to be at conception. Also, the biological facts would probably be very helpful to him, as he obviously would have no way to know anything about it.
Reply
#45
(08-12-2009, 07:52 PM)Psalm26 Wrote: No! I do not worship the same God as Muslims.
For the sake of perspective, Hilaire Belloc considered Islam a heresy of the Christian religion.  The following is from The Great Heresies:

‘Mohammedanism was a heresy: that is the essential point to grasp before going any further.  It began as a heresy, not as a new religion.  It was not a pagan contrast with the Church; it was not an alien enemy.  It was a perversion of Christian doctrine.  Its vitality and endurance soon gave it the appearance of a new religion, but those who were contemporary with its rise saw it for what it was – not a denial, but an adaptation and a misuse, of the Christian thing.  It differed from most (not from all) heresies in this, that it did not arise within the bounds of the Christian Church.  The chief heresiarch, Mohammed himself, was not, like most heresiarchs, a man of Catholic birth and doctrine to begin with.  He sprang from pagans.  But that which he taught was in the main Catholic doctrine, oversimplified.  It was the great Catholic world – on the frontiers of which he lived, whose influence was all around him and whose territories he had known by travel – which inspired his convictions . . .

‘The very foundation of his teaching was that prime Catholic doctrine, the unity and omnipotence of God. The attributes of God he also took over in the main from Catholic doctrine: the personal nature, the all-goodness, the timelessness, the providence of God, His creative power as the origin of all things, and His sustenance of all things by His power alone. The world of good spirits and angels and of evil spirits in rebellion against God was a part of the teaching, with a chief evil spirit, such as Christendom had recognized. Mohammed preached with insistence that prime Catholic doctrine, on the human side – the immortality of the soul and its responsibility for actions in this life, coupled with the consequent doctrine of punishment and reward after death . . .

‘He gave to Our Lord the highest reverence, and to Our Lady also, for that matter.  On the day of judgment (another Catholic idea which he taught) it was Our Lord, according to Mohammed, who would be the judge of mankind, not he, Mohammed.  The Mother of Christ, Our Lady, “the Lady Miriam” was ever for him the first of womankind.  His followers even got from the early fathers some vague hint of her Immaculate Conception.

‘But the central point where this new heresy struck home with a mortal blow against Catholic tradition was a full denial of the Incarnation . . .’
Reply
#46
(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? ...............

Even supposing the rational soul is not infused at conception (say at some later stage), Aquinas still didn't support abortion. Even granting it would not be ''murder'' if there is no human soul present, it would still be a grave offense against the natural law. I'd say you could consider it a form of birth control. This I gathered from a bioethics conf. I listened to, Fr Chad Ripperger the speaker.   
Reply
#47
(08-12-2009, 09:24 PM)Psalm26 Wrote: Amen, the Pope is boss...that is why I am Roman Catholic.  However, we can learn much from the East  :pray2:

Since the Catholic Faith is the fullness of truth, what actually can we learn from those who don't have the fullness of the truth?

-Matt
Reply
#48
Psalm26 Wrote:[size=10pt]No! I do not worship the same God as Muslims[/size].

Nostra Aetate was addressing those individuals who cry out to the Creator of the Universe, to the same God who appeared to Prophet Abraham, and who do so in honesty of heart, but for whatever accidents of history find themself in an Islamic society. Being a part of said society, it would be natural to be a Mohammedan.

Psalm26, I will address the other points you made, some good, others bad, as well as some other comments from fellow posters, later this evening when I have some more time.
Reply
#49
(08-19-2009, 06:37 AM)mattman1970 Wrote:
(08-12-2009, 09:24 PM)Psalm26 Wrote: Amen, the Pope is boss...that is why I am Roman Catholic.  However, we can learn much from the East  :pray2:

Since the Catholic Faith is the fullness of truth, what actually can we learn from those who don't have the fullness of the truth?

-Matt


Humility
Reply
#50
(08-19-2009, 12:28 AM)Lagrange Wrote:
(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? ...............

Even supposing the rational soul is not infused at conception (say at some later stage), Aquinas still didn't support abortion. Even granting it would not be ''murder'' if there is no human soul present, it would still be a grave offense against the natural law. I'd say you could consider it a form of birth control. This I gathered from a bioethics conf. I listened to, Fr Chad Ripperger the speaker.   


You are correct.  It would still be mortal sin even if it were not murder.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)