did pope francis really say evolution is true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hesso12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
OneSmallFlower said:
Right, those are good things to point out. What I mean is, you can believe in the theory if evolution insofar as it matches the teachings of where original sin comes from, that we come from two human parents, etc.
There are some good official church documents out there on this; I’d recommend the OP look them up. They’d probably be more helpful than I would. 🙂
Click to expand...
The Catholic doctrine of Original Sin is actually based on the free choice of the Original first human, not on an evolving population which is today’s current evolution model. There is some interesting information about Original Sin in the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraphs 396-409.

Links to official Catholic teaching
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Unfortunately, in this decade, we have to face the fact that the real current evolution theory aka the science of human evolution denies Adam and Eve’s existence as sole founders of humankind.

Here are some current resources on Catholicism’s firm doctrines.

Link to Catholic article published in Crisis Magazine online: crisismagazine.com/2014/d…e-really-exist

Additional Catholic article hprweb.com/2014/07/time-t…genesis-story/

Informative Catholic website drbonnette.com/

The new expanded third edition of the book *Origin of the Human Species *by Catholic author Dr. Dennis Bonnette includes the article “The Myth of the “Myth” of Adam and Eve” as Appendix One. Appendix Two is “The Philosophical Impossibility of Darwinian Naturalistic Evolution”

http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Human-Species-Third-Edition/dp/1932589686/ref=sr_1_cc_1?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=14124676 70&sr=1-1-catcorr&keywords=Origin+of+the+human+spe cies++Bonnette
 
grannymh said:
Here are two sentences which may look troubling to those who miss the material “nature” context. Try not to read with the secular concept.
Evolution in nature is not opposed to the notion of Creation, because evolution presupposes the creation of beings that evolve.”

*“He created human beings *and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment.”
It appears that the link is referring to the internal laws or natural laws perhaps involved in Intelligent Design and Creationism. There is no question that humans have a natural physical material body with natural extremely developed brains.

Catholicism teaches that it is because of the spiritual immaterial rational soul that the natural body made of matter (material) becomes a human person. We are an unique unification of both the material world and the spiritual world. (paragraphs 355-373, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition)

The link in post one has a lot of text by the link’s author Adam Withnall. Still, I did not find quotes from the Pope that denied the Catholic doctrine of God immediately creating the spiritual soul (image of God, Genesis 1: 26-27) at human conception. Therefore, I do not suggest the false assumption that the human person is the same category as pandas and puppies.
Click to expand...
^^^This.

In addition, consider this: According to the Genesis record, everything that God created was very good. However, in our times there are organisms (the malaria-causing Plasmodium and the liver fluke, to name two) that are very bad. The only possible explanations that I have been able to come up with for this contradiction are that 1) our definition of “very good” is dramatically different from God’s (really?); 2) the devil created them (but does the devil really have the power to create?); 3) God didn’t create anything, and we’re all the result of materialistic evolution (a leap of faith that I’m not prepared to take); or, 4) these organisms evolved from organisms that were originally “very good”. You choose which you want to believe, and my emphasis on “believe” is intentional.
 
DaveBj said:
^^^This.

In addition, consider this: According to the Genesis record, everything that God created was very good. However, in our times there are organisms (the malaria-causing Plasmodium and the liver fluke, to name two) that are very bad. The only possible explanations that I have been able to come up with for this contradiction are that 1) our definition of “very good” is dramatically different from God’s (really?); 2) the devil created them (but does the devil really have the power to create?); 3) God didn’t create anything, and we’re all the result of materialistic evolution (a leap of faith that I’m not prepared to take); or, 4) these organisms evolved from organisms that were originally “very good”. You choose which you want to believe, and my emphasis on “believe” is intentional.
Click to expand...
It appears to me that your explanation 4. is the most reasonable. However, I think that there is more to this explanation.
“4) these organisms evolved from organisms that were originally “very good”. You choose which you want to believe, and my emphasis on “believe” is intentional.”
First. I would offer that the creation account in Genesis 1: 1-31 is based on the harmony of creation pre-Fall. However, this does not mean that the Garden is perfect bliss because perfect bliss is the Beatific Vision. Yes, the word often used is paradise; however, that is earthly paradise and not heavenly paradise. Paragraphs 374-379 in the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, describe “Man in Paradise.” This existed as long as Adam remained in the divine intimacy of God. This is known as Original Holiness, aka the State of Sanctifying Grace.

Second. The pre-Fall harmony of creation was lost when the first human freely scorned his Creator. Information is in CCC paragraphs 396-409. The good news is found in *CCC *410-421. Harmony within living organisms was lost so that down the line, in general, deleterious gene mutations could be formed in addition to the many beneficial gene mutations depending on the involved living organism.

Third. I find that there is a difference between material/physical creation and the creation of the human person whose very nature is an unique unification of the spiritual and material. Thus, we cannot accept materialistic evolution as applying to the human person.
 
OneSmallFlower said:
So basically, you can believe in evolution if you want to, but you don’t have to. It’s really up to you and what you think is most scientifically accurate. But it doesn’t pose a challenge to your faith.
Click to expand...
The OP doesn’t have to believe in any science, if he doesn’t want to. But that won’t make it untrue.
 
God did it the long or the short way - what difference does it make. It will always remain a mystery until Christ comes again.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top