I have previously discussed my admiration for Pope Francis, who strikes me as a truly holy man in every true sense of that term. Francis has pulled the Church into the Twenty-First Century with massive reforms and new approaches. This week saw one of the most remarkable such changes: Pope Francis announced that it is perfectly consistent to be a Catholic and an evolutionist. For many Catholics who cannot deny the evidence that the Earth is billions rather than thousands of years old, the announcement shows that it is possible to believe in both God and evolution.
Pope Francis declared that the Big Bang theory “doesn’t contradict the intervention of a divine Creator, but demands it.” The comment came at the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, gathered in the Vatican to discuss “Evolving Concepts of Nature.” Francis said that the creator “brought all things into being . . . from a supreme Principle of creative love.” He added that “[e]volution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”
On my recent visit to the Vatican, I was told by multiple people that there has been a massive increase in visitors due to the unprecedented popularity of this Pope. Indeed, churches are reporting rising congregations after years of decline due to the draw of Pope Francis. Ironically, he is the greatest evidence that institutions like humans can evolve into better and higher forms.
davidm2575
happypappies, No doubt metaphor is used often in the Bible, but much of it also applies in a literal historical sense. Do you think the genealogies recorded are metaphor? If so, please explain the metaphor.
Thanks for clarifying that you are not Roman Catholic. The Roman Catholics seem to be hiding under their desks on this thread.
lol No, I think that they sat around campfires in their oral tradition back in the day and recited this like the Nomads they probably were. It’s hard to say what’s true and whats not. I can’t find an answer on line but I will give you my answer and will speak with my pastor because she is the Theology expert and is up on the studies. Now, I mean that seriously, because we talk about things like say, perhaps Abraham was listening to the wrong God when he was getting ready to sacrifice Isaac since God was against Murder and the previous gods called for human sacrifice. Things like that. We discuss them. Not normal stuff at all. But anyway. …….. They would sit in oral tradition and I am sure exaggerate and embellish a great deal as men do. Just like the Apocalyptic style the Revelation was told in was to warn the 7 Churches of their failing in the style of a legend a Paul really did think the Roman Empire was coming to end times. So that is why he talked that way. So these Jews had special numeric values they had to have Jesus come out as. He had to be a 14 — Which I know is the number for Temperance — I don’t know what Jews have it for. But anyway it doesn’t matter, historically speaking — the man made an impact and changed the world. That is the point…… The people believe it. I believe it. You either od or don’t. I did not always. The thing is, all of the different things like the Golden Ratio
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GoldenRatio.html
the rules of Themodynamics, the Circle of fifths, Music, Physics, Math all of these things of such nigh vibration resonate and I believe bring us closer to what we would call God – Krishna – Vishnu or any of the other entities that are worshiped as creator because its the source. I go to the Presbyterian Church because my husband is in the Veterans home and he enjoys it and we sing. Very high vibration.
🙂
happypappies – not to put too fine a point on it, but the Roman Empire did come to an end time. The Roman Catholics were never nomads, that would be the Jews, for a point in their history (goodness you need to read the Old Testament).
David M – Perhaps God or whomever is in charge of Creation or whatever you would like to call it because the Egg certainly did not come before the Chicken as I keep trying to tell Liberals about Economics on other threads. – Perhaps Georges Lemaitre was the “Father” of the big bang theory – In 1927, Lemaître published in Belgium a virtually unnoticed paper that provided a compelling solution to the equations of General Relativity for the case of an expanding universe. His solution had, in fact, already been derived without his knowledge by the Russian Alexander Friedmann in 1922. But Friedmann was principally interested in the mathematics of a range of idealized solutions (including expanding and contracting universes) and did not pursue the possibility that one of them might actually describe the physical universe. In contrast, Lemaître attacked the problem of cosmology from a thoroughly physical point of view, and realized that his solution predicted the expansion of the real universe of galaxies that observations were only then beginning to suggest.
He was a monsignor and a Catholic Priest and the Church certainly did not hold him back. The Catholic Church has the largest Binocular Telescope in the world.
You are so busy in your mendacity that you can’t see the glory of the Lord in these people because you can’t stand it for some reason because you don’t believe it or don’t want to and just have to prove it wrong.
You still have not said anything about the 7 arrows of time the 2nd rule of Thermodynamics. Have you any idea how well versed Catholics are in Physics?
Here is a simple stupid diagram of the Thermonuclear dynamics of time moving forwards and backwards like a river
https://www.facebook.com/notes/cosmology-from-the-big-bang-to-the-black-holes/arrows-of-time/270735499694218
Do you find it so impossible to believe that we are having it revealed to us by God now how he conceived the heavens by science?
happypappies wrote: “Do you find it so impossible to believe that we are having it revealed to us by God now how he conceived the heavens by science?”
Of course not. I believe that the study of nature and the study of God should be in harmony. Nevertheless, it is still true that sometimes science gets it wrong and sometimes theologians get it wrong. What you propose here suggests that the modern non-theistic paradigm of evolution is bringing us revelation from God. If that is true, and the older revelation that the church taught for millennia is no longer considered trustworthy, then those of the Catholic faith need to be honest enough to tell us that. It is odd how silent the Catholics on this blog are about this subject, except to express some relief that the Holy Pope seems to be expressing unity with Atheistic Evolution. I think the truth is closer to the idea that when the Pope used the term “evolution,” it does not mean the same thing that the scientist means when he says “evolution.”
On August 12, 1950, Pope Pius XII expressed openness for the church to consider and discuss the evolutionary model. But, he also cautioned that it should not be embraced as true just because scientists had consensus on it.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html
Pope Pius XII wrote, “… this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith. Some however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.”
Pope Pius XII also expressed how one tenet of modern evolutionary theory is absolutely irreconcilable with faith:
“When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.”
Pius XII also goes on to explain that the first eleven chapters of Genesis pertain to history in a true sense and that it should never be considered on a par with myths or other ancient writings. Pius XII wrote, “… our ancient sacred writers must be admitted to be clearly superior to the ancient profane writers.”
The real question concerns the modern profane writers. Is the church really bowing to their wisdom in these matters, or does the church follow the attitude of Pope Pius XII?
Pius XII also goes on to explain that the first eleven chapters of Genesis pertain to history in a true sense and that it should never be considered on a par with myths or other ancient writings. Pius XII wrote, “… our ancient sacred writers must be admitted to be clearly superior to the ancient profane writers.”
The real question concerns the modern profane writers. Is the church really bowing to their wisdom in these matters, or does the church follow the attitude of Pope Pius XII?
Most people realize that the Bible is a description of the ages. How can one couch and bridge the language of 4 thousand years ago to Science without metaphor? Because the Church Father is trying to lead the people shows wisdom as that was the wisdom when Jesus gave Peter the keys to the church. Now, mind you, that is couched in metaphor so please don’t run with that too far.
And, I am not a Catholic, I am a Holy Catholic – meaning Universal – not Roman and don’t follow the Pope.
Religion is very personal. It is like science. It is a many and varied road of discovery individually 🙂
happypappies, No doubt metaphor is used often in the Bible, but much of it also applies in a literal historical sense. Do you think the genealogies recorded are metaphor? If so, please explain the metaphor.
Thanks for clarifying that you are not Roman Catholic. The Roman Catholics seem to be hiding under their desks on this thread.
happypappies wrote: “Religion is very personal. It is like science. It is a many and varied road of discovery individually :)”
You are not expressing the Roman Catholic position. They believe the Church interprets the Scriptures for the rest of us. There is little room for private interpretation.
davidm2575 we are talking about a Catholic church that is now responsive to gays. This is not the 1950s. You are quite wrong. They have Bible Studies now. They are encouraged to have a Spiritual Path. I would imagine the Evangelicals and the Fundamentalists are much tighter wrapped when it comes to interpretation. I talk to these people at length in many forums and I also sing with them in Cape Girardeau in our Messiah Choir the encompasses the area and several annual praise sings that are interdenominational. This is SE Missouri here and I assure you that you could not be more wrong. We have Hospitals and SEMO here and even a Mall and Casinos lol 🙂 If we want more culture we travel
Olly
The direction of these threads is so predictable. JT tosses in a little (religion) red meat and the cell divides. The only question remaining is how long before JT has to step in with a civility ruling.
I agree with you Olly Totally, But I am not upset tonight because I have it figured out finally
Christians and Muslims believe in CREATION.
So the statement of Pope is a significant
departure which might create controversies.
Some will see it as an attempt to reconcile
religious views with the current scientific thoughts.
However there is one religion in the world,
which will be fairly comfortable with what has been said; Hindus, who believe
in Sanatan Dharm.
Hindus have no problem with either CREATION
or EVOLUTION and they are MORE CLOSE to EVOLUTION.
Hindus believe in CYCLIC THEORY of
EVOLUTION, and their theory is more comprehensive.
They Believe and ACCEPT that God sitting in
Heavens can NEVER solve the problems of Societies, and problem associated with
it, but do answer prayers of individuals, and provide reliefs.
If God wants to give relief in the problems
pertaining to societies and other larger problems, He has to come as AVATAR on
earth as Human and then provide direction by examples and by Physical actions
(KARM).
Lord Ram and Lord Krishna are the examples
of the same.
You may read:
CREATION VS. EVOLUTION AND HINDUS
http://awara32.blogspot.com/20…
SANATAN DHARM BELIEVE IN CHAOS AND NOT IN
PERFECTION
http://awara32.blogspot.in/201…
The cathechism of the Catholic Church isn’t particularly new in this regard. The long and the short of it is that whatever science reveals to be true reveals only God’s plan itself to us and therefore is not inconsistent with religion at all.
Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.” “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God.
Catechsim 159
Only older people are familiar with the Baltimore Catechism. Both catholic schools and CCD changed to newer texts a long time ago.
swarthmoremom wrote: “Both catholic schools and CCD changed to newer texts a long time ago.”
Do these new texts contradict the older texts?
Answers like this one are why I am so against religious establishments. The religious weave and dodge at every opportunity. The Pope makes a vague statement about evolution, and all these religious nuts in the church thinks he believes the science account of origins. A religious person says she was never taught certain things in catechism, so I bring up some text from a catechism. Now I am told the catechism I posted is outdated, but I am not told what the new catechism now teaches.
I would welcome any links to modern Catholic teaching on the subject of origins, Adam and Eve, original sin, redemption, the resurrection, eternal life, etc. Certainly there are Catholics here that can fill in my gaps of knowledge about Catholicism. My background and knowledge comes from evolutionary science. I know more of what evolutionary science teaches than I do the various Christian religions.
Does the Catholic Church teach that the first man and woman were real people named Adam and Eve? I think they do. Evolutionary science teaches that there were thousands of humans at the time of the Biblical story.
Does the Catholic Church that Adam and Eve existed originally under grace and without suffering and death? I think they do. Does the Catholic Church teach that Adam and Eve brought suffering and death to humans through sinning? I think they do. Evolutionary science teaches that suffering and death has always existed.
Does the Catholic Church teach that Jesus came to restore to mankind that which Adam lost through sin? I think they do. Evolutionary science rejects any such kind of miracles.
Does the Catholic Church teach that God sometimes intervenes with miracles in response to prayer? I think they do. Evolutionary science teaches there is no such thing as a miracle. There are always natural explanations for every observation.
Does the Catholic Church teach that God exists? I think they do. Evolutionary science refrains from addressing that question, claiming it is unanswerable by means of empirical observation and rational thinking. However, this is primarily a political move. Evolutionary science operates entirely under the premise that there is no God.
Does the Catholic Church teach that there is a Creator who through wisdom and intelligence created both the heavens and the earth? I think they do. Evolutionary science teaches that there was no creator.
“Catechism” is the name of a sex act done in Amsterdam on Fat Tuesday.
The Catholic Church has for years taught that man was created in a perfect state, that animals were created for man in a perfect state also where they did no harm to one another. They taught that man would have lived forever, except that man sinned. That brought death, not only to man, but to all the animals of the earth as well. So a Savior was needed to restore what man had lost through sin. Evolutionary theory of origins is completely opposite of this Biblical story. Death has always existed for evolution. There was no fall into sin that brought death. Evolution can only happen if there has been death since the beginning before there ever was man. Now if the church is going to change in their teaching about life coming from God and death coming from the sin of Adam and Eve, which they would have to do in order to line up with evolutionary theory, then come out and say that. These nebulous statements are irritating to real thinkers.
I recall NONE of these concepts as you have stated them as being taught in my catechism classes. None. I think you need to get a deeper understanding of actual Catholic theology and teachings.
I was not raised Catholic, but I can read. What did they teach you about the origin of man and original sin?
Did your Catholic catechism include the information contained in the lesson in this link?
http://www.catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/lesson05.html
The phrase Ronnie Raygun (mentioned above in a comment) has some religious and theological aspect to it. Our President knew the power of words and verse. When he pointed the finger more came out than direction. Think about when he was Governor and controlled the border with Mexico. He pointed the finger and they had to go back. And he pointed the finger and they got to come in to do the harvests.
Paul: The Big Bang is the name of a cathouse in Amsterdam. It is just off Dam Rak. There is no theory involved. It is all work and much play. You pay more, but you get what you pay for. Kind of like the Jesuit aspect of the Cat O Lic Church. Look at the Jesuit universities in America. They are fine places with good law schools.
rcocean, Sullivan is a disgrace, phony and hypocrite. But, I’m obviously speaking to the choir on that.