How to trust the church/scripture over science

Ben_Sinner · Jul 16, 2014

Hi I’m having a hard time staying strong in the faith. I don’t lose my faith but it is definitely tested by all kinds of difference scientific theories trying to disprove things such as a higher power (God), free will, literal Adam and Eve, homosexuality as a choice, etc. etc.

These are all things that if even one was proven false. The whole faith would be false. Thats scary in my opinion because without Jesus being God and having the Catholic Church to have faith in I would be a wreck.

There are ALOT of different theories and hypothesis that go against church teaching and right when you disprove one of these theories, 5 more pop up that seem to have more evidence than the previous ones.

These aren’t going away.

I need to trust the church’s point of view over the general scientific community but alot of times its hard.

I know scientists are human and humans can error no matter how intelligent their hypothesis are but then again the church is made up of humans too who can make mistakes. Even the Jehovah Witnesses think the Watchtower is infallible but yet we claim them to be wrong. What makes us different then them when we say the Holy See is infallible?

I just was wondering if there is some advice on trusting the word of God and the church over a harmful scientific theory…no matter how strong the evidence is.

pianistclare · Jul 16, 2014

Try searching for other threads on this…there are many.
Suffice it to say that the notion that the Catholic Church is in conflict or contradicts science is false. Many notable scientists are Catholics priests and theologians.
The bottom line is, we believe in the Creator…the Divine “first cause”.

St_Francis · Jul 16, 2014

Science is the study of God’s creation. It is unfortunate that sometimes scientists or popularizers put an atheistic spin on what science learns, or that the same run with an idea with little to no evidence or logical backing to try to undermine the necessity for a Creator.

In fact, it seems the more scientists learn, the greater the need for a Creative Intelligence!

There is plenty to read out there–get it through interlibrary loan to keep it affordable

(Michael Behe, Fr Jaki, etc)

It’s not that science is incompatible with Faith, but the atheistic spin.

zz912 · Jul 16, 2014

Science can never disprove God, for two very important reasons. First, God created science, and God created reason. Science learns more and more about the order and logic to our world, so it better understands what God has created.

Second, science is the study of the universe and the material world. It can’t have anything to say about the non-material (spiritual) world, as it does not have any way of observing, measuring, or testing it.

Faith and science are never in disagreement, nor in contradiction. They actually help each other out quite nicely.

Let’s take one of your examples, homosexuality as a choice, or something else biological. If science were to definitively prove it is biological, so what? It is still a disordered passion that must be controlled. It is similar to things like anger or addiction. We can have very natural tendencies to like anger (those with a natural high temper), but they must control it. We never accept that they are just allowed to let it fly out of control “because that’s how God made them”. We expect them to live in a manner consistent with the natural order of man, which is to control his destructive passions.

As to a literal Adam and Eve, well, don’t look now, but that’s exactly what science is coming closer and closer to finally finding. Which is exactly what you would expect if evolution is true. Evolution states that there are very small changes over vast points of time. But at some point, there had to be a male and female who became homo sapien humans. You wouldn’t expect a mass number of organism to all “mutate” at the same time, which would be ridiculous. See my point?

So relax. Science is the study of God’s majestic creation. The more we learn, the more it points to the rational, loving mind of God.

zz912 · Jul 16, 2014

Oh, I forgot to mention about Scripture, don’t forget, Scripture is NOT a science textbook. It was never intended to be.

As an example, the two stories of creation (yes, there are two) give an overview of the majesty, and complete control of God over the creation of the world and universe. They were never intended to be dry, scholastic documentaries. God wants us to remember the important point of His complete omnipotence, so He gave it to us in the form of a couple of stories, which we are much better at remembering.

Another way of putting it. If I told you that it was raining cats and dogs today where I live, would I be telling you that felines and canines were literally falling from the sky? Of course not! And why is that? Because you recognize my style of writing that I am not writing literalisticly. It literally DID rain very hard, and I am literally telling the truth. But I’m not telling you Garfield and Odie were dropping from the clouds.

Always remember, the Bible is not one book. It is a collection of 73 books/poems/songs/letters/etc. They have many different style, audience, meaning, intent, message, and many different authors.

grannymh · Jul 16, 2014

My best advice is to use the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.

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

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

edwest2 · Jul 16, 2014

Well, people have been saying two contradictory things here at the same time.

Science cannot study, or is silent about, the supernatural.
People post here on a regular basis that “You’re Bible is wrong, here, here and here, because science tells me so.” How can that be? Science cannot study miracles.

People don’t post here trying to find out if the Church accepts quantum entanglement or nanotechnology or dark matter. Their primary focus is on how did life get here? Did it evolve using purely non-God forces? And the answer is usually yes.

Then they try to claim science doesn’t exclude God. Which doesn’t appear to be true. All of our knowledge should come from science, they say. But, as Catholics, what do we know about Jesus? Did he use science to raise the dead? Give sight to the blind? No. He showed us that, as God, he could do those things in a moment.

Other religions believe different things. It’s OK to look at what they teach. But the Catholic Church is the only Church founded by Jesus Christ. That from Peter to Pope Francis, we have existed because of Christ and what He promised to us. That His Church is the Bride of Christ and it is protected by Him.

Think about that.

Peace,
Ed

Nacho45 · Jul 16, 2014

The Scriptures were divinely inspire by God.

The Church was instituted by Jesus through the Apostles.

Science is from man.

sirach2v4 · Jul 16, 2014

from the Psalms

Chapter One

1 Blessed is the man who does not** walk**
in the counsel of the wicked,
Nor** stand** in the way* of sinners,
nor sit in company with scoffers. scoffers are atheists ]
2
Rather, the law of the LORD* is his joy;
and on his law he meditates day and night.

St. John Paul II says that some people reject God because they do not like how God chose to reveal himself.

Technically and legally, college professors and teachers should keep their opinions to themselves. We have a constitutionally guaranteed right to expression of religion (the first amendment to the US constitution).

Faith is a gift from God and sometimes it is easy to find the people to whom God has not yet granted that gift. Pray for them.

TimothyH · Jul 16, 2014

The Church does not teach that homosexuality is a choice.

The Church literally says that the reasons for homosexuality “remain an enigma.” ← That is the official teaching of the Church.

The Church stays out of the arguments and debates on why it happens.

-Tim-

Contarini · Jul 16, 2014

That’s true of the first two things. If there were no God, or if everything were materially determined (as certain neuroscientists argue, for instance), then the Faith would be false.

It’s not true of the latter two. It is no part of Catholic doctrine that “homosexuality is a choice.” The Church is not committed to any particular theory about the origins of homosexuality, only to the view that it is “intrinsically disordered” and that to engage in homosexual acts (mental or physical) is gravely sinful from an objective point of view.

And even if this turned out not to be the permanent teaching of the Church, the Faith would not collapse in my opinion. It’s not a central teaching in the same way that the first two things you mentioned are.

A literal Adam and Eve (in the sense of a literal first couple) is the official teaching of the Church as per Humani Generis. However, the Popes language in HG is somewhat tentative: “it is by no means clear how” polygenesis can be reconciled with the Faith. Frank Sheed, a very well-respected lay apologist (indeed, arguably the father of lay apologetics) suggested back in the 60s that this was a potential doorway to an acceptance of polygenesis. Mark Shea has suggested this more recently. As many here know, Fr. Robert Barron, a priest and seminary dean who is clearly committed to orthodox Catholic faith, does not believe in a literal Adam and Eve.

Now of course Fr. Barron could be wrong in his view, and Shea and Sheed could be wrong in saying that there’s some potential for the view to be reconciled with HG. But it is certainly not true that if a literal Adam and Eve were false the Faith as a whole would be false.

You’re making it harder than it needs to be.

I think a good rule of thumb is not to rush to accept a scientific theory, but if over time it becomes clear that this particular idea is the consensus view, then maybe it’s time to wonder if the accepted Catholic view is actually the formal, authoritative teaching of the Church. A very clear example of a view many conservative Catholics take for granted that is not Church teaching is the idea that homosexuality is a choice. Literal Adam is a more difficult example, because there is Church teaching in Humani Generis.

Edwin

Linusthe2nd · Jul 16, 2014

Who did Christ appoint to teach his Divine Revelation, scientists? Of course not. He appointed the Church and promised it would not err in teaching truths of faith and morality. When science says something that seems to contradict the Faith, either science is wrong or you have missinterpreted what science is saying. It is the Magisterium which holds the deposit of Faith which all Catholics must adhere to. And the place to start there is the Catechism of the Church.

So if you find something that troubles you just post it here and ask if it is contrary to faith to hold that position ( whatever it is ) as true.

Linus2nd

MarcoPolo · Jul 16, 2014

Could you give an example of a scientific theory and the Church doctrine it goes against?

Hans_W · Jul 16, 2014

Don’t fall for the propaganda of atheists, like Richard Dawkins and many others. They don’t speak in the name of science. There are lots and lots of deeply religious scientists who can assure you that science doesn’t contradict your believe in God.

Science can be a wonderful thing to show you how great God’s creation really is. Have you watched Fr. Robert Barron’s series? He has a number of short videos on YouTube. He talks about faith and reason and how well they work together in strengthening your faith in God.

Science cannot and will never disprove that there is a God. Keep that in mind.

Iron_Donkey · Jul 17, 2014

To the title question: it is unnecessary. It’s like saying you’re trying to trust a map from New York to Texas over a a cook book telling you the best way to season a steak.

The physical sciences are completely incapable of talking about God and free will, since these are by definition non-physical, and science studies the physical only. Once again: no amount of experimenting with the best way to season a steak is going to tell you how to get to Texas.

Further, the Church does not teach that being attracted to persons of the same sex either is or is not a choice. It does teach that choosing to act on this attraction, as is choosing to do anything at all, is a choice. These, despite what some people would like to say, are not the same thing.

Several things. There are many, many reasons why the JWs are wrong that, if you are seriously interested in, could be discussed elsewhere. But I think a better response is that that sort of question is inherently unhelpful. It is along the same lines as saying “person A says 2+2=4 with absolute certainty, and person B says 2+2=5 with absolute certainty, and since they both say they are absolutely certain, what’s the difference?”

The difference is, of course, that one of them is wrong. They may claim the same level of certainty, but that is pretty well irrelevant. If you think the reason and the evidence point towards Catholicism, and not the Watchtower, then whatever claims the Watchtower makes about its certitude just don’t matter that much, regardless of whether or not they are the same as those by Catholicism

My strongest advice is this: learn how to tell when a scientist is talking science, and when he’s not. Because, frankly, there is no conflict, and the scientists who think there is only think so because they can’t get it into their heads that Christianity does not postulate God to be a giant bearded man floating in space.

Ben087 · Jul 17, 2014

There is no contradiction between science and the bible. Adam and Eve can be explained by the genealogies being accurate, but not comprehensive. The genealogies in Matthew of Jesus are all 14 generations, but we know from the OT, that there are more generations than that from Adam to Abraham, and from Abraham to David etc.

The Hebrew word for ‘begat’ used in the genealogies doesn’t necessarily mean that the descendants in the genealogies immediately came after their ancestor, but just that they eventually did. Thus we can infer that there were many interspersed generations in the genealogies of the OT, and that a literal reading of Genesis could still allow for man having been on Earth for several hundreds of thousands of years. Just a thought I had. Take heart!

Ben087 · Jul 17, 2014

In regards to homosexuality, I would argue that we may be born with certain predispositions towards it, with some people having it stronger than others, but the Church teaches our ACTIONS are what counts. Regardless of how attracted you are to the same gender, this is not a sin. It is when you act on it in a sexual act that you commit the sin.

The analogy would be violence. Some people are more prone to be violent, are more hot-headed, have greater physical strength, etc. This isn’t fair, that some people have qualities that pre- dispose them to violence, but it is the cross that they have been given, and it is only when they act upon their violent tendencies that they have sinned. This is similar to homosexuality, in that some people have a greater tendency to certain sins, but it is only when we act upon them that we have sinned.

Ben087 · Jul 17, 2014

Most of the scientific community has ulterior motives for their arguments. Fulton Sheen said either you will exercise your logic to control you impulses with reason, or your reason and logic will soon be governed by your impulses ( or something like that). As someone who has worked in research and academia, I believe most academics who try to refute the bible are not doing so out of a sincere pursuit of Truth but they all of their ulterior motives. All scientist who pursue The truth are drawn to Christianity.

Nice first name, BTW.

AmbroseSJ · Jul 17, 2014

Newman complained back in the 1800s that Science was already encroaching into territory that was not strictly scientific, namely Philosophy and Theology.

Remember to keep Science within its borders.

TV shows like Cosmos try to popularize the notion that Science is the overarching knowledge that legitimizes ALL other studies.

That is GROSS ENCROACHMENT!

Science is the study of the tangible, visible Universe with provable, repeatable, tangible results. Anything else is encroachment.

But in Truth, this culture has submitted itself to this Scientific Idol. After all, what is an Idol? It’s a work of human hands. Science is all the work of human hands. Don’t worship it! Use it as a gift from God.

grannymh · Jul 17, 2014

May I gently point out that it is very important to read Humani Generis # 35, #36, and #37.

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

With simply amazing intelligence, Pius XII, in 1950, nailed the chief opposition to Adam and Eve which would appear in a 1995 research paper by Francisco Ayala.
First sentence, #37.
“When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty.”

The New Catholic Encyclopedia , 2012-2013 Supplement has important information.
Citation: Bonnette, Dennis. “Monogenism and Polygenism.” New Catholic Encyclopedia Supplement 2012-2013: Ethics and Philosophy. Ed. Robert L. Fastiggi. Vol. 3. Detroit: Gale, 2013. 1013-1016. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 20 June 2013.

In addition*, Homiletic & Pastoral Review, a long-time major Catholic publication, *
hprweb.com/about/ recently published on line, the article Time to Abandon the Genesis Story?

This comprehensive article addresses major issues such as the perennial Catholic doctrine, the literal Adam and Eve.
Link to article. hprweb.com/2014/07/time-to-abandon-the-genesis-story/

How to trust the church/scripture over science

Ben_Sinner

Guest

pianistclare

Guest

St_Francis

Guest

zz912

Guest

zz912

Guest

grannymh

Guest

edwest2

Guest

Nacho45

Guest

sirach2v4

Guest

TimothyH

Guest

Contarini

Guest

Linusthe2nd

Guest

MarcoPolo

Guest

Hans_W

Guest

Iron_Donkey

Guest

Ben087

Guest

Ben087

Guest

Ben087

Guest

AmbroseSJ

Guest

grannymh

Guest