Liquidpele, don’t believe him! Don’t tar all Catholics with the same brush! I am a Roman Catholic (since 1959) and a theologian who accepts a 13.75 billion year old universe, and human species 3.5 billion years in the making. I am with you excerpt on the atheism bit, and maybe your taste in scotch – Talisker is my favorite.
Here it is:37. 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 that either 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.
That is not what Humani Generis is saying, it says that there were no other true men not descended from Adam. You are omitting the word “true”. Since palaeontology cannot tell whether or not a fossil had a soul, and DNA will not show the presence or not of a soul, in scientific terms evolution can say nothing of souls and so can say nothing about “true men”, which I read to mean “men with souls”. The population required by excellent scientific evidence on past population sizes would have been a mixture of biological men and true men; science cannot distinguish between them. All those descended from Adam would be given souls by God and would be “true men”. All those not descended from Adam would not have souls and so would not be “true men”. Eventually all remaining men would be descended form Adam, have souls and be true men. Seth’s wife would have been a biological (wo)man, but not a true (wo)man. Her children would have been true men because they were all descended from Adam and Eve as grandparents.
Gee, the committee that awarded me the Ph.D. in historical theology in 1993 would be surprised to hear you say that!
Oh don’t worry, I learned long ago to judge a person and not a group. Truth be told, I’m not a big liquor guy though, I prefer a good beer… which is frustrating since I love in the US
I don’t know when theologian authority entered in the picture of the Catholic Church. When did this occur?No. Unless you are a fundamentalist biblical-literalist, you don’t need to leave your brains on the doormat and accept a literal Adam and Eve 6,000-10,000 years ago. I participate in and give papers at the professional meetings of three major theological societies, one of them Catholic. I have yet to meet a theologian who is an Adamic literalist. None of my colleagues in the seminary are Adamic literalists. Our pastor is not an Adamic literalist, nor is our bishop. None of the dozens of parishes where I’ve gone to Mass during my conferences since 1988 have been Adamic literalist parishes, including those in the South, the West, the Northeast, the Midwest, the West, Europe, Australia, and South America. In fact, before I started checking out Catholic Answers, I had never met an Adamic literalist. You may imagine what a surprise it’s been!
StAnastasia
You mean I’ve been obeying a false religion, the Catholic Church?Thanks, Liquidpele. I had some great micobrew beers in Hawaii last year, and in almost every corner of the US. But I confess that English real ale is my favorite, a taste developed in my undergraduate days.Oh don’t worry, I learned long ago to judge a person and not a group. Truth be told, I’m not a big liquor guy though, I prefer a good beer… which is frustrating since I love in the US
The etymology is uncertain. But adam and adamah (of the soil) appears to be one of the many word plays common in Genesis. For example, there are more word plays in the genealogies. To say the story is merely symbolic does identify its genus litterarium and how it works. A figurative expression can have a historical reference and simultaneously go beyond the historical. It can say more than the strictly historical. But to deny what is historical in the story is a failure to recognize its genus litterarium.
A bad argument is a bad argument regardless of the documents on the wall.
When you say “man” I take it you are referring to modern man, Homo sapiens, which is where one may be looking at the issue from the wrong perspective.
According to certain folks on CAF, even some who claim to be Catholic (go figure), the Catholic Church is a false religion. That is, they reject one or more doctrines that are de fide, but so go the rest by logical implication, even the ones they think are true. This is a fact they are unable to see due to their very narrow perspective. It’s a type of intellectual schizophrenia.I don’t know when theologian authority entered in the picture of the Catholic Church. When did this occur?
Correction:
I doubt you understand what you have been hearing. Adamic literalist? What is that? You appear to think if someone says the story of Adam is figurative then it does not affirm anything historical. That is not how figurative language works. Also, your interpretation of Adam in the O.T., which is merely your private interpretation, conflicts with the New Testament, especially does it conflict with what St. Paul teaches. Hence, my previous observation that you understand nothing really about Catholic and biblical theology. Also, you demonstrate a lack of understanding about how literature works and how literature teaches. This is a problem you have in common with fundamentalists.No. Unless you are a fundamentalist biblical-literalist, you don’t need to leave your brains on the doormat and accept a literal Adam and Eve 6,000-10,000 years ago. I participate in and give papers at the professional meetings of three major theological societies, one of them Catholic. I have yet to meet a theologian who is an Adamic literalist. None of my colleagues in the seminary are Adamic literalists. Our pastor is not an Adamic literalist, nor is our bishop. None of the dozens of parishes where I’ve gone to Mass during my conferences since 1988 have been Adamic literalist parishes, including those in the South, the West, the Northeast, the Midwest, the West, Europe, Australia, and South America. In fact, before I started checking out Catholic Answers, I had never met an Adamic literalist. You may imagine what a surprise it’s been!
StAnastasia
Hopefully, we are using our minds. This is also a Catholic thing. You have to be one to truly understand it. Reason says certain interpretations of the account of Adam conflict with the Bible itself and with how literature works. Not all interpretations are acceptable, especially when those interpretations conflict with each other. That is a no-brainer.
I fear you are as innocent of Catholic theology as you appear to be of genetic science. I have nothing more to add to this conversation today.
Yes, your usual hit and run. It’s a pattern with you.
answer to one. Reexamining evolutionary evidence is the path to take.
Have you met Jesus Christ?
While many of my friends doubt that I still have a mind
Thank you.
Granny,While many of my friends doubt that I still have a mind
My mind is another word for the spiritual component of my human nature, i.e., soul. As such, I have an intellect and free will. I do freely think for myself. And I have, with great thought, chosen the Catholic Faith. (note: even cradle Catholics do freely come to the intellectual decision of choosing Catholicism.)
Blessings,
granny
John 3 16 & 17