CC- Theistic Evolution at Catholic Chatechisim

[justamouse]

This may be a little off-topic, but some of you might be interested to read the Pope's speech on Faith, Reason and the University (from before he was pope). http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/BenedictHellenism.php

 

that was awesome and I'll need to read it again because Hooo....All of the gerbils need to be on the wheel for that one.

[wapiti]

All of the gerbils need to be on the wheel for that one.

Indeed! :lol:

[GWOB]

::whispers::Come back! Come back! Come back!!

 

Catholic evangelism. :) LOL!

 

You know that whole "Catholics Come Home" add campaign the church did a couple of years ago? I think that woke the sleeping Catholic inside. Now all you awesome Catholic ladies are blowing me away with your knowledge. Is this that Catholic guilt I always hear about?:tongue_smilie:

[Parrothead]

I don't think that is guilt. Maybe curiosity. ;)

 

Go, plop yourself in the back row on Sunday and just absorb. Next week, go sit up front.

[asta]

Is this that Catholic guilt I always hear about?:tongue_smilie:

 

No. That is strictly reserved for one's own children and grandchildren. You're safe.

 

:lol:

 

 

a

[asta]

Aw, c'mon. Don'tcha want to post a link or two?

 

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI

TO MEMBERS OF THE PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

ON THE OCCASION OF THEIR PLENARY ASSEMBLY

 

Ok - I totally love this part:

 

To “evolve” literally means “to unroll a scroll”, that is, to read a book. The imagery of nature as a book has its roots in Christianity and has been held dear by many scientists. Galileo saw nature as a book whose author is God in the same way that Scripture has God as its author. It is a book whose history, whose evolution, whose “writing” and meaning, we “read” according to the different approaches of the sciences, while all the time presupposing the foundational presence of the author who has wished to reveal himself therein. This image also helps us to understand that the world, far from originating out of chaos, resembles an ordered book; it is a cosmos. Notwithstanding elements of the irrational, chaotic and the destructive in the long processes of change in the cosmos, matter as such is “legible”. It has an inbuilt “mathematics”. The human mind therefore can engage not only in a “cosmography” studying measurable phenomena but also in a “cosmology” discerning the visible inner logic of the cosmos. We may not at first be able to see the harmony both of the whole and of the relations of the individual parts, or their relationship to the whole. Yet, there always remains a broad range of intelligible events, and the process is rational in that it reveals an order of evident correspondences and undeniable finalities: in the inorganic world, between microstructure and macrostructure; in the organic and animal world, between structure and function; and in the spiritual world, between knowledge of the truth and the aspiration to freedom. Experimental and philosophical inquiry gradually discovers these orders; it perceives them working to maintain themselves in being, defending themselves against imbalances, and overcoming obstacles. And thanks to the natural sciences we have greatly increased our understanding of the uniqueness of humanity’s place in the cosmos.

 

ooo this is a REALLY good one -- but you have to read it all the way through -- if I just take an excerpt out of context, the meaning/point can be completely misconstrued.

 

BENEDICT XVI

 

GENERAL AUDIENCE Saint Paul (15): on The Apostle’s teaching on the relation between Adam and Christ

Paul VI Audience Hall, Wednesday, 3 December 2008

 

-------

 

And, finally, Humani Generis. (woo hoo encyclicals) The "official stance" on the matter (for now - and it was written in 1950!). If one only reads the first part, one would have to agree with Martha that the teacher was speaking entirely out of turn. (And yes, it is a long document - stay with me...) But the Pope is trying to "set the stage" so to speak for why he is writing it in the first place - for why things are being clarified. The previously posted things are actually refinements of this document.

 

36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter I believe this is what that teacher said- for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, 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.[11] 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.

 

and

 

37. 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.[12]

 

Not before, after. So again, it sounds as if that teacher was in the "safe" zone.

 

1950! This stuff isn't new! People talk about the Church being in the dark ages, but they were ahead of much of the molecular science on this one.

Edited May 27, 2011 by asta

[zaichiki]

I'm telling you, I was utterly gobsmacked. Speechless. I sat there with this dumb smile on my face. :D It's why I had to post. I'm still dumbstruck.

 

:bigear:

[Mama2Many4]

I'm stick'n to my guns on this one!:D

 

Seriously though, until the Catholic Church comes forward and spouts this all as absolute fact, I'm believing the old school stuff I was taught. Too much new info like this make my head spin. I'm still working my way through the Ignatius Study Bible!

[Twilight Woods]

So everything that we've been taught about a literal Adam and Eve is wrong? There was no man formed from the clay? No woman fashioned from his rib? They were not naked and in the Garden of Eden? I'm so confused.:confused:

 

I've been a Catholic all my life and this is the first I'm hearing of this. I never heard about anything put this way.

 

Im not catholic and this doesn't sound at all what my grandma RC has stated. :confused:

[justamouse]

:bigear:

 

if you ask a question I'll answer? :001_smile: What more would you like to know about?

[justamouse]

asta, you are amazing. That's an awesome list I'll have to make my way though.

[Guest momk2000]

I don't think it's right for any church to teach any one theory as truth. Nobody knows how/when it all started. The only absolute truth we know is that God created everything, and that is all they should be teaching.

I am open to all possibilities. If my children want to believe in theistic evolution, I'm fine with it, YEC,fine with that too. I would just be livid though if someone (especially in the church) was teaching my kids any one theory as fact.

[Twilight Woods]

This thread has been so educational for me :)

 

 

I swear I have been living under a rock.....first i hear of YE, OE, Theistic, etc etc.

 

I'm going to bed now. :)

[asta]

I don't think it's right for any church to teach any one theory as truth. Nobody knows how/when it all started. The only absolute truth we know is that God created everything, and that is all they should be teaching.

I am open to all possibilities. If my children want to believe in theistic evolution, I'm fine with it, YEC,fine with that too. I would just be livid though if someone (especially in the church) was teaching my kids any one theory as fact.

 

You might want to read the links I posted.

 

 

a

[cathmom]

See, for me the thing is, NOBODY KNOWS. No one alive today was there. Nobody has any idea what happened millions or billions or even ten thousands of years ago. It's all conjecture. Saying that these things - anything! - definitely happened is like Harold Camping saying the world would end on May 21. And I wouldn't be happy with someone presenting this to my child as though it were all fact. It's the problem I have - pretty much the one problem - with Montessori education.

[Trish]

I sat in mute wonder today listening to a Nun teach my children about evolution within the framework of the bible in an amazing, amazing way. I didn't expect that. My oldest son was sitting on the edge of his chair. He cant wait to go back next week. :001_huh:

 

I don't remember this from my own CCD classes (not that this class for my kids was CCD, but more of a religious education checkup before they are baptized.)

 

But it was the way she taught it. It brought even more glory to God if that made any sense. She *really* wanted to make sure that I wasn't teaching Genesis as science. I almost fell off my chair.

 

Do any of your kids in CCD say anything about this?

 

Did she think mankind evolved from lower life forms? Did she explain at one point how "free will" came into the picture?

[Parrothead]

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI

TO MEMBERS OF THE PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

ON THE OCCASION OF THEIR PLENARY ASSEMBLY

 

Ok - I totally love this part:

 

 

 

ooo this is a REALLY good one -- but you have to read it all the way through -- if I just take an excerpt out of context, the meaning/point can be completely misconstrued.

 

BENEDICT XVI

 

GENERAL AUDIENCE Saint Paul (15): on The Apostle’s teaching on the relation between Adam and Christ

Paul VI Audience Hall, Wednesday, 3 December 2008

 

-------

 

And, finally, Humani Generis. (woo hoo encyclicals) The "official stance" on the matter (for now - and it was written in 1950!). If one only reads the first part, one would have to agree with Martha that the teacher was speaking entirely out of turn. (And yes, it is a long document - stay with me...) But the Pope is trying to "set the stage" so to speak for why he is writing it in the first place - for why things are being clarified. The previously posted things are actually refinements of this document.

 

 

 

and

 

 

 

Not before, after. So again, it sounds as if that teacher was in the "safe" zone.

 

1950! This stuff isn't new! People talk about the Church being in the dark ages, but they were ahead of much of the molecular science on this one.

Thanks for all this. I'll start reading through it after mass tonight.

[justamouse]

I don't think it's right for any church to teach any one theory as truth. Nobody knows how/when it all started. The only absolute truth we know is that God created everything, and that is all they should be teaching.

I am open to all possibilities. If my children want to believe in theistic evolution, I'm fine with it, YEC,fine with that too. I would just be livid though if someone (especially in the church) was teaching my kids any one theory as fact.

 

The word theory as used in the Theory of Evolution is not the same meaning.

 

 

Did she think mankind evolved from lower life forms? Did she explain at one point how "free will" came into the picture?

 

In a way. Free will (I think I said this a few posts in) was when the hominids evolved in intelligence enough to know right from wrong.

 

I had posted this in another thread on the books she is using.

 

Here are some. She said she was also getting some for next year from Loyola Press. Sorry, wasn't thinking to post links. :001_smile:

 

(The first link to Sadlier Press-my oldest was given the book One Faith One Lord and browsing though it, it has the Nihil Obstat and in the first few chapters talks about how Genesis was not trying to answer questions of science, how 24 hours does not literally mean a day and how evolution is compatible with church teaching-that God is the creator of all life. Just in case you don't want that.)

 

the Common Misconception thread

[Murphy101]

See, for me the thing is, NOBODY KNOWS. No one alive today was there. Nobody has any idea what happened millions or billions or even ten thousands of years ago. It's all conjecture. Saying that these things - anything! - definitely happened is like Harold Camping saying the world would end on May 21. And I wouldn't be happy with someone presenting this to my child as though it were all fact. It's the problem I have - pretty much the one problem - with Montessori education.

 

 

Me too.

 

Facts are facts.

Opinions are opinions.

Educated guesses are still guesses.

Edited May 28, 2011 by Martha

[Guest momk2000]

See, for me the thing is, NOBODY KNOWS. No one alive today was there. Nobody has any idea what happened millions or billions or even ten thousands of years ago. It's all conjecture. Saying that these things - anything! - definitely happened is like Harold Camping saying the world would end on May 21. And I wouldn't be happy with someone presenting this to my child as though it were all fact. It's the problem I have - pretty much the one problem - with Montessori education.

 

 

:iagree:

[AngelaNYC]

I attended CCD classes in elementary school and went to Catholic middle school and a Jesuit prep school 30 plus years ago in a heavily Catholic area. I was never taught to take Genesis literally and only first heard of taking Genesis literally in homeschool circles in my late 40s or from an occasional news story prior to that. My understanding as I was growing up was similar to what this nun taught since I was taught similar things. Just because Genesis is not taken literally does not mean there is no truth to be found there;)

 

:iagree:

 

This is how I was taught as well. As children we all learned about Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel, but as we grew in the Church, it was more about the symbolism and the many lessons that came from it all.

 

I remember asking my 8th grade teacher (a priest) about how cavemen could have come before Adam & Eve if the latter were the first humans. I got a wonderful explanation - similar to the nun's from the OP. As I got older, it all fit together so nicely.

Edited May 28, 2011 by Abkjw01