it can be seen for example that the Church has not said when ensoulment occurs
I have not heard a convincing explanation for assuming that a zygote should be treated as a soul considering the high number of zygotes that don’t implant or get aborted early on in the first trimester
“ensoulment” occurs when the sperm and ova meet and a new human being is ‘conceived’; that is why the documents (which I know you have seen many times on other threads) speak of the dignity of life “from conception to natural death”.
The number of zygotes which do not implant or otherwise have absolutely nothing to do with ‘when’ ensoulment occurs or why a zygote should not be treated as a soul.
Does a zygote, all things considered, in the natural course of biology, go on throughout the pregnancy and result in a birth?
Suppose that zygote has a birth defect but manages to implant etc. and be born. Is the child less than human because of the defect? No.
Suppose the zygote implanted but somehow the pregnancy involved a termination, perhaps by incompetent cervix. Does that fetus then become ‘unsouled’ because of the termination?
So then why would any ‘natural’ as opposed to artificial or manmade complication, which resulted in the unfortunate termination of the pregnancy, make the fetus, at any stage of its development, from the first union of sperm and ova forward, “lack” a soul?
Perhaps because I am a mother myself, and had the joy of pregnancy three times, and perhaps because I am the mother of one disabled child, I understand not just ‘theoretically’ but ‘practically’ pregnancy, from conception (yes, this can be ‘felt’) to birth. The child is as real to me, as uniquely human in its new DNA, from the second that conception occurred.