Church Doctrine & Science

  • Thread starter Thread starter Faith1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Faith1960

Guest
What happens to faithful Catholics if and when science disproves something the Church has long held to be true? Scientific discoveries are moving at an astounding rate and rarely does a week go by without the public being informed of something new, such as the
Australopithecus sediba bones that were recently discovered and made news today.

I’m thinking here about all the debates regarding monogenism vs polygenism but, there may be other teachings. What if one day science proves Church teaching to be incorrect – what happens to the faithful and what happens to the Church in light of advancing scientific discoveries?
 
Faith1960 said:
What if one day science proves Church teaching to be incorrect – what happens to the faithful and what happens to the Church in light of advancing scientific discoveries?
Click to expand...
I’m trying to think of a hypothetical scientific discovery that could conflict with some Church doctrine. The sciences are physical (that’s why we call them “physical sciences”), but the Church deals with topics which are metaphysical (beyond the physical).

That’s like science disproving ghosts. How could science possibly do that?
 
regression said:
What doctrine would this disprove?
Click to expand...
I wasn’t referring to that specifically disproving Chruch doctrine, I was using that as as an example of the most recent scientific discovery in the news. In my OP, I’m specifically talking about monogenism vs polygenism.
 
Faith1960 said:
What happens to faithful Catholics if and when science disproves something the Church has long held to be true? Scientific discoveries are moving at an astounding rate and rarely does a week go by without the public being informed of something new, such as the
Australopithecus sediba bones that were recently discovered and made news today.

I’m thinking here about all the debates regarding monogenism vs polygenism but, there may be other teachings. What if one day science proves Church teaching to be incorrect – what happens to the faithful and what happens to the Church in light of advancing scientific discoveries?
Click to expand...
We keep on. We are told by the Church that we are not required to believe anything that is contradicted by science(this was in some document from about 1900 concerning Genesis). Worse thing science can do is tweek our opinion on Genesis. It can never change our views on original sin. We carried on when evolution and the Big bang came around. I don’t think they really have anything left to throw at our beliefs. I think the next big battles in science will be over things such as prolonging life and population control. Beyond that science has nothing to do with the faith.
 
Science produces theories. It is only as good as it’s current state. It would be assumed that it’s current state is incomplete in either analysis or data.

I think responsible scientists would refrain from calling any of it’s theories the last word on the subject at hand.
 
Benadam said:
Science produces theories. It is only as good as it’s current state. It would be assumed that it’s current state is incomplete in either analysis or data.
Click to expand...
Most theories are based on actual observations. The understanding may change, but what is observed doesn’t. Theories based on observation are typically subsumed into a larger theory.

One of the best examples of this is gravitational theories. Newton had no idea what gravity was, but predicted it’s effects with truly incredible accuracy. Einstein actually explained what gravity was, thus changing the entire theory, yet it didn’t conflict with Newton’s predictions.
I think responsible scientists would refrain from calling any of it’s theories the last word on the subject at hand.
Click to expand...
Most scientists don’t. One’s that do should be looked at with caution.
 
Heuchler said:
We keep on. We are told by the Church that we are not required to believe anything that is contradicted by science(this was in some document from about 1900 concerning Genesis). Worse thing science can do is tweek our opinion on Genesis. It can never change our views on original sin. We carried on when evolution and the Big bang came around. I don’t think they really have anything left to throw at our beliefs. I think the next big battles in science will be over things such as prolonging life and population control. Beyond that science has nothing to do with the faith.
Click to expand...
If the Church came out opposing prolongation of life , methinks it would generate a huge unnecessary faith crisis for a lot of people. I hope that would never happen.

Population control is somewhat of a non-issue, as only dictatorial governments (like China’s) and a handful of environmental fanatics want it. The masses don’t. I’d imagine most average people would side with the Church on this one.

ICXC NIKA.
 
GEddie said:
If the Church came out opposing prolongation of life , methinks it would generate a huge unnecessary faith crisis for a lot of people. I hope that would never happen.
Click to expand...
As usual, it depends on the method used. Using stem cells from aborted babies would not be an acceptable means to prolong life. But organ transplants from willing donors are fine.

Population control is somewhat of a non-issue, as only dictatorial governments (like China’s) and a handful of environmental fanatics want it. The masses don’t. I’d imagine most average people would side with the Church on this one.
Legally sanctioned abortion on demand is a form of population control. Margret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the world) envisioned it as a way to facilitate genocide against black Americans. She did not envision any coercion - just let them willingly abort themselves out of existence.

Her plan is working. We abort more babies in the US than we deliver. Aborted babies are statistically more likely to be black.
 
Actually, it seems science is moving more towards the Church. The Nicene Creed says that “we believe in God, creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.”

Apparently, scientists have discovered an invisible planet.
 
Faith1960 said:
What happens to faithful Catholics if and when science disproves something the Church has long held to be true? Scientific discoveries are moving at an astounding rate and rarely does a week go by without the public being informed of something new, such as the
Australopithecus sediba bones that were recently discovered and made news today.

I’m thinking here about all the debates regarding monogenism vs polygenism but, there may be other teachings. What if one day science proves Church teaching to be incorrect – what happens to the faithful and what happens to the Church in light of advancing scientific discoveries?
Click to expand...
As the Catechism puts it, “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 the of the faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are” (CCC 159).

The Catholic Church has no fear of science or scientific discovery.

catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp

Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish… We need each other to be what we must be, what we are called to be."
Pope John Paul II
 
DavidFilmer said:
Actually, it seems science is moving more towards the Church. The Nicene Creed says that “we believe in God, creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.”

Apparently, scientists have discovered an invisible planet.
Click to expand...
It’s not truly invisible. It’s just too far to see.

ICXC NIKA
 
kepha1 said:
As the Catechism puts it, “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 the of the faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are” (CCC 159).

The Catholic Church has no fear of science or scientific discovery.

catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp
Click to expand...
I know that the CCC says that, yet we’re required to believe in monogenism, when it appears that science has pretty much concluded that there were never just two humans on the planet. I’m trying to reconcile that with what the Church requires us to believe, and fear that discoveries of science go against what Pope PiusXII instructed us to believe in Humani Generis.
 
Faith1960 said:
I know that the CCC says that, yet we’re required to believe in monogenism, when it appears that science has pretty much concluded that there were never just two humans on the planet. I’m trying to reconcile that with what the Church requires us to believe, and fear that discoveries of science go against what Pope PiusXII instructed us to believe in Humani Generis.
Click to expand...
No it hasn’t; fossil records can never say which skeleton was or was not a human being. The mind does not fossilize, and even now, except for our oversized heads and arched feet, our bones are very much like those of other primates. Especially when all that is found are a few limb bones and head fragments.

If at the very beginning of human life, there were many humans, there would now be several human species. By the time of the Bible at least, there were not.

Besides which, most bodies do NOT form fossils. If the first humans did not fossilize, the earliest fossil record would show many human fossils. That cannot prove polygenism.

ICXC NIKA.
 
Faith1960 said:
What happens to faithful Catholics if and when science disproves something the Church has long held to be true? Scientific discoveries are moving at an astounding rate and rarely does a week go by without the public being informed of something new, such as the
Australopithecus sediba bones that were recently discovered and made news today.

I’m thinking here about all the debates regarding monogenism vs polygenism but, there may be other teachings. What if one day science proves Church teaching to be incorrect – what happens to the faithful and what happens to the Church in light of advancing scientific discoveries?
Click to expand...
Is this assuming that each and every bit of all science can pertain to everything in the universe? Can scientists know what happened in every part of the earth, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, going backwards millions of years?
 
Faith1960 said:
I know that the CCC says that, yet we’re required to believe in monogenism, when it appears that science has pretty much concluded that there were never just two humans on the planet. I’m trying to reconcile that with what the Church requires us to believe, and fear that discoveries of science go against what Pope PiusXII instructed us to believe in Humani Generis.
Click to expand...
I don’t know if this makes sense. An individual genetic research project pertains to a set of genes out of 20,000 to 25,000 genes in the human anatomy. In addition to what can be observed as happening today, assumptions and estimates are used to design a computer program that simulates anatomical activities going millions of years backwards. The conclusions follow from the evidence presented.

But, and this is a very important “but”. The evidence presented does not cover what was happening every hour of the day for millions of years going backwards. The evidence presented does not include all the events which were happening on every square inch of planet earth going backwards for millions of years.

Therefore, the possibility of two sole parents of the human species certainly exists.

One more thing. We are not required to provide scientific proof that Adam existed since we have the same human nature and we have Divine Revelation protected by the Holy Spirit.
 
grannymh said:
Therefore, the possibility of two sole parents of the human species certainly exists.
Click to expand...
I think the key word here is possibility. Unfortunately, I’ve spent a few more hours again, today, searching for anything scientific from well-respected scientists who support the theory of monogenism, and I still haven’t found any.

I did find an article on the website, Evidence For God, written by Dennis Bonnette, Ph.D., but the ideas he proposed sound ludicrous to me.

Off and on I’ve been thinking about joining the UCC and have been thinking about it a lot again, lately. I think I’d fare better there, rather than spend so much time trying to make Catholic dogma fit into what we’ve learned about the world and human origin.
 
Faith1960 said:
I think the key word here is possibility. Unfortunately, I’ve spent a few more hours again, today, searching for anything scientific from well-respected scientists who support the theory of monogenism, and I still haven’t found any.

I did find an article on the website, Evidence For God, written by Dennis Bonnette, Ph.D., but the ideas he proposed sound ludicrous to me.

Off and on I’ve been thinking about joining the UCC and have been thinking about it a lot again, lately. I think I’d fare better there, rather than spend so much time trying to make Catholic dogma fit into what we’ve learned about the world and human origin.
Click to expand...
The key word **IS **possibility.

Would you be so kind as to share what possibility means to you?

Depending on how you phrase your answer, I will do my best to explain why it is unnecessary to fit the particular Catholic dogma of monogenism into some kind of scientific research paper.

Question for those who actually do scientific research or who read actual research papers. How would you relate the word possibility to falsifiable? And please give your definition of falsifiable and how it works in your research area.

Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top