C
catholic1seeks
Guest
I’ve addressed this several times.
It’s not binding Catholic doctrine.
It’s not binding Catholic doctrine.
- Status
E
edwest211
Guest
What? Where? Adam and Eve were special creations.
C
ChunkMonk
Guest
I do not believe it is possible to be a faithful Catholic and believe in human evolution. Nor so I believe it is possible to square the circle of combining a literal Adam with evolution of the human.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
So you are asserting.
The consistent (modern) Catholic position is that the soul is a special creation, but that the human body may have evolved.
You said thank you for the CA links. If you read through them, you will notice that, yes, we can accept human evolution (as a means for the formation of the human body).
The consistent (modern) Catholic position is that the soul is a special creation, but that the human body may have evolved.
You said thank you for the CA links. If you read through them, you will notice that, yes, we can accept human evolution (as a means for the formation of the human body).
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
You can believe that.
The facts say otherwise, insofar as the fact is you can be a faithful Catholic AND believe in the evolution of all biological organisms — including the human body.
From Catholic Answers, the very organization whose forum you are using:
The facts say otherwise, insofar as the fact is you can be a faithful Catholic AND believe in the evolution of all biological organisms — including the human body.
From Catholic Answers, the very organization whose forum you are using:
Last edited:
C
ChunkMonk
Guest
CA is not an authority within the Church.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
How convenient of you to say. Surely it would be careful to get this question right, since nearly every article/post/video on the subject of Genesis or creation or evolution makes the same point I’ve made.
Nevertheless, the magisterium is clear as well. Look at the encyclical CA quotes in that very same reference: “pre-existent and living matter” is saying a lot. Besides, popes since that day have allowed for evolution. Pope Francis and JPII both equated it as more than a hypothesis, the former saying that rejection of evolution in principle would be to say that God is a mere magician with a “magic wand.”
Last edited:
C
ChunkMonk
Guest
What is the soul? You are suggesting creatures that have languages, form societies, create tools and art, conceive of abstract concepts, love and fear, but are soulless? Disgusting.
H
Hugh_Farey
Guest
How unkind. Neanderthals were people. In the unlikely event that the Church re-promulgates a literal Adam and Eve event, Neanderthals would certainly be their descendants, not their forbears.
Even if they were, they would not preclude belief in Neanderthals. Is this the first time Edwest and I have agreed on something?
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
What??? I have no idea what you are referring to
E
edwest211
Guest
It does not appear that the human body evolved. Going through the links, I saw nothing that said human evolution definitively occurred.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Ah, your views on Pope Francis are enlightening.
Thanks for sharing.
But in all seriousness, Pope Francis is continuing the the teachings of his predecessors.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Who is saying evolution definitely occurred?
H
Hugh_Farey
Guest
Even a Pope can make mistakes, but to announce that you think one is frequently blasphemous is less a Catholic observation, and more an unCatholic condemnation. Are you basically a pre-Vatican II Catholic, like Edwest and Buffalo, or are you of a different Christian denomination altogether?
B
buffalo
Guest
What?
371 God created man and woman together and willed each for the other. The Word of God gives us to understand this through various features of the sacred text. "It is not good that the man should be alone. I will make him a helper fit for him."242 None of the animals can be man’s partner.243 The woman God “fashions” from the man’s rib and brings to him elicits on the man’s part a cry of wonder, an exclamation of love and communion: "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."244 Man discovers woman as another “I”, sharing the same humanity.
372 Man and woman were made “for each other” - not that God left them half-made and incomplete: he created them to be a communion of persons, in which each can be “helpmate” to the other, for they are equal as persons (“bone of my bones. . .”) and complementary as masculine and feminine. In marriage God unites them in such a way that, by forming “one flesh”,245 they can transmit human life: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth."246 By transmitting human life to their descendants, man and woman as spouses and parents cooperate in a unique way in the Creator’s work.247
371 God created man and woman together and willed each for the other. The Word of God gives us to understand this through various features of the sacred text. "It is not good that the man should be alone. I will make him a helper fit for him."242 None of the animals can be man’s partner.243 The woman God “fashions” from the man’s rib and brings to him elicits on the man’s part a cry of wonder, an exclamation of love and communion: "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."244 Man discovers woman as another “I”, sharing the same humanity.
372 Man and woman were made “for each other” - not that God left them half-made and incomplete: he created them to be a communion of persons, in which each can be “helpmate” to the other, for they are equal as persons (“bone of my bones. . .”) and complementary as masculine and feminine. In marriage God unites them in such a way that, by forming “one flesh”,245 they can transmit human life: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth."246 By transmitting human life to their descendants, man and woman as spouses and parents cooperate in a unique way in the Creator’s work.247
B
buffalo
Guest
Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?
Many succumb to the modernist tendency to “adjust” Church teaching to fit the latest scientific claims—thus intimidating Catholics into thinking that divinely revealed truths can be abandoned—“if need be.”
This skepticism of a literal Adam and Eve begs for four much needed corrections.
First, Church teaching about Adam and Eve has not, and cannot, change. The fact remains that a literal Adam and Eve are unchanging Catholic doctrine. Central to St. Paul’s teaching is the fact that one man, Adam, committed original sin and that through the God-man, Jesus Christ, redemption was accomplished (Romans 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15: 21-22). In paragraphs 396-406, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, speaks of Adam and Eve as a single mating pair who “committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state” (CCC, 404). “Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back toward God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle” (CCC, 405). The doctrines surrounding original sin cannot be altered “without undermining the mystery of Christ” (CCC, 389).
Today, many think that Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani generis did not definitively exclude theological polygenism. What they fail to notice, though, is that the Holy Father clearly insists that Scripture and the Magisterium affirm that original sin “proceeds from a sin truly committed by one Adam [ab uno Adamo]” and that this sin is transmitted to all true human beings through generation (para. 37). This proves that denial of a literal Adam (and his spouse, Eve) as the sole first genuinely human parents of all true human beings is not theologically tenable.
www.crisismagazine.com
Many succumb to the modernist tendency to “adjust” Church teaching to fit the latest scientific claims—thus intimidating Catholics into thinking that divinely revealed truths can be abandoned—“if need be.”
This skepticism of a literal Adam and Eve begs for four much needed corrections.
First, Church teaching about Adam and Eve has not, and cannot, change. The fact remains that a literal Adam and Eve are unchanging Catholic doctrine. Central to St. Paul’s teaching is the fact that one man, Adam, committed original sin and that through the God-man, Jesus Christ, redemption was accomplished (Romans 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15: 21-22). In paragraphs 396-406, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, speaks of Adam and Eve as a single mating pair who “committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state” (CCC, 404). “Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back toward God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle” (CCC, 405). The doctrines surrounding original sin cannot be altered “without undermining the mystery of Christ” (CCC, 389).
Today, many think that Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani generis did not definitively exclude theological polygenism. What they fail to notice, though, is that the Holy Father clearly insists that Scripture and the Magisterium affirm that original sin “proceeds from a sin truly committed by one Adam [ab uno Adamo]” and that this sin is transmitted to all true human beings through generation (para. 37). This proves that denial of a literal Adam (and his spouse, Eve) as the sole first genuinely human parents of all true human beings is not theologically tenable.
Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?
Pure myth! That is today’s typical view of a literal Adam and Eve. Yet, contrary to current skepticism, a real Adam and Eve remain credible—both in terms of Catholic doctrine and sound natural science.
www.crisismagazine.com
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
What does Vatican II have to do with this? I was in Catholic school and I know Vatican II is not relevant.
B
buffalo
Guest
The specific passage?
E
edwest211
Guest
That is the correct, complete answer. Thank you.
B
buffalo
Guest
What on earth is a pre-Vatican II Catholic?
You never answered what specific VII document changed all this…
- Status