Re: Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
It's hard to say wha this refers to. The Bible was definitively set out in the 4th century by the Catholic Church (the material is earlier but the NT was defined in the 4th Century). It is de fide that this work is divinely inspired, and that the selection of works in the NT is infallibly correct.
What it might be saying however is that much of it is parable and analogy, and should be read as such..
Thus while a Catholic certainly believes that God could have created the earth in six days, that doesn't mean to say that he did. Genesis being a poetic description rather than a literal one. Many evangelical sects interpret the Bible literally word for word, but that is not the Catholic method.
However, in saying this the document is worrying.
It is denying fundamental beliefs such as the Jewish blood guilt, which the Church has always held. The article also mistakenly subscribes to the black myth of Gallileo (one of the Anti-Christians favourite historical distortions along with the Crusades, and the Inquisition). They also seem to be plumping for Evolution at the expense of anything else. That's rather premature and close minded. Suprising as it may seem to people, there is nothing scientific about teaching evolution as if it were fact. Despite the name normally being shortened to Evolution these days, it's full term is still The Theory of Evolution. It has never been proven according to the scientific method (much to Darwin's dismay, who thought he would prove it in a matter of months or years at most). As such it should not properly be considered fact. Thus, to do so is more a case of Scientism than being Scientific.
It is a pity that science itself has become a victim to zealots of the religion of Atheism who are making a mockery of it for their own purposes. The truth of the matter is that the ideology of Darwinism is actually scientifically lacking (as admitted by even it's early proponents), but it's greatest attraction seems to be that it proposes an alternative to intelligent design (ie. God) and thus it is exceedingly attractive to the Athiest community. Unfortunately, this doesn't necessarily make it good science. It's legitimacy is being increasingly questioned, not only by religious people, but by non-religious in the scientific community.
"Although the postmodern era questions everything else—the possibility of knowledge, basic morality and reality itself—critical discussion of Darwin is taboo. While evolutionary biologists test Darwin’s hypothesis in every experiment they conduct, the basic premise of evolution remains a scientific Holy of Holies, despite our absurd skepticism in other areas. Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins writes: “It is absolutely safe to say that, if you meet somebody who does not believe in evolution, that person is either ignorant, stupid, or insane.” Biologists continue to recite the worn credo, “the central, unifying principle of biology is the theory of evolution.” But where would physics be if Einstein had been forced to chant, “the central unifying principle of physics is Newtonian theory,” until he could not see beyond its limitations?" (The Harvard Crimson - Halvorson, 2003, p. 4).
__________________
The Irish are one of the most ancient nations that I know of at this end of the world, and are from as mighty a race as the world ever brought forth.
For it is certain that Ireland hath had the use of letters very anciently and long before England; that they had letters anciently is nothing doubtful, for the Saxons of England are said to have their letters and learning, and learned men, from the Irish.
- Edmund Spenser (writer, and British Government Official in Ireland, AD 1596).
|
Friday, October 7th, 2005
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
