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.
Pogo, My profession was to analyze w/o bias. Now, we can never rid ourselves of all bias. But, the Jesuit training was perfect for a PI. This Pope is a pretty easy read for me. The Church needed a salesman. There’s nothing wrong w/ that. No organization, secular or religious, can survive w/o members and financial support. These mega churches have GREAT salesmen. Well, the Catholic Church may have the best in my lifetime. Better than Billy Graham, Joel Osteen, and many more combined. But, he won’t make Al Sharpton his go to guy for black memebership in the US like Obama did.
My diatribe against socialism did not address what Catholics find sinful about capitalism.
Finding a way between these two poles is part of what Catholics try to aim for in what is mistakenly called “social justice,” and I understand and support that unbridled capitalism itself can bend towards evil.
I refuse to accept however that statism is compatible with human freedom.
Nick,
The aim of the papal announcement on evolution (to fill the seats) makes sense to me now.
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.
SWM, The comment @ 9:11.
I thought they were supposed to be INFALLIBLE! They told us for over a century that evolution was a lie.
Changing their story reveals the scam; their imaginary friend doesn’t exist, and they’ve been making it all up!
There’s never been a shortage of people willing to speak for god, and there’s never been a shortage of other people willing to listen to them.
DBQ, My philosophy is as you describe, across the spectrum, depending on the issues. Imagine that. The Jesuits taught me how to think, not what to think. People who are lockstep ideologues, on both sides, don’t get people like me.
“Pogo, LOL is about all that one can do with your idea of economics and vulnerability to evil. I had to LOL along,”
The socialist Soviet Gulags and Maoist re-education camps, with their combined deaths of 50-70 million people were not hilarious.
That’s why it’s not funny.
Socialism as practiced in the 20th century literally killed 200 million people.
‘Vulnerable to evil’ was being kind.
This issue that I just addressed. The boxing in and labeling applies very much to this topic of the Catholic Church, religion, and evolution.
The desire of some to paint all Christians as “fundamentalists” “fundies” and make comments about the flat earth believers…..is again intellectual laziness and ignores that there are many permutations of Christianity and a wide range of beliefs.
Lazy. Disingenuous. And not worthy of anyone’s time to respond.
I prefer not to put people into little boxes by giving them names. If they want to self identify as Socialist or whatever, that is their prerogative.
However, to stereotype people into one dimensional caricatures of what you (generic you….not a personal you) think they think in order to set up strawman arguments is the sign of a very lazy intellect. Address the person and the actual issues instead of setting up false premises.
People are not one dimensional. Someone who may be “right wing” (a term that really has no precise definition) in some aspects of their political thinking might be in a completely different spectrum of the political universe on other issues. The same applies to those who may be leaning more progressive or liberal on issues. Not one dimensional.
To pigeon hole or box in and label someone is the first sign that the person I am talking to is unworthy of my attention.
Paul C, if someone describes themselves as a socialist in a discussion, fine. I don’t know who nick was talking about.
Right wingers demean people to the left of them by calling them socialists all the time. I say it is a loaded term, and was meant that way.
SWM – there are declared Socialists and undeclared Socialists. I think calling someone a Socialist is not demeaning, it is a descriptor.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/roman-observer/next-pope-francis-agenda-curia-reform-personnel-moves-revamped-synod “Today’s generation of bishops are not comfortable hearing a pope says such things. That’s also true of those who work for him at the Vatican. But here’s the problem. A local ordinary may have the right and sometimes the duty to oppose the bishop of Rome to his face, as Paul did to Peter at Antioch, but bishops and cardinals who are directly in his service do not.
And it seems Pope Francis has more than a few of these types meddling in the Vatican. The way he unleashed discussion in the synod seems to have been the last straw for many of them. It certainly smoked them out.
This is actually good, because as he moves toward the second anniversary of his election and begins to make final decisions for a total reorganization of the Roman Curia, he is going to have to begin making key personnel changes. Obviously, he must replace those who oppose his reforms with people who will help implement them.”
@ SWM
Socialist or socialism are defined terms describing a know and enumerated political philosophy.
Right wing “nut job” is a pejorative insult and is not worthy of being included in a civil discussion.
The end of my 2 cents.
I don’t know that at all. Move on.
SWM – I thought that Socialists were Loud and Proud.
There are very proud socialists here, SWM. They have commented on this thread professing their love of socialism. “Socialists” is not an ad hominem. Your words were. Let’s move on, please.
Wisecracks about socialists get very old quite quickly.
Come on SWM, the two comments are not even close to the same. You know that. You’re better than that.
nick, Are you better than your remark about “socialists”?
SWM, This is a good discussion. You are better than the comment you just made.