Evolution and the Vatican

From Scienticity

The draft of this article is incomplete.

Despite appearances that the continual American controversy over evolutionary biology pits Religion against Science, "Religion" in this context is far from monolithic, the anti-evolutionist forces turn out to be a small but influential federation of Protestant fundamentalists, and there is in fact very little conflict between science and mature theology.

Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859, during the papacy of Leo XIII. The book was included in the 1948 edition of the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (the "Index of Prohibited Books"^[1]), but its notoriety was short lived since the Index was officially suppressed in 1966.

Contents 1 John Paul II 2 Leo XIII 3 Pius X 4 Pius XII 5 Benedict XIV 6 Conclusion 7 Notes 8 Sources

John Paul II

In 1996, Pope John Paul II made a speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, known as "Truth Cannot Contradict Truth"^[2], in which he made his clearest remarks about the relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and modern evolutionary bioligy.

Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical [Humani Generis, 1950, by John Paul II's predecessor Pius XII], new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. [...] It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory. And if, at first sight, there are apparent contradictions, in what direction do we look for their solution? We know, in fact, that truth cannot contradict truth (cf. Leo XIII, encyclical Providentissimus Deus).

In a 1987 letter to the Director of the Vatican Observatory^[3] on the occasion of a "study week" held at Castelgandolfo in Rome to mark the 300th anniversary of the publication of Newton's Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, John Paul II made broader statements about the cross-fertilization possible between science and theology, remarks that were far from hostile about science.

Religion is not founded on science nor is science an extension of religion. Each should possess its own principles, its pattern of procedures, its diversities of interpretation and its own conclusions. Christianity possesses the source of its justification within itself and does not expect science to constitute its primary apologetic. Science must bear witness to its own worth. While each can and should support the other as distinct dimensions of a common human culture, neither ought to assume that it forms a necessary premise for the other. The unprecedented opportunity we have today is for a common interactive relationship in which each discipline retains its integrity and yet is radically open to the discoveries and insights of the other.
[...]
If the cosmologies of the ancient Near Eastern world could be purified and assimilated into the first chapters of Genesis, might contemporary cosmology have something to offer to our reflections upon creation? Does an evolutionary perspective bring any light to bear upon theological anthropology, the meaning of the human person as the imago Dei, the problem of Christology -- and even upon the development of doctrine itself? What if any, are the eschatological implications of contemporary cosmology, especially in light of the vast future of our universe? Can theological method fruitfully appropriate insights from scientific methodology and the philosophy of science?
[...]
Contemporary developments in science challenge theology far more deeply than did the introduction of Aristotle into Western Europe in the 13th century. Yet these developments also offer to theology a potentially important resource. Just as Aristotelian philosophy, through the ministry of such great scholars as St. Thomas Aquinas, ultimately came to shape some of the most profound expressions of theological doctrine, so can we not hope that the sciences of today, along with all forms of human knowing, may invigorate and inform those parts of the theological enterprise that bear on the relation of nature, humanity and God?

Leo XIII

John Paul II, in stating that "truth cannot contradict truth", referred to the encyclical Providentissimus Deus, "given at St. Peter's, at Rome, the 18th day of November, 1893, the eighteenth year of Our Pontificate: Leo XII." That encylical concerned the the study of the Scriptures and did not directly discuss science, scientific truth, and its relationship to theology.

The Origin of Species was published in 1859, during the pontificate of Pius IX.

However,

23. In order that all these endeavours and exertions [related to the study of the Scriptures, which is the topic of the encyclical] may really prove advantageous to the cause of the Bible, let scholars keep steadfastly to the principles which We have in this Letter laid down. Let them loyally hold that God, the Creator and Ruler of all things, is also the Author of the Scriptures - and that therefore nothing can be proved either by physical science or archaeology which can really contradict the Scriptures. If, then, apparent contradiction be met with, every effort should be made to remove it. Judicious theologians and commentators should be consulted as to what is the true or most probable meaning of the passage in discussion, and the hostile arguments should be carefully weighed. Even if the difficulty is after all not cleared up and the discrepancy seems to remain, the contest must not be abandoned; truth cannot contradict truth, and we may be sure that some mistake has been made either in the interpretation of the sacred words, or in the polemical discussion itself; and if no such mistake can be detected, we must then suspend judgment for the time being.

Pius X

In his 1907 encyclical "On the Doctrine of the Modernists"^[4], Pius X wrote a stern -- and lengthy -- denunciation of "modernists" whose attitudes and teachings he found to be a serious threat to the Church. In that context, his remarks in passing on science seem far from hostile; in fact, by today's standards, they are next to indifferent.

47. With regard to secular studies, let it suffice to recall here what our predecessor [Leo XIII] has admirably said: "Apply yourselves energetically to the study of natural sciences: in which department the things that have been so brilliantly discovered, and so usefully applied, to the admiration of the present age, will be the object of praise and commendation to those who come after us."^[5] But this is to be done without interfering with sacred studies, as Our same predecessor prescribed in these most weighty words: "If you carefully search for the cause of those errors you will find that it lies in the fact that in these days when the natural sciences absorb so much study, the more severe and lofty studies [i.e., theology and related disciplines] have been proportionately neglected--some of them have almost passed into oblivion, some of them are pursued in a half-hearted or superficial way, and, sad to say, now that the splendor of the former estate is dimmed, they have been disfigured by perverse doctrines and monstrous errors."{{ref|piusx03} We ordain, therefore, that the study of natural sciences in the seminaries be carried out according to this law.

Pius XII

Benedict XIV

62. The endeavor to understand the universe has marked human culture in every period and in nearly every society. In the perspective of the Christian faith, this endeavor is precisely an instance of the stewardship which human beings exercise in accordance with God's plan. Without embracing a discredited concordism, Christians have the responsibility to locate the modern scientific understanding of the universe within the context of the theology of creation. The place of human beings in the history of this evolving universe, as it has been charted by modern sciences, can only be seen in its complete reality in the light of faith, as a personal history of the engagement of the triune God with creaturely persons. 63. According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the “Big Bang” and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5-4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution. 64. Pope John Paul II stated some years ago that “new knowledge leads to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge”(“Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Evolution”1996). In continuity with previous twentieth century papal teaching on evolution (especially Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis ), the Holy Father’s message acknowledges that there are “several theories of evolution” that are “materialist, reductionist and spiritualist” and thus incompatible with the Catholic faith. It follows that the message of Pope John Paul II cannot be read as a blanket approbation of all theories of evolution, including those of a neo-Darwinian provenance which explicitly deny to divine providence any truly causal role in the development of life in the universe. Mainly concerned with evolution as it “involves the question of man,” however, Pope John Paul’s message is specifically critical of materialistic theories of human origins and insists on the relevance of philosophy and theology for an adequate understanding of the “ontological leap” to the human which cannot be explained in purely scientific terms. The Church’s interest in evolution thus focuses particularly on “the conception of man” who, as created in the image of God, “cannot be subordinated as a pure means or instrument either to the species or to society.” As a person created in the image of God, he is capable of forming relationships of communion with other persons and with the triune God, as well as of exercising sovereignty and stewardship in the created universe. The implication of these remarks is that theories of evolution and of the origin of the universe possess particular theological interest when they touch on the doctrines of the creation ex nihilo and the creation of man in the image of God. [...] 69. The current scientific debate about the mechanisms at work in evolution requires theological comment insofar as it sometimes implies a misunderstanding of the nature of divine causality. Many neo-Darwinian scientists, as well as some of their critics, have concluded that, if evolution is a radically contingent materialistic process driven by natural selection and random genetic variation, then there can be no place in it for divine providential causality. A growing body of scientific critics of neo-Darwinism point to evidence of design (e.g., biological structures that exhibit specified complexity) that, in their view, cannot be explained in terms of a purely contingent process and that neo-Darwinians have ignored or misinterpreted. The nub of this currently lively disagreement involves scientific observation and generalization concerning whether the available data support inferences of design or chance, and cannot be settled by theology. But it is important to note that, according to the Catholic understanding of divine causality, true contingency in the created order is not incompatible with a purposeful divine providence. Divine causality and created causality radically differ in kind and not only in degree. Thus, even the outcome of a truly contingent natural process can nonetheless fall within God’s providential plan for creation. According to St. Thomas Aquinas: “The effect of divine providence is not only that things should happen somehow, but that they should happen either by necessity or by contingency. Therefore, whatsoever divine providence ordains to happen infallibly and of necessity happens infallibly and of necessity; and that happens from contingency, which the divine providence conceives to happen from contingency” (Summa theologiae, I, 22,4 ad 1). In the Catholic perspective, neo-Darwinians who adduce random genetic variation and natural selection as evidence that the process of evolution is absolutely unguided are straying beyond what can be demonstrated by science. Divine causality can be active in a process that is both contingent and guided. Any evolutionary mechanism that is contingent can only be contingent because God made it so. An unguided evolutionary process – one that falls outside the bounds of divine providence – simply cannot exist because “the causality of God, Who is the first agent, extends to all being, not only as to constituent principles of species, but also as to the individualizing principles....It necessarily follows that all things, inasmuch as they participate in existence, must likewise be subject to divine providence” (Summa theologiae I, 22, 2). [source:] Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God" The theme of “man created in the image of God” was submitted for study to the International Theological Commission. The preparation of this study was entrusted to a subcommission whose members included: Very Rev. J. Augustine Di Noia, O.P., Most Reverend Jean-Louis Bruguès, Msgr. Anton Strukelj, Rev. Tanios Bou Mansour, O.L.M., Rev. Adolpe Gesché, Most Reverend Willem Jacobus Eijk, Rev. Fadel Sidarouss, S.J., and Rev. Shun ichi Takayanagi, S.J. As the text developed, it was discussed at numerous meetings of the subcommission and several plenary sessions of the International Theological Commission held at Rome during the period 2000-2002. The present text was approved in forma specifica, by the written ballots of the International Theological Commission. It was then submitted to Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the President of the Commission, who has give his permission for its publication.

Conclusion

This could, of course, be easily misread by anxious fundamentalists to imply that science must be kept from making statements that apparently contradict the Bible, but that's not what it means, and that is not the tradition of the Church in its hermeneutics, either.

Rather, the self-assured response begins with the assertion that "truth cannot contradict truth", and moves on from there to examine any apparent contradictions. That is, the Church accepts scientific truth, just as it believes in the revealed truth of the Bible and asserts that if the two appear to contradict each other, the most likely explanation is that the human mind that sees the apparent contradiction has fallen short in its understanding.

Notes

1. ^ "Modern History Sourcebook: Index librorum prohibitorum, 1557-1966".
2. ^ John Paul II, "Truth Cannot Contradict Truth", address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on 22 October 1996.
3. ^ John Paul II, "Our knowledge of God and nature: physics, philosophy and theology", Letter "To the Reverend George V. Coyne, S.J., Director of the Vatican Observatory", date 1 June 1988, originally published in L'Osservatore Romano (Weekly edition in English), xxi:46 (1064), 14 November 1988.
4. ^ Pius X, "Pascendi Dominici Gregis" ("On the Doctrine of the Modernists"), 8 September 1907.
5. ^ The reference in the original was: "Leo XIII, allocution of March 7, 1880."
6. ^ ibid.

Sources

• George V. Coyne, "From the Director", The Vatican Observatory: 2000 Annual Report, 10 April 2001.
• Doug Linder, "The Vatican's View of Evolution: The Story of Two Popes", 2004.
• Keelin McDonell, "What Catholics Think of Evolution: They don't not believe in it.", Slate, 12 July 2005.