Posted on 03/19/2010 2:15:37 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator
This is a .pdf document which will not paste here. Please click on the link and scroll down to p. 184
(Excerpt) Read more at in6days.ie ...
Mr. Donnelly seems to be a very interesting person. He is ostensibly a traditional, orthodox Catholic. He is also a young earth creationist and demonstrates a remarkable (and most unusual) sympathy for American Fundamentalist Protestantism.
However, from my reading of some material in his thesis he seems to be attributing the success of evolutionism within the Catholic Church to the ostensibly traditional Catholic doctrine that "Tradition" is on a par with the Bible. Indeed, he goes so far as to say in one place that the Protestant Reformation did indeed "restore" something that Catholicism had lost (that the Bible is "clear"). Thus he attributes Catholic evolutionism in part not merely to liberalism within Catholicism, but to certain aspects of even traditional Catholicism.
The closest thing to this I have ever seen before now is a "traditionalist" web site that is in fact neo-Jansenist and which dates the current "crisis" in the Catholic Church to the triumph of the Jesuits over the historic Jansenists. After all, if modern popes could teach error, so could earlier ones.
Very interesting.
I'm sorry I'm unable to actually post the article here; you'll have to click on the link and scroll down to p. 184.
It wasn't just the old-school Jesuits who triumphed over the Jansenists. It was the spread of the devotion of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Pope St. Pius X put the stake into the heart of Jansenism by encouraging frequent Communion, and lowering the age of First Communion.
That's funny. Catholic FReeper dsc just told me this morning that "We [Catholics] treat it [young earth creationism] as an error."
Maybe the "orthodox" author of Creation Rediscovered didn't get the bulletin.
How does a “young earth” creationist explain the fact that there are stars out there whose light has taken billions of years to arrive Earth?
Bump for later
It doesn't matter. According to that web page (not to be confused with the one linked in this thread), it was all downhill from there.
Something somewhere certainly caused things in the Catholic Church to go downhill.
What do you mean "there are stars out there?" Don't you mean that there were stars out there billions of years ago that aren't out there anymore, but whose light is just now reaching earth?
To answer your question, I don't know. How do Catholics explain transubstantiation? "G-d can do anything?" What if a young earth creationist said the same thing in answer to your question?
At any rate, debating evolution is not the purpose of this thread. The purpose is speculation as to whether theistic evolution has deeper roots in Catholicism than its critics maintain, but in fact has roots in something far older than "modernism."
The operative phrase was billions of years.
That said, I’m sorry for not having inferred the gist of the article, accurately.
And you personally measured the time, having been there for the duration.
Oh, excuse me. You don't have to have been there. All you have to do is take the laws of the universe as they exist today, and retroject them unchanged into the very creation and formation of the universe, because, goodness knows, the laws of nature are absolutely uniform and unchanging (except for when transubstantiation takes place).
It's good to know that one can take the fact that no one today lives to be 930 years of age as "proof" that "nobody ever has."
Are you disputing the speed of light, the calculation of astronomical distances, the science of interferometry and spectroscopy? In that case, don’t take it up with me, take it up with the physicists.
Why would that be an issue if God created the heavens before creating the earth.
If the theory that species are created by an evolutionary process how do we explain inorganic matter becoming organic and then self replicating. I know of no experiments where this can be accomplished.
When a person wins a lottery jackpot, there is no known way of replicating the same, even if one were to follow every single step taken by the winner, his ancestors, their ancestors, etc., which lead to the person having the opportunity to buy the ticket, at the right time, and at the right place, and win.
Such is the nature of chance.
Good thing the speed of light was exactly the same during the Six Days of Creation as it is today! And, of course, all other physical laws/processes. Yesiree. Nothing has ever changed. No one was ever created as an adult because that's not how it's done today. And no one has ever lived 969 years because no one does today.
I guess that means no one has ever risen from the dead, either. After all, that doesn't happen these days.
That's funny. Catholic FReeper dsc just told me this morning that "We [Catholics] treat it [young earth creationism] as an error."
I would like to know what authority dsc can cite.
I'd like to know why you're asking me rather than him.
Well, again, if you have problems with the concept of the absolute speed of light, don’t take it with me, take it with the physicists.
To imply that the “six days” were longer than the length of the days known through human experience, is to borrow from a Hindu concept, so that’s an interesting lead that you are taking here.
It’s not about what was made “that way” and what was not.
You have stars out there whose light has taken billions of years to arrive Earth. How do you account for that, when you believe that the entire universe is less than 6000 years old?
That’s the conflict of logic.
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.