If We Did Evolve From Apes...

[fragmentsofdreams]

"[font=verdana,arial,helvetica]The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false." ~ Aquinas


[/font]

 

[marciadietrich]

Isn't Aquinas speaking on other Catholics besides the Pope and the magisterium? That lay people in daily discussion don't determine doctrine and shouldn't present personal opinion as dogma when they don't know what they are talking about on that nor on the science.

I don't see how that applies to what is dogmatic and is doctrincal according to the faith under the authority of the Church, unless you believe Aquinas would reject the authority of the Church? Plus, other than being a stand alone quote attributed to Aquinas, I can't find any specific reference for that one to see it in context. It is one of the snippet quotes on quotation of the day type websites.

There is a quote by Augustine that says something similiar that people who go against science in arguing with pagans don't know anything on science or faith (yet Augustine the one we get the paraphrased "Rome has spoken, the case is closed" quote) ... but found this instead looking for that:

When they are able, from reliable evidence, to prove some fact of physical science, we shall show that it is not contrary to our Scripture. But when they produce from any of their books a theory contrary to Scripture, and therefore contrary to the Catholic faith, either we shall have some ability to demonstrate that it is absolutely false, or at least we ourselves will hold it so without any shadow of a doubt. And we will so cling to our Mediator, “in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,”75 that we will not be led astray by the glib talk of false philosophy or frightened by the superstition of false religion. When we read the inspired books in the light of this wide variety of true doctrines which are drawn from a few words and founded on the firm basis of Catholic belief, let us choose that one which appears as certainly the meaning intended by the author. But if this is not clear, then at least we should choose an interpretation in keeping with the context of Scripture and in harmony with our faith. But if the meaning cannot be studied and judged by the context of Scripture, at least we should choose only that which our faith demands.

Augustine, Commentary on Genesis

and this from Aquinas

On the other hand: Augustine says (14 De Trin. 1): “by this science only is faith begun, nourished, defended, and strengthened.” Now this is true of no science except sacred doctrine. Sacred doctrine is therefore a science.

I answer: sacred doctrine is a science. But we must realize that there are two kinds of sciences. Some of them, such as arithmetic, geometry, and the like, depend on principles known by the natural light of reason. Others depend on principles known through a higher science. Thus the science of perspective depends on principles known through geometry, and music on principles known through arithmetic. Sacred doctrine is a science of the latter kind, depending on principles known through a higher science, namely the science of God and the 38blessed. Just as music accepts the principles given to it by arithmetic, so does sacred doctrine accept the principles revealed to it by God.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/nature_grace.vi.i.ii.html

Then Aquinas again in a later part of the same Summa:

I answer: since sacred doctrine is speculative in some things and
practical in others, it transcends all other sciences, whether
speculative or practical. One speculative science is said to be nobler
than another either because it is more certain, or because it treats
of a nobler subject. Sacred doctrine surpasses other speculative
sciences in both respects. It is more certain, since the certainty of
other sciences depends on the natural light of human reason, which is
liable to err, whereas its own certainty is founded on the light of
divine knowledge, which cannot be deceived.

http://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/nature_grace/cache/nature_grace.txt

So would Augustine or Aquinas reject doctrine of the Church (or other doctrines/dogmas) that Adam and Eve are our first and only parents in favor of current scientific thought? OR are you saying it isn't doctrinal at all? ... but it is listed as doctrinal in Ott's work of Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, the statements of Popes, it is in even the current Catechism that original sin is passed by propagation from Adam to all humanity and we are all one in Adam as his descendants.

404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam "as one body of one man".293 By this "unity of the human race" all men are implicated in Adam's sin, as all are implicated in Christ's justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called "sin" only in an analogical sense: it is a sin "contracted" and not "committed" - a state and not an act.


Marcia

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

The short answer is what I mentioned before: Science does not fall under the spheres of Faith and Morals. The countless explainations of infallability found here are always careful to be clear that it only extends to the subject of Faith and Morals.

 

[marciadietrich]

The short answer is what I mentioned before: Science does not fall under the spheres of Faith and Morals. The countless explainations of infallability found here are always careful to be clear that it only extends to the subject of Faith and Morals.

Hi,

This is a case where the Church has spoken on an area that science has also spoken, and they simply do not say the same thing. The Church has said we can accept the science on this issue as long as we don't reject any tenants of faith.

In infallable teaching on faith the Church says that Adam and Eve were literal people and the first parents of all mankind (tied to how we inherit original sin, the fall and our need for redemption, Jesus is the New Adam, Mary the New Eve).

That teaching of faith has more in common with literal creationism than it does with scientific evolution which emphatically says mankind did not descend from a single pair, not even in a best case scenario.

As a protestant theistic evolutionist I simply rejected the idea of Adam and Eve as the sole parents to mankind. In Catholicism Adam and Eve as our first parents and propagation as the way original sin and its consequences come to us is doctrinal.

 

[DivineFiliation]

If we did ever evolve from apes, I hope that my family lineage ate non-gross things like fruits, berries and meat... I hope they did not eat gross things like maggots and bugs. Oh, and I hope that I came from cute monkeys and not the ugly baboon ones.

Sorry... this whole concept humors me.

 

[marciadietrich]

I thought some people enjoy eating bugs, at least if they are covered in chocolate (ants, grasshoppers). Still, not for me thanks. Hmmm, come to think of it I know a guy who would eat ants, just for show, back in high school.

Marcia

 

[DivineFiliation]

I thought some people enjoy eating bugs, at least if they are covered in chocolate (ants, grasshoppers). Still, not for me thanks. Hmmm, come to think of it I know a guy who would eat ants, just for show, back in high school.

Marcia

that's my brother.

 

[DivineFiliation]

This is my mother.

 

[geocajun]

Shakkai, I hope you look more like your father

 

[nyj]

Once again, no one who espouses evolution is saying we evolved from apes. Shared a common ancestor, yes... as a matter of fact, all life probably originated from a single self-propagating RNA or protein species. Theistic evolutionists hold that the combination of molecules to form this species wasn't random chance, but was a well orchestrated plan instituted by God.

Consider life like a vine on a latticework.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Hi,

This is a case where the Church has spoken on an area that science has also spoken, and they simply do not say the same thing. The Church has said we can accept the science on this issue as long as we don't reject any tenants of faith.

In infallable teaching on faith the Church says that Adam and Eve were literal people and the first parents of all mankind (tied to how we inherit original sin, the fall and our need for redemption, Jesus is the New Adam, Mary the New Eve).

That teaching of faith has more in common with literal creationism than it does with scientific evolution which emphatically says mankind did not descend from a single pair, not even in a best case scenario.

As a protestant theistic evolutionist I simply rejected the idea of Adam and Eve as the sole parents to mankind. In Catholicism Adam and Eve as our first parents and propagation as the way original sin and its consequences come to us is doctrinal.

I don't think that any of these teachings require Adam and Eve to be literal people. Original Sin and the Fall both refer to our current state of imperfection. We do not need to rely on Adam and Eve to see that we are imperfect. Likewise, the titles of New Adam and New Eve refer to what Jesus and Mary did. Whether Adam and Eve were literal people does not change what Jesus and Mary did.

 

[marciadietrich]

Hello again, thanks for sticking with the conversation.

I don't think that any of these teachings require Adam and Eve to be literal people. Original Sin and the Fall both refer to our current state of imperfection. We do not need to rely on Adam and Eve to see that we are imperfect. Likewise, the titles of New Adam and New Eve refer to what Jesus and Mary did. Whether Adam and Eve were literal people does not change what Jesus and Mary did.

All teachings I have seen, past or present in the Catechism indicate Adam and Eve as literal people and the literal source of the human race. What you state would have been my preference but I just don't see that as official teaching of the Church. You could refer back to the quotes from the Baltimore Catechism bigSierra gave and the quotes from Popes that I posted earlier.


Also, here is what the Catechism says, and though it allows some figurative reading in the Genesis narratives it is clear that there were real first parents who committed a real sin and passed that on to us by propagation is the position the Church does take.

359 "In reality it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear."224


St. Paul tells us that the human race takes its origin from two men: Adam and Christ. . . The first man, Adam, he says, became a living soul, the last Adam a life-giving spirit. The first Adam was made by the last Adam, from whom he also received his soul, to give him life. . . The second Adam stamped his image on the first Adam when he created him. That is why he took on himself the role and the name of the first Adam, in order that he might not lose what he had made in his own image. The first Adam, the last Adam: the first had a beginning, the last knows no end. The last Adam is indeed the first; as he himself says: "I am the first and the last."225

360Because of its common origin the human race forms a unity, for "from one ancestor [God] made all nations to inhabit the whole earth":226 …

Adam is a created being, who ALSO received a spiritual soul, who was created by the last Adam Jesus Christ, and that first man Adam is the ancestor to all mankind.

374The first man was not only created good, but was also established in friendship with his Creator and in harmony with himself and with the creation around him, in a state that would be surpassed only by the glory of the new creation in Christ.


375 The Church, interpreting the symbolism of biblical language in an authentic way, in the light of the New Testament and Tradition, teaches that our first parents, Adam and Eve, were constituted in an original "state of holiness and justice".250 This grace of original holiness was "to share in. . .divine life".251

The first man was created, in harmony with creation. Even though there is some symbolism in biblical language we are told that our first parents (specifically Adam and Eve) were formed in a state of holiness and justice before the fall.

388 With the progress of Revelation, the reality of sin is also illuminated. Although to some extent the People of God in the Old Testament had tried to understand the pathos of the human condition in the light of the history of the fall narrated in Genesis, they could not grasp this story's ultimate meaning, which is revealed only in the light of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.261 We must know Christ as the source of grace in order to know Adam as the source of sin. The Spirit-Paraclete, sent by the risen Christ, came to "convict the world concerning sin",262 by revealing him who is its Redeemer.

Adam is the source of sin by his act of disobedience. It isn't just an evolved trait or an awakening of awareness.

How to read the account of the fall
390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.265

...

399 Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness.280 They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.281

Again, revelation gives us "the certainty of faith" that sin began with the original freely committed sin (first disobedience) of our first parents (Adam and Eve) who lose their state of grace of original holiness. A real act by real people who pass this condition on to us.

400 The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul's spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.282 Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man.283 Because of man, creation is now subject "to its bondage to decay".284 Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will "return to the ground",285 for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history.286

Now I don't know if it is doctrinal that there was death in nature prior to the fall, but this paragraph (immediatel follows the one on Adam and Eve's disobedience) clearly indicates there was a change in creation itself due to man's sin, including creations 'bondage to decay.'

The consequences of Adam's sin for humanity
402All men are implicated in Adam's sin, as St. Paul affirms: "By one man's disobedience many (that is, all men) were made sinners": "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned."289 The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men."290

403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam's sinand the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the "death of the soul".291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292

404How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam "as one body of one man".293 By this "unity of the human race" all men are implicated in Adam's sin, as all are implicated in Christ's justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called "sin" only in an analogical sense: it is a sin "contracted" and not "committed" - a state and not an act.

Sorry for such a big quote, but I think it is so important to see it all in context how the doctrine of original sin is taught as being absolutely connnect to the sin of real people in Adam and Eve. That this is something that relates to infant baptism - they inherit the sin and death from Adam, to our need for redemption, that all men were effected by it by way of being offspring of Adam (we are one in Adam) and this sin affected human nature, not that human nature as a stand alone is the reason we sin. Our original nature was one of original holiness and justice that we would have inherited from Adam and Eve if they had not sinned, instead we inherit a flawed nature prone to sin.

There are many more quotes in the Catechism dealing with Adam and/or Eve and they are treated as real people, though some of the language surrounding events of the fall might be figurative. Here are a few other mentions, and interesting in what they choose to quote from Tobit 8: 4-9 with a bit of a cut in verse 5 but include the part about Adam and Eve as the sole source of humanity, and I think because it is important also to the teaching on the sacramental nature of marriage.

769 "The Church . . . will receive its perfection only in the glory of heaven,"179 at the time of Christ's glorious return. Until that day, "the Church progresses on her pilgrimage amidst this world's persecutions and God's consolations."180 Here below she knows that she is in exile far from the Lord, and longs for the full coming of the Kingdom, when she will "be united in glory with her king."181 The Church, and through her the world, will not be perfected in glory without great trials. Only then will "all the just from the time of Adam, 'from Abel, the just one, to the last of the elect,' . . . be gathered together in the universal Church in the Father's presence."182

1736 Every act directly willed is imputable to its author:

Thus the Lord asked Eve after the sin in the garden: "What is this that you have done?"29 He asked Cain the same question.30 The prophet Nathan questioned David in the same way after he committed adultery with the wife of Uriah and had him murdered.31

An action can be indirectly voluntary when it results from negligence regarding something one should have known or done: for example, an accident arising from ignorance of traffic laws.

2361 "Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses, is not something simply biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death."143

Tobias got out of bed and said to Sarah, "Sister, get up, and let us pray and implore our Lord that he grant us mercy and safety." So she got up, and they began to pray and implore that they might be kept safe. Tobias began by saying, "Blessed are you, O God of our fathers. . . . You made Adam, and for him you made his wife Eve as a helper and support. From the two of them the race of mankind has sprung. You said, 'It is not good that the man should be alone; let us make a helper for him like himself.' I now am taking this kinswoman of mine, not because of lust, but with sincerity. Grant that she and I may find mercy and that we may grow old together." And they both said, "Amen, Amen." Then they went to sleep for the night.144

Even with an allowance to accept evolution on a personal basis -as long as we don't reject any articles of faith, and the statements that some parts of the Genesis account are figurative, it appears that the Church teaches things that lean towards a literal creation of Adam and Eve, of them as literal first parents to all mankind and it is tied clearly to original sin, to our need for redemption, also to the sacrament of marriage and the need to baptize infants in regard to being born in a state of original sin (sin of Adam).

Marcia