Skip to comments.Papal preacher says intelligent design is truth of faith, not science (Catholic Caucus)
Posted on 03/16/2009 12:17:08 PM PDT by Coleus
Affirming the reality of an intelligent design for the creation and development of the universe is not a scientific theory, but a statement of faith, said the preacher of the papal household.
Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, offering a Lenten meditation to Pope Benedict XVI and top Vatican officials March 13, said the controversy that has arisen between scientists supporting evolution and religious believers promoting creationism or intelligent design is due mainly to a confusion between scientific theory and the truths of faith.
The intelligent-design theory asserts that the development and evolution of life is such a hugely complex process that a supreme being, God, must be directly involved in it. While some proponents of intelligent design claim that it is a scientifically valid theory, most scientists dismiss it as pseudoscience.
The arguments, Father Cantalamessa said, are due to the fact that, "in my opinion, there is not a clear enough distinction between intelligent design as a scientific theory and intelligent design as a truth of faith."
While science and evolution can explain part of the history of creation and how life exists, they cannot explain why, he said. "Even those who eliminate the idea of God from the horizon don't eliminate the mystery," the preacher said.
"We know everything about the world, except how it started. The believer is convinced that the Bible furnishes precisely this missing first page. There, as on the title page of every book, is the name of the author and the title of the work," he said.
Father Cantalamessa's Lenten reflection focused on a verse from St. Paul's Letter to the Romans: "All creation is groaning in labor pains even until now."
The text, he said, is an indication that St. Paul believes that the entire cosmos -- not just humanity -- is waiting to be saved and restored to its original beauty by Christ. The suffering of the cosmos "is not closed and definitive. There is hope for creation, not because creation is able to hope subjectively, but because God has a redemption in mind for it."
Christians contribute to keeping hope alive by respecting and defending nature, he said. "For the Christian believer, environmentalism is not only a practical necessity for survival or a problem that is only political or economic; it has a theological foundation. Creation is the work of the Holy Spirit," he said.
Christians have an obligation to recognize that the moans of creation described by St. Paul "today are mixed with the cry of agony and death" because of "human sin and selfishness," he said.
That should clear things up for the fair-minded.
Hate that it is always “so you believe dinosaurs roamed the earth 3000 years ago” and strict creationism. Ann Coulter describes ID very well and makes fun of evolution very well.
A fine example of Francis Schaeffer refers to as Upper story vs Lower story truth.
And Al Gore will soon have to proclaim that Global Warming ( oops..I mean “Climate Change”...as caused by man...) is also truth of faith...not science.
What exactly, is a truth of faith?
He hasn’t studied the subject thoroughly. He is essentially saying that faith and science are seperate, which is exactly what the anti-Christians have always wanted: to portray God as a figment of the imagination. That is completely the wrong definition of faith.
There is plenty of evidence, much of which has been presented here.
It totally depends what you’re actually talking about anyway. Evolution? The Big Bang? Both of those are provably incorrect.
Sounds reasonable to me.
unprovably true and provably false are not the same thing. While you may be able to state a case in doubt of either theory, to prove it false you would have to prove a different testable hypothesis as true.
evolution and ‘big bang’ cannot be proved true, unless of course someone can invent a machine that can observe the universe from outside and throughout time for direct provable observations of both. While at the same time not get destroyed by the cosmic forces battering it in the process. Proving creation or intelligent design basically requires the same sort of set up.
Everything we suppose on creation is based on guesses, some good and some bad. To say that one theory or the other is absolutely correct is ‘not even wrong.’ That means endless threads debating the issue like the proverbial dead horse.
The Big Bang can be proved false.
If, as is suggested, the universe expanded outwards, bubble-like, and we exist within that expanding bubble, there should be one visible direction which is older than all others; one visible direction in the sky where older, more distant galaxies, with smaller angular seperation (and higher redshift as this is consistently a function of distant for whatever reason). But this is not the case. The most distant, smallest, highest-redshift objects are observed uniformly across the sky, contradicting the theory.
I currently have no way to disprove evolution as conclusively, but there are many counterexamples, and artifacts which the theory does not explain.
That’s not to say I think the big bang theory is incompatible with the Bible. It’s just scientifically wrong.
"An analogy can help us reconcile our faith in the existence of God's intelligent design for the world with the apparent fortuity and unpredictability highlighted by Darwin and current science. It deals with the relationship between grace and freedom. As in the spiritual field grace leaves space to the unpredictability of human freedom and even works through it, so also in the physical and biological world everything is based on the play of the second causes (the fight for survival of species according to Darwin, chance and necessity according to Monod); Even if this very play is contemplated and assumed by God's providence. In both cases, as the saying goes, God "writes straight with crooked lines." "All Creation Has Been Groaning and Suffering in Labor Pains"