Posted on 09/04/2006 8:42:37 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
I know he's right.
I do agree completely, that so far, this thread has been refreshingly devoid of any ad hominems...but the day is still relatively young...I hope this thread remains as such...
Beautiful, thanks so much SJ!
> I do agree completely, that so far, this thread has been refreshingly devoid of any ad hominems...but the day is still relatively young...I hope this thread remains as such...
Same here. I must admit I was really surprised to see religious opposition to evolution, given my Catholic school training on how science beautifully complemented my faith.
I'd love to see the rancor and bitterness fall away from this debate. Hey, dreams come true! :-)
I am not a Catholic, and really dont know a lot about Catholicism...however, when I came to these CREVO threads, I immediately did pick, from other posters experiences within the Catholic Church, and from links provided to me, concerning the Catholic Church and evolution, that indeed, the Catholic Church has very clearly thought out this supposed problem, and has dealt with it in a very wise way...
Paley influenced the English divines who were interested in geology and whose views were sometimes called "gnostic". That's where Huxley got the tag "agnostic."
No, he does not claim special competence in the field. This is not inconsistent with Catholic atitudes since 1859. Not until the problem of modernism in religion came up and scholars began to treat the Scriptures as myth did the papacy say anything about the matter. Newman had no problem with Darwin, so long as he was discussing evidence. It was no such much Darwin as Darwinism that is the rub.
Other technical types who acquired an overwhelming interest in theological matters later:
Pascal
Newton
Swedenborg
Whatever one may think of their theology, the Catholic Church is probably unique in their attitude about science. I doubt that any other denomination has anything remotely like the PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Click on the link there to check out the list of the Academicians. Stephen Hawking is one of the names (he's also one of the "Steves" in Project Steve).
I distinguish Pascal from the others, who were deeply into mysticism. But he certainly didn't confuse his scientific works with his speculations, religious or otherwise.
Thanks for the links PH...as always, you provide lots of informative links...always appreciated...
|
Indeed...
They were all very different. One even had a vast following in America.
placemark
Thanks for the ping!
Thank you, StJaques, for such an exquisite posting. In all the years I've read, and occasionally posted to, the crevo threads, nothing I've encountered up to this point describes the context of science and religion as well as your post has. It is brilliantly succint, sincere and genuinely reflects a deep understanding of both science and the Christian faith that value each without expense to the other. Thank you. P.S. You must have been taught by Jesuits!
If the evidence "fits" a theory, then it fits.
Secondly, it appears (and I haven't read the whole text) as though this isn't an endorsement of evolution but rather an allowance for the same.
Just my two cents.
Well said my friend. Bookmarked for future reference.
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.