Creationism and Evolution.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guy355
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guy355

Guest
What does the Catholic doctrine say about Evolution as a whole, and to be a Catholic is it a must to believe that the world was created in 6 days, and that it happened 6000 years ago? An honest answer from a Catholic view is welcome. Thanks.
 
As Catholics we believe in the truth.

We as Catholics are interested in discovering the truth, because we know that the truth will never disprove our religion or God, but only more firmly prove them.

God bless you.
 
This pretty much makes it clear that Catholics are permitted to believe in evolution but, we must believe that Adam was the first man and that all humans descended from Adam:

“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 either that 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.”
We also must not question the literal and historical sense of certain facts of the creation and fall:

Question III: Whether in particular the literal and historical sense can be called into question, where it is a matter of facts related in the same chapters, which pertain to the foundation of the Christian religion; for example, among others, the creation of all things wrought by God in the beginning of time; the special creation of man; the formation of the first woman from the first man; the oneness of the human race; the original happiness of our first parents in the state of justice, integrity, and immortality; the command given to man by God to prove his obedience; the transgression of the divine command through the devil’s persuasion under the guise of a serpent; the casting of our first parents out of that first state of innocence; and also the promise of a future restorer? – Reply: In the negative.
 
Hi Guy,

On evolution the position of the Church was stated long ago in Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis :
  1. 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.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/p.../hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

In short, the Church admits discussion on evolution of the body but not of the immortal soul.

As for the contents of Genesis, the position of the Church remains what it was when the Pontifical Biblilcal Commission wrote to Cardinal Suhard ;
The question of the literary forms of the first eleven chapters of Genesis is far more obscure and complex. These literary forms do not correspond to any of our classical categories and cannot be judged in the light of the Greco-Latin or modern literary types. It is therefore impossible to deny or to affirm their historicity as a whole without unduly applying to them norms of a literary type under which they cannot be classed. If it is agreed not to see in these chapters history in the classical and modern sense, it must be admitted also that known scientific facts do not allow a positive solution of all the problems which they present. The first duty in this matter incumbent on scientific exegesis consists in the careful study of all the problems literary, scientific, historical, cultural, and religious connected with these chapters; in the next place is required a close examination of the literary methods of the ancient oriental peoples, their psychology, their manner of expressing themselves and even their notion of historical truth the requisite, in a word, is to assemble without preformed judgements all the material of the palaeontological and historical, epigraphical and literary sciences. It is only in this way that there is hope of attaining a clearer view of the true nature of certain narratives in the first chapters of Genesis.** To declare a priori that these narratives do not contain history in the modern sense of the word might easily be understood to mean that they do not contain history in any sense, whereas they relate in simple and figurative language, adapted to the understanding of mankind at a lower stage of development, the fundamental truths underlying the divine scheme of salvation, as well as a popular description of the origins of the human race and of the chosen people. **
http://www.thegodpod.com/thegp/content/letter-cardinal-suhard

In other words, we must interpret these chapter of Genesis, not as if they had been written by Greek, Latin or modern wrilters, but taking into account the environment in which they were written and the way people wrote and understood the writing in the days when Genesis was written…The document states clearly that these chapters were written as a “popular description” of the “fundamental truths”. We are not obliged to interpret them literally, but this interpretation is the work of highly competent specialists.

Finally, we must keep in mind that, in reading the Bible, we must look, first of all, for those .fundamental truths that it intends to convey.

Verbum
 
What does the Catholic doctrine say about Evolution as a whole, and to be a Catholic is it a must to believe that the world was created in 6 days, and that it happened 6000 years ago? An honest answer from a Catholic view is welcome. Thanks.
This directly contradicts science and the Church is open to scientific study…throughout history the Church has seen large portions of Genesis as being symbolic. St. Augustine (5th century) wrote extensively on this. He did not believe in a literal 6 day creation and it seems as though St. Thomas (13th century) agrees.
 
This link provides interesting information about the science and thelogy of the creation of the universe and man. Just for info to anyone who is interested, not to argue.
 
This directly contradicts science and the Church is open to scientific study…throughout history the Church has seen large portions of Genesis as being symbolic. St. Augustine (5th century) wrote extensively on this. He did not believe in a literal 6 day creation and it seems as though St. Thomas (13th century) agrees.
St. Augustine does not represent all of Church teaching, with all due respect.

"The Time Question

Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago."

So, the Church has not made a definite decision about the time frame. God, as God, could have created in 6 days or 6,000. The bottom line: God does not require science as we understand it.

Ed
 
This directly contradicts science and the Church is open to scientific study…throughout history the Church has seen large portions of Genesis as being symbolic. St. Augustine (5th century) wrote extensively on this. He did not believe in a literal 6 day creation and it seems as though St. Thomas (13th century) agrees.
👍 This
 
Msgr. Georges Lemaitre, a Catholic priest and astronomer from Belgium, was the first scientist to publish the idea of an expanding universe (two years before Hubble) which eventually evolved into ‘The Big Bang theory.’

(source Wikipedia which cites Nature.com as a source)
 
Msgr. Georges Lemaitre, a Catholic priest and astronomer from Belgium, was the first scientist to publish the idea of an expanding universe (two years before Hubble) which eventually evolved into ‘The Big Bang theory.’

(source Wikipedia which cites Nature.com as a source)
What does that have to do with the topic?

Ed
 
This directly contradicts science and the Church is open to scientific study…throughout history the Church has seen large portions of Genesis as being symbolic. St. Augustine (5th century) wrote extensively on this. He did not believe in a literal 6 day creation and it seems as though St. Thomas (13th century) agrees.
👍
 
What does the Catholic doctrine say about Evolution as a whole, and to be a Catholic is it a must to believe that the world was created in 6 days, and that it happened 6000 years ago? An honest answer from a Catholic view is welcome. Thanks.
Check out the Library under Tracts, Adam Eve and Evolution.
 
What does that have to do with the topic?

Ed
I was trying to show that the Catholic Church is pro science as long as it involves God as its creator. If you believe in a God originating Big Bang theory, then it is not such a big step to believe in a God originating form of evolution.
 
I was trying to show that the Catholic Church is pro science as long as it involves God as its creator. If you believe in a God originating Big Bang theory, then it is not such a big step to believe in a God originating form of evolution.
Since I cannot respond to the evolution aspect, I can only add the following. The Big Bang is credible but the rest relies on a proper understanding of God’s role in creating everything.

Objects in space are given a certain age but based on what? This man is challenging the fundamental aspects of redshift, which is a method thought to determine how far and how fast other objects are moving away from earth.

haltonarp.com/bio

Here is mention of objects moving at 5 to 10 times the speed of light - called superluminal, which means faster than light.

ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Sept04/Kellermann2/Kellermann3_6.html

So, I think, much has not been settled regarding distance and the rate of motion of objects in space. Do we know how, during planetary formation, the various radioactive elements separate out from the non-radioactive elements? If the earth was filled with uranium, and is as old as claimed, all that uranium would have turned into lead.

Best,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top