Posted on 09/04/2006 8:42:37 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
Pope Benedict and his former doctoral students spent a weekend pondering evolution without discussing controversies over intelligent design and creationism raging in the United States.
The three-day closed-door meeting at the papal summer residence of Castel Gandolfo outside Rome ended as planned without drawing any conclusions but the group plans to publish its discussion papers, said participant Father Joseph Fessio S.J.
Media speculation had said the debate might shift Vatican policy to embrace "intelligent design," which claims to prove scientifically that life could not have simply evolved, or even the "creationist" view that God created the world in six days.
"It wasn't that at all," Fessio, who is provost of Ave Maria University in Florida, said from Rome. The Pope's session with 39 former students was "a meeting of friends with some scholars to discuss an interesting theme".
"We did not really speak much about intelligent design," said Fessio, whose Ignatius Press publishes the Pope's books in English. "In fact, that particular controversy did not arise."
Creationism -- the view that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible -- was "almost off the radar screen of the people in this group," he added. The Catholic Church does not read the Genesis account of creation literally.
Fessio said Benedict took part in the discussions but said nothing different from previous public statements, in which he has recognised evolution as a scientific fact but argued that God ultimately created the world and all life in it.
As the Pope put it at his inaugural Mass after being elected in April 2005, "We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God."
Annual get-togethers
Benedict, who taught theology at four German universities before becoming archbishop of Munich and then the Vatican's top doctrinal official, has held these annual get-togethers since the late 1970s. The international group debates in German.
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution has long been rejected in the United States by conservative Christians who want to have a Bible-based view of creation taught in public schools, where the church-state separation bars the teaching of religion.
More recently, Darwin's critics have campaigned to have "intelligent design" taught as a scientific alternative to evolution. President George W. Bush and other conservative politicians support this drive to "teach the controversy".
The "ID movement" does not name the designer as God, but its opponents say that is the logical conclusion and call this an unacceptable bid to sneak religion into the teaching of science.
Schools in some parts of the United States teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution but a Pennsylvania court banned it there last year, saying it was religion in disguise.
Catholic teaching accepts evolution as a scientific theory but disagrees with what it calls "evolutionism," the view that the story of life has no role for God as its prime author.
Vienna's Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, a close associate of the Pope, was one of four speakers who addressed the meeting. He raised eyebrows last year with a New York Times article that suggested the Catholic Church supported the "ID movement".
Schoenborn and Benedict have said several times over the past year that intelligence in the form of God's will played a part in creation and that neo-Darwinists who deny God any role are drawing an ideological conclusion not proven by the theory.
They say they use philosophical reasoning to conclude that God created the world, not arguments which intelligent design supporters claim can be proven scientifically.
I know he's right.
I do agree completely, that so far, this thread has been refreshingly devoid of any ad hominems...but the day is still relatively young...I hope this thread remains as such...
Beautiful, thanks so much SJ!
> I do agree completely, that so far, this thread has been refreshingly devoid of any ad hominems...but the day is still relatively young...I hope this thread remains as such...
Same here. I must admit I was really surprised to see religious opposition to evolution, given my Catholic school training on how science beautifully complemented my faith.
I'd love to see the rancor and bitterness fall away from this debate. Hey, dreams come true! :-)
I am not a Catholic, and really dont know a lot about Catholicism...however, when I came to these CREVO threads, I immediately did pick, from other posters experiences within the Catholic Church, and from links provided to me, concerning the Catholic Church and evolution, that indeed, the Catholic Church has very clearly thought out this supposed problem, and has dealt with it in a very wise way...
Paley influenced the English divines who were interested in geology and whose views were sometimes called "gnostic". That's where Huxley got the tag "agnostic."
No, he does not claim special competence in the field. This is not inconsistent with Catholic atitudes since 1859. Not until the problem of modernism in religion came up and scholars began to treat the Scriptures as myth did the papacy say anything about the matter. Newman had no problem with Darwin, so long as he was discussing evidence. It was no such much Darwin as Darwinism that is the rub.
Other technical types who acquired an overwhelming interest in theological matters later:
Pascal
Newton
Swedenborg
Whatever one may think of their theology, the Catholic Church is probably unique in their attitude about science. I doubt that any other denomination has anything remotely like the PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Click on the link there to check out the list of the Academicians. Stephen Hawking is one of the names (he's also one of the "Steves" in Project Steve).
I distinguish Pascal from the others, who were deeply into mysticism. But he certainly didn't confuse his scientific works with his speculations, religious or otherwise.
Thanks for the links PH...as always, you provide lots of informative links...always appreciated...
|
Indeed...
They were all very different. One even had a vast following in America.
placemark
Thanks for the ping!
Thank you, StJaques, for such an exquisite posting. In all the years I've read, and occasionally posted to, the crevo threads, nothing I've encountered up to this point describes the context of science and religion as well as your post has. It is brilliantly succint, sincere and genuinely reflects a deep understanding of both science and the Christian faith that value each without expense to the other. Thank you. P.S. You must have been taught by Jesuits!
If the evidence "fits" a theory, then it fits.
Secondly, it appears (and I haven't read the whole text) as though this isn't an endorsement of evolution but rather an allowance for the same.
Just my two cents.
Well said my friend. Bookmarked for future reference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.