The Ziggurat of Doom

Catholicism drinks the ID Kool-Aid?

Filed under: — The Hierophant @ 9:57 am

Here we go. Looks like the Catholic Church has more or less officially come out against mainstream neo-Darwinism. Or, rather, is finally getting around to ‘clarifying’ what the article refers to as a distortion of Catholic doctrine (ie, the acceptance of neo-Darwinist theory). Article is by Christoph Schönborn, the Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna.

Money quote:

Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random
variation and natural selection - is not. Any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is
ideology, not science.

Newsflash: Any sort of “intelligent design” theory is still idiot creationist nonsense, it’s just wearing a funny hat. And I was so hoping that Benedict XVI would prove to be more intellectual. Guess that’s what we get for giving the papacy to the head of the Inquisition. Bah.

Edit: It looks like I may have been a bit hasty. A post over on The Panda’s Thumb about this article makes the point that the Archbishop’s piece, while not terribly clear, seems to be an attempt to emphasize the Church’s position as theistic evolution, and offers this article from the Archdiocese of Cincinatti, which is somewhat more reassuring.

Yet another edit (any more, and I’ll just break out a new entry): Re-reading the article and some of the other blog posts floating around about it, I’m starting to return to my original position. The article is either (a) a very poorly written and terribly unclear clarification of ‘theistic evolution’, or (b) a fairly straightforward embrace of something akin to Intelligent Design. Take this in the context of the Cincinatti article, and it’s possible we’re seeing a shift in doctrine in the making, and not for the better.

Yes, I’ve made a few other edits. All cosmetic stuff, just being finicky today.

5 Responses to “Catholicism drinks the ID Kool-Aid?”

  1. The Hermit Says:

    What’s really sad about this (other than any personal attachments I have to the Church), is that these are people who have enough power and influence to really change the face of the ‘debate’. But instead, we got this.

    Well, I still think Benedict is a place holder, to help the memory of JP fade. I don’t think he’ll be around for a long time, and I can still hold out (a possibly irrational) hope for the next one.

  2. The Hermit Says:

    *after the edits and reading the links*

    Wow, my ability to comprehend the meaning of that article really sucks. I don’t know if it was because of me, the article, or both.

  3. The Hierophant Says:

    It’s the article - I did it too, and we’re not the only ones. It’s a very badly written piece.

  4. The Zombie Lord Says:

    This is only indirectly related to the topic at hand, but I’ve been waiting for a valid excuse to post it–Case’s own Mano Singham keeps a blog where, among other things, he provides some (more) good insights into why ID is kinda fishy.

  5. Steve Says:

    The best move for the Church to make is to state that it firmly believes that there is a creator, they just can’t prove evolution wasn’t part of the plan. I can remember at least one instance in the Bible where man was changed, though I won’t post it here.

Leave a Reply

Please keep comments civil, rational, reasonably on-topic, and in something tangential to standard written English. Comments that display a reckless disregard for civilized discourse will be moderated.

Powered by WordPress