Catholics And Evolution
Editorial FAITH Magazine May-June 1995 by Tim Finigan
“The FAITH Movement is a group of priests, religious and lay Catholics drawn together by a shared vision of Christ as Lord of Creation.” “The particular focus of the FAITH movement is a new synthesis of science and the Catholic faith as defined and proclaimed by the Church’s Magisterium.” These two quotations are taken from the excellent leaflet which has recently been produced by Fr Patrick Burke to introduce the FAITH movement.[i]
The FAITH movement has a particular message to offer to the Church and the world and we are pleased to be able to offer a handy introduction to help dispel misunderstanding. Sometimes this can be simply uninformed prejudice on the part of those who routinely disagree with everything Rome says. For these, FAITH will be another group of youngsters who find the orthodoox magisterium more attractive than the alternatives presently on offer.
Others, however, have more friendly motives and wish to absorb FAITH into a kind of orthodox panoply. There are indeed occasions when Catholics from various walks of life can collaborate to exercise an influence in important areas. This is successfully achieved in the USA where the CREDO movement, the Eternal Word TV Network, the CRNET and Women for Faith and Family would be only a few examples of effective co-operation involving many different groups.
However, the FAITH movement does have something distinctive to offer in the Church and the insistence on this where the name and logo of FAITH are used is not simply to preserve a corporate identity. There is a genuine and urgent need to develop a synthesis of the wisdom of revealed Christian tradition in a way that makes sense of the modern world. To quote our leaflet once again: “Inspired by the seminal work of Fr Edward Holloway, the FAITH Movement offers a perspective of creation through evolution by which we can show clearly the transcendent existence of God and the essential distinction of matter and spirit. We offer a vision of God as the true Environment of men in whom “we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17.28); of his unfolding purpose in the relationship of Word and grace through the prophets; and of Jesus Christ the Son of God and Son of Man as Lord of Creation, centre of history and fulfilment of our humanity.”
The idea of such a synthesis of orthodox Catholicism and modern scientific culture is not an idiosyncrasy of the FAITH Movement. It has been sought by every major theologian of recent years and is clearly the mind of the Church as expressed in the second Vatican Council. The present Holy Father obviously shares the desire to see such a synthesis develop and the programme of his pontificate bear witness to this in the various themes which he has treated since the first encyclical Redemptor Hominis.
The importance of the question of evolution
In his work on Genesis 1, Fr Stanley Jaki quotes the Abbé Michonneau, a worker-priest in Paris of the 1950’s who said that the apparent conflict between science and the six-day creation story was much more effective in promoting atheism among the poor and relatively uneducated than were the social injustices that cut into their flesh and blood. Today, we would have to put it slightly differently. The apparent conflict between science and the bible is probably the easiest way for a young and indifferent Catholic to justify walking out on the Church or for the non-Catholic to ignore the Church. We know that there may well be the motive of a superficially attractive permissive lifestyle. But intellectually the most important doctrine for the young is the doctrine of creation. And therefore the question of evolution is of the utmost importance.
This is why the FAITH movement puts the doctrine of creation at the beginning of catechesis along with an apologetics which takes account of modern scientific knowledge concerning the universe and its development through time.[ii] If we ignore this at the start of our catechesis, the rest is in very real danger of being a waste of time. It is obvious to the most unsophisticated enquirer, that if you cannot answer the questions about the origins of the universe, then there is no point continuing with any further religious teaching except as a pious hobby or harmless and entirely optional interest.
Many Catholic creationists would agree on the importance of the question. They see evolution as a danger to the faith. They argue that it is necessary to unmask the propaganda of the evolutionists and show that their theories are false. They claim the support of many scientists for “scientific creationism” and are willing to campaign against those who write on evolution and creation such as in FAITH. A letter sent last year by a creationist group to the Bishops, quoted with approval the view that “Every attack on the Christian Faith today has, as its basis, the doctrine of evolution.”[iii]
Many may find such a view to be so off-beam as not to be worth considering. However, many orthodox Catholics are likely to find themselves mailed with literature promoting such a position. Speaker meetings are sometimes organised by traditionalist groups to promote such views and often the impression is given that you cannot be an orthodox Catholic without subscribing to anti-evolutionism. More than a hint is often given too that the Popes support such a stance and that it is, in effect, the teaching of the Church or so close as to be implied in it.
Is the earth only 6000 years old?
The creationists often quote Pope Pius XII in the encyclical Humani Generis. They, point out that he said that a theory must not be treated as a fact and that experts were allowed to engage in research and discussion. A key point is often forgotten in the discussion of this part of Humani Generis. Pope Pius XII was speaking of the evolution of man. He said that the research and discussion could 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”[iv] It was this highly contentious area of human evolution where Pope Pius XII’s caution was expressed, not in the (much less controverted) question of the development of the universe over a long period of time.
Yet creationists constantly use Pope Pius XII to justify abandoning modern cosmology wholesale in favour of the theory of a young universe, perhaps only 6000 years old. While there may be some debate in scientific circles over certain areas of human evolutionary biology, there would be few who would take seriously the idea that the whole of astronomy, physics and the rest of the natural sciences are entirely wrong over the age of the earth, the distance of the stars and the size of the galaxies.
Lest observers of this debate think I am being unfair to the creationists here, let me quote one writer who is widely hailed by Catholic creationists and recently lectured in England. In his book Creation Rediscovered, he states “Anyone who does not share the prevailing orthodoxy in favour of billions of years [Viz for the age of the universe] faces a difficult task in being taken seriously. Yet the choice is clear: either the Earth was created along with the rest of the Universe only some 6000 years ago, or the Universe is about 20 billion years old and the Earth about 4.5 billion years old and during that time evolution took place.”[v] He goes on to state that “there is no credible third position between a young universe without evolution and an extremely old Universe with evolution.”[vi] This statement is put in bold type in the text to indicate its importance in the overall thesis.
The author is not blind to all of the consequences of this position. In a manner which draws utter contempt from evolutionary biologists engaged in the debate over origins, he is willing to bring God in to sort out any difficulties which his theory has when faced with the facts of physics. So for instance, he says that God is not limited to human concepts “He could have created the Universe with the light from the distant stars already reaching the Earth. He could have created the Earth first, then created light wave particles and then the stars, or he could have created them all simultaneously.”[vii] This is rather like saying that God could make some ashes and then a fire and then a lot of heat. Perhaps philosophers of religion might allow there to be a sense of “could” in which God “could” do these things but it does not help the credibility of Christianity.[viii]
Evolution: both a fact and a theory
One of the areas of confusion concerning evolution is the question of the nature of scientific theory. To a non-scientist, the word “theory” is often used as if it meant “imperfect fact”. On such an understanding, there is a kind of gradient of assurance with “certainty” at the top, “guess” at the bottom and “theory” about halfway down the slope. This misunderstanding accounts for many of the protests about Catholics who accept evolution as a fact. The protesting creationist will point to many instances where evolutionary theorists have disagreed over various theories, modified theories over time and still come to different conclusions. Surely it is irresponsible to treat such a shaky hypothesis as though it were a fact? The next question is whether it should be taught in schools(—ask in Arkansas.)
Perhaps it will make things clearer if we point out that the same kind of argument could be applied to gravitation. Scientists have long disagreed about theories of gravitation. Even today, gravitational theory is in a state of flux. Any particular explanation of gravity is only a theory and might be changed to take account of new research. But that doesn’t mean that Newton’s apple might suddenly fall upwards tomorrow. We could say that gravity is both a fact and a theory. It is a fact which is observable and measurable. There are various theories to account for the facts. As more is discovered, the theory has to be developed and refined, sometimes radically. Einstein’s theory is very different from Newton’s but Newton’s theory was still true “as far as it goes”.
In the case of evolution we are also dealing with a fact and a theory. As in the case of the heliocentric solar system, what started out as a hypothesis now has so much accumulated evidence in its favour that it is generally regarded as a fact. The debate among scientists lies in the theory that is brought forward to explain the facts. This is so often confused by creationists that it is small wonder that many non scientists are taken in. Time and again, creationists will quote from those who disagree with (for example) Darwinism and thereby “prove” that evolution is a shaky theory that is increasingly disputed by scientists. Pope John Paul II and Evolution
In the encyclical Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII expressed caution in relation to the evolution of man. This is important because of the question of the direct creation of the soul and the transmission of original sin. These are truths which Catholics believe as a matter of divine revelation and any speculation must take this into account.
However, it would be wrong to infer from this that Catholics are not free to take as a given fact the general conclusions of scientists that the universe is billions of years old and that evolution has taken place. 35 years on from Pius XII, Pope John Paul II reflected a more confident view in the Church where the acceptance of evolution was not a new development. In a General Audience address in 1985, he said “All the observations concerning the development of life lead to a similar conclusions. The evolution of living beings, of which science seeks to determine the stages and to discern the mechanism, presents an internal finality which arouses admiration. This finality which directs beings in a direction for which they are not responsible or in charge, obliges one to suppose a Mind which is its inventor, its Creator.”[ix]
We should also be clear about what is of divine revelation. Catholics are bound to believe that God created the universe out of nothing and that he created everything good. We are also obliged to believe that the human soul is immediately created by God and that original sin is transmitted by propagation, not by imitation. As Catholics, we are not in the unfortunate position of the evangelical who has only the literal word of the bible for his authority. With the living teaching authority of the Church, we are able to address with more confidence the questions of science and religion that threaten to undermine the authority of “The Bible” taken as “The Book”. We are able to probe the meaning of the scriptures with the living authority of Christ to guide the Church and protect her from error. We know what is of faith in these matters because the Church defines them for us.
In addition to what is de fide teaching, we also have the prudent and authoritative guidance of the Popes such as the teaching of Humani Generis and the addresses of the present Pope. Under the guidance and authority of the Popes, and following their example, we are free to debate such matters as evolution within the limits of Catholic teaching.
FAITH movement and evolution
The FAITH movement exists expressly for the purpose of fostering a new synthesis of science and religion. We present a positive account of creation through evolution which is wholly faithful to the teaching of the Church’s magisterium. We find such an approach vital in pastoral work with the young. One of the first questions that taxes the enquiring young mind is the question of the creation of the world, the creation of mankind and evolution.
The creationist will have to offer a universe that is 6000 years old and a God who can create light particles before the stars and then make them all hit the earth as though they had been there for billions of years. In FAITH we seek to offer an account which accepts the facts of modern science and accounts for them in a framework where God is infinitely wise as well as infinitely powerful, creating everything through and for the Logos. It is a desperate need in the Church. A quite young person recently asked me in a FAITH group about the origin of the universe and the nature of God. After a few minutes of quite intelligent and hostile questioning after the manner of a TV interviewer, she said “Father, you are the only priest who has ever tried to answer these questions.” I doubt if it was an exaggeration. The others apparently all took refuge in “Well nobody really knows, it’s a mystery.” I do not blame them; they probably never received anything useful in their years of theology on the question of creation and evolution. The FAITH perspective tends to be regarded at best as an interesting sideline in a rather arcane area. This is a shame because for the man and woman in the street, it deals with the commonest and most easily grasped reason (or excuse) for dropping faith altogether. The need for a new synthesis is urgent and it is a need which we believe FAITH has a mission to meet.
[i] Copies are available free of charge from Richard and Maureen Findlay-Wilson at “Meadowsweet”, Breach Lane, SHAFTESBURY, Dorset SP7 8LF Phone/Fax 01747-852816
[ii] There are several relevant FAITH pamphlets on evolution. Please see our list at the back of the Magazine.
[viii] For those interested in the debate, there is far more activity I the USA than here because of the educational decisions made in some areas. The best source of information is the talk.origins usenet conference. There are a large number of useful files available on the World Wide Web at http://rumba.ics.uci.edu.8080 or FTP: ics.uci.edu/pub/origins
Editorial FAITH Magazine May-June 1995 by Tim Finigan
“The FAITH Movement is a group of priests, religious and lay Catholics drawn together by a shared vision of Christ as Lord of Creation.” “The particular focus of the FAITH movement is a new synthesis of science and the Catholic faith as defined and proclaimed by the Church’s Magisterium.” These two quotations are taken from the excellent leaflet which has recently been produced by Fr Patrick Burke to introduce the FAITH movement.[i]
The FAITH movement has a particular message to offer to the Church and the world and we are pleased to be able to offer a handy introduction to help dispel misunderstanding. Sometimes this can be simply uninformed prejudice on the part of those who routinely disagree with everything Rome says. For these, FAITH will be another group of youngsters who find the orthodoox magisterium more attractive than the alternatives presently on offer.
Others, however, have more friendly motives and wish to absorb FAITH into a kind of orthodox panoply. There are indeed occasions when Catholics from various walks of life can collaborate to exercise an influence in important areas. This is successfully achieved in the USA where the CREDO movement, the Eternal Word TV Network, the CRNET and Women for Faith and Family would be only a few examples of effective co-operation involving many different groups.
However, the FAITH movement does have something distinctive to offer in the Church and the insistence on this where the name and logo of FAITH are used is not simply to preserve a corporate identity. There is a genuine and urgent need to develop a synthesis of the wisdom of revealed Christian tradition in a way that makes sense of the modern world. To quote our leaflet once again: “Inspired by the seminal work of Fr Edward Holloway, the FAITH Movement offers a perspective of creation through evolution by which we can show clearly the transcendent existence of God and the essential distinction of matter and spirit. We offer a vision of God as the true Environment of men in whom “we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17.28); of his unfolding purpose in the relationship of Word and grace through the prophets; and of Jesus Christ the Son of God and Son of Man as Lord of Creation, centre of history and fulfilment of our humanity.”
The idea of such a synthesis of orthodox Catholicism and modern scientific culture is not an idiosyncrasy of the FAITH Movement. It has been sought by every major theologian of recent years and is clearly the mind of the Church as expressed in the second Vatican Council. The present Holy Father obviously shares the desire to see such a synthesis develop and the programme of his pontificate bear witness to this in the various themes which he has treated since the first encyclical Redemptor Hominis.
The importance of the question of evolution
In his work on Genesis 1, Fr Stanley Jaki quotes the Abbé Michonneau, a worker-priest in Paris of the 1950’s who said that the apparent conflict between science and the six-day creation story was much more effective in promoting atheism among the poor and relatively uneducated than were the social injustices that cut into their flesh and blood. Today, we would have to put it slightly differently. The apparent conflict between science and the bible is probably the easiest way for a young and indifferent Catholic to justify walking out on the Church or for the non-Catholic to ignore the Church. We know that there may well be the motive of a superficially attractive permissive lifestyle. But intellectually the most important doctrine for the young is the doctrine of creation. And therefore the question of evolution is of the utmost importance.
This is why the FAITH movement puts the doctrine of creation at the beginning of catechesis along with an apologetics which takes account of modern scientific knowledge concerning the universe and its development through time.[ii] If we ignore this at the start of our catechesis, the rest is in very real danger of being a waste of time. It is obvious to the most unsophisticated enquirer, that if you cannot answer the questions about the origins of the universe, then there is no point continuing with any further religious teaching except as a pious hobby or harmless and entirely optional interest.
Many Catholic creationists would agree on the importance of the question. They see evolution as a danger to the faith. They argue that it is necessary to unmask the propaganda of the evolutionists and show that their theories are false. They claim the support of many scientists for “scientific creationism” and are willing to campaign against those who write on evolution and creation such as in FAITH. A letter sent last year by a creationist group to the Bishops, quoted with approval the view that “Every attack on the Christian Faith today has, as its basis, the doctrine of evolution.”[iii]
Many may find such a view to be so off-beam as not to be worth considering. However, many orthodox Catholics are likely to find themselves mailed with literature promoting such a position. Speaker meetings are sometimes organised by traditionalist groups to promote such views and often the impression is given that you cannot be an orthodox Catholic without subscribing to anti-evolutionism. More than a hint is often given too that the Popes support such a stance and that it is, in effect, the teaching of the Church or so close as to be implied in it.
Is the earth only 6000 years old?
The creationists often quote Pope Pius XII in the encyclical Humani Generis. They, point out that he said that a theory must not be treated as a fact and that experts were allowed to engage in research and discussion. A key point is often forgotten in the discussion of this part of Humani Generis. Pope Pius XII was speaking of the evolution of man. He said that the research and discussion could 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”[iv] It was this highly contentious area of human evolution where Pope Pius XII’s caution was expressed, not in the (much less controverted) question of the development of the universe over a long period of time.
Yet creationists constantly use Pope Pius XII to justify abandoning modern cosmology wholesale in favour of the theory of a young universe, perhaps only 6000 years old. While there may be some debate in scientific circles over certain areas of human evolutionary biology, there would be few who would take seriously the idea that the whole of astronomy, physics and the rest of the natural sciences are entirely wrong over the age of the earth, the distance of the stars and the size of the galaxies.
Lest observers of this debate think I am being unfair to the creationists here, let me quote one writer who is widely hailed by Catholic creationists and recently lectured in England. In his book Creation Rediscovered, he states “Anyone who does not share the prevailing orthodoxy in favour of billions of years [Viz for the age of the universe] faces a difficult task in being taken seriously. Yet the choice is clear: either the Earth was created along with the rest of the Universe only some 6000 years ago, or the Universe is about 20 billion years old and the Earth about 4.5 billion years old and during that time evolution took place.”[v] He goes on to state that “there is no credible third position between a young universe without evolution and an extremely old Universe with evolution.”[vi] This statement is put in bold type in the text to indicate its importance in the overall thesis.
The author is not blind to all of the consequences of this position. In a manner which draws utter contempt from evolutionary biologists engaged in the debate over origins, he is willing to bring God in to sort out any difficulties which his theory has when faced with the facts of physics. So for instance, he says that God is not limited to human concepts “He could have created the Universe with the light from the distant stars already reaching the Earth. He could have created the Earth first, then created light wave particles and then the stars, or he could have created them all simultaneously.”[vii] This is rather like saying that God could make some ashes and then a fire and then a lot of heat. Perhaps philosophers of religion might allow there to be a sense of “could” in which God “could” do these things but it does not help the credibility of Christianity.[viii]
Evolution: both a fact and a theory
One of the areas of confusion concerning evolution is the question of the nature of scientific theory. To a non-scientist, the word “theory” is often used as if it meant “imperfect fact”. On such an understanding, there is a kind of gradient of assurance with “certainty” at the top, “guess” at the bottom and “theory” about halfway down the slope. This misunderstanding accounts for many of the protests about Catholics who accept evolution as a fact. The protesting creationist will point to many instances where evolutionary theorists have disagreed over various theories, modified theories over time and still come to different conclusions. Surely it is irresponsible to treat such a shaky hypothesis as though it were a fact? The next question is whether it should be taught in schools(—ask in Arkansas.)
Perhaps it will make things clearer if we point out that the same kind of argument could be applied to gravitation. Scientists have long disagreed about theories of gravitation. Even today, gravitational theory is in a state of flux. Any particular explanation of gravity is only a theory and might be changed to take account of new research. But that doesn’t mean that Newton’s apple might suddenly fall upwards tomorrow. We could say that gravity is both a fact and a theory. It is a fact which is observable and measurable. There are various theories to account for the facts. As more is discovered, the theory has to be developed and refined, sometimes radically. Einstein’s theory is very different from Newton’s but Newton’s theory was still true “as far as it goes”.
In the case of evolution we are also dealing with a fact and a theory. As in the case of the heliocentric solar system, what started out as a hypothesis now has so much accumulated evidence in its favour that it is generally regarded as a fact. The debate among scientists lies in the theory that is brought forward to explain the facts. This is so often confused by creationists that it is small wonder that many non scientists are taken in. Time and again, creationists will quote from those who disagree with (for example) Darwinism and thereby “prove” that evolution is a shaky theory that is increasingly disputed by scientists. Pope John Paul II and Evolution
In the encyclical Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII expressed caution in relation to the evolution of man. This is important because of the question of the direct creation of the soul and the transmission of original sin. These are truths which Catholics believe as a matter of divine revelation and any speculation must take this into account.
However, it would be wrong to infer from this that Catholics are not free to take as a given fact the general conclusions of scientists that the universe is billions of years old and that evolution has taken place. 35 years on from Pius XII, Pope John Paul II reflected a more confident view in the Church where the acceptance of evolution was not a new development. In a General Audience address in 1985, he said “All the observations concerning the development of life lead to a similar conclusions. The evolution of living beings, of which science seeks to determine the stages and to discern the mechanism, presents an internal finality which arouses admiration. This finality which directs beings in a direction for which they are not responsible or in charge, obliges one to suppose a Mind which is its inventor, its Creator.”[ix]
We should also be clear about what is of divine revelation. Catholics are bound to believe that God created the universe out of nothing and that he created everything good. We are also obliged to believe that the human soul is immediately created by God and that original sin is transmitted by propagation, not by imitation. As Catholics, we are not in the unfortunate position of the evangelical who has only the literal word of the bible for his authority. With the living teaching authority of the Church, we are able to address with more confidence the questions of science and religion that threaten to undermine the authority of “The Bible” taken as “The Book”. We are able to probe the meaning of the scriptures with the living authority of Christ to guide the Church and protect her from error. We know what is of faith in these matters because the Church defines them for us.
In addition to what is de fide teaching, we also have the prudent and authoritative guidance of the Popes such as the teaching of Humani Generis and the addresses of the present Pope. Under the guidance and authority of the Popes, and following their example, we are free to debate such matters as evolution within the limits of Catholic teaching.
FAITH movement and evolution
The FAITH movement exists expressly for the purpose of fostering a new synthesis of science and religion. We present a positive account of creation through evolution which is wholly faithful to the teaching of the Church’s magisterium. We find such an approach vital in pastoral work with the young. One of the first questions that taxes the enquiring young mind is the question of the creation of the world, the creation of mankind and evolution.
The creationist will have to offer a universe that is 6000 years old and a God who can create light particles before the stars and then make them all hit the earth as though they had been there for billions of years. In FAITH we seek to offer an account which accepts the facts of modern science and accounts for them in a framework where God is infinitely wise as well as infinitely powerful, creating everything through and for the Logos. It is a desperate need in the Church. A quite young person recently asked me in a FAITH group about the origin of the universe and the nature of God. After a few minutes of quite intelligent and hostile questioning after the manner of a TV interviewer, she said “Father, you are the only priest who has ever tried to answer these questions.” I doubt if it was an exaggeration. The others apparently all took refuge in “Well nobody really knows, it’s a mystery.” I do not blame them; they probably never received anything useful in their years of theology on the question of creation and evolution. The FAITH perspective tends to be regarded at best as an interesting sideline in a rather arcane area. This is a shame because for the man and woman in the street, it deals with the commonest and most easily grasped reason (or excuse) for dropping faith altogether. The need for a new synthesis is urgent and it is a need which we believe FAITH has a mission to meet.
[i] Copies are available free of charge from Richard and Maureen Findlay-Wilson at “Meadowsweet”, Breach Lane, SHAFTESBURY, Dorset SP7 8LF Phone/Fax 01747-852816
[ii] There are several relevant FAITH pamphlets on evolution. Please see our list at the back of the Magazine.
[viii] For those interested in the debate, there is far more activity I the USA than here because of the educational decisions made in some areas. The best source of information is the talk.origins usenet conference. There are a large number of useful files available on the World Wide Web at http://rumba.ics.uci.edu.8080 or FTP: ics.uci.edu/pub/origins