Posted on 12/14/2005 7:01:05 PM PST by AncientAirs
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.