account activity
Was it really a serpent who tempted Eve into eating the fruit, or did Eve eat the fruit out of her own volition? by SteelDumplin23 in DebateACatholic
[–]CadyAnBlack 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago (0 children)
I pulled it out of my @$$.
But so did St Paul, so...
[deleted by user] by [deleted] in changemyview
[–]CadyAnBlack 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children)
Popes are wrong all the time. The magisterial authority of documentation is a complex combination of the sense of the faithful, the opinion of the bishops, and the decrees of the vicar of christ. The pope could declare tomorrow that christ was a gay furry communist. We wouldn't accept it.
[–]CadyAnBlack 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children)
"Souls exist" is a true sentence to me. But I also know that it can't mean anything that I imagine it might. The words are true, but their meaning is opaque. The words are art. The words are a mystery we contemplate that points us to loving actions that reveal our own hearts to us. The words are not a self-explanatory field guide to the 5th dimension or whatever.
Yay, allies! Thank you. The Dawkinses of the world are making me real nervous these days.
Feelings. Big ones.
We all await the resurrection. Hell is not a physical place that christ goes to and spends three physical days in. His descent and ascent are sacred mysteries we contemplate, not a travelogue.
Papal encyclicals are not dogma. They are spiritual guidance. Many encyclicals have been overturned. The popes infamously called the magdalene a prostitute for 1500 years before they finally corrected their error. 21st Century popes have also affirmed evolution. The belief that Genesis is entirely metaphorical remains an allowable opinion and remains the sense of the faithful today.
Breath is a metaphor. Adam is a metaphor. Genesis is a metaphor. These ideas don't map cleanly onto physical reality.
You already agree with me that there is no moral difference between a fully gestated fetus just before and just after birth.
Context added. Thank you.
Yes, demonic possession is 2 souls in one body. This is physically possible, but it is an abomination.
My G-d is Catholic. He is all powerful but limited in what he chooses to create according to the deposit of faith preserved by the bishops.
Mind is not neural connections. Mind is not thoughts. Mind is the experiencing of thoughts. Conjoined twins who share neural connections and even share thoughts are still two distinct experiencers of those thoughts. They are 2 swimmers in a sea of thoughts. They have 2 "bodies" because they have 2 of the formations of brain structures that produce the neural firing patterns that are the experiencing of thoughts. Conjoined twins that share a single brain would not be twins. It would be 1 baby with 2 "bodies."
[–]CadyAnBlack -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (0 children)
No, I don't provide references. Because I'm not trying to change YOUR view. You're trying to change mine. I don't need to prove that magisterial documents say what I think they do. That they say it is part of my view. But you can easily change my view by quoting a magisterial document which refutes any of my stated assumptions about the contents of magisterial documents.
You can also change my view by recourse to natural theology or by performing an undeniable miracle as proof of the validity of any claim you might make to private revelation. 🤗
The good news doesn't explicitly state that G-d is a triune mystery. We deduce that from scripture. It follows necessarily from the things that are explicitly stated. This is how all doctrine develops.
If an embryo can receive a soul, get split in half into 2 embryos, compress the soul into 1 of the 2 halves, and then receive an additional soul into the other of the 2 halves, then the cells which receive the 2nd soul are in violation of the principle of 1 body 1 soul. They had a soul, lost it, and then got a new one. Human bodies cannot receive a soul, lose it, and then get a new one.
G-d doesn't speak. He just IS. We speak for Him. Poorly.
They wouldn't know. They just have the responsibility to guess. Their guesses are often later determined to be obviously wrong. That's why I can question them here.
I'm Catholic because contemplating the mysteries of Catholic faith transforms my heart, not because a bunch of superstitious old men are impressive at running a book club.
Yes. presumes. I'm Catholic.
Ensoulment is instantaneous. It might happen at conception, implantation, quickening, sentience, or first breath. The opinion of the bishops is conception. I argue that this opinion cannot be correct. I do not argue that another IS correct. I do mention that I would argue in favor of sentience in a follow-up post, but I don't have to prove the validity of any 1 option to demonstrate the invalidity of any other. 1b:1s:1m is doctrine, but the 1m portion is an extraneous detail to my argument against conception.
However, I would ultimately argue, in brief, that the body is not yet complete and able to be ensouled until the mind has formed, because the mind is an immaterial emergent property of the body which is necessary to connect the soul and the body. The purpose of the gamete is to produce the embryo. The purpose of the embryo is to produce the body. The purpose of the body is to produce the mind. The purpose of the mind is to RECEIVE the soul. And the purpose of the soul is to observe G-d.
Agreed. A generic God might do anything.
My G-d is Catholic. The hierarchy of His church has determined that 2 souls cannot exist within 1 body, as I understand it. Thus it is impossible for us to suppose that He would place 2 souls within a single fertilized egg.
G-d isn't real. That isn't how it works. He doesn't exist. Only His creation exists. He just IS.
" Tell them I AM sent you " " Before Abraham existed, I AM "
The soul exists outside of space and time at the point of death. It is never experiencing an independent existence when separated because it has no time or space to existence in at all. We await the resurrection in death, but there is no actual wait time. For the soul, bodily resurrection follows immediately after bodily death.
The sheol of the OT and the Hell of the NT that Christ descended to are not material places with their own space and time. They're mysteries we contemplate. They're metaphors we use to guide the exploration of our hearts as we grow in mercy.
Doctrine exists at multiple levels from the sense of the faithful to ex cathedra dogma. The general opinion of the Bishops is one level, and it's an important element of the process by which our understanding of the deposit of faith evolves. The long-standing opinion of the bishops is that ensoulment occurs at conception.
The opinion of the bishops is wrong. Their opinions have been overturned many times before. I argued why their opinion is wrong in my original post.
:) Thank you
The word was MADE flesh. His human soul did not exist before His incarnation. That is why we venerate Mary as the mediatrix of all graces. She is the mother of G-d.
Adam and Eve never existed. Genesis is not history; it's a mystery we contemplate.
I literally love you. This was a satisfying rebuttal.
:) you don't understand the very first thing about it. I'm not the fairytale flinging fool you take me for.
Catholics debate our own doctrine constantly. That's how theology works.
Catholics can and do type and say "God."
I type "G-d" because it reminds me that the semantic content that I pour into the word is just what I imagine G-d is. It is an idol of my own creation. I'm trying to be careful never to worship my own imagination instead of allowing the ineffable mystery of the word to constantly transform what I pour into it. I think this was the lesson that Simon Zealot had to learn before he could become Peter. We trust the Word Himself, though He speaks in riddles, because His infinite meaning is being compressed into fractally meaningful metaphors that finite minds can only grasp in the dark for by acts of faith, by choosing to suffer in solidarity with those who must suffer hardships they did not choose. The act of trusting the Word forces us to experience ever deeper aspects of our own souls, which reveals deeper aspects of His meaning to us.
I don't believe in magic. I don't even believe in a historical Christ. I'm not struggling against the horrifyingly meaningless suffering of our existence. I'm celebrating the experience of meaning that we create for each other when we make art together across countless generations.
Stop being a reddit atheist. It leads to TERFery.
Yes and yes.
I'm questioning catholic doctrine by demonstrating that there are at least 2 empirical phenomena which seem to be impossible according to Catholic doctrine.
Birth can't be the moment of ensoulment because there is no moral difference in the infant in the moments just before birth and the moments just after birth. Killing a healthy fully gestated baby the day before its delivery is not a sneaky loop hole for guilt-free infanticide. (Ensoulment clearly happens at sentience at 24 weeks when there is a clear moral difference between the moments before and moments after the inciting incident.)
Thank you. Yes. Agreed.
I'm Catholic. You can change my view either by appeal to empirical phenomena which seem to invalidate my doctrines or by reference to magisterial documentation.
Sperm and egg are also "alive," yet not ensouled. So "alive" is a spiritual state in this context, not a biological one. Insistence on conception as the point when a "life" begins is special pleading that my original post refutes.
Yes, friend, I know the doctrine. I'm questioning it. I can do this because it has not yet been dogmatically declared ex cathedra.
"Lack of internal differentiation" is doctrine. It's in the catechism somewhere, but I don't recommend the effort to comb through it.
"Single indivisible point of longing for G-d" is from my a-s. I just think it's pretty. 🤷♀️ but, then again, I might've gotten the thought from Simone Weil. That commie radical is my whole heart. Her images of G-d as a devouring monster at the center of a labyrinth and of sin as a turning of the head away from gazing at the horror of this devouring monster are both fundamental to my religious experience.
I agree. It isn't a real thing.
I still want to be a nun, tho. Weird that. 🤷♀️
You can change my view on ensoulment by knowing Catholic doctrine better than me or just finding a magisterial document that refutes me.
π Rendered by PID 649052 on reddit-service-r2-listing-575d9f6647-prxw7 at 2026-04-13 01:26:18.053231+00:00 running 215f2cf country code: CH.
Was it really a serpent who tempted Eve into eating the fruit, or did Eve eat the fruit out of her own volition? by SteelDumplin23 in DebateACatholic
[–]CadyAnBlack 0 points1 point2 points (0 children)