Subject:
|
Re: Papal support of evolution
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 11 Mar 2000 06:54:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
821 times
|
| |
|
|
Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes:
> > > > I'm curious, BTW, what Catholic Christians think of Pope John Paul II's
> > > > statement. Was he misquoted or misquoted? Is he a quack? Is he closer to
> > > > God than the rest of us?
> > >
> > > Hmm...misquoted or misquoted... do I have another choice? ;)
> >
> > Hehheh...I meant to say, "Was he misunderstood or misquoted?"
>
> I remember the incident, but I got the impression (wrongly perhaps) at the time
> that he was refering more to a church position than his own opinion. A quack?
> He's a phony doctor?!? He should be down on Wilshire in L.A. working the
> Miracle Mile? :-)
The Catholic Church accepted the possibility of evolution back in the 1960s. (I
think it may have been earlier, with Vatican II.) The only requirement of a
Christian, said the Catholic clergy, was that they understand that at some point
God infused Man with an immortal soul, and that it is this soul to which Scripture
refers. Other than that, Catholics were free to accept any theory of human origins
they felt was true. (To this day, a lot of excellent evo biology is coming out of
Catholic universities. Can't say that about astronomy, but at least the bio wing
joined the 20th century before it was over.)
> > > Nope, JP II did indeed say that (or similar). As to him being a quack or
> > > closer to God than the rest of us - I'm not qualified to judge that. I
> > > don't think he's a quack, but sufficient bureaucracy can hide any number of
> > > character flaws. Closer to God? <shrug> He seems holier than I, but he
> > > could be a rotter that can act well. The state of his holiness isn't any
> > > of my business, except as it relates to the church on earth - and he seems
> > > to be doing an OK job with it, considering it's a 2000 year old bureaucracy.
> >
> > Well, the amazing thing (IMHO) is this: Because PJP2 is the official head of
> > the RCC, it is the official position of the RCC that DE isn't rubbish. That's
> > a very open-minded and progressive position for the RCC to take -- and a wise
> > change of direction if it still expects Catholicism to have any hope of being
> > around in another 2000 years.
>
> Losing every fight it picked with science tends to wise up even stodgy old
> religions like Catholicism. Note that it is the not-so-wised-up Protestants in
> this country (USA) that are dooming themselves to repeat history because they
> haven't learned.
Hm. They only forgave Bruno and Galileo in the last decade. Old habits die hard!
:)
"But it does move..." Just stop watching eclipses without eyewear, Galileo!
Anyhow, as stated above, the Popes have been "cool" with evolution for forty years
or more. It's only now that PJPII has actually spoken in favour of one particular
theory.
best
Lindsay
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Papal support of evolution
|
| (...) I remember the incident, but I got the impression (wrongly perhaps) at the time that he was refering more to a church position than his own opinion. A quack? He's a phony doctor?!? He should be down on Wilshire in L.A. working the Miracle (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
541 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
