Evidence for Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter SeekingCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Bible itself tells us it is useful for all things.
Explain to me how it’s useful to help us find the target sites on the HIV virus to make a vaccine.
The Catholic Church has a Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
So you agree with them that common descent of all living things on Earth is virtually certain?
The Church does not allow Catholics to believe in atheistic evolution.
Neither does science. We agree with the Pope that the proper role of science is elsewhere.
That’s what I’m against.
Ah. This guy:

 
As far as I can make out there are five main positions in this discussion.

Those who are not-believers in God and accept the Theory of Evolution fully and completely along the lines of Dawkins (evolution is based on mere chance alone)

Those who are not-believers in God and accept the Theory of Eveolution with some conditions.

Those who believe in God and fully reject the Theory of Evolution.

Those who believe in God and accept an Intelligent Design adaptation of Evolution

Those who believe in God and accept the Theory of Evolution in the sense that God is the first mover and that evolution is not “mere chance.” This position is not the same as “Intelligent Design” - This is my position.
There are also those who believe in God and don’t presume to KNOW how God brought about His creation, but are open to speculate based on critical observation without promulgating it as TRUTH.
 
Science and Religion can work hand and hand and they really aren’t at odds with one another. Its a matter or faith and perspective. I’m a Catholic and I believe in evolution. God is the creator and he can make anything change if He so wills it. Since God doesn’t work in or time stasis it can take millions of years but in God’s time, less than a second. Who is to say we are still not in the creation process that God started?
 
(Barbarian points out that a literal Genesis has never been taught by the Church, although a literal Adam and Eve is consistent with our faith and with evolutionary theory)

If so, I’m in good company. St. Augustine and Pope Benedict XVI have a bit more credibility than you do. They don’t see a problem with a non-literal Genesis.

Could it be that they understood something you haven’t?
Yeah maybe they do. I would love them to share with the class.
 
The Bible itself tells us it is useful for all things. The Catholic Church has a Pontifical Academy of Sciences. The Church has not separated itself into parts, it views the world, both physical and spiritual, in its totality. It views man, physical and spiritual, in totality. Only a few would separate science and religion. The Church does not do this.

It does not do this regarding when human life begins.

It does not do this regarding embryonic stem cell research.

It does not do this regarding evolution.

Man is not just his intellect or his body.

The Church does not allow Catholics to believe in atheistic evolution. That’s what I’m against.

God bless,
Ed
You make a good point. The Church has been behind science for a long long time. Now, we should separate?
 
There are also those who believe in God and don’t presume to KNOW how God brought about His creation, but are open to speculate based on critical observation without promulgating it as TRUTH.
MapleOak, That is a good point. This approach brings a certain amount of humility to the discussion of Evolution. We often argue about situations that we are assuming that we - (me, myself and I specifically) know the mind of God.

This is, I think, is the beauty of the Church’s position, as I understand it in the CCC, that allows us to speculate on the “how” the world is created and still allows us to seek the “why” through the Church toward God.
 
There are also those who believe in God and don’t presume to KNOW how God brought about His creation, but are open to speculate based on critical observation without promulgating it as TRUTH.[/qquote]
Would you object to “virtually certain?” 😉
 
Barbarian asks:
Would you object to “virtually certain?”
No, as long as it remains relegated to the realm of hypothesis,
Then you have managed to dissent both from science and the magesterium. Perhaps you don’t know what “hypothesis” means.
 
If it’s such a grave concern, then why does the Catholic Church permit people to believe it in the first place?

I agree that it can lead people away from Christ. But obviously it doesn’t always do this. Many simply switch churches (becoming Catholic for example). Apparently some also simply stay where they and never even question their own denomination’s teachings on the creation/evolution debate.

For many people they could frankly care less exactly how God created His creation. It simply doesn’t concern them so long as they have some faith in Jesus.

Again, if it’s such a grave concern, then why does the Catholic Church permit people to believe it in the first place?

I think you’re seriously exaggerating the dangers of a movement which is simply misguided toward science.
The concern is grave, but not so much for the church which tends to allow a lot of practices it claims are wrong. The reason is quite simple. The impact on the numbers of “Catholics” are already going down rapidly enough as it is. 85% of all Catholics practice birthcontrol and the Church is not ready to lose 85% of its followers. I assume they see no great harm in a small percentage of creationists (mostly very old Catholics or converts from Baptist denominations) the same way they see no big harm in those same folks more often than not being fundamentalists which the Church also decries as incorrect. Since Islam is now the largest religious denomination in the world, I think they are protecting their numbers.

The gravity occurs in our country where we are continually falling farther and farther behind the rest of the world in education. Our children are so poorly taught these days that a full 25% of TEACHERS don’t know that dinosaurs were extinct before humans arrived on the scene. That is so abominable a situation that it makes one physically ill. So much for ill-educated parents decidinig school curriculum and text books. That’s what you get folks. We are an anti-intellectual society precisely because historically the rich worked hard to make sure that the masses thought little of education. We now do, and worldwide we pay a horrific price for it.
 
The concern is grave, but not so much for the church which tends to allow a lot of practices it claims are wrong. The reason is quite simple. The impact on the numbers of “Catholics” are already going down rapidly enough as it is. 85% of all Catholics practice birthcontrol and the Church is not ready to lose 85% of its followers.
The Church does not force anyone to follow its teachings nor does it remain silent on such things as birth control. If you take the time to look into what the Church teaches on artificial birth control you will find that it teaches it to be a gravely immoral practice and to willfully ignore that teaching with the knowledge that it is wrong is to commit mortal sin. The Church is concerned about those 85%, not in that its stands to lose them, but in that it openly professes the wrongness of contraception to them and offers its prayers for them so that their souls may not be lost. In no way does it “allow” the use of contraception.
I assume they see no great harm in a small percentage of creationists (mostly very old Catholics or converts from Baptist denominations) the same way they see no big harm in those same folks more often than not being fundamentalists which the Church also decries as incorrect.
Could you point out where the Church condemns either creationism or Theistic evolution.
Since Islam is now the largest religious denomination in the world, I think they are protecting their numbers.
This is a rather serious conclusion to come to, and completely incorrect.
 
The Church does not force anyone to follow its teachings nor does it remain silent on such things as birth control. If you take the time to look into what the Church teaches on artificial birth control you will find that it teaches it to be a gravely immoral practice and to willfully ignore that teaching with the knowledge that it is wrong is to commit mortal sin. The Church is concerned about those 85%, not in that its stands to lose them, but in that it openly professes the wrongness of contraception to them and offers its prayers for them so that their souls may not be lost. In no way does it “allow” the use of contraception.

Could you point out where the Church condemns either creationism or Theistic evolution.

This is a rather serious conclusion to come to, and completely incorrect.
Very well said. 👍

I’ll add a few more things.
 
The concern is grave, but not so much for the church which tends to allow a lot of practices it claims are wrong. The reason is quite simple. The impact on the numbers of “Catholics” are already going down rapidly enough as it is. 85% of all Catholics practice birthcontrol and the Church is not ready to lose 85% of its followers. I assume they see no great harm in a small percentage of creationists (mostly very old Catholics or converts from Baptist denominations) the same way they see no big harm in those same folks more often than not being fundamentalists which the Church also decries as incorrect. Since Islam is now the largest religious denomination in the world, I think they are protecting their numbers.

The gravity occurs in our country where we are continually falling farther and farther behind the rest of the world in education. Our children are so poorly taught these days that a full 25% of TEACHERS don’t know that dinosaurs were extinct before humans arrived on the scene. That is so abominable a situation that it makes one physically ill. So much for ill-educated parents decidinig school curriculum and text books. That’s what you get folks. We are an anti-intellectual society precisely because historically the rich worked hard to make sure that the masses thought little of education. We now do, and worldwide we pay a horrific price for it.
This is not an anti-intellectual society. Anyone can go to a library and read. Anyone can educate themselves. On the internet, there are worthwhile, fully accredited sources of information. Unfortunately, there are also those who create fear in people. Knowledge is freely available.

Look at American media. Sex, Britney, Jen, Brad, Angelina, profanity spewing “comedians.” People can choose to politely complain about these things. They should.

And the nightly news? Celebrities and nonsense? People can learn if they want to. No one is forcing them not too.

And parents. How many are sitting down with their kids and getting them interested in learning? How many are helpful with their homework?

God bless,
Ed
 
The concern is grave, but not so much for the church which tends to allow a lot of practices it claims are wrong.
The only thing that I can think of regarding this topic is the Church’s warning not to fall into the various errors of fundamentalism. We can appreciate their zeal but we should not emulate their methods.
The reason is quite simple. The impact on the numbers of “Catholics” are already going down rapidly enough as it is. 85% of all Catholics practice birthcontrol and the Church is not ready to lose 85% of its followers.
I’m sorry but if indeed 85% of all Catholics practice birth control then the Church has already virtually lost 85% of her followers. They have effectively excommunicated themselves, so I don’t think the reason is that simple.

Furthermore, the Church does not “permit” this kind of dissention. This is actually an all-out apostasy if indeed the statistics you have provided are correct.

As an example of a “permission” that the Church does grant, the Church does “permit” a divorce via the proper procedures of an annulment. But if this annulment is not properly obtained then the actions of the divorcees have left them in a state of mortal sin if they re-marry. This is the same state that the “85% of all Catholics” you mentioned above are in if they are indeed practicing birth control.

On the issue of creationism, however, the Church permits it without really any warning at all, aside from the warning to avoid the errors of fundamentalism. In other words, no “annulment” is required by the Church to believe in creationism. The Church permits both views.

My own personal view is a theistic evolutionary one, and I would seriously hope to patiently convince many YEC’s here to strongly consider the theistic evolutionary view without advising them falsely that they are going against the Church when doing so. The bottom line is that they are allowed by the Church to believe this if they choose and they have not “sinned” if they believe the Earth is merely 6,000 years old. They’re simply seriously misinformed regarding current scientific issues in my opinion.
I assume they see no great harm in a small percentage of creationists (mostly very old Catholics or converts from Baptist denominations) the same way they see no big harm in those same folks more often than not being fundamentalists which the Church also decries as incorrect.
You mentioned that 85% of all Catholics above. Do you know which percentages of all Catholics actually do believe in some form of YEC? I have no numbers on this.
Since Islam is now the largest religious denomination in the world, I think they are protecting their numbers.
Actually, Islam is now the largest religious denomination in the world precisely because, apparently, 85% of all Catholics practice birth control.

And, yes, we are protecting our numbers by praying for them to remain true to Church teachings and admonishing them to not engage in birth control for example. We are not “permitting” them to use birth control however. We have specifically “condemned” these practices.

We have not, however, condemned creationism though. The comparisons you are giving really are trying to make out creationism as a grave evil which the Church should “repent of” though, such as your example below.
The gravity occurs in our country where we are continually falling farther and farther behind the rest of the world in education.
And what does the Catholic Church have to do with this?

Do you have statistics to verify this claim and by what criteria do we judge this?
Our children are so poorly taught these days that a full 25% of TEACHERS don’t know that dinosaurs were extinct before humans arrived on the scene. That is so abominable a situation that it makes one physically ill.
My children do know that dinosaurs were extinct well before we humans arrived on the scene. But even if they didn’t they could still be very well educated in other areas besides the biological sciences.
So much for ill-educated parents deciding school curriculum and text books. That’s what you get folks. We are an anti-intellectual society precisely because historically the rich worked hard to make sure that the masses thought little of education. We now do, and worldwide we pay a horrific price for it.
I think we’re going to pay a horrific price for the 85% of all Catholics who practice birth control, so I’m not so much concerned with the unknown percentage of Catholics who preach some form of YEC. I’m trusting that they’ll eventually come around if they investigate the matter with an open mind toward the evolutionary methods by which God created humanity. And, if they don’t, society will not collapse anytime soon either.

Anyway, I have another more in-depth thread I’m involved in.

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut. 🙂
 
The concern is grave, but not so much for the church which tends to allow a lot of practices it claims are wrong. The reason is quite simple. The impact on the numbers of “Catholics” are already going down rapidly enough as it is. 85% of all Catholics practice birthcontrol and the Church is not ready to lose 85% of its followers. I assume they see no great harm in a small percentage of creationists (mostly very old Catholics or converts from Baptist denominations) the same way they see no big harm in those same folks more often than not being fundamentalists which the Church also decries as incorrect. Since Islam is now the largest religious denomination in the world, I think they are protecting their numbers.

The gravity occurs in our country where we are continually falling farther and farther behind the rest of the world in education. Our children are so poorly taught these days that a full 25% of TEACHERS don’t know that dinosaurs were extinct before humans arrived on the scene. That is so abominable a situation that it makes one physically ill. So much for ill-educated parents decidinig school curriculum and text books. That’s what you get folks. We are an anti-intellectual society precisely because historically the rich worked hard to make sure that the masses thought little of education. We now do, and worldwide we pay a horrific price for it.
Catholicism is a proposition and not an easy one at that. The Church will not compromise proclaiming the truth as handed down from Jesus.
 
(Barbarian on considering evolutionary theory to be a “hypothesis”)
Then you have managed to dissent both from science and the magesterium.
Interesting conclusion. Perhaps you would care to explain.
Sure. Pope John Paul II taught that evolution was even “more than a theory.” As you might know, “theory” is as high as it goes in science. So if you consider it merely a hypothesis, you’ve ignored what the Pope said about it.

Barbarian suggests:
Perhaps you don’t know what “hypothesis” means.
Sure I do.
So why the confusion between “theory” and “hypothesis?” What do you think a “hypothesis” is?
I have several degrees in science. I was a practicing scientist for nearly 20 years. I teach science. Yes. I know what it is. But you seem not to know. What do you think the difference is between a hypothesis and a theory?
 
Then you have managed to dissent both from science and the magesterium. Perhaps you don’t know what “hypothesis” means.
While Church does indeed agree that evolution is more than a hypothesis (and I would personally consider evolution to be a fact beyond reasonable doubt) the poster also noted a part that seems to have been left out when you quoted them…
…with the consideration for inerrant conclusiveness being a very relevent factor.
This part is important too.
 
Barbarian observes:
Then you have managed to dissent both from science and the magesterium. Perhaps you don’t know what “hypothesis” means.
While Church does indeed agree that evolution is more than a hypothesis (and I would personally consider evolution to be a fact beyond reasonable doubt) the poster also noted a part that seems to have been left out when you quoted them…
…with the consideration for inerrant conclusiveness being a very relevent factor.

It’s completely irrelevant in science. Science doesn’t deal in received wisdom, but rather makes inferences from evidence. Works better for the physical universe.
This part is important too.
For religious beliefs, not for science.
 
Sure. Pope John Paul II taught that evolution was even “more than a theory.”
To which Pope Benedict XVI added “the theory of evolution is not a complete, scientifically proven theory.”

Are you dissenting from the magisterium of the Church?
So why the confusion between “theory” and “hypothesis?” What do you think a “hypothesis” is? I have several degrees in science. I was a practicing scientist for nearly 20 years. I teach science. Yes. I know what it is. But you seem not to know. What do you think the difference is between a hypothesis and a theory?
From the Catholic Encyclopedia: “How far is the theory of evolution based on observed facts? It is understood to be still only an hypothesis.”
newadvent.org/cathen/05654a.htm

Perhaps your 20 years in science puts you above the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top