Posted on 07/12/2005 7:26:15 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Note: This commentary was delivered by Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley.
Much of the late John Paul II’s pontificate was spent clarifying what Catholicism did and, just as importantly, didn’t teach. These clarifications, especially in areas such as humanity, sexuality, and the sanctity of human life, often earned him the enmity of self-styled “progressives.”
There was one area, though, in which many of these same “progressives” hailed the late Pope: And that was evolution. His 1996 statement calling evolution “more than just a hypothesis” was seen as an acceptance of the compatibility of Darwinian evolution and Catholic faith. It turns out that John Paul II’s critics were as wrong about this as they were about the rest of his teaching.
Someone who should know is Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, the Archbishop of Vienna. Schönborn was chosen by John Paul II to be lead editor of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He is also close to the current pope, Benedict XVI.
In early April, Schönborn spoke with then-Cardinal Ratzinger and told him that he “would like to have a more explicit statement” about the Church’s position on evolution. Ratzinger encouraged Schönborn “to go on,” and the result was a piece that appeared July 7 in the New York Times.
From the start, Schönborn rejects the idea that the “neo-Darwinian dogma”—of “an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection”—is “somehow compatible with Christian faith.” While the Church leaves to “science many details about the history of life on earth,” it also “proclaims that by the light of reason the human intellect can readily and clearly discern purpose and design in the natural world . . . ”
He characterized attempts to deny or “explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology” as “ideology, not science” and “an abdication of human intelligence.”
Schönborn’s piece quickly provoked a reaction. “Leading Cardinal Redefines Church’s View on Evolution” was the New York Times headline a few days later. The headline should have read: “Catholics Mean It When They Recite the Nicene Creed on Sunday.”
After all, the Cardinal simply said that a Christian cannot consistently believe in God, the Creator of “all that is, seen and unseen,” while also believing that life is the result of “an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.”
Note that I said “Christian” and not just “Catholic.” The incompatibility Schönborn described is just as true for Protestants as Catholics. What’s more, the piece was the product of unprecedented cooperation between Cardinal Schönborn and the largely evangelical Discovery Institute. Discovery’s vice-president, Mark Ryland, “urged” Cardinal Schönborn to write the piece, and it was placed with the help of Discovery’s public relations firm.
In many respects, this effort is a vindication also of Chuck Colson’s sometimes controversial labors in “Evangelicals and Catholics Together.” Instead of allowing our opponents to play us off one another, we affirm our shared beliefs. Intelligent design can no longer be dismissed as just an evangelical issue. It’s a Christian one. Now that’s a “redefinition” worth celebrating.
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.