Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Roman Catholic Church and Evolution
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 81 (65311)
11-09-2003 11:20 AM


It seems that there is some confusion concerning the Roman Catholic church's supposed support for the Theory of Evolution. This confusion became apparent shortly after an address Pope John Paul II gave to the Papal Academy of Science in 1996.
Newspapers, radio shows and various other parts of the press all made it seem as if the Pope gave his endorsement to evolution. The Pope was portrayed as a relativly enlightened religious figure certainly different from the igrorant Protestant fundamentalists.
But what did the Pope say? The Pope made three points. First he stated that the Theory of Evolution was more than a hypothesis because it has been supported by several independant lines of research. Second, he stated that there was more than one theory. And third he stated that the materialistic theories of evolution are contrary to the Church's teachings on humankind and nature.
Indeed for some time the Church has approved of one Theory of Evolution (variation and change) as a scientific hypothesis worthy of investigation. However, not unlike other Christian churches, the Roman church has continually opposed materialism.
The Pope's exact words were, "Theories of evolution which in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the forces of living matter or as a mere epipenomenon of this matter, are incompatible with the truth about man."
These words were put somewhere in the middle of his speech. The Pope is often viewed as a dictatorial-like individual who imposes his views on abortion, contraception, divorce, homosexuality, and women priests, on his one billion fellow Catholics. While I feel that these criticisms are unfair, I do think that he did not do enough to state his views on evolution. To leave no doubt, at the beginning of his speech he should have said that evolution as understood by Sagan or Asimov or Dawkins, or Lewontin or Futuyma and so many others is completely unacceptable to the Roman Church. Rather than put a rebuke in the middle as he did it should have been at the beginning.
However had he done this, the headlines the next day would have read, "Pope attacks Science," and an exponential number of opinion pieces would have reminded the world that the Church did after persecute Galileo.
Still I do expect more from the Pope. He is a man of great courage and for him to show such weakness makes me think that it would have been better for him not to comment at all.
Nobel Laureate Leon Lederman summed things up well. "When people ask me to talk about spirituality, I tell them to go see the people across the street." Perhaps the Pope feels the same, just about science.
Many evolutionists would agree with creationists that Pope John Paul II is a great man. Indeed he is, and perhaps great understates it, but he still should have been more clear in his opposition to evolution.
Thankfully, the Number Two man in the Roman Church, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, is very clear. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which he authored and the Pope forwarded, Ratzinger makes the following points;
1. God is the Creator of heaven and Earth, and all that is seen and unseen. (279)
2. Creation is the foundation of all of God's saving plans and is the beginning of the history of salvation.(280)
3. Creation is truly important for it concerns the very foundations of humans and life in general. (282)
4. Scientific discoveries invite us to an even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator. (283)
5. The existence of God the Creator can be known through his works. (286)
Ratzinger makes about another 100 points on the Creation of everything. For another excellent overview of the Catholic position on Creation, I would recommend reading the 'Phantom' General's Biblical Creationism.
What is not at issue is whether the Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger, or even the General are right. The purpose of this paper is to show that the Roman Catholic Church does support creation and not evolution.
Sincerely,
The Apostle

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2003 11:39 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 3 by sidelined, posted 11-09-2003 11:46 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 4 by helena, posted 11-09-2003 12:09 PM Apostle has not replied
 Message 5 by Rrhain, posted 11-10-2003 9:46 PM Apostle has not replied
 Message 6 by Zhimbo, posted 11-10-2003 10:26 PM Apostle has not replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 81 (66585)
11-15-2003 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by sidelined
11-09-2003 11:46 AM


What I was discussing was whether or not the Pope does in fact endorse evolution. Whether or not you think his endorsement matters is not relevent to this topic. For my discussions whole purpose was to determine whether or not the Pope has given his okay to evolution.
Also, Sagan, Dawkings, Asimov et al may not matter to you but these are (and were) influential scientists so certainly their opinions on the issues are important to the scientific world. I agree that evidence should be what supports evolution, but for a man like Richard Dawkings, his first job is as an evangelist for atheism. With him, all other things come after that it seems. There are respectful evolutionists, real scientists. Roger Lewin, Shapiro, many honest men hold to the evolutionary belief but they are honest enough to say when they just do not know. For this I admire them.
A man like Dawkings starts with his beliefs and then finds evidence for them. Sometimes the evidence is also very questionable. For this reason I state occasionally that some evolutionists believe in evolution as a religion and not a scientific truth.
My problem is not that people disagree, it is that many scientists like Dawkings refuse to give fair treatment to scientific creationism. Their are many brilliant scientific creationists, Michael Behe for example, just as there are many brilliant scientific evolutionists. Why not treat both with respect?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by sidelined, posted 11-09-2003 11:46 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by NosyNed, posted 11-15-2003 12:37 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 9 by sidelined, posted 11-15-2003 12:40 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 34 by rineholdr, posted 04-14-2004 3:15 PM Apostle has replied
 Message 47 by kofh2u, posted 04-18-2004 3:57 PM Apostle has not replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 81 (70488)
12-02-2003 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by sidelined
11-15-2003 12:40 AM


The purpose of this thread is to determine whether or not the Roman Catholic church supports evolution. Partly through my fault this has yet to be determined.
Does anyone have any evidence that the Church does support evolution?
I still feel that the most clear opinion given from the Church was that given by Cardinal Ratzinger in his 'Catechism of the Catholic Church.' In this he makes known the beliefs of his church. The dominant view that comes across is for Biblical Creation. It is not the Cardinal's job to make the case for scientific creationism, but as a theologian, he does an excellent job at outlining his churches beliefs on Creation. Has anyone else read the Catechism?
One may be able to find Catholic theologians, priests, bishops, even some cardinals that favor a thiestic evolution. But again this is inconsistent with Catholic teaching. It also contradicts the authorotative Catechism that Ratzinger wrote in 1996.
I feel that the evidence overwhelmingly shows that the Roman Church is officially against the evolutionary beliefs on origins and ascent as well as the importance of man.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by sidelined, posted 11-15-2003 12:40 AM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Asgara, posted 12-02-2003 12:32 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 17 by Rrhain, posted 12-02-2003 2:28 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 22 by helena, posted 12-03-2003 6:16 AM Apostle has not replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 81 (70492)
12-02-2003 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Asgara
12-02-2003 12:32 AM


Stay Focused Pleased
I have read the Pope adress to the Papal Academy of Sciences already. I dealt with it already in Message 1.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Asgara, posted 12-02-2003 12:32 AM Asgara has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Asgara, posted 12-02-2003 12:49 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 16 by NosyNed, posted 12-02-2003 1:10 AM Apostle has replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 81 (70677)
12-03-2003 12:20 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Rrhain
12-02-2003 2:28 AM


I have several comments;
1. I feel that you have misinterpreted the Papal encyclical entitled Humani Generis (I think that is the name), as well as Pope John Paul II adress to the Papal Academy of Sciences. Having said this it does little good to merely state my opinion. To get more out of it, I may have to start a thread on each of them. In any event I have given a brief interpretation of the Papal adress in 1996.
2. It sounds a little to simplistic to state that 'Popes outrank them all' in an attempt to diminish the importance of Cardinal Ratzinger's Catechism, which by the way Pope John Paul II forwarded. The last time someone gave me the 'popes outrank all' arguement, I asked them if they knew who Ratzinger was. They did not. Do you?
3. Of coarse evolution talks about origins. While more of an emphasis is placed on change and variation, attention is also given to the question of origins.
4. While the question of whether the Roman Church endorses evolution or not may seem difficult to answer, an attempt is worth a shot, and is not my fault.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Rrhain, posted 12-02-2003 2:28 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Rrhain, posted 12-03-2003 5:49 AM Apostle has not replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 81 (70680)
12-03-2003 12:28 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by NosyNed
12-02-2003 1:10 AM


Re: Ask Some Catholics
You could start by asking me.
Second you could check the most influential piece of Catholic literature written in a long time; that being the Catechism of the Roman Church by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
You could also read one of the best descriptions of Biblical Creation that I have read here, heavily influenced by Catholic thinking, on this very website. It can be found under the Miscellaneous forum under the topic 'Biblical Creationism.'
Indeed you could ask as many Catholics as you want. But this would not give you your answer as to whether the Roman Church supports it or not.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by NosyNed, posted 12-02-2003 1:10 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 12-03-2003 1:48 AM Apostle has not replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 81 (74187)
12-19-2003 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Minnemooseus
12-03-2003 12:19 PM


Catholic Support of Evolution?
I asked for evidence of the Catholic Church's support of evolution. Asgara mentioned the Papal address in 1996. Because this in itself is a new topic, I will post my analysis of the Pope's adress tomorrow, Friday December 19.
This topic will remain on the general teaching of the Church, a teaching that we still have not been able to agree on. In the next month or two I will also be introducing detailed analysis on Pius XII's Humani Generis, Ratzinger's Catechism, and the writings of Pierre Teilhard De Chardin. All will be introduced as individual topics but this post will also be updated, however only with general teaching.
I have come to realize that this topic is far more complex and detailed than I had originally believed. From my research I still conclude that the Roman Church does not support the theories of evolution but accepts the Biblical account of creation. (When I speak of the Church not accepting evolution, I speak of macroevolution).
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Minnemooseus, posted 12-03-2003 12:19 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by NosyNed, posted 12-19-2003 1:11 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 26 by Zhimbo, posted 12-19-2003 1:21 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 28 by PaulK, posted 12-19-2003 3:46 AM Apostle has not replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 81 (74323)
12-19-2003 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Zhimbo
12-19-2003 1:21 AM


Baffling?
Zhimbo,
Read the Papal Address to the Academy of Sciences, if you have not already then read my analysis. Then explain under that topic what part of my statement baffles you.
If you are referring to the address given in 1996, then you are mistaken in saying that the Pope mentions evolution. If after reading the speech you still see the word somewhere, please let me know.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Zhimbo, posted 12-19-2003 1:21 AM Zhimbo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by NosyNed, posted 12-19-2003 4:29 PM Apostle has replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 81 (97490)
04-03-2004 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by NosyNed
12-19-2003 4:29 PM


Re: Evolution and the Pope
Ned,
I made quite clear (I thought I did at least) that the word not mentioned once was macroevolution. If I remember correctly a previous responder stated that the Pope lent his support to macroevolution. I stated that he did not, nor did he even mention the word.
I appreciate you conceding that it is not quite as clear as the press made it out to be. The reason I wrote this piece was to bring this fact to light, and I hope others are as open and honest as you.
I would not disagree with you when you state that the Pope is likely not a Young Earth Creationist. Probably you are right. On the otherhand I do not know for certain. Likely you are right though. I would disagree with you are to him believing we evolved from less formed species. This does contradict the account given in Genesis, and though the Roman Church is somewhat lax in their condemnation of evolution, they are criticized greatly by Protestants for taking the BIble to literally. The Church also takes the Genesis account literally.
With regards to your last question, I believe Pope Pius XII has given the clearest assessment of Church involvement in the Theory of Evolution. Surprisingly, though most evolutionists have not read his encyclical Humani Generis, they cite it as evidence of support for evolution. In fact it is not. You may find my analysis of Humani Generis also under this forum.
Thank you for your feedback.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by NosyNed, posted 12-19-2003 4:29 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 04-15-2004 4:39 AM Apostle has replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 81 (100137)
04-15-2004 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by rineholdr
04-14-2004 3:15 PM


Rineholdr
Catholics also believe the Bible to be God's inspired Word. The Pope is not contradicting scripture by his adress. While I criticized his weakness on this position, I did not question his position or person. Certainly the Pope does not think he is God, and I know of no laws of God's that the Pope has changed, and last time I checked, when the Pope speaks, the world listens, not just Catholics. I am sorry to say, but you have made a fool of yourself, and while we likely share the same faith, you have a long way to go in moderating your prejeduces.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by rineholdr, posted 04-14-2004 3:15 PM rineholdr has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by PaulK, posted 04-15-2004 4:16 AM Apostle has replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 81 (100688)
04-18-2004 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by PaulK
04-15-2004 4:16 AM


Read the Address First
Paul,
I realize that you almost definately have not read the entire Papal Address. That's okay, you'll find others you haven't also. However, I have read it, and that seperates me from you, in that I am able to comment on it, while you are simply going by what you heard.
How can you accuse me of refusing to accept what he plainly said, when you have not read what he plainly said?
Wait, I could be way off, and you may have actually read it. In that case there is a problem, a much larger one, How can you honestly believe that he lent his support to evolution?
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by PaulK, posted 04-15-2004 4:16 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by PaulK, posted 04-18-2004 6:11 AM Apostle has not replied

Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 81 (100689)
04-18-2004 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by crashfrog
04-15-2004 4:39 AM


Crashfrog
Many prominent evolutionists refer to 'macroevolution.' It is certainly not just creationists. Microevolutionary change describes small changes within species. A species simply adapting to its enviroment. There are countless examples. Macroevolutionary change, refers to huge change, say from fish to amphibian, or ape to man. Lets not confuse the issue. This debate is on the Roman church's position on evolution. THat includes macroevolution.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 04-15-2004 4:39 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by crashfrog, posted 04-18-2004 3:06 AM Apostle has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024