Evolution dispute now set to split Catholic hierarchy

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Evolution dispute now set to split Catholic hierarchy

Postby emad » Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:43 pm

Evolution dispute now set to split Catholic hierarchy <br>By Michael McCarthy <br>Published: 05 August 2005 <br> <br>Recent comments by a cardinal close to the Pope that random evolution was incompatible with belief in "God the creator" are fiercely assailed in today's edition of The Tablet, Britain's Catholic weekly, by the Vatican astronomer.<br><br>In an article with explosive implications for the Church, Father George Coyne, an American Jesuit priest who is a distinguished astronomy professor, attacks head-on the views of Cardinal Christoph Shönborn, the Archbishop of Vienna and a long-standing associate of Joseph Ratzinger, the German cardinal who was elected as Pope Benedict XVI in April.<br><br>In an article entitled "Finding Design in Nature" in The New York Times last month, Cardinal Shönborn reignited the row between the Church and science by frankly denying that "neo-Darwinian dogma" was compatible with Christian faith. He wrote: "Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo- Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not."<br><br>His views have provoked alarm among many scientists and liberal Catholics around the world, who thought that Catholicism had come to terms with evolution, and who now see the spectre of creationism rising in the Catholic Church as it has risen among fundamentalist Protestants in the US.<br><br>Only this week President George Bush said that the theory of "intelligent design" - a version of creationism, which disputes the idea that natural selection alone can explain the complexity of life - should be taught in America schools alongside the theory of evolution.<br><br>Cardinal Shönborn is understood to have been urged to write the article, and to have been helped to place it in The New York Times, by Mark Ryland, a leading figure in the Discovery Institute, a conservative American Christian think-tank that promotes intelligent design.<br><br>The cardinal's views are publicly and robustly rejected by Fr Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, which is a scientific institution sponsored by the Holy See.<br><br>Fr Coyne, who is 72, has been in charge of the observatory since 1978; he spends half the year in Tucson, Arizona, as a professor in the University of Arizona astronomy department, where he is still actively involved in research.<br><br>In The Tablet he says that Cardinal Shönborn's article has "darkened the waters" of the rapport between Church and science, and says - flatly contradicting the cardinal - that even a world in which "life... has evolved through a process of random genetic mutations and natural selection" is compatible with "God's dominion".<br><br>For a Vatican official of such seniority openly to attack the views of a cardinal on such a potentially explosive subject as evolution is unprecedented. It also reveals a deep rift at the heart of the Catholic Church's thinking. It is known that Fr Coyne wrote privately to both Cardinal Shönborn and the Pope himself protesting against The New York Times article soon after it was published last month. But it is understood that so many scientists, especially Catholic scientists, have since contacted him to express their disquiet, that he felt he had to go public. He is believed to have cleared the article with his Jesuit superiors.<br><br>The previous pope, John Paul II in 1996 declared to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that evolution was "no longer a mere hypothesis". In his July article Cardinal Shönborn played down this statement as "vague and unimportant". He points instead to comments Pope John Paul gave during an audience in 1985, when he spoke at length of the role of God the creator.<br><br>Fr Coyne attacks the cardinal's analysis and says that the Pope's later statement was "epoch-making". He goes on: "Why does there seem to be a persistent retreat in the Church from attempts to establish a dialogue with the community of scientists?"<br><br>The key question behind the debate is the opinion of new Pope. Some fear that the cardinal would never have published such a controversial article in such a prominent medium without his personal approval. But nothing will be known for certain until the Pope speaks for himself. <br><br> 'La Creazione' (The Creation) fresco by Michelangelo from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel <br>The conflict at the highest level of the Catholic Church about the truth of Darwin's theory of evolution breaks out publicly today. <br><br>Recent comments by a cardinal close to the Pope that random evolution was incompatible with belief in "God the creator" are fiercely assailed in today's edition of The Tablet, Britain's Catholic weekly, by the Vatican astronomer.<br><br>In an article with explosive implications for the Church, Father George Coyne, an American Jesuit priest who is a distinguished astronomy professor, attacks head-on the views of Cardinal Christoph Shönborn, the Archbishop of Vienna and a long-standing associate of Joseph Ratzinger, the German cardinal who was elected as Pope Benedict XVI in April.<br><br>In an article entitled "Finding Design in Nature" in The New York Times last month, Cardinal Shönborn reignited the row between the Church and science by frankly denying that "neo-Darwinian dogma" was compatible with Christian faith. He wrote: "Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo- Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not."<br><br>His views have provoked alarm among many scientists and liberal Catholics around the world, who thought that Catholicism had come to terms with evolution, and who now see the spectre of creationism rising in the Catholic Church as it has risen among fundamentalist Protestants in the US.<br><br>Only this week President George Bush said that the theory of "intelligent design" - a version of creationism, which disputes the idea that natural selection alone can explain the complexity of life - should be taught in America schools alongside the theory of evolution.<br><br>Cardinal Shönborn is understood to have been urged to write the article, and to have been helped to place it in The New York Times, by Mark Ryland, a leading figure in the Discovery Institute, a conservative American Christian think-tank that promotes intelligent design.<br>The cardinal's views are publicly and robustly rejected by Fr Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, which is a scientific institution sponsored by the Holy See.<br><br>Fr Coyne, who is 72, has been in charge of the observatory since 1978; he spends half the year in Tucson, Arizona, as a professor in the University of Arizona astronomy department, where he is still actively involved in research.<br><br>In The Tablet he says that Cardinal Shönborn's article has "darkened the waters" of the rapport between Church and science, and says - flatly contradicting the cardinal - that even a world in which "life... has evolved through a process of random genetic mutations and natural selection" is compatible with "God's dominion".<br><br>For a Vatican official of such seniority openly to attack the views of a cardinal on such a potentially explosive subject as evolution is unprecedented. It also reveals a deep rift at the heart of the Catholic Church's thinking. It is known that Fr Coyne wrote privately to both Cardinal Shönborn and the Pope himself protesting against The New York Times article soon after it was published last month. But it is understood that so many scientists, especially Catholic scientists, have since contacted him to express their disquiet, that he felt he had to go public. He is believed to have cleared the article with his Jesuit superiors.<br><br>The previous pope, John Paul II in 1996 declared to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that evolution was "no longer a mere hypothesis". In his July article Cardinal Shönborn played down this statement as "vague and unimportant". He points instead to comments Pope John Paul gave during an audience in 1985, when he spoke at length of the role of God the creator.<br><br>Fr Coyne attacks the cardinal's analysis and says that the Pope's later statement was "epoch-making". He goes on: "Why does there seem to be a persistent retreat in the Church from attempts to establish a dialogue with the community of scientists?"<br><br>The key question behind the debate is the opinion of new Pope. Some fear that the cardinal would never have published such a controversial article in such a prominent medium without his personal approval. But nothing will be known for certain until the Pope speaks for himself. <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article303775.ece">news.independent.co.uk/wo...303775.ece</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
emad
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 12:03 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Evolution dispute now set to split Catholic hierarchy

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:51 pm

I haven't read the whole thing yet emad, are we back to living flat ? <br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://69.64.177.16/images/blog/flat.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Evolution dispute now set to split Catholic hierarchy

Postby emad » Fri Aug 05, 2005 4:04 pm

Wondered where you were hiding these days Seems!<br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=emad@rigorousintuition>emad</A> at: 8/6/05 9:39 am<br></i>
emad
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 12:03 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

'intelligent design'

Postby rain » Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:24 pm

guess where this is going.<br><br>ooh, watch out. you're gonna have to weigh everything you've ever stood on, in and for with this one.<br> <p></p><i></i>
rain
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 12:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

oops, sorry

Postby rain » Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:46 pm

that it's a church splitting crisis is bunk. that's just a tactic to get people's attention.<br>'intelligent design' will win out. der.<br><br>some background - google Micheal J. Behe.<br>probably the leading exponent.<br><br>'Hello George. George, this is God speaking. look George, I've got a little plan, and I think you're just the man for the job'<br><br>need I say it? 'THEY'RE BACK'<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
rain
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 12:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

black boxes

Postby rain » Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:20 pm

" Chapter 2<br>NUTS AND BOLTS<br>THE NATIVES ARE RESTLESS<br>Lynn Margulis is Distinguished Professor of Biology at the University of Massachusetts. Lynn Margulis is highly respected for her widely accepted theory that mitochondria, the energy source of plant and animal cells, were once independant bacterial cells. And Lynn Margulis says that history will ultimately judge neo-Darwinism as 'a twentieth-century religious sect within the sprawling religious persuasion of Anglo-Saxon biology'. At one of her many public talks she asks the molecular biologists in the audience to name a single, unambiguous example of the formation of a new species by the accumulation of mutations. Her challenge goes unmet. Proponents of the standard theory, she says, 'wallow in their zoological, capitalistic, competitive, cost-benefit interpretation of Darwin - having mistaken him ... Neo-Darwinism, which insists on (the slow accrual of mutations), is a complete funk."<br><br>Micheal J. Behe. Darwin's Black Box.1996.<br><br>p.s.: mostly I read this this sort of stuff because I find the process amusing, and to insert it in my kids' curriculum. of course, they don't see the funny side to it (yet).<br><br>p.p.s.: you also might want to check the work and career of Australia's Ted Steele.<br> <p></p><i></i>
rain
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 12:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

a little further on down the road ...

Postby rain » Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:18 pm

... more black boxes.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.biped.info/index.html">www.biped.info/index.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>and a bit of a wrangle<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1998/apr/d17-002.shtml">www.ufomind.com/misc/1998...-002.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>so, who's<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.drboylan.com/">www.drboylan.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>and then Australia's Bill Chalker, with particular attention to the Peter Khoury story<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.theozfiles.com/">www.theozfiles.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>just no-one mention Goff Whitlam...<br> <p></p><i></i>
rain
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 12:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Bush’s neocon friends shocked as he backs the Darwin-doubter

Postby emad » Sun Aug 07, 2005 12:33 pm

Bush’s neocon friends shocked as he backs the Darwin-doubters<br> <br> <br> <br>THE theory of intelligent design, which emphasises the role of a creator in the development of the universe, has received a boost from President George W Bush. He has called for it to be taught alongside evolution in schools, writes Sarah Baxter. <br>While Bush’s conservative Christian fundamentalist base is delighted by his pronouncement, it has opened a split with neoconservatives and other secular allies on the right. <br><br> <br> <br>In Texas, where the president likes to spend August reconnecting with his heartland, Bush said last week: “Both sides ought to be taught . . . so people can understand what the debate is about.” <br><br>The teaching of Darwinism is a controversial issue in Kansas and other patches of middle America, where legal and political challenges are being mounted to introduce intelligent design into the science curriculum. Many fundamentalists believe that the world is only 6,000 years old and that atheistic theories are being foisted on children. <br><br>The teaching of intelligent design advocates a divine — or “intelligent” — creator and is regarded by many scientists as mumbo-jumbo. <br><br>“With the president endorsing it, at the very least it makes Americans who have that position more respectable, for lack of a better word,” said Gary Bauer, a leading Christian activist. “It’s not some backwater view. It is a view held by the majority of Americans.” <br><br>Some of the president’s greatest supporters in the war on terror are shaking their heads in disbelief at his remarks. Charles Krauthammer, a neoconservative commentator, said the idea of teaching intelligent design — creationism’s “modern step-child” — was “insane”. <br><br>“To teach it as science is to encourage the supercilious caricature of America as a nation in the thrall of a religious authority,” he wrote. “To impose it on the teaching <br> <br> <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1724138,00.html">www.timesonline.co.uk/new...38,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=emad@rigorousintuition>emad</A> at: 8/7/05 10:36 am<br></i>
emad
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 12:03 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Darwin-doubter

Postby ZeroHaven » Sun Aug 07, 2005 12:53 pm

Teacher:<br>So children, some scientists believe that all life on this planet sprang up in this primordeal soup millenia ago. Every plant, insect, fish, and even humans have a single ancestor cell that was spontaneously assembled due to a lightning strike.<br><br>Other people who are not scientists believe an all-knowing, all seeing being waved his hand and all the creatures we see just popped into existence.<br><br>Johnny:<br>But teacher! The museum lady told us that there were no people during the time of the dinosaurs. Does that mean this being made people after the dinosaurs were dead, or did he not make the dinosaurs?<br><br>Teacher:<br>Good question Johnny. Some people believe... <p><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a239/ZeroHaven/tinhat.gif"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></p><i></i>
ZeroHaven
 
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:34 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to Religion and the Occult

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest