Pope John Paul II, Darwin, and Evolution Catholic Opinions on Evolutionary Origins

By Austin Cline, About.com

In America one is accustomed to seeing religious figures condemn evolutionary theory and argue that teaching evolution is incompatible with Christianity. Catholicism, however, not only doesn’t reject evolution but in fact has supported evolutionary theory for quite some time - Pope John Paul II even expressed some support for it. This continues to surprise people because it’s simply not reported in the news very often.

In 1950, Pope Pius XII wrote in his encyclical Humani generis:

“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, insofar as it inquiries into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter.”
[The full encyclical can be read here: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12HUMAN.HTM]

On October 23, 1996, Pope John Paul II said in a speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences:

“[N]ew findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.”

“A theory is a meta-scientific elaboration, which is distinct from, but in harmony with, the results of observation. With the help of such a theory a group of data and independent facts can be related to one another and interpreted in one comprehensive explanation. The theory proves its validity by the measure to which it can be verified. It is constantly being tested against the facts; when it can no longer explain these facts, it shows its limits and its lack of usefulness, and it must be revised.”
[To read Pope John Paul II's words on the matter: http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP961022.HTM]

None of this necessarily means that Pope John Paul II accepted evolution as a fact and it certainly doesn’t mean that Catholics are required to accept evolution as a fact. John Paul’s address was designed to explain the Vatican’s theological position on human origins, not the Vatican’s position on science. The address wasn’t meant to be either an endorsement or (obviously) a condemnation.

Instead, the address was meant to lay out for Catholics a basis for accepting evolutionary theory. There are many scientific facts that the Catholic Church doesn’t require Catholics to accept — that the Sun in as the center of the solar system and that the Earth is round, for example. The truth of these statements is obvious to everyone, but that doesn’t make them appropriate for religious doctrine either.

On a practical level, evolutionary theory is taught without reservation at Catholic educational institutions. This has been a problem because the general anti-evolution trends in American society has made teaching evolution more difficult, even at private Catholic schools. This has led to calls for more detailed teaching about evolution in these schools. David Byers, executive director of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Science and Human Values from 1984 to 2003, has said that, “Denying that humans evolved seems by this point a waste of time.”



My note: He expressed the Catholic position on the subject of evolution very well. This author is a contributor to About.com is an Agnostic/Atheistic 'guide'. I wanted to show that someone who is NOT Catholic grasps the Catholic concept of the acceptance of the THEORY of evolution. I, even as a Catholic, am free to make up my own mind about it. As I have said, I believe there is a lot of validity to evolution within species, however, the THEORY of evolution does NOT account for the beginning of life nor does it account for the complexity thereof. [bolding, italics, brackets mine]

For 'Bob' and All Those Ignorant of the Meaning of Intelligent Design

I got the following from Intelligentdesign.com.
http://www.intelligentdesign.org/whatisid.php I hope it will help those who are ignorant of the difference between Intelligent Design and so-called "creation science."

[quote]
What is intelligent design?

Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system's components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago.

Is intelligent design the same as creationism?

No. The theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the "apparent design" in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism typically starts with a religious text and tries to see how the findings of science can be reconciled to it. Intelligent design starts with the empirical evidence of nature and seeks to ascertain what inferences can be drawn from that evidence. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design does not claim that modern biology can identify whether the intelligent cause detected through science is supernatural.

Honest critics of intelligent design acknowledge the difference between intelligent design and creationism. University of Wisconsin historian of science Ronald Numbers is critical of intelligent design, yet according to the Associated Press, he "agrees the creationist label is inaccurate when it comes to the ID [intelligent design] movement." Why, then, do some Darwinists keep trying to conflate intelligent design with creationism? According to Dr. Numbers, it is because they think such claims are "the easiest way to discredit intelligent design." In other words, the charge that intelligent design is "creationism" is a rhetorical strategy on the part of Darwinists who wish to delegitimize design theory without actually addressing the merits of its case.

Is intelligent design a scientific theory?

Yes. The scientific method is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.
[unquote]

I hope you've learned something today.
Go in Peace.

Ben Stein and Intelligent Design

We finally got around to watching Ben Stein's wonderful documentary "Expelled". I highly recommend this movie to anyone interested in the alternative to Darwinism taught as established fact. Since, it has never explained the origin of life, why can't some one put forth the idea that their is an intelligence behind life? PLEASE, please see this movie. If you homeschool, if you have teenagers with questions, if you are at all interested in the debate in the science community, see this movie! My son is studying Biology at this time in his 9th grade homeschool course. This movie fit in perfectly with the chapter on Darwin he just read. As can be predicted Darwin's unsubstantiated theory is presented as fact in his textbook. I was happy to present "Is Evolution Fit to Survive?" I am sure this informative book is available elsewhere but I got it through Kolbe Academy: http://www.kolbe.org/Biology___Is_Evolution_Fit_to_Survive__Book-p21819.html It is $14.50. My son asked why he need to learn about it. I told him that if he were to get anywhere in any scientific field or study biology in college, I want him to be prepared for such a discussion. We do not believe in sheltering our kids behind a homeschool wall. They have to live outside that wall someday and I want them prepared for anything.
Trailer and image from http://expelledthemovie.com/ Which also has the video for sale as well as wallpapers, academic freedom petition, and more. ONLY FOR THE INTELLIGENT AND OPEN MINDED!