Can you convert to the Catholic faith and still believe in creationism?

[Shin]

Dogma is always to be understood as it has been understood in the past, and is not subject to reinterpretation. This too has been declared as the authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church.

So either you’re a Catholic and you accept dogmas as they are, and intended to be and always have been understood, or you’re not and at best fooling yourself.

You have to work any ‘history of the world’ within the dogmas – specifically amongst others, those listed above. And let me add, that a minimalist approach is also contrary to the Catholic conscience, you do have to take into account far more than just the declared absolutes to be a Catholic. You have to care about tradition, you have to know there’s far more to it that’s completely binding on the conscience and true than merely the declared and defined.

Whenever I see someone say on this forum, ‘is that infallible’, with the clear design of getting out of it – I see a goat, not a sheep. There’s a person who doesn’t understand the good behind what he is trying to dispense with, rather than seeking to know God that person is seeking to be the one who determines how the world works.

Which is why Chardin and his ilk are and always will be people not to be taken very seriously. He lacked the sanctity and grace to not propose heresy, something which a person of holiness would’ve preferred to die than do, and burned all his own writings with his own two hands rather than propose and mislead people into. The spiritual penalties, I might add, for misleading people that way are so great that if any person could perceive them in this life, I do not doubt he would die on the spot of horror.

… Another reason I might add, not to be a teacher, until you’ve been a good enough student.

 

[ricmat]

It depends on what you mean by “non-negotiable.”

And I’ll bet it depends on what the definition of “is” is as well.

 

[StAnastasia]

You can’t bargain your way, make minor changes, or be like cafeteria catholics, pick and choose…You either accept as is or you don’t. If you do, then you are a Christian and Catholic. So, there! PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem

Of course no “bargaining.” But I don’t personally know any Catholic scientists or theologians who humbly remove their brains and leave them at the church door in response to a forced rejection of what we know from science.

 

[StAnastasia]

… Another reason I might add, not to be a teacher, until you’ve been a good enough student.

Ha – tell that to the National Catholic Teacher’s Association, the Catholic Biblical Association, the Catholic Theological Society of America, or the International Society for Science and Religion!

 

[VanDoodah]

Hi, Malia!

Yes, many Catholics do believe in evolution. Or, more accurately, many Catholics do not see why the question of evolution vs. the Bible is an either/or proposition. Realize that in the world today this evolution vs. creationism debate is very much an American phenomenon. American Protestantism has staked a lot on the creationist position, the Catholic Church does not.

The Catholic Church interprets the Bible, which is asserted to be true and divinely inspired. It also asserts that if you accept that Darwin’s claims are true, then you must reconcile them to your faith because reason and faith can never be in opposition.

The Catholic Church did score a major “coup” in the evolution debate, when a humble Catholic priest dabbling in mathematics laid the out the basis for what has become known as the “Big Bang” theory of the universe. Note that at the time atheists maintained a version of the universe that held the universe was eternal and infinite. A friar stepped up and proved it had a beginning, just like the Bible said. That theory was dubbed “The Big Bang Theory” by secular, scientific detractors. The name was pejorative, meant as ridicule.This was a major embarrassment for secular forces at the time, who were forced to re-tool their thinking.

The Catholic Church believes that it expresses, and guards, the truths that it was given. It does not say that Darwin’s ideas are a part of that deposit of truth. It does not allow that Darwin’s ideas invalidates that deposit, either.

Erm…What? The Big Bang Theory has nothing to do with evolution, and there is no “evolution debate” among scientifically literate people. The person who coined the phrase “Big Bang” was Fred Hoyle, the agnostic Cambridge astronomer. The theory had already been largely accepted within the scientific community at that time.

It is amusing that you claim the Big Bang to be “a major embarrassment for secular forces at the time”, seeing as how the majority of scientists, including astro-physicists, are non-theists i.e. atheists or agnostics.

 

[Shin]

Ha – tell that to the National Catholic Teacher’s Association, the Catholic Biblical Association, the Catholic Theological Society of America, or the International Society for Science and Religion!

Gladly, I will tell it to everyone – I know of grave problems with all but one of those associations, and the only reason I don’t know of them with that one likely is I haven’t bothered to look! I’m sure I’d find them.

Another truth about Catholicism is that it’s not based on votes like democracy. So when in times of great cultural corruption – it does not in fact change. And this is sadly one of those times.

When the Anglican Church was created – very few of the higher ups stayed Catholic. They went with what was popular. It’s not a good way to please God. Eternity is what matters, not what is popular with the world here below.

 

[StAnastasia]

Gladly, I will tell it to everyone – I know of grave problems with all but one of those associations, and the only reason I don’t know of them with that one likely is I haven’t bothered to look! I’m sure I’d find them. )

Good luck!

 

[buffalo]

Erm…What? The Big Bang Theory has nothing to do with evolution, and there is no “evolution debate” among scientifically literate people. The person who coined the phrase “Big Bang” was Fred Hoyle, the agnostic Cambridge astronomer. The theory had already been largely accepted within the scientific community at that time.

It is amusing that you claim the Big Bang to be “a major embarrassment for secular forces at the time”, seeing as how the majority of scientists, including astro-physicists, are non-theists i.e. atheists or agnostics.

The name Big Bang was coined as a mocking term to Father Lemaitre’s theory. The secular scientists would not admit to the universe having a beginning.

 

[daughteroftruth]

I’m thinking about converting to the Catholic faith but I read in a book that most Catholics believe in evolution. I’ve also seen a few posts on here in the past that seem to kind of make fun of the Protestant belief in creationism. So I guess I have two questions. Can one convert to the Catholic faith and believe in creationism and also if the answer is yes to that question are creation believers kind of ostracized because of this belief?

Thanks for reading.

Yes you can and yes we are. But then again, Catholics who believe in the Kingship of Christ are also seen as nuts. St. Teresa of Avila says that persecution from the good is the greatest trial we can receive, so prepare yourself coming in. Remember, the Lord comes first. God Bless.

 

[daughteroftruth]

Of course no “bargaining.” But I don’t personally know any Catholic scientists or theologians who humbly remove their brains and leave them at the church door in response to a forced rejection of what we know from science.

If only science never contradicted itself…it might be worthy of blind faith.

 

[buffalo]

If only science never contradicted itself…it might be worthy of blind faith.

The truth stands the test of time. Revelation is truth.

 

[StAnastasia]

If only science never contradicted itself…it might be worthy of blind faith.

Science doesn’t contradict itself; if you think it does, you simply don’t understand how science works. I know of no scientist, Catholic or otherwise, who accepts science out of blind faith. You don’t know any either.

 

[buffalo]

Science doesn’t contradict itself; if you think it does, you simply don’t understand how science works. I know of no scientist, Catholic or otherwise, who accepts science out of blind faith. You don’t know any either.

Hmmmm!

Why Darwin was wrong about the tree of life

…“For a long time the holy grail was to build a tree of life,” says Eric Bapteste, an evolutionary biologist at the Pierre and Marie Curie University in Paris, France. A few years ago it looked as though the grail was within reach. But today the project lies in tatters, torn to pieces by an onslaught of negative evidence. Many biologists now argue that the tree concept is obsolete and needs to be discarded. “We have no evidence at all that the tree of life is a reality,” says Bapteste. That bombshell has even persuaded some that our fundamental view of biology needs to change

 

[StAnastasia]

/

Interesting article, Buffalo. It certainly supports my argument, and undercuts yours.

 

[daughteroftruth]

Science doesn’t contradict itself; if you think it does, you simply don’t understand how science works. I know of no scientist, Catholic or otherwise, who accepts science out of blind faith. You don’t know any either.

Perfect example of *blind *presumption.

You know very little about me, and among the *many *things you do *not *know, one would be who/what I am aquainted/familiar with.

Future reference: Try to avoid *blind *accusations.

 

[StAnastasia]

Perfect example of *blind *presumption. You know very little about me, and among the *many *things you do *not *know, one would be who/what I am aquainted/familiar with. Future reference: Try to avoid *blind *accusations.

Have you an example of a scientist who works by blind faith?

 

[ricmat]

Interesting article, Buffalo. It certainly supports my argument, and undercuts yours.

Then you’d be willing to include it in your famous Powerpoint presentation where you describe how common descent works? Perhaps you’d even be willing to hand out entire copies of the article - all in support of your position?

 

[daughteroftruth]

Have you an example of a scientist who works by blind faith?

It probably wouldn’t matter to you if I provided names, they just wouldn’t be scientific *enough *to convince. Doesn’t matter, I didn’t post here to debate the validity of changing science, but to give support to a possible future sister in Christ.

 

[StAnastasia]

It probably wouldn’t matter to you if I provided names, they just wouldn’t be scientific *enough *to convince. Doesn’t matter, I didn’t post here to debate the validity of changing science, but to give support to a possible future sister in Christ.

Slandering the entire science community is probably not the most eirenic way to broach a discussion. I know a large number of scientists in many departments, and quite a few of them are Catholic priests. They don’t practice their scientific profession out of blind faith. Their faith is in God, and their science is part of their service of God.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

Then you’d be willing to include it in your famous Powerpoint presentation where you describe how common descent works? Perhaps you’d even be willing to hand out entire copies of the article - all in support of your position?

I don’t usually had out long articles, but if there were a summary – sure! The biologists in the department like the article.