Reconciling Evolution & Faith

[Ziggamafu]

Sooooooo, anybody know of articles that seek reconciliation between the billions of years of violent chaos and the doctrine of a perfect world before the Fall? The only thing that springs to my mind is that life was free of violence and suffering only for Adam & Eve, and that seems extremely weak.

Any theistic evolutionists (or even mere old-earthers) who would like to chime in on this?

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1282318579' post='2160604']
Sooooooo, anybody know of articles that seek reconciliation between the billions of years of violent chaos and the doctrine of a perfect world before the Fall? The only thing that springs to my mind is that life was free of violence and suffering only for Adam & Eve, and that seems extremely weak.

Any theistic evolutionists (or even mere old-earthers) who would like to chime in on this?
[/quote]

perfect as in "without sin" ?

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1282319110' post='2160605']
perfect as in "without sin" ?
[/quote]

Without suffering & death. Regardless of the fact that animals lack spirits, a brutal "survival of the fittest" and agonizing torture-play amongst animals with their food does not seem to fit with a perfect world.

[cmotherofpirl]

Where do you see violent chaos? I see an orderly progression of time and space as the world was prepared for Adam and Eve.

[KnightofChrist]

I reject the Darwinian Theory of Evolution. As I believe in the miraculous Resurrection of Christ which science cannot explain, I believe in the miraculous creation of Adam by God from previously non-living matter. Belief that Adam and Eve had parents other than God would seem to be a rejection of the Catholic Doctrine that they were our First Parents.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1282341821' post='2160777']
I reject the Darwinian Theory of Evolution. As I believe in the miraculous Resurrection of Christ which science cannot explain, I believe in the miraculous creation of Adam by God from previously non-living matter. Belief that Adam and Eve had parents other than God would seem to be a rejection of the Catholic Doctrine that they were our First Parents.
[/quote]
I have no problem with evolution, God created it as well.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1282342130' post='2160778']
I have no problem with evolution, God created it as well.
[/quote]

Darwin created the Darwinian Theory of Evolution and it is purposefully Atheistic in nature. That theory of Evolution is not compatible with Church Teaching. However I accept forms of mirco-evolution, but I reject we have any other first parents other than Adam and Eve.

[ThePenciledOne]

I dunno much about the whole monkey evolution thing.

But, in essence evolution is a reasonable theory of how lifeforms transition in development. In essence it is just how God expresses His wonderful and marvelous works of Creation.

[KnightofChrist]

God…creator of all visible and invisible things, of the spiritual and of the corporal;... 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. - [b]Fourth Lateran Council[/b] (1215)

If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing - let him be anathema (canon 5). - [b]Vatican I (1869-70)[/b]

[MithLuin]

[b]K of C[/b], when God created man in his own image, He made something that had not been seen on earth before. So, yes, humanity has a common ancestor of Adam and Eve. We can trace the mitochondrial DNA back to discover the (genetic) origin of the first human female from whom we are all descended, and we can trace mutations in the Y chromosome to do the same for the human male.

The Church, however, does not condemn evolutionary biology as being incompatible with a Catholic reading of the book of Genesis.

Pope Pius XII's 1950 encyclical on the matter had this to say:

[quote]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—for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.

[url=http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html]Humani Generis[/url][/quote]

JPII's October 22, 1996 address to the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences was much less cautious and skeptical towards evolutionary theory than Pope Pius had been. For one thing, the evidence that had been built between 1950 and 1996 was hardly insubstantial. With the discovery of DNA, an entirely new tool was opened up for studying relationships between species. [Example: the chromosomal similarities of great apes and humans [url=http://www.gate.net/~rwms/hum_ape_chrom.html]here[/url]]

The pope's original speech was given in French, but you can read it in English here:

[url=http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02tc.htm]Truth Cannot Contradict Truth[/url]

All of that being said, Catholics do not 'have' to agree with evolution. Most Catholics probably have very little reason to study any of the theories of modern science, so having an opinion (one way or another) on evolution hardly seems necessary. But it would be a mistake to suggest that the Catholic Church is herself opposed to the theory in general. Obviously, She is opposed to atheistic interpretations of human history. Not surprisingly, Dawkins was none too pleased with JPII's speech. So yes, the Church cautions and states reservations, but not with the theory of evolution, actually.


As for your question, [b]Zigg[/b], one would first have to discuss the chronology of the fall of Man [i]and[/i] the fall of the angels. We weren't the only ones to fall, and our fall wasn't the only one that affected creation. Just some food for thought, there.

[Winchester]

Our soul is not dependent upon physical accidents.

[KnightofChrist]

The Church has always taught that the creation of Adam's body and soul was miraculous and directly created by God, and that Eve's creation was miraculous and that she was created from a part of Adam, directly by God. I do believe God could have used both living and non-living matter to create Adam and Eve. But in such a way that the matter would have been changed and it would have ceased to be what it was and it would have became new matter. Therefor if it was living matter that life whatever it was would have died and not had parenthood over Adam or Eve.

If however Darwinian Evolution is true I do not see how we are not forced to believe in some form of Polygenism. Because it teaches that one species gave birth to another species and that is clearly Polygenism. And we know from the Blessed Mother that parenthood is not effected by the offspring being superior to the parent. Mary was and is still the Mother/parent of Christ even though He is God. If Adam and Eve evolved from apes or what have you those apes would be our first parents not Adam and Eve.

Darwinian Evolution clearly teaches some form of Polygenism and that is clearly condemned by the Church.


"the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with [the doctrine of] original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which through generation is passed on to all and is everyone as his own." - Pope Pius XII

Edited August 21, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[peach_cube]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1282318579' post='2160604']
Sooooooo, anybody know of articles that seek reconciliation between the billions of years of violent chaos and the doctrine of a perfect world before the Fall? The only thing that springs to my mind is that life was free of violence and suffering only for Adam & Eve, and that seems extremely weak.

Any theistic evolutionists (or even mere old-earthers) who would like to chime in on this?
[/quote]

I never really felt the the world was perfect before the fall. I took it as the Garden of Eden was perfect, but outside its gates it was not (good, but not perfect in a human sense). That sin entered the world with the fall, but that sin is not something that animals are capable of.

[peach_cube]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1282319601' post='2160608']
Without suffering & death. Regardless of the fact that animals lack spirits, a brutal "survival of the fittest" and agonizing torture-play amongst animals with their food does not seem to fit with a perfect world.
[/quote]
I see death as part of their nature. It is not in our nature because we are created in the image and likeness of God. Torture play usually serves some purpose.

[sixpence]

to answer the original question:
I do not know much about that topic at all, so anyone, please feel free to enlighten me if I am wrong, but here is my idea (as person who accepts evolution):
Adam and Eve (the first humans) having been created by God, and being the first earthly creatures with souls, were also the first creatures even capable of sinning against God's law (as all other animals before then simply act according to the law's of nature, which presumably cannot be "sinful").


as for this argument against macroevolution:
just ..Wow... as a biologist it is so difficult for me to understand how people can still reject evolution... especially people who are not fundamentalist protestants....

Basing the argument that macroevolution did not occur on the grounds that God (of course) has the ability to defy the "laws of nature" (ex. evolution, genetics, life, death), is like saying gravity does not exist because we believe in the Assumption Mary and the Ascension of Christ.

I think it is quite reasonable for a Catholic to accept macroevolution, particularly in light of PJPII's acknowledgment that it may not necessarily be contrary to the Faith. I believe that God used this means to develop the human form, and created the soul's of the first humans in His image.