Vatican accepts evolution as fact

In what appears to be its latest capitulation to worldly wisdom, the Vatican apparatus now assumes (contrary to the teaching of Pius XII in Humanae Generis) that the evolution of men from animals is a proven fact.

On June 24, 2004 Zenit.org reported that "Vatican Observatory has convoked a range of experts to reflect on a question that at times seems to be forgotten in scientific research: Is there purpose in evolution?" That is, evolution is now assumed to have occurred, and the only debate is over whether it has a purpose. The Vatican called a symposium of experts to meet on June 24-26 to discuss whether evolution has a "purpose."

The Vatican Observatory’s announcement of the symposium states that "in scientific circles, there is a very deep-seated distrust of teleological language, even though researchers may occasionally use the word ‘design’ in an attempt to grapple with the often astonishing adaptive complexes they study … Put crudely, the widely accepted scientific worldview is that human beings or any other product of evolutionary diversification is accidental and, by implication, incidental."

Well, that’s right, of course. And what is the Vatican’s response to this worldview? Read it for yourself, if you can believe it: "The purpose of this symposium is not to dispute this worldview, but to inquire whether it is sufficient and, if it is not, to consider what we need to know and ultimately how we might discover the requisite information with one or more research programs." So, the Vatican does not dispute the view that the emergence of human life is merely incidental to the process of "evolution," whose truth is now apparently assumed.

The symposium (whose results have not yet been published) was asked to address five questions:

-- What does convergence [different species displaying the same traits] tell us about evolution?

-- What do we mean by intelligence? Is intelligence an inevitable product of evolution?

Notice that every question presumes that evolution has, in fact, occurred, even though there is abundant evidence showing no gradual transition from one form of life to another (as evolution supposes), but rather the sudden appearance of every basic form in the fossil record, which is precisely what one would expect to see if God directly and specially created each kind, as the Book of Genesis recounts.

In Humani Generis Pope Pius XII warned that "the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that 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."

Moreover, Pope Leo XIII taught in his encyclical letter Arcane Divinae Sapientiae (Christian Marriage) that Adam and Eve, and they only, are our first parents and that Eve was created from Adam's body:

We record what is to all known, and cannot be doubted by any, that God, on the sixth day of creation, having made man from the slime of the earth, and having breathed into his face the breath of life, gave him a companion, whom He miraculously took from the side of Adam when he was locked in sleep. God thus, in His most far-reaching foresight, decreed that this husband and wife should be the natural beginning of the human race, from whom it might be propagated, and preserved by an unfailing fruitfulness throughout all futurity of time.

The Church says that no one may doubt these things. Yet how can these things be reconciled with the view that Adam and Eve (and who knows how many other humans) "evolved" from apes and that Eve was not formed from the body of Adam, as the Vatican now seems to suppose, in calling for a symposium to discuss the "purpose" of evolution.

So the question must be asked: Do those who are in charge of the Vatican’s approach to "modern science" still believe in what the Church teaches concerning the origin of the human race? Or are we witnessing yet another sign of the great apostasy in the Catholic Church beginning at the top, which was predicted by the Third Secret of Fatima?

I am forever grateful to scientists like yourself who recognize the authorship of God in all His creation.

Darwin was part and parcel of his times -- a product of the eugenicists, Fabians and assorted occultists who hoped to control men by denying God. Same as it ever was.

From Pastor Colin Maxwell of the Cork Free Presbyterian Church, Cork, Ireland...

THE HUMAN EYE:

AN UNANSWERABLE TESTIMONY FOR CREATION AND AGAINST EVOLUTION:

The human eye is an awesome piece of machinery. It is more wonderful than the most intricate man made device. Although the human eyeball measures only about 1" (25 mm) in diameter, yet it can see objects as far away as a star and as small as a grain of sand. It can quickly adjust its focus between a distant point and a near one and can be accurately directed toward an object even while the head is moving.

The eye is made up of a number of different parts, each in turn causing us to wonder. The eyelid serves to protect the eye, often by reflex action when danger is sensed. The eyelash on the lid screens out some of the dust and other particles which could enter and damage the eye. The conjunctiva is the membrane which lines the inside of the eyelid and extends over the white part of the eye. Part of its job is to keep the keep the eyeball lubricated (think of the number of times you blink each day) and also produces some tears which help keep the eye clean. The retina makes up the innermost layer of the wall of the eyeball. Although as fragile as a piece of wet tissue paper, it has light sensitive cells which absorb light rays and changes them into electrical signals. There are 2 types of these light sensitive cells - rods and cones, so named after their shapes. The eye has about 120 million rods and around 6 million cones. These enable us to see shades of grey and in dim light and also to distinguish more than 200 colours. Nerve fibres attached to the rods and cones join at the centre of the retina and form the optic nerve. This nerve has around 1 million fibres and it serves as a flexible cable that connects the eyeball to the brain. In fact the optic nerve and the retina are actually extensions of the brain. The optic nerve carries the electrical signals produced in the retina to the brain, which interprets them as visual images. Every second, one billion electrical impulses are thus transmitted to the brain.

Although the above details are only really a fraction of what could be said about the human eye, it must be admitted that it is a truly wonderful contraption indeed! For the purposes of this article, it will do two things:

1) IT SHOWS THE SHAM OF EVOLUTION WHICH TEACHES US THAT THE EYE EVOLVED FROM A VERY SIMPLE BASIS TO WHAT IT IS TODAY:

Some who hold to evolutionist faith tell us that the whole human body evolved through what they call mutations i.e. slight changes from one generation to another. Here they have two main problems because first of all, the vast majority of mutations are either lethal, harmful or just plain useless. But some evolutionists claim that every so often (once in a million years! Has been suggested) there is a positive mutation (i.e. is beneficial) and this increases the generally usefulness of the organism. We might ask, what about the other mutations which are either lethal or harmful? What about the net result? A football team which manages to score a goal now and again but concedes goals by the dozen every game will hardly succeed. This is evidently a non starter. Secondly, with all the details listed above, even if we were to forget about the bad mutations (which could well undo any previous advances), how long do we need to produce all those rods and cones and nerve fibres? These evolutionist tells us that all this took place over billions of years, but even with all this vast expanse, he simply runs out of time. Not only must these mutations actually take place, but to be of any use they must co-ordinate together. To go back to our football illustration again, what is the use having a brilliant winger who can pass brilliant balls into the opponent’s penalty box, if there is no one there to convert them into goals? One failure will effectively destroy the whole. An animal with half developed eyesight is effectively blind and therefore unlikely to survive in the evolutionists survival of the fittest scenario.

DARWIN’S STARTLING CONFESSION

Is it any wonder that Darwin, the apostle of evolutionary thinking, in his book Origin of the Species wrote the following: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." In a letter in February 1860 to his evolutionary friend, Asa Gray, Darwin lamented: "To this day the eye makes me shudder." This is because it completely smashes his notion to smithereens. However, Darwin foolishly pushed on with his doctrine of evolution.

2) IT SHOWS THE WONDERFUL POWER OF OUR CREATOR GOD:

In Proverbs 20:12, we read: "The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the Lord has made even both of them." It is more rational to believe that a Designer designed the eye than to believe that it came about by blind random chance. Truly, each of us can say, like David: "I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Marvellous are thy works: and that my soul knoweth right well." (Psalm 139:14) We cannot run away from the thought of a Creator God. Our own bodies bare testimony to His existence and power. One day we must meet Him. His is the hand that graciously feeds us. "He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? He that formed the eye shall he not see?"(Psalm 94:9)

THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST:

Best of all this great Creator God has provided for us a wonderful and eternal salvation from sin. God loves His creation (John 3:16) He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11) He would have all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) He has made salvation to be a free gift (Romans 6:23) - without money and without price (Isaiah 55:1) - and also without works of any kind (Ephesians 2:8-9) Evolution can offer nothing like this! It's message panders to man's lowest instincts - encouraging men to pursue sin - but God says: "Thou shalt call his name Jesus…for He shall save from their sins" (Matthew 1:21)

But my assertion still stands, as the modern propounders of evolution have as their foundation that (a) living beings evolved from inert matter, and (b) there is no soul, and therefore (c) there is no God in control, and the whole evolutionary progressive march is accidental, and therefore without transcendent meaning or purpose.

The case assumption is not quite (a). Evolution presumes that living beings evolve from other beings. The life-form zero origination isn't a matter anyone can address. There just are not any viral fossil records.

The Theory itself is silent on (b) and (c) for or against. They don't deal with the Soul. My opinion is that God guides history and the whole universe, and sets things in motion, and explained it to mankind in general terms and gross details.

There may a believer in evolution here or there who differs with these basics, but in general - and as taught to the masses - these (a, b and c) are taught as the absolute truth.

This is not a correct assertation, and I have an university degree in Anthropology, and advanced Engneering degrees. The issue is not inert matter at all. The theory supposes that life changes over time from other life forms.

"Educated" people believe this as though there were eyewitnesses and notaries present during the transition of inert matter to life

This isn't the case, for example, Antropology showed that the fertile crescent, which includes the Holy Land, has more species of native grass than anyplace else, and always has. We know this because of fossilized materials in that area, and no notary was used or needed.

If God provided a fossil record, should we not understand the meaning of those things He left behind?

Not having read any of Darwin's books, I cannot speak with authority about the inventor or original promulgator of evolution. Although I have read several times that he either started out an atheist or became one later in his life.

Darwin died a believing Catholic, IIRC.

But my assertion still stands, as the modern propounders of evolution have as their foundation that (a) living beings evolved from inert matter

No, the theory of evolution does not speak to the origins of life.

(b) there is no soul, and therefore

No scientific theory attempts to cover a metaphysical concept such as the soul.

(c) there is no God in control

No scientific theory speaks to the existence or non-existence of God.

There may a believer in evolution here or there who differs with these basics, but in general - and as taught to the masses - these (a, b and c) are taught as the absolute truth.

Not true.

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.