I would like to thank all of you who responded with creative ideas
about what one could do to make science exhibits more engaging to the public. A
long-term effort (of almost geologic time scale proportions) will be required
to keep setting the record straight and to keep informing people what evolution
is all about.
With regard to the position of the
Thanks
Dirk Van Tuerenhout
" MESSAGE TO
Magisterium
is concerned with question of evolution, for it involves conception of man
“Man is called to enter into a relationship of
knowledge and love with God himself, a relationship which will find its
complete fulfilment beyond time, in eternity. All the depth and grandeur of
this vocation are revealed to us in the mystery of the risen Christ (cf.
Gaudium et spes, n. 22). It is by virtue of his spiritual soul that the whole
person possesses such a dignity even in his body. Pius XII stressed this
essential point: if the human body takes its origin from pre-existent living
matter, the spiritual soul is immediately created by God”, the Holy
Father said in a Message to the members of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences
who had gathered in the Vatican for their plenary assembly. The focus of the
Pope's reflections was the relationship between Revelation and theories of
evolution. Here is a translation of his Message, which was written in French
and dated 22 October.
To the Members of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences taking
part in the Plenary Assembly
With great pleasure I address cordial greetings to you, Mr
President, and to all of you who constitute the Pontifical Academy of Sciences,
on the occasion of your plenary assembly. I offer my best wishes in particular
to the new academicians, who have come to take part in your work for the
first time. I would also like to remember the academicians who died during the
past year, whom I commend to the Lord of life.
1. In celebrating the 60th anniversary of the
Academy’s refoundation, I would like to recall the intentions of my
predecessor Pius XI, who wished to surround himself with a select group of
scholars, relying on them to inform the Holy See in complete freedom about
developments in scientific research, and thereby to assist him in his
reflections.
He asked those whom he called the Church's Senatus
scientificus to serve the truth. I again extend this same invitation to you
today, certain that we will all be able to profit from the fruitfulness of a
trustful dialogue between the Church and science (cf. Address to the Academy of
Sciences, n. 1, 28 October 1986; L’Osservatore Romano English
edition, 24 November 1986, p. 22).
Science at the
dawn of the third millennium
2. I am pleased with the first theme you have chosen, that
of the origins of life and evolution, an essential subject which deeply
interests the Church, since Revelation, for its part, contains teaching
concerning the nature and origins of man. How do the conclusions reached by the
various scientific disciplines coincide with those contained in the message of
Revelation? 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). Moreover, to
shed greater light on historical truth, your research on the Church’s
relations with science between the 16th and 18th centuries is of great importance.
During this plenary session, you are undertaking a
“reflection on science at the dawn of the third millennium”,
starting with the identification of the principal problems created by the
sciences and which affect humanity’s future. With this step you point the
way to solutions which will be beneficial to the whole human community. In the
domain of inanimate and animate nature, the evolution of science and its
applications gives rise to new questions. The better the Church's knowledge is
of their essential aspects, the more she will understand their impact.
Consequently, in accordance with her specific mission she will be able to offer
criteria for discerning the moral conduct required of all human beings in view
of their integral salvation.
3. Before offering you several reflections that more
specifically concern the subject of the origin of life and its evolution, I
would like to remind you that the Magisterium of the Church has already
made pronouncements on these matters within the framework of her own competence.
I will cite here two interventions.
In his Encyclical
Humani generis (1950), my predecessor Pius XII had already stated that there
was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith about man and
his vocation, on condition that one did not lose sight of several indisputable
points
(cf. AAS 42 [1950], pp. 575-576). [Emphasis added.]
For my part, when I received those taking part in your
Academy’s plenary assembly on 31 October 1992, I had the opportunity,
with regard to Galileo, to draw attention to the need of a rigorous hermeneutic
for the correct interpretation of the inspired word. It is necessary to
determine the proper sense of Scripture, while avoiding any unwarranted
interpretations that make it say what it does not intend to say. In order to delineate
the field of their own study, the exegete and the theologian must keep informed
about the results achieved by the natural sciences (cf. AAS 85 [1993], pp.
764-772; Address to the Pontifical Biblical Commission, 23 April 1993,
announcing the document on The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church: AAS
86 [1994] pp. 232-243).
Evolution and
the Church's Magisterium
4. Taking into account the state of scientific research at
the time as well as of the requirements of theology, the Encyclical
Humani generis considered the doctrine of “evolutionism” a serious
hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the
opposing hypothesis. Pius XII added two methodological conditions: that this
opinion should not be adopted as though it were a certain, proven doctrine and
as though one could totally prescind from Revelation with regard to the
questions it raises. He also spelled out the condition on which this opinion
would be compatible with the Christian faith, a point to which I will return.
Today, almost half a century after the publication of the
Encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of more than one
hypothesis in the theory of evolution. 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 favour of this theory.
What is the significance of such a theory? To address this
question is to enter the field of epistemology. A theory is a metascientific
elaboration, distinct from the results of observation but consistent with them.
By means of it a series of independent data and facts can be related and
interpreted in a unified explanation. A theory's validity depends on whether or
not it can be verified; it is constantly tested against the facts; wherever it
can no longer explain the latter, it shows its limitations and unsuitability. It
must then be rethought.
Furthermore, while the formulation of a theory like that of
evolution complies with the need for consistency with the observed data, it
borrows certain notions from natural philosophy.
And, to tell the truth, rather than the theory of evolution,
we should speak of several theories of evolution. On the one hand, this
plurality has to do with the different explanations advanced for the mechanism
of evolution, and on the other, with the various philosophies on which it is
based. Hence the existence of materialist, reductionist and spiritualist
interpretations. What is to be decided here is the true role of philosophy and,
beyond it, of theology.
5. The Church’s Magisterium is directly concerned with
the question of evolution, for it involves the conception of man: Revelation
teaches us that he was created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gn
1:27-29). The conciliar Constitution Gaudium et spes has magnificently
explained this doctrine, which is pivotal to Christian thought. It recalled
that man is “the only creature on earth that God has wanted for its own
sake” (n. 24). In other terms, the human individual cannot be
subordinated as a pure means or a pure instrument, either to the species or to
society; he has value per se. He is a person. With his intellect and his will,
he is capable of forming a relationship of communion, solidarity and
self-giving with his peers.
Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance
with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the mind as emerging from the
forces of living matter, or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter, are
incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to ground the dignity
of the person.
6. With man, then, we find ourselves in the presence of an
ontological difference, an ontological leap, one could say. However, does not
the posing of such ontological discontinuity run counter to that physical
continuity which seems to be the main thread of research into evolution in the
field of physics and chemistry? Consideration of the method used in the various
branches of knowledge makes it possible to reconcile two points of view which
would seem irreconcilable. The sciences of observation describe and measure the
multiple manifestations of life with increasing precision and correlate them
with the time line. The moment of transition to the spiritual cannot be the
object of this kind of observation, which nevertheless can discover at the
experimental level a series of very valuable signs indicating what is specific
to the human being. But the experience of metaphysical knowledge, of
self-awareness and self-reflection, of moral conscience, freedom, or again, of
aesthetic and religious experience, falls within the competence of
philosophical analysis and reflection, while theology brings out its ultimate
meaning according to the Creator’s plans.
We are called
to enter eternal life
7. In conclusion, I would like to call to mind a Gospel
truth which can shed a higher light on the horizon of your research into the
origins and unfolding of living matter. The Bible in fact bears an
extraordinary message of life. It gives us a wise vision of life inasmuch as it
describes the loftiest forms of existence. This vision guided me in the
Encyclical which I dedicated to respect for human life, and which I called
precisely Evangelium vitae.
It is significant that in
To warn us against the serious temptations threatening us,
our Lord quotes the great saying of Deuteronomy: “Man shall not live by
bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Dt
8:3; cf. Mt 4:4).
Even more, “life” is one of the most beautiful
titles which the Bible attributes to God. He is the living God.
I cordially invoke an abundance of divine blessings upon you
and upon all who are close to you.
From the