Creationists Blast Vatican for Not Inviting Them to Evolution Conference

Creationists Blast Vatican for Not Inviting Them to Evolution Conference

The Discovery Institute, the main organization supporting intelligent design research, says it was shut out from presenting its views because the meeting was funded in part by the John Templeton Foundation, a major U.S. nonprofit that has criticized the intelligent design movement.

…But in an e-mail, he said the conference didn’t speak for the Vatican as a whole, where he said evolution and intelligent design “remain in serious and fruitful dialogue.”

…Participants took the microphone away from Babuna when, during a question-and-answer session, he challenged them to give proof of transitional forms of animals in Darwinian evolution.

more…

[quote=the article]An official with the Pontifical Council for Culture, which is backing the conference, said the Templeton grant covered almost half the meeting’s budget. But the official, the Rev. Tomasz Tramfe, also denied Templeton put any restrictions on who was invited to speak.
[/quote]

I really don’t understand this part of the article:

Intelligent design holds that certain features of life forms are so complex that they can best be explained by an origin from an intelligent higher power, not an undirected process like natural selection.

I would like to know why natural selection is considered to be undirected? Does the intelligent design movement hold that God has his hands in everything at every moment and is the *direct *cause of everything? Can’t you believe in natural selection and hold that this is God’s way of creating all things?

The basis of ID is to be able to test for patterns of intelligence.

As far as the origins of man Catholics have held and continue to hold:

Adam and Eve are our first parents, Eve came from Adam, bodily immortality, freedom from sickness and irregular desire, infused knowledge, AKA preternatural gifts.

So when Genesis says that Adam was created from the dust of the earth, we are to take that literally or figuratively? Also, isn’t there some disconnect between science’s definition of a human and the theological definition of a human?

Both. Adam’s body has the raw materials of the earth.

Revelation teaches us a human is a material body with an immortal soul. A human needs both. Science cannot speak to the soul. It can only study the material body. Science can say nothing about the ontological leap.

I would like to know why natural selection is considered to be undirected?

It’s not. No one who knows anything about natural selection would call it that. It is what keeps evolution from being random.

Does the intelligent design movement hold that God has his hands in everything at every moment and is the direct cause of everything?

Apparently, some of them do.

Can’t you believe in natural selection and hold that this is God’s way of creating all things?

Christians can. But creationists can’t.

“The world would not endure for a single moment, if God were to withdraw His governing power from it” (St. Augustine, In Gen., 4:14).

“Being (or existence) is not the nature or essence of anything created, but of God alone. Nothing therefore can remain in existence when the divine activity ceases” (Contra Gentiles, 3:65).

While that makes it clear that it was God who has directed, willed, and sustained the process, none of that speaks to the possibility that evolution was the mechanism through which He has acted.

Only from a man can another man descend, whom he can call father and progenitor" Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1941, pg. 506

On November 30, 1941, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope Pius XII identified three elements that must be retained as certainly attested by the Sacred Author of Genesis, without any possibility of allegorical interpretation:

					1. The essential superiority of man in relation to other animals, by reason of his spiritual soul.
					2. Derivation in some way of the first woman from the first man.
					3. The impossibility that the immediate father or progenitor of man could have been other than a human being, that is, the impossibility that the first man could have been the son of an animal, generated by the latter in the proper sense of the term. [12]

**On November 30, 1941, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope Pius XII identified three elements that must be retained as certainly attested by the Sacred Author of Genesis, without any possibility of allegorical interpretation:

  1. The essential superiority of man in relation to other animals, by reason of his spiritual soul.
  2. Derivation in some way of the first woman from the first man.
  3. The impossibility that the immediate father or progenitor of man could have been other than a human being, that is, the impossibility that the first man could have been the son of an animal, generated by the latter in the proper sense of the term. [12]**

The first is, of course consistent with evolution.

The second assertion is not Catholic doctrine. It may be viewed as historical, or as an allegory.

He causes a deep sleep to fall upon him, and taking out one of the ribs, forms it into a woman, who, when she is brought to him, is recognized at once as bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. A discussion of the arguments in favor of thehistorical, or the more or less allegorical character of this narrative would be beyond the scope of the present notice. Suffice it to say that the biblical account has always been looked upon by pious commentators as embodying, besides the fact of man’s origin, a deep, practical and many-sided significance, bearing on the mutual relationship established between the sexes by the Creator. Catholic Encyclopedia

The third has no meaning in science, since humans are animals. We are merely animals who have been given immortal souls by God. The Church allows that we may have evolved as a species, but our souls did not.

Pope Benedict has written that humans evolved. But that is not yet a doctrine. You may deny it if you like.

The non-political concept of Intelligent Design, as opposed to the version you see here, makes the following points:

We and all life show evidence of Design.

Design requires a designer.

If an archaeologist picks up a triangular rock, he can determine if it is just a rock or an arrowhead. Happens all the time.

SETI is searching for signs of intelligence in the universe, even though there is no empirical evidence such intelligence exists.

So-called natural selection works with so-called random mutations. Nature has no will or intelligence. It can guide nothing

So, an Intelligent Agent guided whatever process occurred. As Pope Benedict said, We are not hahazard mistakes.

I have no confidence in any Institute, whether it calls itself Christian or not. In the case of the Discovery Institute, it appears politics is the overriding goal. Too bad.

Peace,
Ed

Pontifical Biblical Commission’s Responsum of June 30, 1909
Whether, in particular, the literal historical sense (sensus litteralis historicus) may be called in question (vocari in dubium possit), where it is a question of facts narrated in these chapters (ubi agitur de factis in eisdem capitibus enarratis) which involve the foundations of the Christian religion (quae christianae religionis fundamenta attingunt), as are, among others, the creation of all things by God at the beginning of time; the special [or, particular] creation of man; ***the formation of the first woman from the first man (formatio primae mulieris ex primo homine)***; the unity of the human race; the original happiness of our first parents in a state of justice, integrity and immortality; the precept given by God to man in order to test his obedience; the transgression of the divine precept under the persuasion of the devil in the guise of a serpent; the fall of our first parents from the aforesaid primeval state of innocence; and the promise of a future Savior?

Resp.: Negative

Vatican Council I

This, our Holy Mother the Church believes and teaches: When God was about to make man according to His image and likeness in order that he might rule over the whole earth, He breathed into the body formed from the slime of the earth the breath of life, that is, a soul produced from nothing. . . . And blessing the first man and Eve his wife who was formed by divine power from his side, God said: “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth” (Genesis 1: 28)

Oktar Babuna, a representative of a prominent Turkish creationist, Harun Yahya, was denied the right to speak at the opening session Tuesday.

Participants took the microphone away from Babuna when, during a question-and-answer session, he challenged them to give proof of transitional forms of animals in Darwinian evolution.

Organizers said he hadn’t formulated a question and was just stating his point of view.

Gee, what a surprise.

They can’t provide proof because as my old Daddy used to say, “There ain’t no such animal.” But to admit that would throw a real big monkey wrench in the One Holy True And Infallible Faith Of Our Lord Darwin…therefore, people like Babuna must be silenced.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years, it’s that True Believers In Darwin will brook absolutely no challenges whatsoever to their religion.

Buffalo,

(1) The Discovery Institute was not specifically targeted for exclusion from the Gregorian University conference. I had a long talk with the priest who was co-director of this conference, who told me that the DI did not have a coherent scientific viewpoint to contribute to a conference on evolutionary biology and its implications for Catholic thought. Perhaps when their research wing has conclusively proven irreducible complexity they will have earned a place at the table of scientific discussion. The sense of the participants in Rome is that at present ID offers nothing more than incessant whining about what science cannot do, rather than introducing anything positive of their own.

(2) Oktar Babuna was removed from the microphone on Tuesday morning not because he opposed evolution, but because he was causing a ruckus. We were on a very tight time schedule: the sessions were each about fifty minutes long, a forty-five minute presentation followed by time for two questions. Babuna was not asking a question – he was merely grandstanding, depriving other questioners of their allotted time. I remarked on other occasions that a questioner would go on and on, or would try to ask follow-ups, when there was a line of other questioners patiently awaiting their turns. Babuna was rude and abusive; he was removed because of his obnoxious public behavior, not for any other reason.

I participated in Mass at St. Peter’s Basilica on Sunday, an experience rendered a little less spiritually serene by virtue of the fact that 10,000 people had to pass through airport metal detectors before entering the Vatican.

StAnastasia

They can’t provide proof because as my old Daddy used to say, “There ain’t no such animal.” But to admit that would throw a real big monkey wrench in the One Holy True And Infallible Faith Of Our Lord Darwin…therefore, people like Babuna must be silenced.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years, it’s that True Believers In Darwin will brook absolutely no challenges whatsoever to their religion.

Let’s test that belief. Give me a few examples of major groups said to be evolutionarily related, and I’ll see if I can show you any transitionals.

So far, no one’s ever picked up that challenge. Would you like to be the first?

Pontifical Biblical Commission’s Responsum of June 30, 1909
Whether, in particular, the literal historical sense (sensus litteralis historicus) may be called in question (vocari in dubium possit), where it is a question of facts narrated in these chapters (ubi agitur de factis in eisdem capitibus enarratis) which involve the foundations of the Christian religion (quae christianae religionis fundamenta attingunt), as are, among others, the creation of all things by God at the beginning of time; the special [or, particular] creation of man; the formation of the first woman from the first man (formatio primae mulieris ex primo homine); the unity of the human race; the original happiness of our first parents in a state of justice, integrity and immortality; the precept given by God to man in order to test his obedience; the transgression of the divine precept under the persuasion of the devil in the guise of a serpent; the fall of our first parents from the aforesaid primeval state of innocence; and the promise of a future Savior?

Don’t see the point. Which of these do you think rules out evolution?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.