Why didn't God save Neanderthals?

[grannymh]

The contemporaries of A&E could have “inherited” spiritual souls by other means.

Naturally, children of Adam and Eve would be considered their contemporaries. So obviously, the One God would immediately create the spiritual soul for each child of Adam and Eve.

Information source for Catholic teachings on the rational spiritual soul which is considered to be the “form” of the body. Genesis 1: 26-27; CCC 362-366, especially CCC 364-365.

*With God, all things are possible, right? *

Hang on to that thought.

It could have been a supernatural inheritance

I really do not believe that God has a God Spouse and together they procreate children who then would have a supernatural inheritance.

Do you see? Science cannot change the important points of the creation story. How the inheritance happened simply does not matter! If such a minor point shakes a person’s faith, then there was not much faith there to begin with. The details should not be hurdles, at all, right? Faith is based on relationship, not a pile of facts and assertions.

It is very nice to assert that Faith is based on* relationship.* And obviously, the visible Catholic Church teaches that the State of Sanctifying Grace is an amazing relationship between a human creature and the Divine Creator. However, the Catholic Church did not jump into a* relationship* with the Divine Creator as an afterthought.

 

[Tomdstone]

Pardon me. Would it be possible for you to post what exactly, in precise language, you are referring to as a possible dogma of the Catholic Church?

This:

Or it could be your ignoring the fact that a Catholic must believe in a literal Adam and Eve.

 

[grannymh]

In answer to Tomdstone post 400

The nitty-gritty of Catholic protocol when it comes to defining dogma is often overlooked. In other words, I am going to sidestep your question and go back to the promise of the Holy Spirit in chapter 14, Gospel of John.

Jesus said: " I have told you this while I am with you. The Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in My name–He will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you."
​

This says two things important for the future of the Catholic Church. 1. Do not be surprised when there are different interpretations of Divine Revelation. 2. Do not worry because the wisdom of the Holy Spirit will guide your efforts to sort out the truth.

Jesus also said: I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.
​

It was not very long when points 1. and 2. were present in the early Catholic Church. Acts, chapter 15, describes the Council of Jerusalem. The history of the infant Church is filled with major ecumenical councils which, under the guidance of the promised Holy Spirit, sorted out the truth of Divine Revelation. This truth would be duly defined and properly proclaimed as the dogmas we know today. The collection of dogmas is often referred to as the Catholic Deposit of Faith.

Any questions so far?

Regarding the original question. Must Catholics believe in a literal Adam and Eve?
Because of St. Paul’s teachings, Romans 5: 12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15: 21-22, Adam and Eve would be considered real people from the start.

I wish I could remember my high school class in early Church history. I was fascinated with the battles over doctrines between this person and that person, between this geographical location and that geographical location. The Holy Spirit must have had an awful headache.

In general, during various councils, questions were raised about who Adam was, when did he live, what was his relationship to his Creator, how did he live his life, why was his original sin so important, etc. etc. All these questions would be a hill of beans, if Adam did not exist. This does not mean that “answers” were being changed over time. It does mean that some “answers” needed further explanation.

From the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraph 66. I put the key sentence in bold.

**66 **“The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

​

This is my personal observation. The actual Catholic doctrines about Adam and Eve are the answers to important questions such as the above. These questions presuppose belief in a literal Adam and Eve.

This sentence from the encyclical Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII, is a good example.

“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.”

​

The sources of revealed truth is Holy Scripture. The documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church refers to duly defined and properly declared dogmas. The doctrine of Original Sin is basic to Catholicism. In Humani Generis, Original Sin “actually committed” is literal truth that depends on Adam being a literal person. “through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own” is the explanation of the human race being in Adam “as one body of one man”. Information source. CCC 404 and footnotes, St. Thomas Aquinas and the Council of Trent.

What is fascinating about Catholicism is that the major dogmas which flow from the first three chapters of Genesis are logically connected. Refer to CCC 289.

I can hear someone commenting – one needs all those words to demonstrate that Adam and Eve are literal in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

Seriously, not only is my computer fighting me, but I have run out of time.
What I have posted above is sufficient to say that Catholics must believe in a literal Adam and Eve simply because that is the foundation for some major Catholic doctrines. However, I would like to discuss CCC 390. There are some persons, including some clergy, who claim that this paragraph indicates that Adam and Eve are not real. I find five Catholic doctrines in this paragraph because I understand the word “affirms.”

Please add comments and questions. This will help me in my research. In fact, I now think that the above could easily be used in the thread “Adam & Logic, 2nd Edition”
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=891536

I may have to :takethat:

Eventually, I will return and take a look at *CCC *390.

 

[Tomdstone]

InThe doctrine of Original Sin is basic to Catholicism. In Humani Generis, Original Sin “actually committed” is literal truth that depends on Adam being a literal person. “through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own” is the explanation of the human race being in Adam “as one body of one man”. Information source.

What is the effect of this original sin on unbaptised aborted babies?

 

[grannymh]

What is the effect of this original sin on unbaptised aborted babies?

The Catholic terminology is that humans begin life at conception in the contracted State of Original Sin. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace erases the contracted State of Original Sin. The baptized person is now in the State of Sanctifying Grace. Information source. CCC 404-405.

What you are basically asking is – What happens in the womb immediately before the baby is killed by abortion?

The answer is found in the beginning of CCC 1260. I put the key in bold.

**1260 **“Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.”
​

The Paschal mystery refers to Christ’s work of redemption which was meant for every person regardless of their physical location. Thus, a baby at conception has a right to redemption. God loves these innocent humans about to be murdered. Therefore, in a way known to God, He provides the means in which this child will be redeemed by the life of Christ’s grace.

The last line of CCC 1257 is

God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments.

​

We are often told to trust God’s mercy for these innocents. All I have to do is to look at Jesus as the God Shepherd with a lamb in His arms. The walls of the womb are not strong enough to keep out God’s love for the tiny helpless child.

Note: I will continue work on post 401 …

 

[Tomdstone]

The Catholic terminology is that humans begin life at conception in the contracted State of Original Sin. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace erases the contracted State of Original Sin. The baptized person is now in the State of Sanctifying Grace. Information source. CCC 404-405.

What you are basically asking is – What happens in the womb immediately before the baby is killed by abortion?

The answer is found in the beginning of CCC 1260. I put the key in bold.

**1260 **“Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.”
​

The Paschal mystery refers to Christ’s work of redemption which was meant for every person regardless of their physical location. Thus, a baby at conception has a right to redemption. God loves these innocent humans about to be murdered. Therefore, in a way known to God, He provides the means in which this child will be redeemed by the life of Christ’s grace.

The last line of CCC 1257 is

God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments.

​

We are often told to trust God’s mercy for these innocents. All I have to do is to look at Jesus as the God Shepherd with a lamb in His arms. The walls of the womb are not strong enough to keep out God’s love for the tiny helpless child.

So the unbaptised baby will go to heaven?

 

[Faith1960]

As Grannymh has said, the Catholic Church has not pronounced as an article of faith that catholics must believe that the geographic location of the Garden of Eden was actually in the Middle East in the area of the Tigris and Euphrates and that is where Adam and Eve were placed by God. .

Which means the Church hasn’t told us we must believe that, right?

 

[Richca]

Originally Posted by Richca View Post

As Grannymh has said, the Catholic Church has not pronounced as an article of faith that catholics must believe that the geographic location of the Garden of Eden was actually in the Middle East in the area of the Tigris and Euphrates and that is where Adam and Eve were placed by God. .

Which means the Church hasn’t told us we must believe that, right?

I probably should have worded what I said above differently because I think it could be understood in a sense I didn’t imply. Holy Scripture is the inspired word of God and I’m not suggesting to anyone to not believe or to hold in doubt the literal sense of any passage, narrative, story, or text of the Bible. Far be it from me to hold such a view or worse yet, be a cause of others holding such a view.

In the CCC where it talks about the senses of Holy Scripture, it says: " The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.” (#116). The magisterium of the Catholic Church is the authentic interpreter of Sacred Scripture so we must hold to what ever the Church proposes for our belief which is taken from Scripture. Since the Church hasn’t pronounced definitively on every passage of the Bible, we must follow what the Church says on what is the proper method to be used in biblical exegesis. Here, what the fathers of the Church have said, what the saints and doctors of the Church have said, discoveries of modern biblical scholarship, and common sense are invaluable. We can also prayerfully and meditatively read the Bible and pray to the Holy Spirit to give us light in understanding what we read. The word of God is food for the soul so the Holy Spirit may inspire us according to any or all of the four senses the CCC says Scripture possesses.

All I meant about the geographic location of the Garden of Eden is that the Catholic Church, as far as I know, has not officially come out with some official infallible document about the geographic location of the Garden of Eden. The Church probably understands this as being of less importance as the theological truths the inspired writer of Genesis wanted to convey to his readers and to us. This does not mean that the Church holds that the literal geographic location of the Garden of Eden which Genesis presents to us has no historical or literal value to it or that it is purely symbolic. To the best of my knowledge, I don’t think the Church has definitively said it is purely symbolic either. The Bible itself, as being the inspired word of God, is itself an infallible document.

As far as Paradise (Garden of Eden) being an actual corporeal place, this is what St Thomas Aquinas says:

Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. viii, 1): “Three general opinions prevail about paradise. Some understand a place merely corporeal; others a place entirely spiritual; while others, whose opinion, I confess, hold that paradise was both corporeal and spiritual.”

I answer that, As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiii, 21): “Nothing prevents us from holding, within proper limits, a spiritual paradise; so long as we believe in the truth of the events narrated as having there occurred.” For whatever Scripture tells us about paradise is set down as matter of history; and wherever Scripture makes use of this method, we must hold to the historical truth of the narrative as a foundation of whatever spiritual explanation we may offer. And so paradise, as Isidore says (Etym. xiv, 3), “is a place situated in the east, its name being the Greek for garden.” (Summa Theologica, Pt. I, q.102, art.1).

 

[grannymh]

There is another serious side to the question Why didn’t God save Neanderthals?

This may come as a shock to Catholics. One of the first great heresies, Arianism (Jesus is a great guy but no God) is still around. Ever alert, the Catholic Church issued a warning in paragraph 389, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. I put the words of the warning in bold.
**389 **The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the “reverse side” of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.

In the encyclical* Humani Generis,* Pope Pius XII recognized the danger of a humanizing population of random breeding multiple genetic sources which is being presented as the developing origin of humankind.
From paragraph 37,* Humani Generis*

“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.[12]”

Link to Humani Generis, paragraphs 35, 36, 37.w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

While it is certainly proper to debate the issue of Neanderthals having true rational spiritual souls, we need to keep in mind that the majority of science interpreters do not recognize that humankind began as a specific fully developed genetic population of two. That is the serious side to the question “Why didn’t God save Neanderthals?”

Unfortunately, there are some Catholics who yield to the scientific approach to our origin. Thus, the Catholic doctrine of a real Adam and a real Original Sin is being attacked at the same time we are trying to decide if archaic fossils were human. Because the Neanderthals are definitely more than a population of two, we need to determine their origin before we can apply the Creator God to their extinction.

 

[Bradski]

“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.[12]”

Surely anyone would recognize the prevarication? The Pope did not say that science was wrong, but he does (obviously) need to insist that the church is correct. But it is not apparent how the two views can be reconciled.

In other words: This is obviously a problem and I have no idea how we can solve it.

 

[Hans_W]

Surely anyone would recognize the prevarication? The Pope did not say that science was wrong, but he does (obviously) need to insist that the church is correct. But it is not apparent how the two views can be reconciled.

In other words: This is obviously a problem and I have no idea how we can solve it.

The same way as the heliocentric system was adopted, 400 years ago.

BTW it’s not a problem for the Church and most Catholics, only some seem to spend sleepless nights over this “problem”.

 

[grannymh]

Surely anyone would recognize the prevarication? The Pope did not say that science was wrong, but he does (obviously) need to insist that the church is correct. But it is not apparent how the two views can be reconciled.

In other words: This is obviously a problem and I have no idea how we can solve it.

Solving the problem is easy once Catholics update themselves regarding the current science of human evolution. Pope Pius XII simply recognized the difference between Adam and ants, plants, bacteria, and bears. The era of the Piltdown Man is long gone.

 

[Mark1970]

I’ve just come across this thread and haven’t read all the posts, so apologies if what I’ve said has already been covered elsewhere but I’ve not seen it.

When I consider Neanderthal Man and the modern human race, I have a highly speculative idea that I find a bit - scary, for want of a better word.

In Genesis, our first parents were Adam and Eve, after the Fall they had 2 sons, Cain and Abel, and as we know Cain murdered Abel.

This is where the speculation begins, hope that readers aren’t too offended. Suppose our first parents were the parents of both the modern human race and Neanderthal Man. Neanderthal Man became extinct several tens of thousands of years ago and there has been speculation about the role of man in their extinction.

Suppose the Biblical account of Cain murdering Abel isn’t just an account of one individual murdering another individual, but a memory of one human sub-group killing another human sub-group? (I know my terminology is bad but I can’t think of anything better.) In modern terms it could almost be seen as verging on genocide…

Hope it isn’t the case!

 

[grannymh]

I may have to :takethat:

Eventually, I will return and take a look at *CCC *390.

The following is dedicated to intimidated Catholics.

Paragraph 390, universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
**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.
This paragraph’s first concept that of “figurative language” is often shouted in big black bold capital letters. See, the pointed finger says – the Genesis story is figurative fantasy! Actually, CCC 390 emphasizes one event in one chapter. However, as most Catholics know, the reality of this event is directly connected to the reality of the doer of the deed. It is the doctrine of the perpetrator which annoys some, not all, Catholics.

What is that single event which is suppose to be figurative? CCC 390 calls it a primeval event. We have to admit to the difficulty of going thousands of years backwards to the beginning of the history of man. Before we give up, we find a definitive word following “figurative language” – the quiet word “affirms.” Apparently, the word “affirms” is so gentle that shouting “figurative language” totally misses it.

The minuscule word “affirms” becomes dominant as we read the strong word “Revelation” which refers to God Who definitely was present at the beginning of the history of man. Genesis 1:1. Hopefully, those who bash CCC 390 are not considering God as figurative. Genesis 3: 8-11.

This powerful Creator interacted with the first people in the beginning. Genesis 1: 26-28. Obviously, the original people would be our “first parents.” CCC 390 is very careful about wording. There is no indication that the original fault aka original sin was committed by a random mating population.

Going back to that innocent word “affirms.” My dictionary meaning is “To declare positively or firmly; maintain to be true.” The use of figurative language, Pig Latin, whatever, cannot change the meaning of “affirms.”

 

[Hans_W]

The following is dedicated to intimidated Catholics.

Paragraph 390, universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
**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.
This paragraph’s first concept that of “figurative language” is often shouted in big black bold capital letters. See, the pointed finger says – the Genesis story is figurative fantasy! Actually, CCC 390 emphasizes one event in one chapter. However, as most Catholics know, the reality of this event is directly connected to the reality of the doer of the deed. It is the doctrine of the perpetrator which annoys some, not all, Catholics.

What is that single event which is suppose to be figurative? CCC 390 calls it a primeval event. We have to admit to the difficulty of going thousands of years backwards to the beginning of the history of man. Before we give up, we find a definitive word following “figurative language” – the quiet word “affirms.” Apparently, the word “affirms” is so gentle that shouting “figurative language” totally misses it.

The minuscule word “affirms” becomes dominant as we read the strong word “Revelation” which refers to God Who definitely was present at the beginning of the history of man. Genesis 1:1. Hopefully, those who bash CCC 390 are not considering God as figurative. Genesis 3: 8-11.

This powerful Creator interacted with the first people in the beginning. Genesis 1: 26-28. Obviously, the original people would be our “first parents.” CCC 390 is very careful about wording. There is no indication that the original fault aka original sin was committed by a random mating population.

Going back to that innocent word “affirms.” My dictionary meaning is “To declare positively or firmly; maintain to be true.” The use of figurative language, Pig Latin, whatever, cannot change the meaning of “affirms.”

Granny, you would be a great scientist if you would put your zeal into the study of God’s Book of Nature.

 

[afthomercy]

…Pope Pius XII simply recognized the difference between Adam and ants, plants, bacteria, and bears. …

When you say that the two distinct buckets in an evolutionary scenario are (a) human beings and (b) other living creatures, do you imply that only the souls of the (a) category are “immediately created by God”? If so, what is the Church teaching on the origin of the souls of the (b) category? How are their souls generated?

 

[grannymh]

When you say that the two distinct buckets in an evolutionary scenario are (a) human beings and (b) other living creatures, do you imply that only the souls of the (a) category are “immediately created by God”? If so, what is the Church teaching on the origin of the souls of the (b) category? How are their souls generated?

Human beings are the only creatures who have rational spiritual souls. Do notice the dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26, please.

When “soul” is applied to a non-human creature, it simply means the “principle” of non-human life. Thus, successful live non-human animal conception occurs. Please compare this to CCC 355-357; CCC 362-266; CCC 1730-1732.

Links to the universal *Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. *
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

Category (a) human beings are the only ones canonized as Saints.

 

[grannymh]

Granny, you would be a great scientist if you would put your zeal into the study of God’s Book of Nature.

I prefer the Bible which, as everyone knows, is Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth.

 

[Richca]

When you say that the two distinct buckets in an evolutionary scenario are (a) human beings and (b) other living creatures, do you imply that only the souls of the (a) category are “immediately created by God”? If so, what is the Church teaching on the origin of the souls of the (b) category? How are their souls generated?

Human souls are immediately created by God as the CCC says. I don’t think the Church has officially said exactly how the non-human souls of other living things are produced except that God is at work in all the actions of his creatures. God is the first cause who operates in and through secondary causes (cf. CCC#308). I think this is more a philosophical question. The souls of non-human living things are generated from nature. St Thomas Aquinas holds that non-human souls of living things are educed out of the matter which is provided by the female and male parents and upon the fertilization of this matter. There is a certain power, for example, in the semen of the male parent that upon the fertilization of the female egg, this power is able to educe from the matter the soul for the new thing. The souls of non-human living things, though they are immaterial forms, St Thomas calls them material forms because they are wholly immersed, tied too, and dependent on matter for their existence. Human souls are spiritual and immaterial in nature akin to the nature of angels who are wholly immaterial or of God. As such, the human soul can survive the death of the body which isn’t the case of the souls of non-human living things which are not spiritual and depend on being united to matter for their existence.

 

[simpleas]

I’ve just come across this thread and haven’t read all the posts, so apologies if what I’ve said has already been covered elsewhere but I’ve not seen it.

When I consider Neanderthal Man and the modern human race, I have a highly speculative idea that I find a bit - scary, for want of a better word.

In Genesis, our first parents were Adam and Eve, after the Fall they had 2 sons, Cain and Abel, and as we know Cain murdered Abel.

This is where the speculation begins, hope that readers aren’t too offended. Suppose our first parents were the parents of both the modern human race and Neanderthal Man. Neanderthal Man became extinct several tens of thousands of years ago and there has been speculation about the role of man in their extinction.

Suppose the Biblical account of Cain murdering Abel isn’t just an account of one individual murdering another individual, but a memory of one human sub-group killing another human sub-group? (I know my terminology is bad but I can’t think of anything better.) In modern terms it could almost be seen as verging on genocide…

Hope it isn’t the case!

There is also this : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_seed about cain and abel, which when I first read it I was horrified

If it’s some of what hitler believed, I now understand why he thought what he was doing was right.