Rome Promotes Evolutionism, Excludes the God of Creation

Download 67 Kb.
Size67 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8

Dear Friend,
Evolutionism remains one of the major tools of Satan and his cohorts to denigrate biblical faith. In England many people have be mislead to think of Evolutionism as if it were scientific. As the atheistic world celebrated 150 years of Darwinism, Papal Rome’s used the divisive issue of evolutionism to its own advantage. Our article on what has occurred exposes Vatican’s method of deceit. I ask study this article and make it known others.
Yours in the God of creation and His mighty power,

Richard Bennett

Rome Promotes Evolutionism, Excludes the God of Creation

To better evaluate the Vatican’s current position on evolutionism, it is necessary to know of its Project STOQ (Science, Technology, and the Ontological Quest). The Project’s publicly stated purpose is to work toward a new philosophical basis by which the integration of science and religion can be traditionally understood. Apparently they deem this an urgent necessity since they claim that “there is a lack of a solid tradition of affronting [facing] issues in this way, [i.e., through an integrated view of science and religion].”1
The Project’s current plan of action includes exchanging ideas with major worldwide groups in the areas of what is called “science” and religion. Thus, under the auspices of the Pontifical Council for Culture, Project STOQ co-sponsored an international conference to mark the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. It held the five-day conference from March 3-7, 2009, at Rome’s Pontifical Gregorian University. The title for the conference was “Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories: A Critical Appraisal 150 Years after The Origin of Species.” The purpose of the conference was stated straightforwardly. It was to focus “on the possibility to reconcile in the same philosophical position the ‘Creation’ thinking and the ‘Evolution’ thinking, without the first pretending to be a scientific theory nor the second being reduced to a dogma.”2
According to the London Times, “Msgr. Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, which co-organized the conference with Notre Dame University in Indiana and support from the John Templeton Foundation, said there was ‘no a priori incompatibility between evolution and the message of the Bible.’”3 The head of the Pontifical Council for Culture could take this position because the primary authority for all Catholics is the dogmas taught by the reigning Pope.4

The Times further noted that, “The Vatican has rejected the claim by Richard Dawkins, the biologist and campaigning atheist, that evolution proves that God does not exist, proclaiming that on the contrary Darwinian evolution and the account of Creation in Genesis are ‘perfectly compatible.’” It is no surprise then that the Vatican conference firmly rejected any presentation by Creationists as well as those who hold for Intelligent Design. In the organizers’ opinion these positions are extreme. Regarding Intelligent Design, the Catholic News Service also reported, “[The conference] organizers agreed to discuss how it appeared and developed as a cultural ideology, not as science. A number of presentations discussed intelligent design’s ‘long and complex genesis’ in an historical context and its impact on society and culture.

Saverio Forestiero, a member of the conference’s organizing committee, declared that, Intelligent Design is ‘certainly not discussable in the scientific, philosophic and theological fields.’”5 Interestingly Project STOQ was willing to hold discussions among themselves regarding the history and cultural aspects of the Intelligent Design movement.6 However, it was absolute in refusing to invite any proponents of that movement to make any presentations. Further, those who hold for atheistic evolutionism were also uninvited. Rather, in order to fulfill the purpose of the STOQ Project, both the creationists and the atheists were marginalized as “extremists.” Demonstrating that prejudice, Cardinal William Levada, in his opening address, spoke against fundamentalist Christians in the U.S. who want schools to teach the biblical account of creation alongside or instead of evolutionism.7
The current change in the Vatican’s position began with the 1950 teaching of Pope Pius XII. Later, Pope John Paul II, in his 1996 address to the Pontifical Academy for Sciences, said that the theory of evolution was “more than a hypothesis.” Since then the Vatican agenda has attempted consistently to negate the truth expressed in the very first verse in the Bible. This agenda has now received added impetus. Catholic News Service headlined the recent approval under the title “Evolution and faith complementary: Cardinal Levada.” The account stated,

“Speaking outside a Vatican conference on Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species, CDF head, Cardinal William Levada, has said there is a ‘wide spectrum of room’ for belief in both the scientific basis for evolution and faith in God the creator….‘We believe that however creation has come about and evolved, ultimately God is the creator of all things,’ he said.”8

It is noteworthy that Cardinal Levada’s comments, as well as those of the STOQ organizers, show Rome to be a very useful tool in the hands of Bible believers’ chief enemy. Rome’s compromise is untenable, however. As Dr. Donald Chittick of Creation Compass explains,

“One of the tricks of the enemy is to not define the word science, but to use it within the worldview of naturalism.  In other words the enemy operates on the basis that science equals naturalism and naturalism is equivalent to science.  That fact is concealed from unsuspecting public.  By contrast, historically, going back to the roots of modern science, the word science according to the first scientists such as Newton, Boyle, Faraday, Pasteur, etc., was defined as a systematic study of the created universe in all areas of study (biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, geology, etc.). Thus science to the founders of modern science and to modern creationists means a systematic study of the created universe.  In naturalism, in contrast, so-called science is defined as an attempt to explain the universe without using creation.  In naturalism, only naturalistic processes are allowed to be called ‘science.’  The general public thinks that science deals with objective truth. So when naturalism (which in biology is simply evolutionism) presents supposed data—which in fact is only an interpretation of actual data (observation), and is the opposite of creation—the general public can unsuspectingly consider it as ‘science.’ Accordingly the general public can be deceived to mistakenly think that the worldview of naturalism is ‘scientific fact’ based on observation.  The word ‘evolutionism’ helps people to realize that it is a worldview and not an explanation.  It is a framework for an explanation.  In creationism which is a systematic study of the created universe, creation was an event, not a process.  In naturalism, the universe and life originated by a series of supposed naturalistic processes.”9

In this light, the foundational flaws of Cardinal Levada’s opinion—that there is room for belief in “both the scientific basis for evolution and faith in God the creator”—are exposed. First, there is no scientific basis for evolutionism.10 Scientific study is observations that are made of the natural world. It is done by perceiving patterns and regularities in these observations. These observations are interpreted within a worldview under which they become a basis for proposing a hypothesis to explain them. When worldviews are different, the interpretations regarding the data are different. When it comes to creation and the origin of life, however, there are no observations since no one was alive at that time. Therefore all so-called scientific studies in these areas are simply explanations that are influenced by a worldview which includes philosophical, religious and cultural presuppositions and assumptions. In looking at some of the abstracts of the papers presented at the STOQ conference, the worldviews or presuppositions of the writers were very much in evidence.

Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8

The database is protected by copyright © 2020
send message

    Main page