0
031064
Guest
Hell. I am going to make it short. What are Cardinal Schonborn’s views on evolution? Sorry, I’m a bit of a novice:blush: .
- Status
1
1ke
Guest
Why don’t you get a copy of his new book, Chance Or Purpose?
It’s excellent.
It’s excellent.
0
031064
Guest
No, I just wanted a simple explanation, I don’t want to read a book. thank though.
Vobiscum Dominum
Vobiscum Dominum
P
PhilVaz
Guest
I see him toning down the “scientific” critique and arguing from a more philosophical point of view. In his original Op-Ed for the New York Times, he argued “design in nature” in a Intelligent Design sense: “Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense – an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection – is not. Any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is ideology, not science.” (July 2005)
Then he toned it down in his Oct 2005 catechetical lecture when he says he didn’t mean a Catholic could not accept evolution or Darwinian natural selection:
“…Darwin undoubtedly scored a brilliant coup, and it remains a great oeuvre [work] in the history of ideas. With an astounding gift for observation, enormous diligence, and mental prowess, he succeeded in producing one of that history’s most influential works. He could already see in advance that his research would create many areas of endeavor. Today one can truly say that the ‘evolution’ paradigm has become, so to speak, a ‘master key,’ extending itself within many fields of knowledge…I see no difficulty in joining belief in the Creator with the theory of evolution, but under the prerequisite that the borders of scientific theory are maintained. In the citations given above (from Julian Huxley, Will Provine, Peter Atkins), it is unequivocally the case that such have been violated. When science adheres to its own method, it cannot come into conflict with faith. But perhaps one finds it difficult to stay within one’s territory, for we are, after all, not simply scientists but also human beings, with feelings, who struggle with faith, human beings, who seek the meaning of life. And thus as natural scientists we are constantly and inevitably bringing in questions reflecting worldviews…I am thankful for the immense work of the natural sciences. Their furthering of our knowledge boggles the mind. They do not restrict faith in the creation; they strengthen me in my belief in the Creator and in how wisely and wonderfully He has made all things.” (Oct 2005 cat lecture)
In his recent 2007 book Chance or Purpose? which is an English re-translation of all his 2005-2006 German cat lectures, he has no problem with evolution from a scientific standpoint, including human evolution. See his section “Man – A Part of Nature” (page 113ff) –
“It is one of the marvelous aspects of our earthly life that as men we are related to all other creatures. We share with them the same laws of matter, the same building blocks of life. We have no other sphere of life than that of all other living beings. We are all together in this ‘Noah’s ark’ of a planet.” (page 116-117)
“Matter, the elements, of which our body is made up, originated in the tremendous nuclear fusion processes within the stars…astrophysicist Marco Bersanelli adds: 'we are in the literal sense “children of the stars” '…To acknowledge this is in no way humiliating. Being part of the universe is nothing to be ashamed of…It is likewise no humiliation when it becomes clear that man’s entry on the stage of the earth entails a long story. The long road of ‘hominization’ is the subject of intensive research…Is there a common line of descent? Are there several ‘origins’? And above all, from what chronological point can we talk about ‘man’? Can there be a gradual transition from animal to man? If man, homo sapiens, developed from ‘hominids’, man-like species, then how did hominids become men?” (page 117,118)
“The Pope [Pius XII] emphasizes here [in Humani Generis] that the notion that the human body has its origin in material that already exists and is living does not stand in contradiction to the faith. The human soul, on the other hand, cannot be a product of evolution. Nor is it ‘produced’ by the parents. It is directly created by God. This doctrine of the Church represents the concrete application of the biblical teaching about the special creation of man, alone of all living things, ‘after the image and likeness of God’ (cf. Gen 1:26)…[refers to Gen 2:7]…He [man] is associated with all other living things through his earthly origin, but only on account of the soul that God ‘breathed into him’ is he a man. This accords him his distinctive dignity as well as his unique responsibility, which exalts him above all other living things and at the same time makes him their shepherd.” (page 123)
I wanted to ask the Cardinal specifically about Adam/Eve, but had a bad cold/cough that day.
Phil P
Then he toned it down in his Oct 2005 catechetical lecture when he says he didn’t mean a Catholic could not accept evolution or Darwinian natural selection:
“…Darwin undoubtedly scored a brilliant coup, and it remains a great oeuvre [work] in the history of ideas. With an astounding gift for observation, enormous diligence, and mental prowess, he succeeded in producing one of that history’s most influential works. He could already see in advance that his research would create many areas of endeavor. Today one can truly say that the ‘evolution’ paradigm has become, so to speak, a ‘master key,’ extending itself within many fields of knowledge…I see no difficulty in joining belief in the Creator with the theory of evolution, but under the prerequisite that the borders of scientific theory are maintained. In the citations given above (from Julian Huxley, Will Provine, Peter Atkins), it is unequivocally the case that such have been violated. When science adheres to its own method, it cannot come into conflict with faith. But perhaps one finds it difficult to stay within one’s territory, for we are, after all, not simply scientists but also human beings, with feelings, who struggle with faith, human beings, who seek the meaning of life. And thus as natural scientists we are constantly and inevitably bringing in questions reflecting worldviews…I am thankful for the immense work of the natural sciences. Their furthering of our knowledge boggles the mind. They do not restrict faith in the creation; they strengthen me in my belief in the Creator and in how wisely and wonderfully He has made all things.” (Oct 2005 cat lecture)
In his recent 2007 book Chance or Purpose? which is an English re-translation of all his 2005-2006 German cat lectures, he has no problem with evolution from a scientific standpoint, including human evolution. See his section “Man – A Part of Nature” (page 113ff) –
“It is one of the marvelous aspects of our earthly life that as men we are related to all other creatures. We share with them the same laws of matter, the same building blocks of life. We have no other sphere of life than that of all other living beings. We are all together in this ‘Noah’s ark’ of a planet.” (page 116-117)
“Matter, the elements, of which our body is made up, originated in the tremendous nuclear fusion processes within the stars…astrophysicist Marco Bersanelli adds: 'we are in the literal sense “children of the stars” '…To acknowledge this is in no way humiliating. Being part of the universe is nothing to be ashamed of…It is likewise no humiliation when it becomes clear that man’s entry on the stage of the earth entails a long story. The long road of ‘hominization’ is the subject of intensive research…Is there a common line of descent? Are there several ‘origins’? And above all, from what chronological point can we talk about ‘man’? Can there be a gradual transition from animal to man? If man, homo sapiens, developed from ‘hominids’, man-like species, then how did hominids become men?” (page 117,118)
“The Pope [Pius XII] emphasizes here [in Humani Generis] that the notion that the human body has its origin in material that already exists and is living does not stand in contradiction to the faith. The human soul, on the other hand, cannot be a product of evolution. Nor is it ‘produced’ by the parents. It is directly created by God. This doctrine of the Church represents the concrete application of the biblical teaching about the special creation of man, alone of all living things, ‘after the image and likeness of God’ (cf. Gen 1:26)…[refers to Gen 2:7]…He [man] is associated with all other living things through his earthly origin, but only on account of the soul that God ‘breathed into him’ is he a man. This accords him his distinctive dignity as well as his unique responsibility, which exalts him above all other living things and at the same time makes him their shepherd.” (page 123)
I wanted to ask the Cardinal specifically about Adam/Eve, but had a bad cold/cough that day.
Phil P
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Then I suggest that you tune into Catholic Answers Live this Friday at 3pm to hear him speak about it in a pre taped interview during which I call in and ask some of the questions that I see all the time.
I have his new book and it’s under 180 pages and based on what I heard from him when we talked, I expect it to be a very good read. I 2nd Phil’s recommendation though.
G
GordonBOPS
Guest
Speaking of evolution - check out the first few chapters of Chesterton’s Everlasting Man – very good critiques of the theory.
1
1ke
Guest
You just want a “simple” explanation of a complex topic, without having to exert yourself to read and study.
Uh… well… sorry, can’t help you there.
0
031064
Guest
thanks PhilVaz, that did it for me. Just simple enough for my humble mind. thanks buddy.
- Status