Posted on 12/14/2005 7:01:05 PM PST by AncientAirs
Interview With Father Rafael Pascual
ROME, DEC. 14, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Evolution and creation can be compatible, says a philosopher who goes so far as to speak of "evolutionary creation."
Legionary Father Rafael Pascual, director of the master's program in Science and Faith at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University, puts his comments in context by clarifying that the "Bible has no scientific end."
The debate on evolution and faith heated up last summer after Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna published an article July 7 in the New York Times in which he affirmed: "Scientific theories that try to explain away the appearance of design as the result of 'chance and necessity' are not scientific at all."
To understand the issue better, ZENIT interviewed Father Pascual, author of "L'Evoluzione: crocevia di scienza, filosofia e teologia" (Evolution: Crossroads of Science, Philosophy and Theology), recently published in Italy by Studium.
Q: Yes to evolution and no to evolutionism?
Father Pascual: Evolution, understood as a scientific theory, based on empirical data, seems to be quite well affirmed, although it is not altogether true that there is no longer anything to add or complete, above all in regard to the mechanisms that regulate it.
Instead, I don't think evolutionism is admissible as an ideology that denies purpose and holds that everything is due to chance and to necessity, as Jacques Monod affirms in his book "Chance and Necessity," proposing atheist materialism.
This evolutionism cannot be upheld, either as a scientific truth or as a necessary consequence of the scientific theory of evolution, as some hold.
Q: Yes to creation, no to creationism?
Father Pascual: Creation is a comprehensible truth for reason, especially for philosophy, but it is also a revealed truth.
On the other hand, so-called creationism is also, as evolutionism, an ideology based, on many occasions, on an erroneous theology, that is, on a literal interpretation of the passages of the Bible, which, according to their authors, would maintain, in regard to the origin of species, the immediate creation of each species by God, and the immutability of each species with the passing of time.
Q: Are evolution and creation compatible?
Father Pascual: Evolution and creation may be compatible in themselves; one can speak -- without falling into a contradiction in terms -- of an "evolutionary creation," while evolutionism and creationism are necessarily incompatible.
On the other hand, undoubtedly there was an intelligent design but, in my opinion, it is not a question of an alternative scientific theory to the theory of evolution. At the same time, one must point out that evolutionism, understood as a materialist and atheist ideology, is not scientific.
Q: What does the Church's magisterium say on the matter?
Father Pascual: In itself, the magisterium of the Church is not opposed to evolution as a scientific theory.
On one hand, it allows and asks scientists to do research in what is its specific ambit. But, on the other hand, given the ideologies that lie behind some versions of evolutionism, it makes some fundamental points clear which must be respected:
-- Divine causality cannot be excluded a priori. Science can neither affirm nor deny it.
-- The human being has been created in the image and likeness of God. From this fact derives his dignity and eternal destiny.
-- There is a discontinuity between the human being and other living beings, in virtue of his spiritual soul, which cannot be generated by simple natural reproduction, but is created immediately by God.
Q: What are the fundamental truths on the origin of the world and the human being which the Church indicates as basic points?
Father Pascual: Clearly, the magisterium does not enter into scientific questions as such, which she leaves to the research of specialists. But she feels the duty to intervene to explain the consequences of an ethical and religious nature that such questions entail.
The first principle underlined is that truth cannot contradict truth; there cannot be a real contrast or conflict between a truth of faith -- or revealed truth -- and a truth of reason -- that is, natural -- because both have God as origin.
Second, it is emphasized that the Bible does not have a scientific end but rather a religious end. Therefore, it would not be correct to draw consequences that might implicate science, or respect for the doctrine of the origin of the universe, or about the biological origin of man.
A correct exegesis, therefore, must be done of the biblical texts, as the Pontifical Biblical Commission clearly indicates in "The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church."
Third, for the Church, in principle, there is no incompatibility between the truth of creation and the scientific theory of evolution. God could have created a world in evolution, which in itself does not take anything away from divine causality; on the contrary, it can focus on it better as regards its wealth and potentiality.
Fourth, on the question of the origin of the human being, an evolutionary process could be admitted in regard to his corporeal nature, but in the case of the soul, because it is spiritual, a direct creative action is required on the part of God, given that what is spiritual cannot be initiated by something that is not spiritual.
There is discontinuity between matter and spirit. The spirit cannot flow or emerge from matter, as some thinkers have affirmed. Therefore, in man, there is discontinuity in relation to other living beings, an "ontological leap."
Finally, and here we are before the central point: The fact of being created and loved immediately by God is the only thing that can justify, in the last instance, the dignity of the human being.
Indeed, man is not the result of simple chance or blind fate, but rather the fruit of a divine plan. The human being has been created in the image and likeness of God; more than that, he is called to a relationship of communion with God. His destiny is eternal, and because of this he is not simply subject to the laws of this passing world.
The human being is the only creature that God wanted for its own sake; he [the human] is an end in himself, and cannot be treated as a means to reach any other end, no matter how noble it is or seems to be.
Q: An appropriate anthropology is needed therefore that takes all this into consideration and that can give an account of the human being in his entirety.
Father Pascual: On the kind of relationship that the Church promotes with the world of science, John Paul II said the collaboration between religion and science becomes a gain for one another, without violating in any way the respective autonomies.
Q: What is Benedict XVI's thought on creation and evolution?
Father Pascual: Obviously we are not faced with an alternative such as "creation or evolution," bur rather with an articulation.
In a series of homilies, on the first chapters of Genesis, the then archbishop of Munich, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, wrote in 1981: "The exact formula is creation and evolution, because both respond to two different questions. The account of the dust of the earth and the breath of God, does not in fact tell us how man originated. It tells us that it is man. It speaks to us of his most profound origin, illustrates the plan that is behind him. Vice versa, the theory of evolution tries to define and describe biological processes. However, it does not succeed in explaining the origin of the 'project' man, to explain his interior provenance and his essence. We are faced therefore with two questions that complement, not exclude each other."
Ratzinger speaks of the reasonable character of faith in creation, which continues to be, still today, the best and most plausible of the theories.
In fact, Ratzinger's text continues saying, "through the reason of creation, God himself looks at us. Physics, biology, the natural sciences in general, have given us a new, unheard-of account of creation, with grandiose and new images, which enable us to recognize the face of the Creator and make us know again: Yes, in the beginning and deep down in every being is the Creator Spirit. The world is not the product of darkness and the absurd. It comes from an intelligence, from a freedom, from a beauty that is love. To acknowledge this, infuses in us the courage that enables us to live, that makes us capable of confidently facing life's venture."
It is significant that, in his homily at the start of his Petrine ministry, Pope Benedict XVI said: "We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary." ZE05121422
Whatever happened to dogma?
What business does any representative of the Church have in speaking about evolution without first asserting the importance of the dogmas that are affected by it? The dogmas that evolution puts in question are at odds with any such discussion because as Catholics we are forbidden from engaging in questioning whether or not they are true. When a priest (or bishop, etc.) chimes in on evolution, he is commiting grave public scandal UNLESS he enunciates the dogma first, and proceeds to explain why evolution crosses the line on that matter. If he does anything other than that, he is making a disgrace of himself, and, if you want to take it to its logical conclusion, he is actually excommunicating himself by the fact of his commission of grave public scandal.
One to file away and be aware of.
Ok, when you try to slide between evolution and the theological statment of creationism, there are gaps on both ends... and in near equal proportions.
On the side of generic evolutionism, there lacks a solid begining... Yes, primordial soup, but where in the world did it come from, 'climate changes' what started those, the deeper you dig, eventually you fall into the hole and get stuck. So, we came from this little pool of chemicals that mixed together to make the basics of DNA... Then began the process of the actual evolution of small microbs and protazoa and the like... single celled soon became multi, then boom! you hit another gap... When was it that the genetics of mamals began, thus humans... somewhere in late Jurassic or Triassic period or something like that right? But where was the jump from... more digging, another hole, more plummeting to the bottom hopping something soft breaks your fall and you don't break your neck.
Now religious creationism comes into play.
Now before I go on. I am not atheist, I am not a purist, I am agnostic and not because I cannot make up my mind...
"My name is Steven M. Burgess, I am a human being, I was not put on this earth to be the pawn of someone that allows so much suffering for the sins of one to affect millions... I am down here on the world, and if there is a god s/he\it is up there... we will settle things in the end. If that means eternal damnation in the fiery pits of hell, so be it..."
Creationism, as the church sees it, serves to many flaws to not be true... possible but not plausible as some would say.
So here is one man, one woman... They have some sons... says really nothing about daughters, except books that the church feels inappropriate thus left them out of revisions...
The Bible is not the words of GOD. The Bible, the Books as they are all together to form the testaments, new, old, forbidden and forgotten, are possibly the words of GOD interpetted by man... This would mean that any racey things 'man' thought could be left out, was... or else there would be a much larger bible today... About 2 out of 5 books are left out of the bible because their text doesn't fit in with peoples popular belifes.
One book was left out reguarding sin.
No matter what the sin, at the 'end times' all would be forgiven by the lord and all shall rise to the kingdom of Heaven, so sayeth Jesus of Nazerith... Oh yeah... now, what kind of God would make all of us... well technically make just two, and then let all living and nonliving hell break loose...
Incest is against the church, how else could the idea of creationism work if it never happened and GOD never made another person other then Adam and Eve... also what of Adam's first wife? So there is one man 2 women, and suddenly the world is populated with no record of how or why... and yet humans do not appear until the later parts of civilization...
Both ideas have flaws... lots of them... But when brought together... well then new flaws arrive... what of the ancient reptiles... where did they come from and why? GOD decided he was lonely and tested out on Dinos first? Meh... mabye... But if you take evolution, that means the growth of a being's genetic code to its enviroment, and add it with creationism, it slowly peices together... but there are still rifts...
Where are your dogmas? gone... There is no thought to the holy writs because not everyone is taught them anymore... When can a religious figure head come into this topic... any time they feel like it... I mean, they are the vessels of GOD, he has something to tell us, they step forward... some listen some fall asleep in the pews, and others just don't care.
YEC INTREP - just more evidence that Roman Catholics don't really hold to Biblical authority.
*Pffftt. Post any Magisterial Document teaching that.
Yes. I just have to figure out where to file it.
Junior, for the archives?
It appears to me that Father Pascual is expending some effort to explain to you why it doesn't cross the line.
Interview With Father Rafael Pascual ROME, DEC. 14, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Evolution and creation can be compatible, says a philosopher who goes so far as to speak of "evolutionary creation." Legionary Father Rafael Pascual, director of the master's program in Science and Faith at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University, puts his comments in context by clarifying that the "Bible has no scientific end." The debate on evolution and faith heated up last summer after Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna published an article July 7 in the New York Times in which he affirmed: "Scientific theories that try to explain away the appearance of design as the result of 'chance and necessity' are not scientific at all."
/narnia-sarcasm?
ping
Faith and Science Ping.
Sure thing.
Well, you just blew your credibility right there. By definition, evolution cannot happen until there is imperfectly reproducing life. Scientists have speculated on where this "life" came from, with no real answers. But wherever the first life came from, until it existed, there was no evolution.
Go back to school.
Thanks for the ping!
Where did I ever say I was looking for credibility...
When you speak about generic evolution, the idea most people has is of some soup of chemicals that mixed because of atmosphiric changes... If all you got out of my comment was that, then there was such time wasted on my end... Good day and God Bless. Or whoever you belive in.
There is discontinuity between matter and spirit. The spirit cannot flow or emerge from matter, as some thinkers have affirmed. Therefore, in man, there is discontinuity in relation to other living beings, an "ontological leap."
Finally, and here we are before the central point: The fact of being created and loved immediately by God is the only thing that can justify, in the last instance, the dignity of the human being.
Indeed, man is not the result of simple chance or blind fate, but rather the fruit of a divine plan. The human being has been created in the image and likeness of God; more than that, he is called to a relationship of communion with God. His destiny is eternal, and because of this he is not simply subject to the laws of this passing world.
The human being is the only creature that God wanted for its own sake; he [the human] is an end in himself, and cannot be treated as a means to reach any other end, no matter how noble it is or seems to be.
These passages especially deserve further reflection. Truly there is no incompatibility between faith and reason, nor between matter and spirit, as some of our correspondents tirelessly insist. They are complementarities that express the whole man, and they do not contradict each other in any way. For both have their origin in God, who is Truth. And truth cannot contradict truth.
I do not see the benefit in rejecting the plain truth about God and man. No good has ever come from it.
Thank you for pinging me to this excellent essay, curiosity!
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.