How do I respond to evolution


#21

"Our first parents were formed immediately by God. Therefore we declare that…those who…assert…man…emerged from spontaneous continuous change of imperfect nature to the more perfect, is clearly opposed to Sacred Scripture and to the Faith.”

There is no contridiction between this statement and evolution, and the Church has even said as much. God immediately created true man by imbuing a biological form with a human soul, thus making it instantaneously perfect. What this is saying is that humans didn’t have a semi-human soul at any point in time. So says the Church.


#22

Why Human Evolution Can Never Become
Part of the Deposit of Faith

     [***Clement       Butel***]("http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/creation/cbutel/humanevo.html")

In this essay several definitive reasons are given why an evolutionary creation of our first parents can never become part of the Deposit of Faith. This being so, it is imperative that the Catholic Church should without delay not only reject the possibility of such a creation but should also re-affirm those teachings of the Church that hold that our first parents were created as described in the Book of Genesis, Chapter 2.


#23

buffalo: If you have a problem with the Magesterium, take it up with the Magesterium, not with Catholics who are loyal to it. You have an essay written by some theologian. Which Council did he have a seat on? Which Pope was he? We, on the other hand, have statements from the Magesterium that faith and reason do not contridict, and from our current Pope that states that evolution is more than a hypothesis. We’ve got a Pope and the Magesterium behind us, backed up with countless theories that don’t violate any of the doctrines and dogmas of the faith. You’ve got the opinions of a few theologians. I’m pretty happy standing in the shadow of Peter on this one.

When the Papacy absolutely condemns all notions of evolution, I’ll change my position. Until then I’m perfectly within the bounds of the faithful, orthodox, traditional Catholic Church.


#24

[quote=Ghosty]There is no contridiction between this statement and evolution, and the Church has even said as much. God immediately created true man by imbuing a biological form with a human soul, thus making it instantaneously perfect. What this is saying is that humans didn’t have a semi-human soul at any point in time. So says the Church.
[/quote]

Ghosty:

What do you not understand about the following statement:

“Our first parents were formed immediately by God.”

Who were our first parents? Pure spirit, or body and spirit? Just because you made a statement, does not make it truth. Do me a favor, please. Find one statement made by a pope or a council that says Adam and Eve were chosen from stock and I will find for you many statements that state they were created ex nihilo, from nothing. I have already provided four such statements.


#25

I take your ICR, AiG, Kolbe Center, a Lateran IV (not VI btw but IV, Sungenis made the same mistake), a Vatican I, a (local) Council of Cologne, and raise you a Cardinal Ratzinger and his International Theological Commission:

According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the “Big Bang” and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5 - 4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution.

International Theological Commission of Cardinal Ratzinger: Created in the Image of God, paragraph 63

Theistic Evolution vs. Six-Day Creation, by me

Perspectives on an Evolving Creation edited by Keith Miller

Evolution and the Magisterium by Jimmy Akin

That’s all. Stop reading that young-earth garbage please. :o :eek: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Phil P


#26

We can trade quotes all day, but this isn’t a “majority rules” argument. Ratzinger, the Pope, and the current Council of Bishops are the people with the authority to rule on such matters, and they have ruled that theistically guided evolution is in line with Catholic Doctrine. You don’t get to decide what a Council means, the Magesterium does, and the Magesterium has spoken on the matter; neither your view, nor mine, is out of line with faith. Your view, however, is indeed out of line with reason whereas mine is not.

When you are selected by the Pope to rule on such matters as interpretation and application of Doctrine, by all means do so. Until then you should humbly accept that my views are within orthodoxy according to the authority of the Church.


#27

Some people in this thread say:

“Evolution is completely ridiculous”

“…or whatever the latest theory for the absurd idea of evolution is…”

“…there is absolutely no scientific evidence whatsoever for macro-evolution…”

“Evolution is a pseudoscientific MYTH”

But some prominent Catholics have said, and maybe you’d like to try a little harder in finding out why:

JOHN PAUL II: "…new knowledge has led to the recognition of more than a hypothesis in the theory of evolution. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory.” (Pope John Paul II, to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, October 1996)

CARDINAL RATZINGER: “While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5 - 4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution.” (Cardinal Ratzinger’s International Theological Commission, published last year, from meetings in Rome, 2000-2002)

See also the Catechism, my favorite paragraphs 159, 283-284 again.

A few other prominent people quoted on evolution here, scroll near the bottom:

Theistic Evolution vs. Six-Day Creation, part 3 by me

WARNING: don’t forget that Gravity is only a theory too

I see we keep quoting the same documents back and forth. Maybe one of us can actually read the other side for a change. :smiley:

Phil P


#28

[quote=Stevereeno]Would you please clarify, for me, what you are actually saying? How can a scientific fact be more proven than any other scientific fact?
[/quote]

Quite easily
One theory might be a better fit to the data or have a much larger data set to back it up

For example the theory of relativity is much more accurate than Newton’s laws of motion
But in our everyday world the difference is not noticeable to make the extra math worthwhile

[quote=Stevereeno]In 1906, the New York Times made similar wild assertions claiming “evolution is now taught in the textbooks of all
schools” and evolution “is no more debatable than the multiplication table”.
[/quote]

yeah, that is pretty much right

[quote=Stevereeno]Oh really!?! We can now manufacture DNA (and have been for the last 50 years)! Get real, the Jurassic Park movie was not a documentary, it was fiction.
[/quote]

Did I say DNA? No I didn’t

Alright you got me in a little hyperbole here; we’ve been making organic molecules for over 50 years but self replicating peptides for only 10 or so

[quote=Stevereeno]Dude, just use some common sense. What were the hosts for these viruses if there were not even unicellular organisms? Other viruses?
[/quote]

Sigh,

I didn’t say they were viruses?

I meant that they were just very primitive life forms LIKE a virus or something else very simple

Remember modern single cell organisms (and viruses too) are also the product of several billion years of evolution

[quote=Stevereeno]Yes, fine. But before you read the textbook, you will need to throw away your faith. From [font=Arial]Lateran VI:

“Firmly we believe and we confess simply that the true God… who by His own omnipotent power at once from the beginning of time created each creature from nothing, spiritual, and corporal, namely, angelic and mundane, and finally the human, constituted as it were, alike of the spirit and the body.”[/font]

[font=Arial]And from the Council of Cologne:

"Our first parents were formed immediately by God. Therefore we declare that…those who…assert…man…emerged from spontaneous continuous change of imperfect nature to the more perfect, is clearly opposed to Sacred Scripture and to the Faith.”[/font]

[/quote]

Why would all that mean that I had to give up my faith?

The Vatican has asserted several times in the last century that evolution is not incompatible with Christianity

Sure God created life

He just took several billion years to do it

Trying to squeeze God down to a human time scale seems kinda……blasphemous to me

When I consider the great probability of life but the improbability of me it makes Creation all the more wonderful


#29

[quote=Ghosty]buffalo: If you have a problem with the Magesterium, take it up with the Magesterium, not with Catholics who are loyal to it. You have an essay written by some theologian. Which Council did he have a seat on? Which Pope was he? We, on the other hand, have statements from the Magesterium that faith and reason do not contridict, and from our current Pope that states that evolution is more than a hypothesis. We’ve got a Pope and the Magesterium behind us, backed up with countless theories that don’t violate any of the doctrines and dogmas of the faith. You’ve got the opinions of a few theologians. I’m pretty happy standing in the shadow of Peter on this one.

When the Papacy absolutely condemns all notions of evolution, I’ll change my position. Until then I’m perfectly within the bounds of the faithful, orthodox, traditional Catholic Church.
[/quote]

I don’t have any problem with the Magisterium. The essay has quotes and references to other Popes and Magisterial teachings as well as Tradition. Look at what the constant teaching of the Church has been… All of a sudden the prior Popes and Magisterial Authority have been denied?

At some point this has to be resolved not ignored.


#30

I don’t have any problem with the Magisterium. The essay has quotes and references to other Popes and Magisterial teachings as well as Tradition. Look at what the constant teaching of the Church has been… All of a sudden the prior Popes and Magisterial Authority have been denied?

At some point this has to be resolved not ignored.

If I’m not mistaken, it’s the Magisterium that speaks on behalf of the Magesterium, not the author of that essay. The quotes he gives can be taken in many ways, and the Magisterium has said that certain theories of evolution, even of the evolution of the human body, apparently do not contridict the prior teachings. If you are accusing Pope XII, Pope John Paul II, and Cardinal Ratzinger of denying previous Popes and Magisterial rulings, then you have more issues with the Church than you’re letting on. The Magisterium can not contridict the Magisterium, and in the last 50 years the Magisterium has been very clear, in a way that previous documents didn’t even come close to, on what we can and can’t believe in regards to Creation.

For the record, the Magisterium has not said that it in any way goes against faith to believe in a Young Earth, but it has said the same about certain “old Earth” theories, including certain aspects and theories of evolution. If you trusted the Magisterium before, why can’t you trust it now?


#31

Bump, because it’s not showing that I posted on the thread…


#32

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.