Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: "Thomistic Evolution”: Development of Doctrine or Diabolical Deception?

  1. #1
    Iridium Dachsie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    7,982
    Thanks
    1,301
    Thanked 2,526 Times in 1,857 Posts

    "Thomistic Evolution”: Development of Doctrine or Diabolical Deception?

    For those interested in the doctrine of creation and evolution, this is a wonderful informative read.

    I sent this to Ken Ham and AnswersInGenesis.org

    Toward Fides et Ratio

    _____________

    http://kolbecenter.org/thomistic-evo...cal-deception/

    kolbecenter.org
    “Thomistic Evolution”: Development of Doctrine or Diabolical Deception?
    Admin
    39-50 minutes

    by Eric Bermingham

    With an Introduction and a Conclusion by Fr. Thomas Hickey

    Introduction

    Why have the Gentiles raged, and the people devised vain things?
    The kings of the earth stood up, and the princes met together,
    against the Lord, and against his Christ. (Ps 2:1–2).

    Eric Bermingham has done us a valuable service by critiquing the recent work of Fr. Nicanor Austriaco, O.P. and the so-called “Thomistic” evolutionists. Certainly no one should doubt the sincerity of the faith of Fr. Austriaco and his colleagues, nor impugn their motives, nor disparage their credentials. Nevertheless, Mr. Bermingham finds serious errors in almost all of their apologetic for molecules-to-man evolution. At times, Mr. Bermingham points out more recent discoveries that Fr. Austriaco seems to be unaware of. At other times, he calls attention to flaws of reasoning, to self-contradictory claims, to unsupported conclusions, and to unwarranted assumptions. Still at other times, Mr. Bermingham points out Fr. Austriaco’s unwillingness to acknowledge the depth of the clash between the current conclusions of the majority of natural scientists and the deposit of faith.

    Lest the reader get lost in these individual critiques and arguments, it seems necessary to offer a sort of meta-analysis – to zoom out, so to speak, and view the forest before marking the trees. Here one can see more clearly what is at stake. Without this wider perspective, the tendency might be to view each individual critique dismissively, as if to say it’s just one bad tree in the forest. It is not until we see the totality of the “bad trees” that we may conclude that we are in the wrong forest altogether.

    To that end, let us examine the purpose or intention of Fr. Austriaco in writing these articles. Like many others in our time, he wants to demonstrate that there is no conflict between natural science and our faith. What needs to be added, however, is the qualification of “sound” natural science and “true” faith. Just as there are poor representations of what the Church teaches as true, so there are flawed suppositions presented as scientific fact. Science can only be “sound” to the extent that it follows the scientific method to conclusions that can be repeated and verified by observation. And faith can only be “true” to the extent that it holds fast to what God has revealed and verified through His Church.

    The whole issue of Fr. Austriaco’s articles and Mr. Bermingham’s critique boils down to one statement: Fr. Austriaco believes that evolution is an incontrovertible fact. Thus this “truth” of science must be reconciled with the truth of revelation. Notice that Fr. Austriaco can only believe that it is fact, for it cannot be demonstrated. What is surmised to have happened over millions of years cannot be repeated and verified, and thus it can never be “sound” natural science. One can only believe that it is true. So the primary concern of reconciling natural science with faith is not at all what it appears to be, i.e. fact vs faith. There is no “fact” to deal with in evolutionary hypotheses; there is only the “faith” that it is so.

    SNIP excised center part of article


    Conclusion

    Fr. Thomas Hickey

    Hopefully, Mr. Bermingham’s critique has been read as more than a merely academic exercise. The integrity of our faith is at stake. Fr. Austriaco believes that he is preserving this integrity by showing how our faith can accommodate whatever is presumed to be scientific fact. The undercurrent of his thought is “We must avoid another Galileo affair,” as if the Church lost credibility when Galileo’s speculations were questioned. In fact, all the Church ever asked of Galileo was proof of his hypotheses, proof that is still lacking today. To ask for proof in the realm of science is a legitimate request, for that is the method of science. But in a clever manipulation of popular opinion that can only be attributed to diabolical influence, the common perception today is that the Church opposed the progress of science. Galileo’s unproven speculations have been accepted as fact, and even many Church leaders have been cowed into accepting them as such. Yet Galileo himself at the end of his life admitted that he had overstepped his bounds and erred in using an unproven hypothesis to dictate how the Church should interpret the Word of God.

    Today, most Churchmen have chosen to be silent as the world of consensus science continues to spin more and more wild fantasies that cannot be proven, tested, or verified. We have yet to wake up to the fact that the Devil often manipulates his losses into perceived triumphs. The strongest recent pronouncement of the Magisterium defending life and condemning the evils of contraception, Humanae vitae, is often ridiculed, even within the Church. The Pill was viewed as a medical and scientific breakthrough, and once again, the Church was portrayed in the public eye as opposing “progress.” Examples of this kind could be multiplied to demonstrate that some kind of mesmerism seems to fall upon the public mind when scientific claims are made. The result is an absolute confidence in any claim that has the label “science” attached to it.

    The damage wrought by this misplaced confidence is incalculable. Millions of Catholics are led to doubt and dismiss Church teaching in favor of something deemed to be more accurate, true, and reliable. Who is going to remain in a Church that has been steeped in error from the beginning? The constant litany of “There is no contradiction between science and our faith” falls on deaf ears, as it becomes evident that the contradiction is only removed by altering the faith. Again, why should someone trust Church leaders who are willing to “sell out” their faith to gain the approval of the consensus science community? Why should the faithful bow before the altar of God when their leaders are bowing at the altar of godless science?

    Science need not be godless, but consensus science has become godless in regard to origins. The Church has long recognized the autonomy of the natural sciences (cf. Fides et ratio, 45), but a similar autonomy should also be afforded to philosophy and theology, as St John Paul II noted in Fides et Ratio (75). Within her proper realm of autonomy, the Church has held that unaided human reason can rightly conclude that there is an all-powerful Creator (CCC 34,35, Rom. 1:19-20). Thus, anyone, scientist or not, who denies the existence of God is not reasoning properly. It is well within the scope of our autonomy to correct those who misuse natural science to undermine our faith.

    Instead, we have been intimidated by the very word “science” to the point of inviting open and avowed atheists to sit on our Pontifical Academy of Science. Instead of pointing out the theological and philosophical errors of modern scientific speculation, we have been all too willing to sacrifice even sacred dogma so as not to offend the scientific community. Rather than stand our ground in demanding proof from the natural sciences, we have cowered in fear of criticism from those outside the Church. And within the Church we have offered to accept whatever consensus science proposes – without proof – and bend our Creed to accommodate it.

    Where are the churchmen who will boldly point out that the emperor has no clothes? Certainly not with our Thomistic evolutionist brethren. The Evil One has been using the aura of science to breach the walls of the Church for several generations, and writings such as those of Fr. Austriaco effectively call off the battle and throw open the gates to the invaders. We cannot impute pure motives to all who work within the realm of the natural sciences. To do so is to tear down the very walls they are attacking.

    Long ago, St. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle, warned that a “small error in the beginning becomes a great error later on.” The Thomistic evolutionist apologetic of Fr. Austriaco and his colleagues flows logically from their false premise that everything the majority of “scientists” currently say about the age of the universe, the age of the earth, and the slow development of life from simpler to more complex forms is correct and true. In reality, all of these assertions rest on unwarranted extrapolation from the present natural order back to the beginning of creation. But, rather than examine these claims and ask for proof, the Thomistic evolutionists accept it all as fact and then propose that this in no way conflicts with our faith. Only afterwards, as if under his breath, Fr. Austriaco admits, “Of course, we have to alter the faith.”

    This is all eerily reminiscent of the warning issued by the Apostle Paul to the Thessalonian believers:

    Let no man deceive you by any means: for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition Who opposeth and is lifted up above all that is called God or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God. Remember you not that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now you know what withholdeth, that he may be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity already worketh: only that he who now holdeth do hold, until he be taken out of the way. (2 Th 2:3–7)

    What we are facing is indeed a “revolt” against the authority of the Church, as supposed knowledge is “lifted up above all that is called God” in a great “mystery of iniquity.” Jesus warned that there would one day be a deception so great that it might possibly deceive even the elect (Mat. 24:24).

    It is time for the elect to recall the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ to the Pharisees, “If you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote of Me. But if you believe not his writings, how will you believe My Words?” (John 5:46)

    Fr. Thomas Hickey

    (Fr. Thomas Hickey and Mr. Eric Bermingham are members of the advisory council of the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation. For a detailed explanation of the theological, philosophical, and natural science arguments in defense of the traditional Catholic doctrine of creation and in contradiction to molecules-to-man evolution in its theistic and atheistic forms, please see the articles in theology, philosophy, and natural science on the Kolbe website www.kolbecenter.org )

  2. #2
    Unobtanium crimethink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Mystery Babylon
    Posts
    13,482
    Thanks
    9,400
    Thanked 6,806 Times in 4,311 Posts

    Re: "Thomistic Evolution”: Development of Doctrine or Diabolical Deception?

    No one but God Himself knows the real history of humanity.

    Was Adam and Eve created in 4004 BC? Almost assuredly not. But did they "evolve" from ape-like creatures? There is no evidence that proves that, nor even suggests it. Such "evidence" exists solely in the minds of those who want to believe in Darwinian "evolution." If Darwinian evolution is "true," then God is a liar. Trofim Lysenko was not only a fool, but a plagiarist. Lysenkoism - "science" concocted in accordance with ideological beliefs - predated him by decades; it was (and is) called Darwinism.

    What we do know is that complex order does not stem from chaos, and it requires far more faith to believe in "random chance" bringing forth the extremely well-ordered universe, than to simply believe a Great Consciousness designed it that way.

    I say this as someone whose primary degree is in Anthropology.

    The sad thing is, Darwin had doubts. These so-called "scientists" who follow in his name have none. Christians who have signed on to worldly system of "knowledge" are, at best, fools.
    The night has come upon us, and we have but two choices: to fear it, or to face it bravely while looking to the Light that cannot be overcome. John 8:12

  3. #3
    Platinum
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    1,459
    Thanks
    401
    Thanked 548 Times in 378 Posts

    Re: "Thomistic Evolution”: Development of Doctrine or Diabolical Deception?




  4. The Following User Says Thank You to C.Martel For This Useful Post:

    Dachsie (29th July 2017)

  5. #4
    Great Value Carrots StreetsOfGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,960
    Thanks
    1,058
    Thanked 805 Times in 538 Posts

    Re: "Thomistic Evolution”: Development of Doctrine or Diabolical Deception?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dachsie View Post
    FCertainly no one should doubt the sincerity of the faith of Fr. Austriaco
    The Roman Catholic church OFFICIALLY accepts EVOLUTION, they TRY and FIT the Bible in by claiming God ORDAINED evolution (theistic evolution) and thus discount the entire Genesis account as "allegorical" , which it is NOT!

    This stinks as an attempt to BRING more NON Catholics INTO their one world religion
    Murder was the Catholic answer - Pope Francis

  6. #5
    Unobtanium crimethink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Mystery Babylon
    Posts
    13,482
    Thanks
    9,400
    Thanked 6,806 Times in 4,311 Posts

    Re: "Thomistic Evolution”: Development of Doctrine or Diabolical Deception?

    Quote Originally Posted by StreetsOfGold View Post
    This stinks as an attempt to BRING more NON Catholics INTO their one world religion
    The one-world religion is Judaism, and modern Catholicism is part of it.
    The night has come upon us, and we have but two choices: to fear it, or to face it bravely while looking to the Light that cannot be overcome. John 8:12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •