By Kennedy Hall
Some may be confused as to why I am so concerned with Evolution. Many believe that the Church has given the thumbs-up to Evolution, but this is not true. It is true that the Church only pronounces infallibly on matters of faith and morals. But, this does not mean that the Church can not demand the assent of faith to matters that may overlap with the natural sciences. Evolutionary thinking is not mere natural science inquiry. Because it deals in the past, it is a matter of history, therefore it must be studied in light of the doctrines of the Church that pertain to historical things.
You may have never considered the fact that the Church deals in historical things, but the Bible is inerrant and historical. There may be parts of the Bible that are not meant to be taken as history, but this is obvious by their literature type. For example, the Book of Proverbs may contain references to real events, but it is wisdom literature first and foremost. On the other hand, Genesis speaks of real events in time, and therefore must be looked at through the lense of history. It may be true that some events therein are presented in a poetic fashion, but this does not take away from their historicity. I could write a poem about the day I fell in love with my wife, but it would still be a poem about a real event. Whether the account of Adam and Eve is written in the fashion of a modern historical text book is irrelevant.
There are a whole host of things we are required to believe as dogma that restrict our liberty in how we read Genesis. Simply put, Evolution does not fit the faith. If you desire to hold on to belief in Evolution than you desire to hold on to worldly things. “Heaven and earth shall pass, but my words shall not pass.” (Matthew 24:5) The Bible is the inspired Word of God, it is without error. Any inference we make from the natural world needs to be in keeping with the sense of the Scriptures. We do not conform the Faith the world.
Finally, Evolutionary thinking has been a scourge of demonic philosophy that has justified unspeakable horrors. Look up “Evolution and the Culture of Death” on YouTube for a lecture by a priest and exorcist on the dangers of Evolutionary thinking. Evolutionary thinking a pagan idea that sees something magical in natural things, and it urges men to depend on themselves rather than God. Also, it is unscientific at its root as Evolution can never be observed in practice, which means belief in it is superstitious.
The following is a list of the Traditional teachings on Origins. For further information, visit www.kolbecenter.org.
Collection of Church Teachings on Origins
The following list is taken from the Kolbe Center, and is available for free, all credit goes to Hugh Owen for his great work.
- God created everything “in its whole substance” from nothing (ex nihilo) in the beginning. (Lateran IV; Vatican Council I)
- Genesis does not contain purified myths. (Pontifical Biblical Commission 1909)
- Genesis contains real history—it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)
- Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII)
- Polygenism (many “first parents”) contradicts Scripture and Tradition and is condemned. (Pius XII; 1994 Catechism, 360, footnote 226: Tobit 8:6—the “one ancestor” referred to in this Catechism could only be Adam.)
- The “beginning” of the world included the creation of all things, the creation of Adam and Eve and the Fall (Jesus Christ [Mark 10:6]; Pope Innocent III; Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus).
- The body of Eve was specially created from a portion of Adam’s body (Leo XIII). She could not have originated via evolution.
- Various senses are employed in the Bible, but the literal obvious sense must be believed unless reason dictates or necessity requires (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus).
- Adam and Eve were created upon an earthly paradise and would not have known death if they had remained obedient (Pius XII).
- After their disobedience of God, Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden. But the Second Person of the Trinity would subsequently pay the ransom for fallen man (Nicene Creed).
- Original Sin is a flawed condition inherited from Adam and Eve (Council of Trent).
- The Universe suffers in travail ever since the sin of disobedience by Adam and Eve. (Romans 8, Vatican Council I).
- We must believe any interpretation of Scripture that the Fathers taught unanimously on a matter of faith or morals (Council of Trent and Vatican Council I).
- All the Fathers who wrote on the subject believed that the Creation days were no longer than 24-hour-days. (Consensus of the Fathers of the Church)
- The work of Creation was finished by the close of Day Six, and nothing completely new has since been created—except for each human rational soul at conception (Vatican Council I)
- St. Peter and Christ Himself in the New Testament confirmed the global Flood of Noah. It covered all the then high mountains and destroyed all land dwelling creatures except eight human beings and all kinds of non-human creatures aboard the Ark (Unam Sanctam, 1302)
- The historical existence of Noah’s Ark is regarded as most important in typology, as central to Redemption. (1566 Catechism of the Council of Trent)
- Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught. (Pius XII, Humani Generis)
- Investigation into human “evolution” was allowed in 1950, but Pope Pius XII feared that an acceptance of evolutionism might adversely affect doctrinal beliefs.
Very good article. The only one that seems incorrect is the comment on a literal 24-hour day consensus of the fathers.
St Augustine doesn’t see it this way. He, like the Jewish commentator Rashi, saw everything created at once. He also points out that the Sun isn’t created until day four.
Psalm 89 (90) is authored by Moses, and says in v4 1,000 years are like a day in your sight, implying that even Moses didn’t see days as being merely a 24-hour period if they were seen from God’s perspective. We also know this because Adam is warned that he will die in the day that he eats of the fruit, and all people of the world proceed to die at less than 1,000 years of age. Rashi points this out and it seems this view dated back much earlier than when he was writing (~1,000 AD).
I believe Augustine wasn’t alone, and he says in his Confessions that it was Ambrose who helped him to understand the sense of the science in Genesis, which conflicted with the understanding of the world according to the science of his day. For more detail, you could check his commentaries on Genesis, and his Confessions.
Also, a few people including a Priest have pointed out to me that Humanii Generis says that polygenism’s condemnation is written in such a way that implies it is because it does not seem possible to be able to reconcile it with the Bible and Trent’s position of original sin. But, it allegedly leaves a door open that if it can be reconciled it could be later approved.
Hope this helps. Otherwise, everything seems correct.
Thank you for your comment. Augustine was one of three Church Fathers who didn’t subscribe to the literal 6 days, along with Origen and Clement of Alexandria. They believed in an instant creation and that the days were otherwise timeless or symbolic to appeal to human minds. The issue of figurative language about a day being a thousand years, etc, appeals to how God is outside time and feels no delay in the passing of time. Furthermore David is the principle author of the Psalms, which were written hundreds of years after the death of Moses, who in fact wrote the first five books of the Bible.
https://fatima.org/news-views/fatima-perspectives-1376/
https://kolbecenter.org/st-augustine-rediscovered-a-defense-of-the-literal-interpretation-of-st-augustines-writings-on-the-sacred-history-of-genesis/
It is unclear if your caution with “Evolution” is neo-Darwinian radical ideologies and scientists sometimes failing to practice science qua science or actual evolutionary mechanisms that can be properly integrated into the “catholic understanding of divine causality”, where contingent natural processes can fall within God’s providential plan. (p. 69, ITC,). Though not completely siding with Augustine on the interpretation of Genesis Creation accounts, Aquinas actually provides a rich theological framework in which contingent processes can be both contingent and guided (p. 69, ITC; Summa theologiae I, 22,2). An elementary, primitive, and imperfect analogy from mathematics are a strain of Markov chain models where transitional probabilities ultimately result in a steady-state, fixed outcome.
Furthermore, Pius XII stated clearly in Humani Generis “that the Church does not forbid that … research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter. – for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.” . Likewise, the replies from the Pontifical Commission that is also cited above highlights that the Genesis accounts do not need to be read for the “exactness of scientific language” and “the word Yom (day)” does not necessarily need to be interpreted as a 24-hour day. The Church has a rich tradition of holding that there is no conflict between reason and faith. In areas where there is a seemingly apparent contradiction between Holy Scripture and the sciences, often a deeper, more spiritually fruitful distinction can be revealed after further reflection. Thus, to the extent that science qua science is properly practiced, it should inspire further wonder and awe at creation ex nihilo and our story of salvation. Clarification of the position that Meaning of Catholic holds (or leans toward) would be helpful for readers to more fully understand and weigh your arguments in both the article and video as representative of the Church’s position.
I would be happy to speak more via email if that would be more fruitful.
God Bless,
Robert
1. INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION. COMMUNION AND STEWARDSHIP: Human Persons Created in the Image of God*. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html
2. Summa theologiae I, 22
God created Adam and Eve. Eve was to be the “mother of all the living”. They had 3 sons together. No daughters. Somehow Cain & Seth found wives and had children.
Who were their wives? Did they marry their sisters? Why weren’t they mentioned as Adam & Eve’s daughters, if so?