Posted on 11/18/2005 10:14:11 AM PST by shooter223
If anything, it looks as though some humans are devolving into squishy little things.
(I am a non evo-fundie.)
Yes, and that is ONE view inside the Church. It is my understanding that many views, including the literal, exist.
:)
"Any other members of the Catholic Caucus care to weigh in?"
Please see my post #67.
Darwin was really attached to the idea of apes being his close relatives because he was one in his last lifetime. And likely in his next.
:-)
Good post, thanks for refuting the silly noting that Rome denies Genesis.
Who in the Church argues that Genesis must be read literally?
Nobody said Rome denied Genesis.
The fact is, the creation story is a story meant to teach a truth. The writer had no way of knowing exactly how creation came to be.
"The writer had no way of knowing exactly how creation came to be."
No way? Divine Revelation sinky, how about THAT way?
Revelation teaches spiritual truths, not scientific truths.
Hoping to catch the first look when the Lord returns?
Philosophy classes should discuss what kind of philosophy that science is. Philosophy is the root, science only the branch.
It is very hard to read the Summa as anything but a literalist view of the Holy Writ. St. Thomas is still seen by many as a key Doctor of the Church, is he not?
So says sinkspur. I'll depend on St. Thomas thank you. At least I know he is who he says he is.
Bingo!
As to his scientific knowledge, Thomas taught that the male semen contained sperm and egg together, and the female was a mere receptacle.
But, you're free to believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis if you wish. You will, however, be in the minority among Catholic scholars.
From I:74:2, it seems clear to me that Aquinas accepts that there will be varying interpretations. YMMV.
LOL, yeah and your tales make you trustworthy? I think not. Since St. Thomas died before the Immaculate Conception was a dogmatic belief of the faith, he was entitled to that opinion. Further, his standing in the Church is, was and probably always will be immense. So yes, I join with him in what he taught over the modernist nonsense you spew while claiming (falsely) to speak for the whole Church. (Not the first falsehood you've spewed here, eh what sinky?)
Including the literal.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...."
These words, with which Holy Scripture begins, always have the effect on me of the solemn tolling of a great old bell, which stirs the heart from afar with its beauty and dignity and gives it an inkling of the mystery of eternity. For many of us, moreover, these words recall the memory of our first encounter with God's holy book, the Bible, which was opened for us at this spot. It at once brought us out of our small child's world, captivated us with its poetry, and gave us a feeling for the immeasurability of creation and its Creator.
Yet these words give rise to a certain conflict. They are beautiful and familiar, but are they also true? Everything seems to speak against it, for science has long since disposed of the concepts that we have just now heard -- the idea of a world that is completely comprehensible in terms of space and time, and the idea that creation was built up piece by piece over the course of seven [or six] days. Instead of this we now face measurements that transcend all comprehension. Today we hear of the Big Bang, which happened billions of years ago and with which the universe began its expansion -- an expansion that continues to occur without interruption. And it was not in neat succession that the stars were hung and the green of the fields created; it was rather in complex ways and over vast periods of time that the earth and the universe were constructed as we now know them.
Do these words, then, count for anything? In fact a theologian said not long ago that creation has now become an "unreal" concept; that if one is to be intellectually honest one ought to speak no longer of creation but rather of "mutation and selection." Are these words true? Or have they perhaps, along with the entire Word of God and the whole biblical tradition, come out of the reveries of the infant age of human history, for which we occasionally experience homesickness but to which we can nevertheless not return, inasmuch as we cannot live on nostalgia? Is there an answer to this that we can claim for ourselves in this day and age?
Difference Between Form and Content
One answer was already worked out some time ago, as the scientific view of the world was gradually crystallizing; many of you probably came across it in your religious instruction. It says that the Bible is not a natural science textbook, nor does it intend to be such. It is a religious book, and consequently one cannot obtain information about the natural sciences from it. One cannot get from it a scientific explanation of how the world arose; one can only glean religious experience from it. Anything else is an image and a way of describing things whose aim is to make profound realities graspable to human beings. One must distinguish between the form of portrayal and the content that is portrayed. The form would have been chosen from what was understandable at the time -- from the images which surrounded the people who lived then, which they used in speaking and in thinking, and thanks to which they were able to understand the greater realities. And only the reality that shines through these images would be what was intended and what was truly enduring. Thus Scripture would not wish to inform us about how the different species of plant life gradually appeared or how the sun and the moon and the stars were established. Its purpose ultimately would be to say one thing: God created the world.
The world is not, as people used to think then, a chaos of mutually opposed forces; nor is it the dwelling of demonic powers from which human beings must protect themselves. The sun and the moon are not deities that rule over them, and the sky that stretches over their heads is not full of mysterious and adversary divinities. Rather, all of this comes from one power, from God's eternal Reason, which became -- in the Word -- the power of creation.
All of this comes from the same Word of God that we meet in the act of faith. Thus, insofar as human beings realized that the world came from the Word, they ceased to care about the gods and demons. In addition, the world was freed so that reason might lift itself up to God and so that human beings might approach this God fearlessly. In this Word they experienced the true enlightenment that does away with the gods and the mysterious powers and that reveals to them that there is only one power everywhere and that we are in his hands. This is the living God, and this same power (which created the earth and the stars and which bears the whole universe) is the very one whom we meet in the Word of Holy Scripture. In this Word we come into contact with the real primordial force of the world and with the power that is above all powers.
- Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, "In the Beginning....": A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall
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.