I saw a post to Twitter about the Catholic Church and Dawrin’s theory of evolution. The twitterer is an evangelical- sometimes extreme- christian blog, where members can post. Everytime I start to wonder why I’m following it, something like this comes up and I am glad that I am.
Now the blogger gets some of it right and some of it… not so much.
While the blogger found the article on 2/27/09, telegraph.co.uk actually ran the story on 2/11.2009. The idea of the Vatican rejecting Christ? Well, that is the blogger’s assertion. Could be a desire for a provocative headline, or a little anti-catholic bigotry?
So how about the basis of the story? Yes, it seems the Vatican, along with some other demonimations, si seeking to mend part of the divide between Religion and Science, and say that Darwin’s theories can be compatible with religious tradition. Perhaps the church is trying to learn from its mistakes (remember Gallileo) or possibly they are trying to sort out ways to keep the flood of people who are leaving the chuch. The battle line between Religion and Science has never been a win/win situation, especially for the church. The only potential outcome where the church triumphs would be another middle ages where science is forgotten.
I don’t have any meaningful reply for the blogger in terms of his interpretation and conclusion. He cirtes a few scripture to support his position. Isn’t that the way with scripture? You can always find a passage to prove you are correct? The first passage is I Timothy, where Paul encourages the young apostle to hold fast to the doctrine that Paul has provided to him. This doctrine is all about the second coming of Jesus. But here, the blogger expands that doctrine to much more. Then he uses a passage from Matthew, which is really about divorce, to promote a creationist view.
The Vatican’s position is that what we need is to seek out ways of understanding how Science, and specifically Darwin’s theory can be seen as aligned with church teaching. Not to take just one or the other alone.
What I find most ludicrous is how the blogger’s position dumbs-down God and the fullness of God’s plan. Or more accurately inflates a human’s undewrstanding of the whole. For me0- if we can explain the whole of al that exists in the Bible, then God and al that has been created isn’t all that amazing. I don’t need Faith. If on the other hand, I can’t make all the pieces fit nicely like a puzzle. If I am left unclear how these two things can both be real, THEN, I need Faith. Thenn, I see myself as human instead of all-knowing, and I have the opportunity to grasp a bigger understanding of all that is.
The Christian Blog: VATICAN REJECTS CHRIST IN FAVOUR OF DARWIN
The actual article:
The Vatican claims Darwin’s theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity – Telegraph.
I saw a post to Twitter about the Catholic Church and Dawrin’s theory of evolution. The twitterer is an evangelical- sometimes extreme- christian blog, where members can post. Everytime I start to wonder why I’m following it, something like this comes up and I am glad that I am.
Now the blogger gets some of it right and some of it… not so much.
While the blogger found the article on 2/27/09, telegraph.co.uk actually ran the story on 2/11.2009. The idea of the Vatican rejecting Christ? Well, that is the blogger’s assertion. Could be a desire for a provocative headline, or a little anti-catholic bigotry?
So how about the basis of the story? Yes, it seems the Vatican, along with some other demonimations, si seeking to mend part of the divide between Religion and Science, and say that Darwin’s theories can be compatible with religious tradition. Perhaps the church is trying to learn from its mistakes (remember Gallileo) or possibly they are trying to sort out ways to keep the flood of people who are leaving the chuch. The battle line between Religion and Science has never been a win/win situation, especially for the church. The only potential outcome where the church triumphs would be another middle ages where science is forgotten.
I don’t have any meaningful reply for the blogger in terms of his interpretation and conclusion. He cirtes a few scripture to support his position. Isn’t that the way with scripture? You can always find a passage to prove you are correct? The first passage is I Timothy, where Paul encourages the young apostle to hold fast to the doctrine that Paul has provided to him. This doctrine is all about the second coming of Jesus. But here, the blogger expands that doctrine to much more. Then he uses a passage from Matthew, which is really about divorce, to promote a creationist view.
The Vatican’s position is that what we need is to seek out ways of understanding how Science, and specifically Darwin’s theory can be seen as aligned with church teaching. Not to take just one or the other alone.
What I find most ludicrous is how the blogger’s position dumbs-down God and the fullness of God’s plan. Or more accurately inflates a human’s undewrstanding of the whole. For me0- if we can explain the whole of al that exists in the Bible, then God and al that has been created isn’t all that amazing. I don’t need Faith. If on the other hand, I can’t make all the pieces fit nicely like a puzzle. If I am left unclear how these two things can both be real, THEN, I need Faith. Thenn, I see myself as human instead of all-knowing, and I have the opportunity to grasp a bigger understanding of all that is.
The Christian Blog: VATICAN REJECTS CHRIST IN FAVOUR OF DARWIN
The actual article:
The Vatican claims Darwin’s theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity – Telegraph.