Whose responsibility is it?

Home Forums All Things Catholic Whose responsibility is it?

This topic contains 15 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  LEX 9 years, 5 months ago.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1165

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    Concerning the evolution/”intelligent design” situation: there are certain school districts out there wanting the biology curriculum to include intelligent design to be taught along side evolution.

    Personally, I think it’s ridiculous. First and foremost, evolution should be taught for exactly what it is: a theory. Second, evolution does not answer the question of how life began in the first place. Third, evolution in it’s purest form does not exclude God.

    So, my opinion is that it does not really matter if intelligent design is taught in biology or not. I think it is the parent’s responsibility to pass that on to their children if that is what the family believes.

    #5621

    Victor
    Member

    No I do not think it should be taught in science classes. But I do think they should offer it up in college outside of the umbrella of sciences. I think this will be productive and get the students to be detail natzi’s with the science professors.

    ~Victor

    #5622

    Dave
    Member

    I think public school should be abolished, making this discussion irrelevent :mrgreen:

    But beyond that, I see no necessity for including it. As was said, it can be up to the parents to decide that(it should be for everything educational, hence my comment above).

    #5623

    Benedict
    Member

    [quote:3hqcxe2h]First and foremost, evolution should be taught for exactly what it is: a theory.[/quote:3hqcxe2h]
    Gravity is also a theory.

    #5624

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    [quote:fuwiykxu][quote:fuwiykxu]First and foremost, evolution should be taught for exactly what it is: a theory.[/quote:fuwiykxu]
    Gravity is also a theory.[/quote:fuwiykxu]
    Yes, it is. It also bears little in terms of morality and appropriate accreditation to God for creation of the universe. <img src=” title=”Wink” />

    #5737

    Fred
    Member

    Peace be with all!

    This issue is one that is constantly in debate here in GA. My view point is such:

    Evolution is a weak theory[/url:1jcdn5pz] at this time. It starts in reverse to provide it’s self. We start with the finished product and work our way backwards. Not common practice in establishing a theory. Lewis Leaky and the rest have yet to find the “missing link”. Now Neandertal is a separate species that died off because Homosapiens ran them into extinction.

    Gravity has proofs, Sir Issac Newton provide the existence of gravity and thus is fact no longer theory. Evolution can make no such claim. Intelligent Design[/url:1jcdn5pz] has proofs, the bible, Saint Thomas Aquinas’s proofs of God[/url:1jcdn5pz] As Catholics we believe these to be truths. Remember science is dynamic, ever evolving, and man’s attempt at trying to explain his world.

    I think as an option it should be taught in school. If we allow this dilution of free thinking and our Faith as Christan’s, we will become luge warm at best and lead our children on a path away from God. I do not subscribe to politically correctness as is so popular today. This was and is a Christian country, read what OUR Founding Fathers wrote.

    I leave you with this on the debate of Intelligent Design and Science:

    The Big Bang is what created out universe, according to scientists, this is acceptable even to me. But, what caused the Big Bang?? Know scientist knows, this is fact, but we believe God is the First Mover, something caused the Big Bang but science cannot explain who or what. Food for thought.

    God Bless!

    Fred

    #5738

    Victor
    Member

    [color=darkred:3pfhytus]This weekend after Confirmation 1, I was greeted by the directors of education [husband and wife] and pastor of the parish [head priest] after having been listening to me give a lecture to the 180 high school students. This year I happen to have one [they have 11 kids] of their kids in my class and this usually rattles many of the other teachers only because it’s the directors kid. But not me. I have nothing to fear if I’m being honest and true to the Church and myself. After a short discussion and greeting the pastor left and my interesting discussion with the directors began. Apparently they didn’t appreciate that I said “evolution is open for discussion and you do not have to reject it”. Long story short they ended up asking me where I was getting my thinking from. So now I have to provide them with a list. So I figured this would suffice:[/color:3pfhytus]

    http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p14.htm

    http://www.mark-shea.com/ambiguity.html

    http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_pi12hg.htm

    http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p80.htm

    [color=darkred:3pfhytus]It seems I’m mostly bumping heads with older Catholics on this. Has anyone else experienced this?

    ~Victor[/color:3pfhytus]

    #5739

    Fred
    Member

    Peace be with you Victor,

    The issue is not with older Catholics. If so then at 40 I must be one my self, lol. The problem lies in a deeper area. Evolution as is taught and presented today and as in the past, denies God and Intelligent Design. It’s a fact I’ve read Darwin and others and if you take all that they say as fact, we are lucky to even have existed at all. To them we are a series of cosmic mistakes that we lucked up from. Sorry I can’t and won’t except that. Now maybe that’s were”older” Catholics and “younger” Catholics differ.

    Nothing in the Catechism really address this other then:

    [quote:1n0ldflx]Catechism 159 Faith and science: “Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.”37 “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.”38 [/quote:1n0ldflx]

    I have a article[/url:1n0ldflx] that I think helps in this discussion and why I and others have a problem with presenting Evolution as the only explanation to young minds as to why we are here.

    I hope this helps in some understanding. God Bless!

    Fred

    #5740

    Victor
    Member

    [color=darkred:2oxr2mwo]I’m sorry Fred, I was only sharing my experiences. I didn’t intend to say that all older catholics don’t submit to evolution, but rather that [b:2oxr2mwo]most that I have confronted[/b:2oxr2mwo] do not. It could be due to the way evolution was presented to people in general in the past. Evolution is only a pieace of the pie in the sciences and does not intend to explain the beggining like the big bang. That isn’t part of evolution. Evolution isn’t intending to answer the question of “why we are here”. The PAS[/url:2oxr2mwo] is constantly writing articles and letters to help the Magisterium educate themselves on the matters of science. It think the Church has gone through some growth in this regard. And because of it, has given catholics the freedom to disagree while being One in the Church.

    Peace in Christ,
    ~Victor[/color:2oxr2mwo]

    #5741

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    I’m pretty sure we can accept parts of the theory, but not the whole thing. Like we can accept that perhaps we did evolve from monkeys and that was part of God’s plan and that God did breathe life into something to make it human, but we cannot accept that the universe is just some random coincidence.

    I believe that the Big Bang was God. He snapped his fingers and life began. Science can help us show that the earth formed over time and life formed over time – that does not conflict with our faith.

    I think science’s role is to help explain God’s mystery of life. It can’t account for everything, but it certainly helps.

    #5742

    Fred
    Member

    Peace be with you Victor and Jon!

    Vic, my brother, no need to apologize! It is hard to offend me with words lol! What I was trying to say and Jon has hit on some of it in his reply also, is that Evolution on a strictly science level I have no problem with and from all that I have read, neither does the Vatican. Now when they try to make a philosophy and/or use it to discount God, as is the norm in schools, please look at the school curriculum on this, I have a real problem.

    I can except that over the years I have lost hair on my back because I wear clothing, lol. But to say I was slim that crawled out of muck that had been hit bu a meteor or such bringing the building blocks of life to create me, and then say this was a cosmic mistake and happenstance, I lose it. That is Intelligent Design, if you believe in God, there real cannot be any happenstance.

    Vic, again no worries bro! If I was easily hurt, I need to rethink the Deaconate, Apologetics, and my public life in general, lol. I want free, open, loving (1Cor 13 type), discussion. That is how we learn and express our love toward the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit!

    God Bless!

    Fred

    #5743

    Victor
    Member

    [quote:ca7iheer]Peace be with you Victor and Jon!

    Vic, my brother, no need to apologize! It is hard to offend me with words lol! What I was trying to say and Jon has hit on some of it in his reply also, is that Evolution on a strictly science level I have no problem with and from all that I have read, neither does the Vatican. Now when they try to make a philosophy and/or use it to discount God, as is the norm in schools, please look at the school curriculum on this, I have a real problem.

    I can except that over the years I have lost hair on my back because I wear clothing, lol. But to say I was slim that crawled out of muck that had been hit bu a meteor or such bringing the building blocks of life to create me, and then say this was a cosmic mistake and happenstance, I lose it. That is Intelligent Design, if you believe in God, there real cannot be any happenstance.

    Vic, again no worries bro! If I was easily hurt, I need to rethink the Deaconate, Apologetics, and my public life in general, lol. I want free, open, loving (1Cor 13 type), discussion. That is how we learn and express our love toward the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit!

    God Bless!

    Fred[/quote:ca7iheer]

    I see what you mean. Completely agree… Anyone know of the areas of science that [b:ca7iheer]do[/b:ca7iheer] go against Church teaching? I couldn’t find a site on it.

    #5744

    Victor
    Member

    [b:n6izqskl]Intelligent design not science, says Vatican newspaper article[/b:n6izqskl]

    By John Thavis
    Catholic News Service

    VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Intelligent design is not science and should not be taught as a scientific theory in schools alongside Darwinian evolution, an article in the Vatican newspaper said.

    The article said that in pushing intelligent design some groups were improperly seeking miraculous explanations in a way that creates confusion between religious and scientific fields.

    At the same time, scientists should recognize that evolutionary theory does not exclude an overall purpose in creation — a “superior design” that may be realized through secondary causes like natural selection, it said.

    The article, published in the Jan. 17 edition of L’Osservatore Romano, was written by Fiorenzo Facchini, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Bologna in Italy.

    The article noted that the debate over intelligent design — the idea that certain features of life and the universe are best explained by an intelligent designer rather than adaptive evolution — has spread from the United States to Europe.

    The problem with intelligent design is that it turns to a “superior cause” — understood though not necessarily named as God — to explain supposed shortcomings of evolutionary science. But that’s not how science should work, the article said.

    “If the model proposed by Darwin is held to be inadequate, one should look for another model. But it is not correct methodology to stray from the field of science pretending to do science,” it said.

    The article said a Pennsylvania judge had acted properly when he ruled in December that intelligent design could not be taught as science in schools.

    “Intelligent design does not belong to science and there is no justification for the pretext that it be taught as a scientific theory alongside the Darwinian explanation,” it said.

    From the church’s point of view, Catholic teaching says God created all things from nothing, but doesn’t say how, the article said. That leaves open the possibilities of evolutionary mechanisms like random mutation and natural selection.

    “God’s project of creation can be carried out through secondary causes in the natural course of events, without having to think of miraculous interventions that point in this or that direction,” it said.

    What the church does insist upon is that the emergence of the human supposes a willful act of God, and that man cannot be seen as only the product of evolutionary processes, it said. The spiritual element of man is not something that could have developed from natural selection but required an “ontological leap,” it said.

    The article said that, unfortunately, what has helped fuel the intelligent design debate is a tendency among some Darwinian scientists to view evolution in absolute and ideological terms, as if everything — including first causes — can be attributed to chance.

    “Science as such, with its methods, can neither demonstrate nor exclude that a superior design has been carried out,” it said.

    From a religious viewpoint, it said, there is no doubt that the human story “has a sense and a direction that is marked by a superior design.”

    #5745

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    Good find, Victor. That about sums it up.

    #5746

    Fred
    Member

    Peace be with all!

    This is what I was talking about. I’m in full agreement! I just have a problem with schools excluding Intelligent Design as an option. Like I said in my previous posts, maybe not well, that I accept that we change, evolve, etc.. I don’t like the way this discounts God. Further calling it a theory is not accurate. A study of position papers on the subject show it to be more of a debate on a possible answer to how we have come to be.

    The proof necessary to make it a theory is weak. No missing link has been discovered and many family branches that have disappeared leaded me to question Evolution as the manner in which we have come to be.

    I am not anti-evolutionist, I just want truth and accuracy taught. And in my opinion its lacking at this time. Evolution needs more time to be studied before it is considered fact in main stream thinking. I hope this better explains my position.

    As far as teachings against the Church, it is not an attack on the Church as much as it is on God and that is evident in what is being taught in schools here in GA and position papers by supporters of Evolution in the intellectual realms.

    Here are some articles I have read on this topic:

    [url:1q6uolr3]http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html[/url:1q6uolr3]
    [url:1q6uolr3]http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1401[/url:1q6uolr3]
    [url:1q6uolr3]http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/Teachers/newteacherevolution.html[/url:1q6uolr3]
    [url:1q6uolr3]http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/050922_ID_main.html[/url:1q6uolr3]

    God Bless!

    Fred

    #5755

    LEX
    Member

    Its stupid to think such a thing, the aithiests are just mad because eveloution is practicly dis-proved by itself they need to play it up a bit.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.