"Pope sacks astronomer over evolution debate"

[simonadams]

There have been some stories in the UK gutter press recently that have suggested that our Pope has come out in favour of ID. Of course that’s an ignorant opinion considering that he has written things like;

We cannot say: creation or evolution, inasmuch as these two things respond to two different realities. The story of the dust of the earth and the breath of God, which we just heard, does not in fact explain how human persons come to be but rather what they are. It explains their inmost origin and casts light on the project that they are. And, vice versa, the theory of evolution seeks to understand and describe biological developments. But in so doing it cannot explain where the ‘project’ of human persons comes from, nor their inner origin, nor their particular nature. To that extent we are faced here with two complementary – rather than mutually exclusive – realities.

(Cardinal Ratzinger, In the Beginning: A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall [Eerdmans, 1986, 1995], see especially pages 41-58)

And as president of the Commission and head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has sanctioned documents that include;

According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the ‘Big Bang’ and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5 - 4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution.

(paragraph 63, from “Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God,” plenary sessions held in Rome 2000-2002, published July 2004)

But I’m really curious what proportion of Catholics actually support these refuted scientific theories. As I’m unable to poll here, I’d appreciate it if you could cast your vote on a sister Catholic forum in the UK → totalcatholic.com/discuss/viewtopic.php?p=63989#63989

How we deal with this debate will determine the future of our Church. Anyone who thinks this is a matter of personal opinion must at least make sure their will is for the truth, and has confidence that our belief in God is in accordance with truth.

Thanks

Simon

 

[PhilVaz]

<< that have suggested that our Pope has come out in favour of ID >>

I would suggest Benedict favors lower-case “intelligent design” and we have some endorsement in that same Commentary on Genesis:

“Now let us go directly to the question of evolution and its mechanisms. Microbiology and biochemistry have brought revolutionary insights here. They are constantly penetrating deeper into the inmost mysteries of life, attempting to decode its secret language and to understand what life really is. In so doing they brought us to the awareness that an organism and a machine have many points in common. For both of them realize a project, a thought-out and considered plan, which is itself coherent and logical. Their functioning presupposes a precisely thought-through and therefore reasonable design. But in addition to this commonality there are also differences. A first and somewhat unimportant one may be described as follows: An organism is incomparably smarter and more daring than the most sophisticated machines. They are dully planned and constructed in comparison with an organism.” (Ratzinger, In The Beginning…)

This sounds like Behe’s kind of argument 10 years before Behe. And Behe noticed this and has quoted this paragraph approvingly, while Ken Miller emphasizes other portions of the Pope’s pro-evolution writings. This commentary by Ratzinger was originally published in 1986, ten years before Behe’s book. And I’m somewhat looking forward to the sequel.

So depends how you quote him. But I don’t think he’ll go on record supporting the Discovery Institute or Kolbe Center. He’s got a lot of scientific advisors he can consult I’m sure.

As for the “sacking” of astronomer Fr. George Coyne this was news a few months ago, he simply had bad health (colon cancer) and stepped down, replaced by Jose Gabriel Funes who I don’t think is any more pro-ID than Coyne was.

Phil P

 

[simonadams]

<< that have suggested that our Pope has come out in favour of ID >>

I would suggest Benedict favors lower-case “intelligent design” and we have some endorsement in that same

Yes well the only option for us other than that is calling God stupid - which in some ways is almost as ridiculous as us puny humans calling him intelligent!!!

So depends how you quote him. But I don’t think he’ll go on record supporting the Discovery Institute or Kolbe Center. He’s got a lot of scientific advisors he can consult I’m sure.

Yes and that’s why I find it annoying that people out there are suggesting that the Catholic Church, that has been at the forefront of scientific discovery far longer than any secular body, and has some of the best minds on the planet in its Pontifical Academy of Science, is tempted to support a theory that is both unscientific and non-Christian.

As for the “sacking” of astronomer Fr. George Coyne this was news a few months ago, he simply had bad health (colon cancer) and stepped down, replaced by Jose Gabriel Funes who I don’t think is any more pro-ID than Coyne was.

Exactly. New Scientist reported the same thing and it was only the Daily Mail that decided to turn rumours into fact. From more honest accounts it seems that the Church initiated by the Word through whom the universe was created is openly engaging with the truth as best we can fathom it. Its just sad there are organisations like the The Kolbe Center that want to make us look like we are afraid of the truth. Jesus is the truth. So how can we be afraid of the truth ?

 

[PhilVaz]

Simon << Its just sad there are organisations like the The Kolbe Center that want to make us look like we are afraid of the truth. Jesus is the truth. So how can we be afraid of the truth ? >>

Yes, they represent a small minority I would hope. You might be interested in the Catholic Answers Live program next Wednesday:

Date: November 15 2006
Time: 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM
Title: Pope Benedict XVI on Intelligent Design
Guest: Fr. Joseph Fessio

The guest Fr. Fessio was (I think) a student of the Pope, and founded Ignatius Press which used to offer some explicitly “creationist” videos and books. One video I got from them is "Incredible Creatures that Defy Evolution" (there are parts 1, 2, 3) which is typical ICR / Answers In Genesis style creationism. They also have the video "Icons of Evolution" by (Moonie biologist) Jonathan Wells. They might have got complaints but Ignatius Press still sells these videos.

Not to be too provocative, but the Catholic Answers people are definitely “sympathetic” with upper-case I.D. as they’ve had on Bruce Chapman and David Berlinski of the Discovery Institute earlier this year, and they’ve published articles by Kolbe Center people. Its all Karl’s fault I think, but at least he’s not a geocentrist or young-earther.

Phil P

 

[simonadams]

Yes as you can see from my “blog” I used to listen to Catholic Answers on my way commuting up to London and loved it - but was then disillusioned by a program where they had a chap from the Discovery Institute on. It was like a little yeast being added to the dough.

Very sad really - how can such a magnificent luminous carpet, laid down by the people who built the house, that retained its wonderful zany colours and translucent quality despite all the muck that was walked into it, is now being made brown and threadbare due to the influence of extremist Christians who prefer to put scientific theories above God himself. Evolution theory is a damn good scientific theory. But only fools consider it a threat to God. To say that God cannot have chosen to ‘shape man from the dust of the earth’ in one way rather than another undefined but childish and comic-like way is plain arrogant. But worse than the arrogance of placing human conceptions above the reality that God intended, is the fact it makes us Catholics look like idiots to those who know the actual science. I have no problem with looking like an idiot (I contribute to that conception regularly on my own ). What I do have a problem with is intelligent and questioning people who are looking for truth in this strange world rejecting Jesus purely because some sycophants have hijacked Jesus and made him look like a joyrider on the road to nowhere.

To be honest ID is just as bad as Young Earth Creationism. In fact its worse. At least YEC people are just simple and child like people who take the bible in a literalist way. They infuriate me with their arguments that make it look like we have a deceptive God that tricked us by emulating ongoing geological processes, but their sincere belief in the authority of the bible (as they understand it) is kind of ingratiating and its difficult to imagine God would be angry with them.

But I’m fairly certain that God is pissed off with the ID croud. They claim to be scientific, and yet nothing about their theories is scientific. In their hearts they think they are supporting these wacky theories for God, but then they openly admit that ID supports the Hindu or the Ancient Egyptian account of creation just as much as the bibles account. They somehow think they are being more scientific by saying that - but they are unsound in terms of both science and Christian theology. Worse than that - they make our religion look like some kind of grasping desperate attempt to cling on to a comfort blanket in the face of a philosophy (science) that has effectively refuted it. Its a massive insult to God. Its driven by fear rather than faith.

As they say, the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[simonadams]

ID=blasphemy, plain and simple.

We all know that God is Intelligent - we just cannot possibly in this life fathom what intelligence means in relation to omniescence. And we all know that God made the universe to be and do exactly as he meant it to, with free will thrown in like a wild card. Have you not seen ? Have you not read ? What is the matter with you people that you embrace such nonsense as ID ?

Isaiah 55

8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,”
declares the LORD.

9 "As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

10 As the rain and the snow
come down from heaven,
and do not return to it
without watering the earth
and making it bud and flourish,
so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater,

11 so is my word that goes out from my mouth:
It will not return to me empty,
but will accomplish what I desire
and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.

 

[Shawdude]

I hope I do not offend anyone by saying this, but, to me, the evolution arguement is such a small minded arguement. I mean honestly with what we know in the physics deptartment these days, who cares? I don’t know much about the opposing veiwpoints, to my understanding creationism states that God made everything as it is today without an evolutionary process. I’m not too sure about intellegent design, except that it is said that natural patterns emerge like that of a nautilus shell, and that’s how we know God exists? How elementary… When it comes to the gamble, I would much rather put my money on God creating an infinitly vast amount of realities that each play out differently with it’s own characteristics. How could you not believe in God having a power that great or greater when science has postulated that theory? Of course I might be wrong, but I doubt I’ll be condemned to Hell for it.

 

[I_Leatherman]

… I would much rather put my money on God creating an infinitly vast amount of realities that each play out differently with it’s own characteristics. How could you not believe in God having a power that great or greater when science has postulated that theory? Of course I might be wrong, but I doubt I’ll be condemned to Hell for it.

[SIGN]burn the heretics![/SIGN]
joking!

…“I would much rather put my money on God creating an infinitly vast amount of realities …”
Reality is: a supernatural Creator and a spiritual and a temporal creation.
Any reality, I think, has to include all of that to be real, which would just make everything one Reality.
If you see what I mean.

 

[DNS]

Its just sad there are organisations like the The Kolbe Center that want to make us look like we are afraid of the truth. Jesus is the truth. So how can we be afraid of the truth ?

The Kolbe Center wants to “make us look like we are afraid of the truth”? :tsktsk:

PhilVaz:

You might be interested in the Catholic Answers Live program next Wednesday:

Date: November 15 2006
Time: 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM
Title: Pope Benedict XVI on Intelligent Design
Guest: Fr. Joseph Fessio

The guest Fr. Fessio was (I think) a student of the Pope, and founded Ignatius Press which used to offer some explicitly “creationist” videos and books.

Fr. Fessio was a student of Benedict XVI, and he was at a recent meeting Benedict XVI had with his former students. The topic was…evolution. So Fr. Fessio should know pretty well just what the pope’s current thoughts are on Intelligent Design.

PhilVaz:

Not to be too provocative, but the Catholic Answers people are definitely “sympathetic” with upper-case I.D. as they’ve had on Bruce Chapman and David Berlinski of the Discovery Institute earlier this year, and they’ve published articles by Kolbe Center people. Its all Karl’s fault I think, but at least he’s not a geocentrist or young-earther.

Bruce seemed a bit confused about the Church’s position on evolution when he was on Catholic Answers Live. If I remember correctly, he said he thought that the Church was against macroevolution but not microevolution, which would be incorrect. (The Church allows research to be done on both, so long as it does not deny God’s existence).

But you’re right, Catholic Answers does seem to prefer the Intelligent Design folks to the theistic evolutionists (not that I really mind, but I understand why you do ). However, they usually do seem to give evolution its due, and they always try to stress that a Catholic may believe in it. (I don’t know for sure, but I get the sense that Jimmy Akin believes in evolution.)

By the way, the Catholic Answers Live program with Michael Behe from 1999 is now available in the archives, and evolution is given a more “balanced” evaluation in that program.

 

[PhilVaz]

DNS << By the way, the Catholic Answers Live program with Michael Behe from 1999 is now available in the archives, and evolution is given a more “balanced” evaluation in that program. >>

Ah ha, thanks I almost forgot about that one! That’s right Behe was on CA Live early on. The program this Wed (11/15/2006) with Fr. Fessio should be enlightening. Then we won’t have to debate and speculate so much on the topic in here.

Phil P