Catholic doctrine of Creation ?

[twinc]

so how about [cfnews.org/sung-pio] via google - any comments - twinc

 

[twinc]

What happens is we have literal interpretations of scripture that put Christians at odd with true science....one example: Those who believe the earth is still the center of the solar system and the sun revolves around it.

This is the type of nonsense, literalistic extremism can produce

excuse me - not just the sun but the whole universe - twinc

 

[twinc]

Two popes before Benedict also espoused evolution as the most plausible explanation for the origin of the species - but not the human soul; let us be clear about that.

Note that the Holy See has not taken one side or the other on the issue. It is legitimate in the eyes of the bishops and the Church's magisterium to believe evolution, creationism, even instantaneous creation (at least, that was an "off the cuff" comment of Augustine of Hippo's, once).

all statements by Church leaders favourable to evolution have been not authorative or ambigious - it is creation that is of major importance and is mentioned many times in the Catechism and Bible - evolution is of no importance at all and is not mentioned even once - as stated Catholics are adrift and divided - Catholics come home now - twinc

 

[twinc]

Two popes before Benedict also espoused evolution as the most plausible explanation for the origin of the species - but not the human soul; let us be clear about that.

Note that the Holy See has not taken one side or the other on the issue. It is legitimate in the eyes of the bishops and the Church's magisterium to believe evolution, creationism, even instantaneous creation (at least, that was an "off the cuff" comment of Augustine of Hippo's, once).

if so they are in error and anathema - as are the English Catholic Bishops with their Gift of Scripture regarding the total inerrancy of the Bible - so what - no one seems to care much anyway - crisis in the Church = what crisis = lullabies and back to sleep - as stated Catholics are divided and adrift - Catholics come home now - twinc

 

[twinc]

so how about [cfnews.org/sung-pio] via google - any comments - twinc

also and especially see via google [response to Ron L Conte jr]scroll down to 'download PDF - btw also see via google Vatican 1/Canon 1.....para 4 & 5 = no Origins evolution or common ancestry necessary or possible - twinc

 

[Meowzltov]

let us really be clear - so I repeat - it is forbidden and anathema to and for Catholics to accept and/or teach Origins evolution as fact - Catholics come home now - twinc

You are mistaken. Multiple Popes have embraced theistic evolution. They are not ignorant of magisterial teaching.

You want to say that these popes are anathema??? And in another popular thread, someone actually proposed that there was no such thing as Catholic Fundamentalism. Go figure.

 

[Mary's Bhoy]

You are mistaken. Multiple Popes have embraced theistic evolution. They are not ignorant of magisterial teaching.

You want to say that these popes are anathema??? And in another popular thread, someone actually proposed that there was no such thing as Catholic Fundamentalism. Go figure.

But those popes have not condemned the alternative views. There is no need to speak of "Catholic Fundamentalism" because of the disparaging connotations attached to the words. Catholics must believe in an Adam and an Eve, and that we are all descenent of Adam and Eve. Even if you accept an evolutionary process leading up to Adam and Eve's physical bodies, you must still accept Adam and Eve, and I've no doubt many in academia would laugh at a Catholic for believing this.

Yours in Jesus and Mary,
SCIM.

 

[Meowzltov]

There is no need to speak of "Catholic Fundamentalism" because of the disparaging connotations attached to the words.

I am sorry, but I call a spade a spade. If she just wanted to hold a creationist view, I'd have no problem. But a willingness to proclaim multiple popes anathema rather than allow a divergent opinion into the room is TOXIC and well deserving to be used as an example of fundamentalism.

 

[twinc]

You are mistaken. Multiple Popes have embraced theistic evolution. They are not ignorant of magisterial teaching.

You want to say that these popes are anathema??? And in another popular thread, someone actually proposed that there was no such thing as Catholic Fundamentalism. Go figure.

the Church does not teach nor would any Pope dare preach or teach that Popes are always and everywhere infallible - all statements by Church leaders favourable to Evolution have been non authoritative or ambiguous - twinc

 

[twinc]

I am sorry, but I call a spade a spade. If she just wanted to hold a creationist view, I'd have no problem. But a willingness to proclaim multiple popes anathema rather than allow a divergent opinion into the room is TOXIC and well deserving to be used as an example of fundamentalism.

the best and truest Catholics are fundamentalists and by far more fundalmental than any Protestant - twinc

 

[Meowzltov]

the Church does not teach nor would any Pope dare preach or teach that Popes are always and everywhere infallible - all statements by Church leaders favourable to Evolution have been non authoritative or ambiguous - twinc

I have no problem with your disagreement with these popes. My problem is how you declare them anathema. You have no such authority.

 

[twinc]

I have no problem with your disagreement with these popes. My problem is how you declare them anathema. You have no such authority.

your quarrel is not with me but with God who said let them be anathema - via google see[Vatican 1/Canon 1.....para 4 & 5/EWTN - twinc

 

[WisdomTree]

your quarrel is not with me but with God who said let them be anathema - via google see[Vatican 1/Canon 1.....para 4 & 5/EWTN - twinc

This is the very attitude I find quite detestable. Who are you to say that those who disagree with your viewpoint are in quarrel with God!? The one that should be in anathema is you for twisting the canons of a holy council to your benefit and claiming to be speaking on behalf of God when you are doing anything, but.

I have already told you how those sections of the canon is supposed to be interpreted as. Interpreting legislation is not the same as interpreting scripture. It takes different skill sets, that's why Pontifical Universities do not combine their law degrees with theology degrees because they are two completely different things. Listen to what others say and instead of ignoring them because it doesn't conform to your view, actually take it in and then respond rather than pointing blindly at a Church Canon. You don't see anyone else here throw random bible verses at you, do you?

 

[twinc]

my dear dear sad fellow who are you to pontificate and play God and as an individual mixed up about what the Church really teaches - we as Catholics have been advised, but some blatantly choose to ignore this advice, to consult the experts and specialists in all the disciplines of theology and science and for Catholics these may be found together and united at The Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation and/or Home Page - Origins Science for Catholics - come home now - twinc

 

[Defensor Christi]

also and especially see via google [response to Ron L Conte jr]scroll down to 'download PDF - btw also see via google Vatican 1/Canon 1.....para 4 & 5 = no Origins evolution or common ancestry necessary or possible - twinc

Read it again...

"4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals: let him be anathema."

This is talking about Emanationism...which is opposed to creationism, thus in direct oppostion to ex nihilio.

"5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema."

Again, this reiterates the churchs teaching of ex nihilio (something from nothing) that God created all things...it does not expressly forbid theistic evolution. You are muddling the terms/facts....

"The doctrine of the CatholicChurch is contained in the definition of the dogma of the creatio ex nihilo by the Fourth Lateran Council and, especially, the Council of the Vatican. The latter expressly condemns emanationism (I. De Deo rerum omnium creatore, can. iv), and anathematizes those "asserting that finite things, both corporeal and spiritual, or at least spiritual, have "emanated from the Divine substance."


CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Emanationism

http://www.ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm#5

 

[twinc]

Read it again...

"4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals: let him be anathema."

This is talking about Emanationism...which is opposed to creationism, thus in direct oppostion to ex nihilio.

"5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema."

Again, this reiterates the churchs teaching of ex nihilio (something from nothing) that God created all things...it does not expressly forbid theistic evolution. You are muddling the terms/facts....

"The doctrine of the CatholicChurch is contained in the definition of the dogma of the creatio ex nihilo by the Fourth Lateran Council and, especially, the Council of the Vatican. The latter expressly condemns emanationism (I. De Deo rerum omnium creatore, can. iv), and anathematizes those "asserting that finite things, both corporeal and spiritual, or at least spiritual, have "emanated from the Divine substance."


CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Emanationism

Pius IX     Vatican I

strange is it not how your interpretation differs to mine and those of the experts and specialists I have consulted as we have been advised to do - para 4 is in the main about "the totality of things in genera and species" etc = no evolution or common ancestry - para 5 is in the main about "whole substance out of nothing" = no evolution necessary or possible = come home now - twinc

 

[Armoured]

 

[Defensor Christi]

strange is it not how your interpretation differs to mine and those of the experts and specialists I have consulted as we have been advised to do - para 4 is in the main about "the totality of things in genera and species" etc = no evolution or common ancestry - para 5 is in the main about "whole substance out of nothing" = no evolution necessary or possible = come home now - twinc

No...what is strange is how you seem to be the "lone voice" concerning these methods. I am not sure who your "experts" are, but you might want to revisit the thought of following them.

This isnt a matter of interpretation, the text is very clear...you are off base on this one.

 

[twinc]

No...what is strange is how you seem to be the "lone voice" concerning these methods. I am not sure who your "experts" are, but you might want to revisit the thought of following them.

This isnt a matter of interpretation, the text is very clear...you are off base on this one.

in deed the text is so clear but you are not - what other nonsense about Evolution do you believe and accept ? - twinc

 

[Defensor Christi]

in deed the text is so clear but you are not - what other nonsense about Evolution do you believe and accept ? - twinc

Are you being serious? Do you even read what people post? Your use of Vatican I has nothing at all to do with evolution. You are claiming that the Church teaches "X, Y and Z" everyone is trying to tell you that she doesnt...this has nothing to do with what I do or dont believe about evolution, it has everything to do with you misrepresenting the Church's teachings.