From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Wis. City's Schools Allowing Creationism Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 13:42:16 -0600
The link is:
http://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.html
The quote is:
<quote> Today, almost half a century after the publication of the Encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of more than one 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. <end quote>
The whole piece separates the role of philosophy and science in answering similar sounding, but really quite different questions.
Yet according to Leo the 13th - 'truth cannot contradict truth' - which, due to John Paul II using said quote in his message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, creates a fundamental distinction between science and theology in terms of which discipline is better suited to unravel the mystery of the origin of humanity.
The Pope - John Paul II - relies on the following words of Pius the 12th to tackle evolutionary theory, which is hardly unexpected since he is after all the Vicar of Christ and consequently he must view scientific postulation through dogmatic eyes:
(On 'evolutionism')
"this opinion should not be adopted as though it were a certain, proven doctrine and as though one could totally prescind from Revelation with regard to the questions it raises."
The first point I'm ok with in a general sense. Look before you leap, that sort of thing. But the second point is completely nonsensical unless, again, you were to look at things from a dogmatic point of view. Which as I stated above, the Pope surely does. But that's not exactly conducive to the perspective of hardcore science now is it?
The Pope - John Paul II - continues with his endorsement of the preceding ideology:
"Pius XII stressed this essential point: if the human body takes its origin from pre-existent living matter the spiritual soul is immediately created by God"
"Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the mind as emerging from the forces of living matter, or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter, are incompatible with the truth about man."
In other words, the Church of Rome cannot accept wholeheartedly the theory of evolution as it doesn't allow for divine intervention, i.e. the insertion of the soul into the animal to truly make it human.
But wait! There's more:
"With man, then, we find ourselves in the presence of an ontological difference, an ontological leap, one could say."
We're the only sentient beings known to exist. Fair enough.
"However, does not the posing of such ontological discontinuity run counter to that physical continuity which seems to be the main thread of research into evolution in the field of physics and chemistry?"
Huh? We're sentient. We do as sentient beings do. Where's the discontinuity in that? Hell...ah excuse me...heck! If we weren't sentient we wouldn't be doing very much science at all! Incidentally, organized religion wouldn't exist either...(pardon me, but I see the above as a pointless question)
"Consideration of the method used in the various branches of knowledge makes it possible to reconcile two points of view which would seem irreconcilable."
Again, only through dogmatic eyes would these 'two points of view' seem irreconcilable in the first place...
"The sciences of observation describe and measure the multiple manifestations of life with increasing precision and correlate them with the time line. The moment of transition into the spiritual cannot be the object of this kind of observation, which nevertheless can discover at the experimental level a series of very valuable signs indicating what is specific to the human being. But the experience of metaphysical knowledge, of self-awareness and self-reflection, of moral conscience, freedom, or again, of aesthetic and religious experience, falls within the competence of philosophical analysis and reflection while theology brings out its ultimate meaning according to the Creator's plans."
In other words, we acknowledge science, but it doesn't have the answers we are looking for.
Therefore, we will draw a line in the sand and stand firmly behind it while attempting to bury said line in the sand.
Dan wrote:
Its far from anti-scientific.
And it's far from scientific. It's RELIGION...
...which may or may not be the 'way to go' so to speak. It is after all, all about perspective. At least until such time as we can claim to know the empirically objective truth.
-Travis
_________________________________________________________________
Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft� SmartScreen Technology http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN� Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
