Saturday, June 09, 2007

Abortionists: my take

It goes beyond even that they are "non-human" (?) or "non-person", but more, non "child of God"...

The zygote itself, sans eyespot or even rudimentary brain stem is still one of God's "sparrows"; as the Gloria Patri states "all creatures, here below"...

The abortionist isn't trying to murder man; he is trying to murder God.

By the way, have you caught the latest? I am burning to the core of my existence. Intimidation, indeed!

SEV

4 comments:

Winnipeg Catholic said...

I certainly will not defend abortionists.

But I do want to discuss this zygote=God thing.

I agree with Augustine that the soul descends at the quickening. So I tend to 'feel' (as differentiated from 'believe') that the embryo is a chalice awaiting a soul.

Biologically speaking, fertilized eggs die all the time because they aren't viable, don't implant, implant in the wrong place, and for other reasons. Some 20% of pregnancies end in miscairage.

So I don't 'feel' that god would send souls from the Guff out into an embryo until the quickening.

And so this chalice, while very sacred, is not God himself any more than his other beautiful created matter. And from this perspective I do not think it is really appropriate to demonize the abortionist to the point that you would encourage murder of abortionists.

Let's remember that Christ forgave his murderers who 'know not what they do' and they infact were God-killers quite literally. He did not revoke their status as children of God. That is not for us to do, we are not the judge.

Xavier Martel said...

Who encouraged murder of the Abortionists? Standifer certainly didn't. His statement was that the abortionist is "trying to murder God".

As to this Guff & Quickening business, it's been too long since I've seen "The Seventh Sign" to really comment on Judaic apocryphal constructs.

While I have enormous respect for Augustine, he lacks the precision of Aquinas, and consequently I think it's much safer to base one's concept of conception on a Thomistic framework.

I know it would be very convenient if the embryo were nonhuman. But the great mystery of theodicy extends to the womb. We can no more understand why God permits embryos to die than we can understand why God permits plagues or tidal waves. But the fact that embryos die is not proof that they are nonhuman, any more than the fact of Indonesians dying is proof of their nonhumanity.

Christ asked the Father to forgive His killers, which is interesting, since in other scripture He Himself forgives in the name of the Father. This is a subtle point, but one worth pondering. Also, Christ's forgiveness was not unconditional - for example, Judas is not forgiven, nor are those who scandalize children. Being a fan of Augustine, I presume you are familiar with his descriptions of limited salvation and perdition from Civitas Dei.

I am not sure how you extrapolated from Standifer's comments on abortion that he somehow advocates nonforgiveness of Abortionists or violence against them. Regardless, it is one thing to encourage Christians to be meek, mild, and passive, and quite another to make a soteriological construct in which Abortionists are presupposed to be innocent little Eichmanns.

Winnipeg Catholic said...

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Standifer Evasto Visum said...

Well, this much I can say, and I "believe" with absolute veracity...I do not ponder on matters such as the will of God.

It is not my place to ponder such matters.

I am a mere servant in God's Kingdom. I am not a master of any piece of real estate (most especially, that real estate that houses the human soul).

I can no more tell you when that soul enters the vessel than I can tell you the color of God's eyes.

I can however tell you with what I believe to be as absolute certainty -- and that is...I do not dictate God's will.

I have no control over God's will.

He, like me (His lowly creation) has His own volition.

I would never in my wildest imaginings take it upon myself to interfere or in any way, shape, or fashion or consider myself a bell-weather of said will.

It is my humblest assumption that when God Himself deems the soul to exist in as much as a strand of DNA floating on celestial wind then, incontrovertably, that DNA is human (and, with soul - for where else does the soul emanate than FROM God, and ergo, a "part" of Him).

When HE determines to take a soul back into the realm of heaven (or, leave it in that in-between, or worse), again, it is at HIS volition - not my own.

My fundamental concern is not with the volition of God, but rather, with those lowly creatures (such as myself) who deem themselves worthy to communicate that will of God to the rest of us (and take that presumptive scepter).

Yes, Martel, I agree with you that our brother and our Father (Christ - first as human brother and teacher and then as the divine Father - once He was fully raised as the Son is raised to take over the family farm) was certainly capable of forgiving from the cross - but you see, even He, upon the cross teaches us once again. He teaches us that God is at the helm (always - and it is HIS will to be done).

God granted to the Apostles the ability to heal (they were conduits of God's powers); He granted them this power in the very same fashion that He grants us what we percieve as "life" (some know how to live it, and others struggle).

I cannot answer why His children are called home (and by our count, always prematurely so)...I just don't know.

The fictionist me likes to hypothesize that perhaps He needs to call certain souls home like some old, God-forsaken man, lonely and alone in a rocking chair must call the grandchildren round his feet for a story.

Yes, it is a cheesy concept (and simplistic, overtly so) - but I notice when studying the Master that many of His parables were equally simplistic.

"A hypocrit", you say...and you would be right. I am that (and a horrible sinner as well - never been very diligent at either hypocrisy or sinning).

But in addition, I am God's child. And I must tell you, I am very happy that it will be HE who calls me home one day (and not the filthy hands of an abortionist - which has the potential to cast my soul adrift, like that strand of DNA - and then where would I be? A sorry piece of flotsm and jetsm to be analyzed, categorized and marginalized by some dastardly liberal calling himself a "scientist", I "feel" quite certain---there I would be, under his microscope, where he would be absolutely certain beyond the shadow of doubt that it is I who built the global hothouse (and some darned-fine tomatoes to boot).

Not a single one of us has the right to speak for God. Not one of us is worthy to wash His feet, or to carry His shoes.

We can, however, convey to others what He has taught us (each of us).

He has taught me that life is precious. He has taught me to live it, up to the standards that He would live it (were He able).

As to the "zygote = God 'thing' " ... I think I must have mislead or misthought - I cannot equate God to anything in this realm as this realm is a part of His divine creation and as such, subordinate to God - it is the equivalent of a blaspheme...what I meant by the statement is simply that His creations are a part of Him, just as poetry is a "part" of the writer.

We are His children, and just as the biblical characters of the old testament, we are subject to precisely the same treatment as the families were accostomed to then.

Adam and Eve were punished...Cain was punished - even Moses was punished (rebuked).

My intent has never been (nor will it ever be) to harm humans (or discern their "just" punishment - justice being something I think only God can perform to prime effect).

It is, you see, no differnt than the concern some have that I will bring civil suit against someone for some infraction against my personage - bolderdash! I am a conservative who preaches FOR tort reform.

I would no more harm an abortionist (thus violating my principles regarding the sanctity of God-given souls- which I do not own, which means, I should not harm or kill or take as a slave or something as rediculous and stupid as that!) than would I bring suit against some party (again, in violation of my stand on the issue).

So, evil-doing liberals - I am fair game. Bring me into your courts wrapped in your constitutional finest - I dare you! The Daniel Webster in me dares you, you devils you!

I will have some fun then (for sure).

As to this abortion thing, I will close with this...

"Consider the lillies of the field...for even they are not arrayed as ye".

You old strand of DNA, you!