Betrayal? Should the Catholic Church continue to live in the Dark Ages? Evolution is an accepted fact. People need to learn that "evolution" and "creation" can live side by side without conflict.
I get comfort from being a member of a nondenominational church that relies on the Bible rather than religion...
And the beat goes on.
"Catholicism may begin to seem less and less 'realistic' to more and more thoughtful people,"
I don't understand the statement being made. I would hope that Catholics become more and more thoughtful people. I think what they are trying to say, as badly as David Byers has said here, is that there is a misconception that Catholics, in general, are anti-science. That is simply not true.
I don't trust much that comes from today's Jesuits. They are simply not the same kind of men that I knew during my years of Jesuit education. I believe that Pope John Paul has made a clear distinction between "micro evolution", which are more or less gradual adaptative changes over time within various species (including humans) and "macro evolution" which would lead us back to a fish having walked up on the beach one day in the process of becoming a man.
I don't know whether this is too fine a distinction for the average secularist to understand or perhaps they purposely overlook it in order to keep a foolish argument going.
""Betrayal" is the only word I can think of right now..."
Betrayal seems an odd word to use. Since the RCC already accepts evolution as the way species developed, then they're simply clarifying the issue in the face of those who would have the creation story from Genesis as literal truth.
Sorry, but you'll find that most Christian denominations accept evolution as the means by which species came about. Not all, but most.
I have taught my kids that both evolution and creationism are theories. Both have components that are arguable for and against. As far as I know, the Catholic Church has never come out and said how God created the Earth or man. When the Bible says that Adam was taken from the dust of the Earth. How did God do it? How long did it take? What did a day in Genesis represent? All these questions are not answered by Faith alone. Science and scientific testing of various theories can help man obtain a better understand of how God works. The strict evolutionists are just as anti-science as the strict creationists. The fact is that nobody alive today was there when God created the Earth. So any ideas that we have are just educated guesses. The Bishop is right that the Church must be open to what it can learn from science to better understand how God wove His creation. There is no denial of God in evolution as long as man accepts that all creation was guided by God throughout - IMHO.
"By their fruits, you shall know them"
The CC has a long and notorious history of political expediency and doctrinal compromise. It's what comes from adopting a belief that their clergy continue to get "revelations" about the suppossed "incomplete" scriptures. Non sola scriptura reaps what it sows.
It's a first cousin to the "living Constitution" mindset: "Go with the times."
BTW, a number of scientists, including devout Catholics who would have no doctrinal reason to disagree with this bishop, in fact do disagree very strongly. See, e.g., Michael Behe and William Dembski.
Why wasn't this posted in breaking news? It's a week old and posted before.
Table 1: Summary of the results of analyses of characteristics of fossil Homo species [After Table 7 in Wood and Collard, Ref. 3]. 1) body size, 2) body shape, 3) locomotion, 4) jaws and teeth, 5) development and 6) brain size. H = like modern humans, A = australopith-like, I = intermediate ? = data unavailable.
|
Species name |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
|
H. rudolfensis |
? |
? |
? |
A |
A |
A |
|
H. habilis |
A |
A |
A |
A |
A |
A |
|
H. ergaster |
H |
H |
H |
H |
H |
A |
|
H. erectus |
H |
? |
H |
H |
? |
I |
|
H. heidelbergensis |
H |
? |
H |
H |
? |
A |
|
H neanderthalensis |
H |
H |
H |
H |
H |
H |
In order to fend off the usual bogus anti-creationist accusations of quoting out of context, Table 1 (above) has been reproduced from Table 7 in Wood and Collard exactly as it appears in their work. As can be seen, only one major constellation of traits in the specimens in question is in fact characterized as I (intermediate) between australopiths and Homo sapiens. All of the others are either unknown, clear-cut australopith in morphology, or clear-cut Homo sapiens in morphology. Now, had the hominins actually been a series of transitional forms gradually progressing from australopith to modern Homo sapiens (as commonly portrayed in textbooks), many if not most of the entries in Table 1 would instead be I (intermediate).
****(3)Wood and Collard, The human genus, Science 284, Ref. 1, p. 66
Also see The Rise and Fall of Skull KNM-ER 1470.
Note: I do NOT work for AIG. I am simply pointing out an article that disagrees with supposed 'human evolution.'
Also note that anthropology has been plagued by fraud many times in the past. Most recently by a flamboyant Professor from Germany... Fraud
What betrayal? You haven't been paying attention to the church if you think they have ever been against evolution. The catholic church has NEVER declared evolution in conflict with the faith.. in fact they have released edicts saying the exact opposite.
Evolution does not now, nor never has negated God. In fact evolution in all things is visible evidence of God's existence. Go read some St. Thomas Aquinas.
The church definately needs to get better at articulating its stands and getting the word out. I'd suggest every Catholic here watch "A life worth living" on EWTN at 9pm on Fridays... you will get more truth and logic and articulate message about the faith than probably anywhere else from the church in the last 40 years.
Originally broadcast on NETWORK TELEVISION believe it or not, for about 8 years, and a top show during that time, often beating out the other networks. You will find yourself enlightened and reaffirmed of things you already know to be true, but the church's message on them does not get out much in this secular society these days.
I don't get it.
Why bother to believe in God?
Why bother to believe in a virgin birth?
Why bother to claim you are a Christian if you don't believe in the miracle of Creation?
God is supernatural. He has no limits. Why limit Him on Creation and (pretend?) to believe in God, a virgin birth etc.?
BTW, it's not just the Catholic church pushing this nonsense.
Church Needs Better Bishops, says God
Jesus said, "At the beginning of creation, God made them male and female." (Mark 10:6) and "Father, I want those youhave given me to ve with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world." (John 17:24). Jesus taught that God created the world and everything in in in numerous places in the New Testament. He is God, and He is never wrong. I'll take His Word over bishops and practitioners of the false religion of evolution.
Ping.
Catholic educators need better teaching programs about evolution "to correct the anti-evolution biases that Catholics pick up" from the general society…
I would also feel betrayed if this were anything more than one man's opinion. As the former committee chairman of a national bishop's organization, his views mean no more than anyone else's. I expect more of these meaningless outbursts as the left attempts to take advantage of their increasing perception of the Pope's weakness.
Why is this such a suprise? The Catholic church has long accepted the Theory of Evolution as the most likely cause of speciation.