What are Catholics expected to accept !?

[twinc]

Is it required that a Catholic accept that all human beings are descendants of Adam and Eve - twinc

 

[Scaun]

It is required for every Christian to accept it.

 

[JohnDamian]

No it is not required. We are allowed to interpret that Genesis was a poetic allegory.

This is demonstrated by Sirach 18:1. We do not have to believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans.

 

[Barbkw]

Science has proven that all of humanity (through our bloods’ DNA) has one genetic mother.

Overwhelming Evidence for the Out-of-Africa Hypothesis

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

A Burgoo of Human Origin Discoveries

reasons.org/human-origins/adam-and-eve/burgoo-human-origin-discoveries

"These three new research reports can be thrown into a large simmering kettle of studies that support the Out-of-Africa model. (For a detailed discussion of the myriad evidences in favor of the Out-of-Africa Hypothesis see the book Who Was Adam?

**Collectively, the consensus that emerges from this work indicates that humanity originated recently (about 100,000 years ago) from East Africa (near the location theologians ascribed to the Garden of Eden) from a small population.

Amazingly, studies using mitochondrial and Y chromosomal DNA markers trace humanity’s origin back to a single man and woman.

These studies also indicate that humanity’s migration around the world began at or near the Middle East."**

 

[AndrewA]

Yes, we do.
catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp

 

[The_Reginator]

No it is not required. We are allowed to interpret that Genesis was a poetic allegory.

This is demonstrated by Sirach 18:1. We do not have to believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans.

How, then, do you explain original sin?
twinc’s link shows the Catholic teaching on this. Adam and Eve are our first parents.

– Reg.

 

[JohnDamian]

twinc’s link shows the Catholic teaching on this. Adam and Eve are our first parents.

As I said. Poetic allegory.

 

[Barbkw]

The CCC writes:

IV. HOW CAN WE SPEAK ABOUT GOD?

39 In defending the ability of human reason to know God, the Church is expressing her confidence in the possibility of speaking about him to all men and with all men, and therefore of dialogue with other religions, with philosophy and science, as well as with unbelievers and atheists.

40 Since our knowledge of God is limited, our language about him is equally so. We can name God only by taking creatures as our starting point, and in accordance with our limited human ways of knowing and thinking.

159 Faith and science :

"Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason.

Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth." (Dei Filius 4: DS 3017)

"**Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God.

The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are." **(GS 36 ’ 1)

 

[Corki]

As I said. Poetic allegory.

The story may have been written as poetic allegory. The teaching of the Church, to which we must assent, is that all of us were decended from a pair of first parents. CCC 397-421.

 

[JohnDamian]

The story may have been written as poetic allegory. The teaching of the Church, to which we must assent, is that all of us were decended from a pair of first parents. CCC 397-421.

I know…

I wonder; do people know what “allegory” means?

An allegory is a way of conveying an idea of meaning that is not literal. It communicates a truth through symbolic figures and actions.

When I say that it is a poetic allegory; I am stating that the poetic verse of the first (Gen:1) and second Genesis (Gen:2-3) stories use poetry to represent symbolically a truth about something which has occurred in the past; where we are descended from the Original Human parents; who caused Original Sin; and were the first humans to have knowlege of Good and Evil.

Genesis represents this truth through poetic imagery; it is not a literal account; although the characters and actions are symbolic of an underlying truth; which is explained through the allegory.

 

[Barbkw]

Genesis is a literal account expressed in simplistic narrative.

Told, as any good father would explain creation to his children.

After all, if you were the Creator of the Universe, to whom would You direct Your religious educational program?

Wouldn’t you start when your children are very young even while they were yet unable to understand higher mathmatics, cosmology and astrophysics?

 

[Scaun]

No it is not required. We are allowed to interpret that Genesis was a poetic allegory.

This is demonstrated by Sirach 18:1. We do not have to believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans.

[bibledrb]Sirach 18:1[/bibledrb]I do not follow. How does Sirach 18:1 demonstrate this?

According to all Scriptures, and according to Catholic Tradition as well (if I’m not mistaken, of course; I’m no expert in Tradition), there was an Adam and Eve. They had sons, Cain, Abel and others. These multiplied. Moses wrote about Adam and Eve and Jesus said: “But if you do not believe his [Moses’] writings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:47)

And now share your opinion in more detail: why do you consider that there was not an Adam and Eve? What proof do you offer?

 

[JohnDamian]

And now share your opinion in more detail: why do you consider that there was not an Adam and Eve? What proof do you offer?

Well Sirach 18:1 removes the first Genesis poem; and is consistent with Augustinian theology (that of St. Augustine; Doctor of the Church); see the City of God; written about 400AD; arguing for a non-literal interpretation.

To me it seems it is very clear that the story is an allegory used to communicate the mysteries of Original sin and the Knowlege of Good and Evil; into a form that even a child could understand. I see no reason to believe it is literal; clearly scripture contradicts the first Genesis poem; so unless a good reason can be presented for me believing the second Genesis poem I shall not.

 

[1ke]

No it is not required. We are allowed to interpret that Genesis was a poetic allegory.

This is only partially correct. Certain elements of Genesis can be interpreted in various ways using the various senses of Scripture.

However, Catholics are required to adhere to Church teaching regarding a real, original set of first parents from whom we all inherit Original Sin.

We do not have to believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans.

We don’t have to believe their names were Adam and Eve, we **do **have to believe in a real set of original parents from whom all humanity descends.

See Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis:

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

Especially paragraph 37:

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.*

See also the Catechism:

374 The first man was not only created good, but was also established in friendship with his Creator and in harmony with himself and with the creation around him, in a state that would be surpassed only by the glory of the new creation in Christ.

375 The Church, interpreting the symbolism of biblical language in an authentic way, in the light of the New Testament and Tradition, teaches that our first parents, Adam and Eve, were constituted in an original “state of holiness and justice”.

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms **a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. **Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.

404 By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.

 

[clmowry]

No it is not required. We are allowed to interpret that Genesis was a poetic allegory.

This is demonstrated by Sirach 18:1. We do not have to believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans.

I think you need to check your facts on this one.

Chuck

 

[twinc]

Is it required that a Catholic accept that all human beings are descendants of Adam and Eve - twinc

Is it required that a Catholic accept that Eve was created from Adam’s side according to scriptures,church fathers,tradition etc - twinc

 

[1ke]

Is it required that a Catholic accept that Eve was created from Adam’s side according to scriptures,church fathers,tradition etc - twinc

No.

From Humani Generis, 36:

36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.

 

[twinc]

What about just as “Eve came from the side of Adam so the Church came from the side of the second Adam”[Tradition] - was not Adam the pre-existent and living matter from which[whom] Eve came[Humani Generis] - imho - twinc

 

[twinc]

Is it required that a Catholic accept that Eve was created from Adam’s side according to scriptures,church fathers,tradition etc - twinc

is it required that a Catholic accept that there was a global flood according to Christ,scriptures,church fathers,tradition etc - twinc

 

[seagal]

is it required that a Catholic accept that there was a global flood according to Christ,scriptures,church fathers,tradition etc - twinc

That’s a whole other thread.