Catholicism and Science

  • Thread starter Thread starter Samwise21
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
grannymh said:
Seriously, evolution is a material process and if you wish, you can say that God created a material process. This material process can be beneficial in the medical arena.

Where the evolution theory intersects (incompatible) with proper Catholic teaching is that the material process cannot produce a spiritual rational soul which moves humans up the ladder and out of the material world. Yes, because of Genesis 1: 27, humans are spiritual beings.
Click to expand...
There is no practical use for evolution.

the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/16649/title/Why-Do-We-Invoke-Darwin-/

Ed
 
Samwise21 said:
Whatever you say. Yet I seem to have read more of the letter than you did.

Note how he doesn’t refer to the overall theory of evolution as being incompatible, but certain theories regarding it put forth which are promoted by atheists and materialists. And John Paul II isn’t saying Catholics are specifically required to believe in evolution, the most he is doing here is saying that evolution, at this point a given scientific theory, does not contradict or is not irreconcilable with the deposit of faith, since the overall Church does not deal with matters outside of teaching what was passed on by the apostles. It isn’t in the business of teaching science.
Click to expand...
Yet threads like this appear on a regular basis that contradict the last sentence.

Ed
 
Science is collecting data.

And being open with the data. Sharing. [You can read up on how theories get postulated.] But it is about data. Experiments that can be duplicated.

Catholicism is studying the life of Jesus.

Today the readings at Mass and the homily were about applying Jesus’ teachings.

Read the New Testament [and the Old Testament and the 150 Psalms]. Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church and read the Baltimore Catechism. Read the lives of the various saints for their inspiration.
 
What I’m asking is if the Church is willing to accept science while not explicitly advocating it (that’s what the PAS is for, a bridge between the two) why must there be such a talked about rift? Why is it not possible to accept both Catholic truth as well as scientific truth?

I do believe that we came from the slime of the Earth. And I do believe that we each have instilled in us an immortal soul. I reject atheism/scientism and its call to submit to them as the true teachers of what is real. I believe it is the Church’s job to tell us why we are here and what we are. Science’s job is to tell us how.
 
Samwise21 said:
What I’m asking is if the Church is willing to accept science while not explicitly advocating it (that’s what the PAS is for, a bridge between the two) why must there be such a talked about rift? Why is it not possible to accept both Catholic truth as well as scientific truth?

I do believe that we came from the slime of the Earth. And I do believe that we each have instilled in us an immortal soul. I reject atheism/scientism and its call to submit to them as the true teachers of what is real. I believe it is the Church’s job to tell us why we are here and what we are. Science’s job is to tell us how.
Click to expand...
The Biology textbook cannot give the complete answer. Evolutionary psychology is trying to do something it has no business doing.

Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The Biology textbook cannot give the complete answer. Evolutionary psychology is trying to do something it has no business doing.
Click to expand...
I agree. Anyone who claims that everything that makes us human can be amounted to nothing but chemicals is probably a robot anyway.
 
Samwise21 said:
What I’m asking is if the Church is willing to accept science while not explicitly advocating it (that’s what the PAS is for, a bridge between the two) why must there be such a talked about rift? Why is it not possible to accept both Catholic truth as well as scientific truth?

I do believe that we came from the slime of the Earth. And I do believe that we each have instilled in us an immortal soul. I reject atheism/scientism and its call to submit to them as the true teachers of what is real. I believe it is the Church’s job to tell us why we are here and what we are. Science’s job is to tell us how.
Click to expand...
Science will not tell you where the best restaurant in Rome is.

What do YOU mean by science?

A “bridge” between the two seems meaningless.

Science is limited to making observations and collecting data.
 
May I gently repeat that in this century, it is the Science of Human Evolution which contradicts the teachings surrounding Original Sin.

:eek:
I just realized that in this century, there are not a lot of people who know and understand all the basic teachings surrounding Original Sin and the interaction of the Science of Human Evolution.

It is useless to debate when people are not aware of all the facts. :o
 
Monte_RCMS said:
A “bridge” between the two seems meaningless.
Click to expand...
To the fundamentalist, maybe. Pius XII would disagree.

As Bishop Barron says, faith and reason are complementary and compatible paths toward the knowledge of truth. Any apologist worth his salt would say the same.
 
Samwise21 said:
To the fundamentalist, maybe. Pius XII would disagree.

As Bishop Barron says, faith and reason are complementary and compatible paths toward the knowledge of truth. Any apologist worth his salt would say the same.
Click to expand...
What did Pius XII say?

Ed
 
Samwise21 said:
To the fundamentalist, maybe. Pius XII would disagree.

As Bishop Barron says, faith and reason are complementary and compatible paths toward the knowledge of truth. Any apologist worth his salt would say the same.
Click to expand...
And any scientist worth his salt would be laughing.
 
Samwise21 said:
Read ‘Humani Generis.’
Click to expand...
From Humani Generis:

"36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.[11] Some however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.

“37. When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.[12]”

Ed
 
Samwise21 said:
What I’m asking is if the Church is willing to accept science while not explicitly advocating it (that’s what the PAS is for, a bridge between the two) why must there be such a talked about rift? Why is it not possible to accept both Catholic truth as well as scientific truth?

I do believe that we came from the slime of the Earth. And I do believe that we each have instilled in us an immortal soul. I reject atheism/scientism and its call to submit to them as the true teachers of what is real. I believe it is the Church’s job to tell us why we are here and what we are. Science’s job is to tell us how.
Click to expand...
There are great scientists who are Catholic. This suggests neither is in irreconcilable conflict with the other.
 
I bet a dollar to a donut that no one knows what the Science of Human Evolution is.
 
I bet a dollar to a donut that no one knows what the Science of Human Evolution includes.
 
edwest2 said:
There are scientists who are atheists, so I don’t see the connection.
Click to expand...
The reasons for atheism can be numerous.

No one claims that science should drive one to be religious, or vice versa.

The point is that science and religious belief need not be opposed, not that they ought be a job lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top