Vatican says no reason to "apologize" to Charles Darwin (salvation, hell)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Vatican says Darwin's theory of evolution is compatible with the Bible, whose creation story is interpreted as an allegory. The Anglican Church had recently decided that it needed to apologize for its treatment of Darwin's scientific work.
I'm ok with skipping the apology to Darwin, I'm just thankful that the Catholic church is acknowledging the reality of evolution. That's a big step forward when you look at their history. Now if only the American Fundamentalists would get on board.
Right. The Vatican has much more resources to employ to investigate the scientific validity of evolution than almost any other Christian organization in the world. That the Vatican isn't interested in attacking evolution is very telling.
The Vatican is acknowledging evolution just by acknowledging a change in their doctorine, not by just by acknowleding the theory. Religion does evolve, which is a great thing, it shows progress. I'm very glad about this, even if they say they don't need to apologize to Darwin, it is
irrelevant.
What I don't understand is if the Catholic Church is willing to adjust its position on evolution in accordance with various scientific findings....and this isn't the first time in history it has happened, for example conceding the theory of heliocentrism and apologizing for how it treated Gallileo....then why is it so unyielding on other scientific findings, such as the possibility (and as every gay person will attest, the reality) that homosexuality is indeed an inborn trait that isn't chosen?
What I don't understand is if the Catholic Church is willing to adjust its position on evolution in accordance with various scientific findings....and this isn't the first time in history it has happened, for example conceding the theory of heliocentrism and apologizing for how it treated Gallileo....then why is it so unyielding on other scientific findings, such as the possibility (and as every gay person will attest, the reality) that homosexuality is indeed an inborn trait that isn't chosen?
I believe they do acknowledge that many people are predisposed to various orientations
I believe they do acknowledge that many people are predisposed to various orientations
Of course you're right, and I did know that. I just didn't correctly say what I wanted to say.
What I meant was if the RCC is willing to accept the scientific evidence and concede that man was created through an evolutionary process - effectively changing a historically held position - why doesn't it change its position on homosexuality and concede that because gays and lesbians don't choose their orientation, they therefore should not be denied personally fulfilling, intimate, sexual relationships within the confines of a monogamous marriage?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.