Catholics: (POLL) Do you accept evolution?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Abiogenesis is the study of non-life to life, and it’s correct that there are no definitive answers yet, it’s an emergent field. A few experiments have shown the creation of simple building blocks using chemical reactions.

A single-cell organism is actually still much more complex than you’d need initially. RNA almost certainly predates DNA and is much simpler. But even RNA can potentially begin as even simpler self-replicating molecules. Once that replication begins to occur you can have mutation and selection.

Will be cool to see what the coming decades reveal about the process.
 
God did not say animal became man. Animals and humans have two different types of souls. He created animal and man separately, with different purposes. Eve was created from Adam’s rib. I just don’t see how that can possibly align well with the evolution theory at all of apes becoming human and suddenly having immortal souls.
 
I do find it amusing that the Catholics supporting the Protestant idea of creationism are often those Catholics that abhor the very thought of Protestantism.
 
It is not a Protestant idea. It comes from Catholics…for instance, the Church Fathers. Blessed Anne Emmerich also had visions of it as well.

Most Catholics have believed in a literal Genesis up until the 1800’s, which was when the evolution theory came into the picture.
 
misstherese said:
It is not a Protestant idea. It comes from Catholics…for instance, the Church Fathers.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn’t. It’s a recent import from Protestantism. The Catholic Church was never all that big on Biblical literalism, even in the early days.
 
Biblical inerrancy, yes, but that is not the same as Biblical literalism.
 
Here’s a direct quote from one of the Church fathers, Origen:

“who is so silly as to believe that God…planted a paradise eastward in Eden, and set in it a visible and palpable tree of life…[and] anyone who tasted its fruit with his bodily teeth would gain life?”
 
Interesting you quote the only one (besides Augustine, who was considered an outlier compared to other Church Fathers on this subject) who didn’t believe in a more literal Genesis account, and who also believed in reincarnation.

I tell you it absolutely does not come from Protestantism. Would you consider St. Thomas Aquinas Protestant? Or any of the other Church Fathers?
 
Catholic Schools teach evolution as part of their curriculum, both in the states and abroad. It is a well founded scientific theory. Creationism doesn’t get such support. Additionally, the last two Popes have commented that evolution is not inconsistent with creation.

While the Church doesn’t take an official position on it, they clearly state in CCC #159 that “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God.” Research in evolution has been carried out in such a fashion and does not override moral laws, so it’s good. If at some point down the road further research shows it to be false, then that would be good as well. Not likely though.

From what I’ve seen creationism is an idea that’s supported mostly by Protestant Biblical literalists.
 
catholic1seeks said:
I wanted to clear up my perception, which may be distorted from the participants in a recent forum on creationism.
Click to expand...
FWIW, I’ve never met a Catholic in real life who was a creationist, nor is this issue even on the radar screen of the average Catholic.
It’s simply a non-issue for most of us. The Church says it’s fine to believe in evolution, and people generally do.
 
Can we all perhaps be more careful at least of what we consider “creation”. The CCC states in the very first sentence "God (description of God) freely CREATED man …

Therefore a Catholic IS a creationist according to the CCC. We look around and see creatures. It is time to stop talking like a bad rerun of an atheist vs fundamentalist debate and start taking Catholic back.
 
Darryl_B said:
Can we all perhaps be more careful at least of what we consider “creation”. The CCC states in the very first sentence "God (description of God) freely CREATED man …
Click to expand...
I didn’t say “creation”, I said “creationIST”.

“Creationist”, at least in USA, generally refers to people who reject the theory of evolution in a big way.
 
Apologies my friend, I only answered you because you were the last of a string of posts. As I say, to all, do not let fundamentalist christians make the term Creation a bad word as if they own it, they do not own it. Just as they do not own the word Christian though they think they do.
 
Thanks for clarifying. I do indeed believe that God created everything, but I think he could very easily have used the process of evolution, or any other process he wished, as part of his creation process.
So we are on the same page.
 
This might sound wierd to some folks. I don’t think it is.

I believe, as St. John Paul II stated, for a state of life to rise to a higher state, a higher state of life must lift it up.
I have applied that idea to my own (I think) theory of theistic evolution combined with St. Thomas Aquinas’ theology of the material soul ie. Delayed Hominisation.

God said “let there be light” when the earth was without form. The earth is void and without form. The image is an earth that in of it’self is not created in the light but the light is created in it.The void is filled with light and every earthly being thereafter is formed in and with the light. The light is in this speculation, the higher state that preexists and lifts up all subsequent forms and draws all forms of matter to it’s ultimate end in God.

For me then, I see the earth, or matter that is earth, potent with it’s ultimate divine end. Anyone who understands the theology of the material soul will see that I am applying St Thomas’ theology called delayed hominisation. to the theory of evolution. A property of organic matter is material soul.

I think human life is potent in primal organic matter and evolution is a process that reduces that potency to act, and like the material soul is produced as the organic matter reaches the complexity to receive it’s powers, powers that are potent in organic matter from it’s singular primitive state. When life began on earth.it is potent with it’s ultimate end in God. Substantially driven by divine purpose and accidentally driven by random events.
 
Last edited:
Everything is theistic for Christians.
“In Him we live and move and have our being”.
Existence itself is theistic. We only understand the world and ourselves in relation to God.

Ok, now what?

Theology is not a dead end. Your understanding of theology should open your mind and heart to revelation.
Theology should enhance your reason, not cause you to check it at the door.
And science should not frighten you, as science discovers what God created.

If you are not doing reason, you’re not doing theology either. You’re doing fideism, which is condemned by the Catholic Church.

I’m glad this poll was posted, the results indicate that the persistence of the ignorant thankfully amounts to nothing in the end.
 
Last edited:
If I limited my belief in our faith to that which I understood, I’d have a very limited faith indeed.

I trust that God’s plan was perfect. I don’t need to understand how He carried it out to trust in it. I also trust what I can see and observe with the senses God gave me, and those observations support evolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top