Glad you cleared that up, Pat. I was getting a little frightened that the Catholic church would degenerate further into the sort of lunecy going on with the evangelicals here. Though to be frank, I wouldn't be surprised one bit if the man in the pointy hat start to veer closer in that direction in the coming years.
Nice post, Pat.
The situation with Schoenborn confuses and concerns me a bit. I remember the controversy he caused last year, but I'm not sure exactly what he meant to say. There are often miscommunications between Europeans and Americans on issues like creationism, because they and we use the same words to mean different things. I remember Schoenborn saying that pure neo-Darwinian evolution, meaning an unguided process with no fixed goal, is wrong under Catholic Church doctrine. But I also remember him saying that he didn't agree with Discovery Institute-style intelligent-design creationism. Where the DI says "God did it instead of evolution," the Catholic Church's current position seems to be "God did it using evolution." That's theistic evolution, which is about as pro-science a position as you can reasonably expect from a Christian church.
So just what does the Catholic leadership really think about evolution? I can't tell.
I'm sorry to hear about Rev. Coyne. It sounds as though, whether by choice or force, by his leaving his post that the Vatican has lost a most important voice of reason to temper their dogma.
That the Pope thinks that Schoenborn is the person with which he can have a frank and honest discussion about evolution and the role of Catholicism in Science is more than a little disturbing.
That's theistic evolution, which is about as pro-science a position as you can reasonably expect from a Christian church.
True. But theistic evolution is how the DI portrays its position to a secular audience. And I think that an already uneducated public easily confuses God-driven evolution with irreducible complexity, which is the DI's aim.
Yes, that meeting is disturbing. I don't know anything about Schoenborn, but a friend of mine told me only this weekend that she heard the Pope's name a few years ago at a Catholic youth conference, and asked who he was. One of the nuns whispered to her, "He's that bastard at the Vatican."
Bless Coyne's heart. My thoughts are with him. I hope he's doing well.
I think you all are reading way too much into Benedict's desire to discuss evolution in a symposium that includes Cardinal Schoenborn.
Yes, Schoenborn is confused when it comes to the topic of evolution, but he is a very smart man and a highly respected theologian notwithstanding. His theological insights are therefore of value to the pope. Understanding of evolution isn't some be-all-end-all litmus test of someone's intellectual capabilities, especially if the person isn't a biologist. Someone can be wrong about some aspect of science, but be very right and insightful about some other unrelated discipline, like theology. There's no doubt that this is the case with Schoenborn.
The pope understands this, and I seriously doubt he's going to rely upon Schoenborn as his expert on the science of evolution. He's invited some heavyweight mainstream scientists to his symposium, including the president of the Austrian Academy of Scientists. In addition, he hasn't invited a single person who pushes pseudo-scientific criticisms of modern evolutionary theory like those put out by the Discovery Institute and other Creationist groups.
Observatory exit not about evolution:
A recent story in an English tabloid proclaimed that Coyne had been fired for his public criticism of Intelligent Design.
In an e-mail statement sent to "friends" on an Internet mailing list, Funes said the rumors that Coyne was replaced because of his stance on Intelligent Design were "absolutely false." He said Coyne requested in May that church officials in Rome replace him.
"A recent story in an English tabloid proclaimed that Coyne had been fired for his public criticism of Intelligent Design."
Yes, there's been a lot of bad reporting and jumping to unwarranted conclusions lately regarding the Catholic Church. I'm very surprised to see this happening on the pro-evolution blogs. I thought scientists are supposed to carefully evaluate evidence and rule out alternative hypotheses before coming to any conclusions.
Just because Pope Benedict wants to discuss evolution and Creation doesn't mean he's going to endorse ID. Given his earlier writings on the matter, it's very likely he just wants to flesh out the theological implications. Just because a Church official like George Coyne is replaced doesn't mean he's been ousted for his views on evolution or anything else. It just as easily could be an ordinary retirement, and that turns out to be the case. This should be obvious, yet seems beyond some of the militant atheists like PZ Myers.
Commenting by HaloScan
