Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholicism and evolution: Are they contradictory?
Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | May 9, 2011 | Faye Flam

Posted on 05/09/2011 9:16:50 AM PDT by Alex Murphy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: Claud
I like Augustine's point.

I illustrate it this way....

Right now stars are forming off in the universe via gravity and nuclear fusion. To me these stars are just as much “Created by God” as any others.

I was created by God “from dust” - yet I was also created via cellular processes involving DNA. The fact that we understand the physical processes doesn't make me any less “created by God”.

21 posted on 05/09/2011 10:37:51 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
"So where does that leave in the Incarnation?"

The Incarnation is/was a supernatural event and did not spring forth from inorganic or non-living matter.

22 posted on 05/09/2011 11:02:46 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
Scientists have their head down in the weeds methodically looking at things they can deal with

I quite agree.

The silliness comes into play when some of them think their acquisition of a great deal of knowledge about the weeds entitles them to make grand philosophic statements about meaning and purpose. The scientific method is just not suited to making such determinations.

23 posted on 05/09/2011 11:12:06 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Exactly. And the Scripture is still literally true. We are literally made from dust...the carbon and other elements that are part of the earth.


24 posted on 05/09/2011 11:19:25 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All

For discussion, here’s another Augustine quote that I think is very relevant, from his “On the Literal Interpretation of Genesis”

Book II “Question of the phase in which the moon was made” 15, 30

“God, after all is the author and founder of things in their actual natures. Now whatever any single thing may in some way or other produce and unfold by its natural development through periods of time that are suited to it, it contained it beforehand as something hidden, if not in specific forms and bodily mass, at least by the force and reckoning of nature, unless of course a tree, void of fruit and stripped of its leaves throughout the winter, is then to be called imperfect, or unless again at its origins, when it had still not yet borne any fruit, its nature was also imperfect. It is not only about the tree, but about its seed also that this could not rightly be said; there everything that with the passage of time is somehow or other going to appear is already latent in invisible ways. Although, if God were to make anything imperfect, which he then would himself bring to perfection, what would be reprehensible about such an idea? But you would be quite within your rights to disapprove if what had been begun by him were said to be completed and perfected by another.”


25 posted on 05/09/2011 11:21:40 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Claud

Exactly - my literal creation “from dust” by God is not at all abridged amended or rendered moot by the understanding that it was also through a cellular process involving DNA.


26 posted on 05/09/2011 11:24:00 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
You missed my point, as expected.

In the Incarnation, the Son became born of a virgin. True God and True Man.

If evolution is correct, then what man was then, will change to something different and was an animal in the past. If/when man evolves to the “next stage” will the Incarnation and economy of Salvation still be valid? Was it for the monkeys? Or for that matter, was the Incarnation valid only for certain subspecies of humans?

Think about it. The one big danger is that the Catholic theologians of today have been playing fast and loose with the Incarnation, something that the Early Church guarded very closely.

27 posted on 05/09/2011 12:51:38 PM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: redgolum; Natural Law

I don’t have much problem believing in evolution and seeing the Incarnation as a unique and appropriately singular event.

This world was designed with humanity at the head of it—as its gardeners and tenders and keepers and lords. All the other species were placed under us as our charges. If we had to go through millions of years to get to man...what is that to me? Didn’t we go through thousands of years before God revealed Himself to Moses? And another thousand at least before the Christ? And another two thousands before the Church encompassed all the earth? God works in His time, not ours.

However we got here, we fell in a way that no other species could fall. So we needed to be fixed in a special way: the Incarnation.

Because we are the head species, and presumably the species through which God was going to bring the earth to perfection, God became man. Not monkey. Not slug. Once man is set aright, the whole earth will then fall into place, because that’s what our job was from the beginning. To tend, to keep, and to subdue.

As for some hypothetical “next stage” evolved human—that will never happen. We’ll need geologic time to get there, and we can’t even make it one century without cataclysmic wars and bigger and better superweapons making those wars ever more destructive. Simply put, given our titanic hubris, we’ll never make it that far. We’ll see the book of Revelations play out instead.


28 posted on 05/09/2011 4:05:50 PM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Got created the universe, he created this world, he created all life on this world. Evolutionary origins mythology is a very clever weaving of science, speculation, and wishful thinking by people who, like the builders of the Tower of Babel, wish to prove that God is unnecessary.

People who understand how hard forensic science is even when dealing with the just-completed past have a better grasp of the house of cards that is evolutionary history.

The Catholic Church’s attempts to remain relevant by cozying up to evolution will look bad when we realize that the evolutionary mythology of our being is no more scientifically accurate than global warming or the normality of homosexuality.


29 posted on 05/09/2011 5:55:55 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Claud

Some major assumptions there, big enough to drive a truck through.

For starters, the assumption “We will never get to the next stage”. We can’t define what that stage is, or for that matter what the last ‘stage’ was.

When I was a kid, Neanderthals were pictured as upright apes. Today, with modern forensic science, they are pictured like a guy I work with. There have even been hybrids found in various places. Were the Neanderthals saved? Or just the Shemites? Or where they just modern humans with brows like my friend? Heck, I had one professor at college maintain that they were descendants of modern humans, not the ancestors.


30 posted on 05/09/2011 5:56:14 PM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Claud; it_ürür; Bockscar; Mary Kochan; Bed_Zeppelin; YellowRoseofTx; Rashputin; ...
Catholics "cannot accept evolution as we scientists accept it - as an unguided, materialistic process with no goal or direction," said University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne, who writes about science and religion in his blog, "Why Evolution Is True."
No kidding.
31 posted on 05/09/2011 6:03:40 PM PDT by narses ("Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
Some Catholic scientists, such as University of Pennsylvania paleontologist Peter Dodson, say Gould may be right. "Perhaps we'd get intelligent penguins" the second time around, he said.

It all sort of depends on when the "design" phase ended.

32 posted on 05/09/2011 6:06:27 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (Time to raise Cain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
EVOLUTION......One night some where, some how, some time in a very warm and humid RadioShack electronic parts were shaken and mixed together by some unknown force and began to assemble themselves into various items, computers, calculators, etc.
Many didn't survive and adapt and we find the fossil remains of BetaMax and WebTV hinting at a Golden Age of innovation.
I know this to be so because the idea that anyone would actually and deliberately build anything like my poorly functioning system is just too fantastic. Even tech support says there's nothing wrong with the equipment, it just doesn't work.
33 posted on 05/10/2011 1:29:03 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson