Well . . . now for some reason you have adopted the tactic of not answering my questions. Is there some reason for this? Is it perhaps sympathy for a poor redneck like myself who doesn't have what it takes to debate with an intellectual such as yourself?
Come now.
You say the Catholic/Orthodox churches are "agnostics" when it comes to creationism yet post an article that condemns creationism.
You say that since Genesis is a theological text rather than a history book it can't be interpreted literally. Does that mean that since Luke isn't a science text its assertions about the virgin birth and resurrection from the dead can't be taken literally?
Do you think you could take the time to answer those two questions? Never mind about how unintelligent I am. Please, devastate me . . . by all means.
I think you fail to understand that the Church does not have a dogmatically defined perspective.
I meant the secular media. That’s how I read your reference to the media.
I stand on the side of creationism with you, Zionist Conspirator!
The awesome power of infallible definition is used sparingly, mainly for the painful yet necessary task of purging heretics. One must accept the virgin birth and resurrection to be considered Catholic, but it has not yet been deemed necessary to cast evolutionists from the Arc of Salvation. Perhaps declaring macro-evolution to be anathema would have spared us the aberration of Vatican II.