Live-Blogging with Jennifer Fulwiler

Editor, What I enjoy most when you print something Catholic, like “A Sexual Revolution,” are the negative reactions they elicit. You are brave for occasionally running articles that will hurt you financially.

Posting from the dotCommonweal blog and numerous responses. Here is the link: Shortcut to: http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=2121#comments Testimonials are very impressive but my concern is that we have a child dying of hunger every second in this world; a human being dying of disease every five seconds; the world, governments, churches have the resources to alleviate both of these and yet the RC Church fixates on abortion as a "higher level" of focus over starvation; disease e.g. HIV/AIDs; lack of safe drinking water (kills someone every 10 seconds in the world); threat of nuclear war; etc. The abortion issue in Catholic moral development simplistically had three sections: a) when does the soul inhabit the new life - the church is now moving towards conception but even science questions this.....40% of all conceptions abort spontaneously (are they in limbo - no, we got rid of limbo recently); b) science indicates that it takes roughly 14 days for the DNA (double helix configuration) to inhabit the fetus so that we can say there is life; c) political/social laws - reality is that most catholics do not support abortion but also do not support criminalization based on the fact that most abortions are driven by social, economic reasons...studies indicate that when the economy is doing well, abortions decrease; when marriages are supported; abortions decrease; when economic bad times and unemployment increase; so do abortions; d) the link between the church's view of contraception and abortion; and e) American separation of church and state - it is appropriate for religion to be pro-life but it may also be appropriate for the state to find ways to support all folks which may mean living with laws that are less than perfect.

Dear Lone Star Vanguard- To answer your question: when is the soul united in the human person? Conception or gestation...what does the Church say? “In Sacred Scripture the term "soul" often refers to human life or the entire human person. But, "soul" also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him, that by which he is most especially in God's image: "soul" signifies the spiritual principle in man. The human body shares in the dignity of "the image of God": it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit (CCC 263-4). The body and the soul are so integrally connected, that one cannot distinguish the difference between them. The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception states: “[I]n the first instant of [Her] creation and in the first instant of the soul's infusion into the body, was, by a special grace and privilege of God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, her Son and the Redeemer of the human race, preserved free from all stain of original sin.” What does this mean? Mary was free from sin at the first instant of her conception, but, moreover, since original sin is a condition of the soul (doctrine of the Church, see Council of Trent, DS 1510-1516) she had a soul at the “first instant” her conception. While the church doesn’t explicitly state that the infusion of the soul accrues at conception, it infers as such in the dogma.

You also stated that 40% of conceptions do not spontaneously abort. I have heard that term before. Sadly, the “wordsmiths of the Culture of Death” have described the failure of a pre-born baby to make it to gestation or birth as abortion. That is simply ridiculous. Simply stated, abortion and miscarriage is not the same thing. Limbo was not a doctrine of the Catholic Church. Limbo was always viewed in the realm of speculative theology, not dogma or doctrine. The dogma of heaven, hell of purgatory have been consistent (see CCC 1030-2).

This magazine has traditionally done an excellent work in highlighting both the issues involved in the various areas of suffering enumerated by the above poster as well as the ways in which the Church addresses all of these areas, in some cases, where the state does little or enables the situation. But, how to go about ''living'' as the poster proposes, with ''laws that are less than perfect'' if you are a fetus in your sixth month of existence, kicking away, when under the law you have no right to defend yourself against the possibility that it is decided that your existence represents a distinct inconvenience dictating termination? Obviously such an individual has no options to live and is completely at the whim of others. All this in one of the wealthiest nations in the world. Perhaps before it is proposed to other nations to implement the final soluation on its own citizenry we learn what is and what is not barbaric and in use on our own shores.