Response to Eagleton
Contrary to the implication of former Senator Thomas Eagleton in his May 21, 2006, Commentary, St. Thomas Aquinas did not teach that the human embryo is something less than human.
It has become routine now, in the stem cell debate, to throw out assertions that certain writings of Sts. Augustine and Aquinas are not consistent with the authentic Catholic teaching on the grave sinfulness of abortion and destruction of pre-nascent life. These saints taught the serious sinfulness of deliberate destruction of innocent life at any stage and they believed that the child in the womb (they were not aware of zygotes and embryos, as such) was human from the start. (See Anne B. Gardiner's article in the New Oxford Review, 2004.) In a published interview on the subject (National Catholic Reporter, Jan. 17, 2003), bioethics expert and professor Father Brian Johnstone, CSSR, stated, "There was never any question (in Augustine and Aquinas) of whether terminating a pregnancy was sinful, but rather what kind of sin it was in the early stages -- homicide or something else."The tortuous logic of the claim originates in a 1970 article by Father Joseph F. Donceel, SJ. Father Donceel uses the medieval biology of St. Thomas Aquinas to question the arguments used by Catholics in support of the teaching identifying abortion as a killing of an innocent human being. The same logic is being used to justify the destruction of embryonic humans.Father Donceel used the outdated biology to assert that in the first several weeks the fetus went through two prior stages, possessing first a vegetative soul then an animal soul, before becoming human. More recent arguments arising out of Father Donceel's musings have gone so far as to assert that no human person exists until the eighth month when the brain is developed to a point when it is capable of a certain level of knowledge.However, in a timely refutation of Father Donceel's archaic analysis, David Granfield wrote that according to Thomistic philosophy a rational soul is infused at the moment of fertilization ("Abortion Decision," 1971). The history of the matter and the unbroken tradition condemning the destruction of human embryos and fetuses is much clearer than those who challenge the Church on this issue would allow. In his book titled "Contraception," John T. Noonan reviews the historical evidence beginning with the very earliest Christian writing we have, the Didache, and continuing on through the Letter of Barnabas from the early second century which holds, "You shall not kill the fetus by an abortion or commit infanticide." Referring to such documents and numerous other writings the testimony of history is so strong it leads Noonan to conclude, "The Christians taught that all life must be inviolate, and, using the terms the law reserved for the killing of adults, they charged that not only the destruction of existing life but the interruption of the life-giving process was homicide and parricide. They were led to attach sanctity not only to life but to the life-giving process."
Senator Eagleton and others need to be clear that the authentic Catholic position regarding the destruction of the life of the unborn in the womb applies equally to the destruction of embryonic humans outside the womb. Moreover, the canonical penalty of excommunication for deliberate abortion applies equally to the destruction of human embryos.
Rev. Edward J. Richard, MS, DThM, JD, is a professor of Moral Theology, Vice-Rector and Dean of Students at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary and the Director of the Paul VI Pontifical Institute of Catechetical and Pastoral Studies in St. Louis MO (Part of this commentary comes from an earlier article in the St. Louis Review, Jan. 14, 2005.)
It has become routine now, in the stem cell debate, to throw out assertions that certain writings of Sts. Augustine and Aquinas are not consistent with the authentic Catholic teaching on the grave sinfulness of abortion and destruction of pre-nascent life. These saints taught the serious sinfulness of deliberate destruction of innocent life at any stage and they believed that the child in the womb (they were not aware of zygotes and embryos, as such) was human from the start. (See Anne B. Gardiner's article in the New Oxford Review, 2004.) In a published interview on the subject (National Catholic Reporter, Jan. 17, 2003), bioethics expert and professor Father Brian Johnstone, CSSR, stated, "There was never any question (in Augustine and Aquinas) of whether terminating a pregnancy was sinful, but rather what kind of sin it was in the early stages -- homicide or something else."The tortuous logic of the claim originates in a 1970 article by Father Joseph F. Donceel, SJ. Father Donceel uses the medieval biology of St. Thomas Aquinas to question the arguments used by Catholics in support of the teaching identifying abortion as a killing of an innocent human being. The same logic is being used to justify the destruction of embryonic humans.Father Donceel used the outdated biology to assert that in the first several weeks the fetus went through two prior stages, possessing first a vegetative soul then an animal soul, before becoming human. More recent arguments arising out of Father Donceel's musings have gone so far as to assert that no human person exists until the eighth month when the brain is developed to a point when it is capable of a certain level of knowledge.However, in a timely refutation of Father Donceel's archaic analysis, David Granfield wrote that according to Thomistic philosophy a rational soul is infused at the moment of fertilization ("Abortion Decision," 1971). The history of the matter and the unbroken tradition condemning the destruction of human embryos and fetuses is much clearer than those who challenge the Church on this issue would allow. In his book titled "Contraception," John T. Noonan reviews the historical evidence beginning with the very earliest Christian writing we have, the Didache, and continuing on through the Letter of Barnabas from the early second century which holds, "You shall not kill the fetus by an abortion or commit infanticide." Referring to such documents and numerous other writings the testimony of history is so strong it leads Noonan to conclude, "The Christians taught that all life must be inviolate, and, using the terms the law reserved for the killing of adults, they charged that not only the destruction of existing life but the interruption of the life-giving process was homicide and parricide. They were led to attach sanctity not only to life but to the life-giving process."
Senator Eagleton and others need to be clear that the authentic Catholic position regarding the destruction of the life of the unborn in the womb applies equally to the destruction of embryonic humans outside the womb. Moreover, the canonical penalty of excommunication for deliberate abortion applies equally to the destruction of human embryos.
Rev. Edward J. Richard, MS, DThM, JD, is a professor of Moral Theology, Vice-Rector and Dean of Students at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary and the Director of the Paul VI Pontifical Institute of Catechetical and Pastoral Studies in St. Louis MO (Part of this commentary comes from an earlier article in the St. Louis Review, Jan. 14, 2005.)
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home