It's about time

  • Thread starter Thread starter fishstick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Catholic Church never condemned Darwin, nor his hypothesis, so there’s really nothing to apologize for.

Peace and God bless!
Yes, that’s quite true.

Aside from that, why would anyone apologize for initially rejecting a scientific theory? Lots of new theories are initially rejected. Lots of new theories turn out to be wrong. And I doubt the Church of England ever published a formal rejection in a peer reviewed scientific journal. The only mistake might have been trying to comment on a new anthropological theory at all. But after all, laypeople are allowed to have opinions too.
 
Actually the pope is of the opinion that evolution is not viable and not in favor of the catholic church. So you guys are going to have to pick sides.

And in response to Jim G, it wasn’t initial, it was 150 years worth of rejection, this apology is long overdue.
 
I, for one, am tired of the politically correct presentism that seems to have been adopted by large segments of society that should know better. By “presentism” I mean the practice of viewing historical facts in light of current social customs, mores, and knowledge and then proceeding to draw simplistic conclusions.

The classic example is the oft-heard criticism of the Church for its response to Gallileo. A serious inquiry into this case will reveal that the facts, issues, and personalities are much more complex than is generally thought.

What possible good will be accomplished by apologizing to a man who has been dead all these years for something done by people who have long since been laid to rest? If in the future Darwin’s theory is successfully attacked as the result of new discoveries, will the Church of England rescind its apology with the observation, “Hey, we were right the first time.”

Darwin was a scientist. Applying the scientific method is exceedingly difficult and public rejection of a theory is far from unusual. Scientists have thick skins. I really don’t think Mr. Darwin, even if alive, would be jockeying for an apology.
 
Actually the pope is of the opinion that evolution is not viable and not in favor of the catholic church. So you guys are going to have to pick sides.

And in response to Jim G, it wasn’t initial, it was 150 years worth of rejection, this apology is long overdue.
That’s certainly not the opinion of the Pope, not the current one, nor previous ones that I’m aware of.

msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/

Peace and God bless!
 
Just what do you want the Vatican to apologize for? When did the Vatican reject evolution? Please provide documentation.

For that matter, as far as I know the C of E never rejected evolution either. Some churchmen did, but many others accepted it. Rev. Brown appears to have “apology fever.” (Not the same thing as apologetics fever, from which lots of people on this board suffer. In fact, the two maladies are opposite, although both disturb the brain and make clear thinking about the Faith difficult.)

Edwin
 
Actually the pope is of the opinion that evolution is not viable and not in favor of the catholic church. So you guys are going to have to pick sides.

And in response to Jim G, it wasn’t initial, it was 150 years worth of rejection, this apology is long overdue.
You are talking through your hat, based on prejudice. You have no evidence for anything you are saying. So why should we take you seriously?

Neither Catholicism nor Anglicanism has ever, as a whole and formally, rejected the Darwinian theory as far as I know. You are welcome to provide evidence to the contrary if you have any. If you don’t, you need to pipe down and learn a little more before spouting your prejudices so confidently.

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top