Pope says Big Bang and Evolution are real

[dragon]

Bet this is going to piss a lot of people off.

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis has waded into the controversial debate over the origins of human life, saying the big bang theory did not contradict the role of a divine creator, but even required it.

The pope was addressing the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which gathered Monday at the Vatican to discuss "Evolving Concepts of Nature."

"When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so," Francis said.

"He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment."

Francis said the beginning of the world was not "a work of chaos" but created from a principle of love. He said sometimes competing beliefs in creation and evolution could co-exist.

Pope Francis tells an audience that the Big Bang does not contradict the "creative intervention of God". He says, "on the contrary, it requires it". Rough Cut (no reporter narration). Newslook

"God is not a divine being or a magician, but the Creator who brought everything to life," the pope said. "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve."

Unlike much of evangelical Protestantism in the U.S., Catholic teaching traditionally has not been at odds with evolution. In 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed there was no opposition between evolution and Catholic doctrine. In 1996, St. John Paul II endorsed Pius' statement.

Some wondered if Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI wanted to change that when he and some acolytes seemed to endorse the theory of intelligent design, the idea that the world is too complex to have evolved according to Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection.

Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn of Vienna, a close associate of Benedict, penned a widely noticed 2005 op-ed in The New York Times that said "Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense — an unguided, unplanned process … is not."

Giovanni Bignami, a professor and president of Italy's National Institute for Astrophysics, welcomed Francis' comments, saying he had buried the "pseudo theories" of creationists.

"The pope's statement is significant," Bignami told Italian news agency Adnkronos. "We are the direct descendants from the Big Bang that created the universe. Evolution came from creation."

Giulio Giorello, professor of the philosophy of science at Milan's University degli Studi, said he believed Francis was "trying to reduce the emotion of dispute or presumed disputes" with science.

Francis made his speech while unveiling a bust in honor of Benedict, his predecessor, at the Vatican.

"Benedict XVI was a great pope: great for the power and penetration of his intellect, great for his significant contribution to theology, great for his love of the church and of human beings, great for his virtue and piety," he said.

link

[Elheru Aran]

Well. Honestly? This is not terribly inconsistent with Catholic or Christian doctrine, depending on your interpretation of the Bible. St. Augustine-- one of the founding fathers of the Church-- stated that a literal creation in 7 days was ridiculous.

Essentially it's a matter of deciding which parts of the Bible you're allowed to take metaphorically and which parts should be literal. It's a surprisingly liberal notion for a Pope to take, though. But I have no problem with it.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the usual amount of American conservative screeching about it, though...

[Dominus Atheos]

I'm just going to leave these here...

+http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rel ... 0170/posts

+http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rel ... 0491/posts

[DaveJB]

I never got the impression that Young-Earth Creationists were especially common among Catholics, anyway. Intelligent Design proponents a little moreso, but they could still probably reconcile the Pope's statements with their beliefs.

[Joun_Lord]

I've had some Christian friends and family members pretty much say the same thing Pope Franky is saying, humans were "intelligently designed" to evolve to our current "God-like image" form by God. God in creating our world wouldn't leave so glaring a hole in our creation as to make us magically pop into existence. Evolution and the Big Bang they say requires God to by catalyst to start it all.

While I don't see the need to inject God in it to make it work I'm not going to complain when people hold that view. They seem to be less anti-science and more open minded then those that are biblical literalists.

[The Romulan Republic]

Not that surprised that Francis would be open to science. Didn't he study chemistry at some point?

[Dalton]

Jesuits have always had an academic tradition.

[Rogue 9]

As the joke goes around the local monastery, you can never tell what a Jesuit's thinking, how much money the Benedictines have, or what the Franciscans are giving up this week. Good on him.

[loomer]

It's a much more impressive God, too, at least in my eyes. I'd rather the craftsman who can create an intricate device where every piece falls into place over cosmic timescales than one who just creates it pre-formed. Self-organizing, self-aware and self-replicating systems are a much trickier thing to build.

[salm]

Why is this news. It even says in the article that the catholic church has been saying this for decades.

[Thanas]

Yeah, only people who are surprised about this are people who think all religions are the same, essentially anti-science. The catholic church has long abandoned that road.

[Irbis]

Pity not in all sciences, though. To be fair, maybe Francis will change course from the one picked by last 2 fossils...

[Borgholio]

The Catholic church has indeed come a long way from the time of Galileo. Hopefully Francis can keep the momentum going.

[ArmorPierce]

Big bang and evolution being real has been the catholic church's stance for a while now. Who is it going to piss off? He is continuing the status quo.

[NecronLord]

The Catholic church has indeed come a long way from the time of Galileo. Hopefully Francis can keep the momentum going.

And a long way before the time of Galileo, at least as regards to science. Even in those days they did not interpret the bible literally. The arrest of Galileo was after all, only after he was commissioned by the pope to produce a book exploring both geocentric and heliocentric theories - which were scientifically competing theories both with valid evidence at the time - by the pope, to teach the new developments in both Copernican and Aristotlean theory.

Then he directly quoted the pope as a character "The Fool" at length in the book the pope was paying for, and generally misused the funds the pope had given him. Whereupon he was invited to dine in various villas, and eventually placed under house arrest as a punishment, never so much as going near a cell or dungeon let alone a torture tool or a torturer; he managed to write two new sciences while he was under arrest after all, he was hardly being racked.

The cavalcade of depravity that can be rightly attributed to the Catholic church is so long that it would take me a day to recite even the examples I know of, but even I'd be pretty peeved off if someone I was paying to write a science textbook inserted me as a character called 'The Idiot' in it and stole my money.

Galileo was a genius. He was also an asshole.

[K. A. Pital]

I fixed a typo in the title, it was a bit irritating.

[streetad]

The whole 'literal truth of the bible' is more of a Protestant thing tbh - and a particular strand of Protestantism at that. And those guys basically think the Pope is the Antichrist anyway....

[Elheru Aran]

The whole 'literal truth of the bible' is more of a Protestant thing tbh - and a particular strand of Protestantism at that. And those guys basically think the Pope is the Antichrist anyway....

Only the extremist offshoots. Anti-Catholicism nowadays is more an issue of theological beliefs (saints, Virgin Mary, confessionals, etc) than anything. Note that 'Protestant' is a pretty wide net to cast and includes Anglicanism (Catholicism without a Pope, just about) all the way down to your snake-handler churches.

In general though, the taking-the-Bible-literally thing is a tad more widespread than you might think. The origins are largely in American evangelical Christian denominations in the mid to late 1800's on, with an added emphasis from the mid-1900's in opposition to what was seen as anti-Christian Communism. These denominations also happen to be some of the most energetically proselyting churches, which mean that they tend to spread out a lot of missionaries. These missionaries, in turn, are generally selected for being the most enthusiastic about their beliefs, and as such they spread it wherever they go. Africa, Asia, South America, you name it.

[Irbis]

And a long way before the time of Galileo, at least as regards to science. Even in those days they did not interpret the bible literally. The arrest of Galileo was after all, only after he was commissioned by the pope to produce a book exploring both geocentric and heliocentric theories - which were scientifically competing theories both with valid evidence at the time - by the pope, to teach the new developments in both Copernican and Aristotlean theory.

I beg your pardon? "Valid"? IIRC when Galileo started promoting heliocentrism Inquisition took note and banned Copernican works in 1615 placing them on Index. They also warned Galileo that if he won't stop he will be burned at stake. All because Pope's bootlicker astronomers raised semi-valid argument about lack of parallax and his priests said Bible describes Earth as flat, so heliocentrism is pure heresy (which was officially confirmed at his trial later).

And Galileo wasn't even the first victim of prosecution for heliocentrism, Giordano Bruno burned at stake for heretical speech claiming between others Earth is just one of many planets and Sun is just unimportant star. Copernicus himself feared inquisition so much he published De revolutionibus moments before death and despite it still put weasel words into introduction: "this work has nothing to do with reality or the heavens, it just might be a good way to make calculations less complicated". "Valid" indeed..

Then he directly quoted the pope as a character "The Fool" at length in the book the pope was paying for, and generally misused the funds the pope had given him. Whereupon he was invited to dine in various villas, and eventually placed under house arrest as a punishment, never so much as going near a cell or dungeon let alone a torture tool or a torturer; he managed to write two new sciences while he was under arrest after all, he was hardly being racked.

That is not exactly true. Galileo had the book read by Inquisiton to confirm it's kosher. Sadly, his enemies attacked from another angle, and started convincing the Pope the dumber, needed to be convinced person (which at the time was popular form of literature, dialogue, easier to absorb for uneducated people) was the Pope. Just because Pope had the same doubts as book's Simplicius - who was named after a philosopher and not any "Fool". The connection was tenuous at best and Galileo would need to be an idiot to insult boss of the organization he feared his whole life - the only ones supporting it tend to be people defending Pope and/or religion.

House arrest is also wrong. While yes, he wasn't locked in cell, he was put under heavy guard. Said guard included his daughters who were forced earlier to adopt nunhood, which would be rather cruel thing to do, don't you think? But it gets worse, when Galileo contracted eye sickness he was forbidden to go to doctor and locked in home until he went blind. Had this happened with political prisoner today world would be full of howls of outrage. "Merciful" indeed...

Third claim is also suspect. Yes, he redacted two works but these were just refinements of his earlier work. His more important paper, imperfect version of Second law of motion was abandoned. Yes, that's right - had fucking church weren't so blind and backward, Galileo could have solved Newton's equation a century earlier. That's 100 years Church possibly dragged science back just thanks to bruised ego of an asshole surrounded by clackers. Even without it, just banning publishing all Galileo's works for 300 years was incredibly harmful to science in all Catholic countries with active Inquisition.

The cavalcade of depravity that can be rightly attributed to the Catholic church is so long that it would take me a day to recite even the examples I know of, but even I'd be pretty peeved off if someone I was paying to write a science textbook inserted me as a character called 'The Idiot' in it and stole my money.

Mendeleev did the similar to Russian tzars. When priests urged to send him to prison, for bigamy, lack of morals and defraudation, tzar replied "Mendeleev has two wives, yes, but I have only one Mendeleev". When backward feudal/religious despot with more power than Pope ever had shows more common sense than you, maybe, just maybe the problem was in Pope and the church and not in (alleged) Galileo's "crimes" Hell, the Pope was even so petty to deny Galileo burial with honours next to his family organized by secular powers.

No one managed to ever prove Galileo intended the insult, far from it, Galileo's reaction proves it was unexpected and we know obscurantist people on Pope's court tried their best to have Galileo's branded. I also wouldn't give Pope any credit for funding the book, as Galileo needed to gut it after criticism (going so far to deleting any mention of 'tides', in book concerning movement of the water, just because it was proof for heliocentrism) making it nearly useless. In fact, the book alone is best proof just how stupid and ignorant the church was, not testament to its enlightenment.

[NecronLord]

And Galileo wasn't even the first victim of prosecution for heliocentrism, Giordano Bruno burned at stake for heretical speech claiming between others Earth is just one of many planets and Sun is just unimportant star.

Bing, yes.

In case you missed it, the point is that Galileo's suffering is much exaggerated, I categorically did not say that either justice or mercy were served to him. Go and read my post and return when you have found where I said 'merciful' or 'just' were among the things.

This is an immensely better example of oppression.

That is not exactly true. Galileo had the book read by Inquisiton to confirm it's kosher. Sadly, his enemies attacked from another angle, and started convincing the Pope the dumber, needed to be convinced person (which at the time was popular form of literature, dialogue, easier to absorb for uneducated people)

I know, yes, and indeed, such dialogues are quite ancient; it is why I use the comparison to a modern textbook.

was the Pope. Just because Pope had the same doubts as book's Simplicius - who was named after a philosopher and not any "Fool". The connection was tenuous at best and Galileo would need to be an idiot to insult boss of the organization he feared his whole life

Simplicio, which does in fact mean 'The Fool' or very technically 'to 'strike a single root' in Latin though by this time it was closer to its modern english equivalent 'Simpleton' as a name, is supposed to be based on Simplicius, the philosopher.

In any case, that's the point, yes, academic intelligence does not inherently denote political caution. Humans do stupid things every day, to the point that scarcely a day goes by when I don't see a supposedly fully capable adult deliberately choosing to cross a busy road twenty feet away from a traffic light that stands idle.

The idea that Galileo may have done something stupid, it is indeed almost unavoidable, either he was an idiot for deliberately insulting the pope, or he was an idiot for not considering how easily his book could be misread.

House arrest is also wrong. While yes, he wasn't locked in cell, he was put under heavy guard. Said guard included his daughters who were forced earlier to adopt nunhood,

Um, yes, they were forced to become nuns... by Galileo. Galileo dispatched them to the convent in 1610, they became nuns in 1614 and 1615. Two world systems was written in 1632. The pope was powerful.

He was not able to travel back in time.

Galileo was not able to afford a dowry for them as they were illegitimate, and therefore sent them to a convent. By the by, Maria Celeste's letters are horrifying nightmare fuel, and easily one of the most disturbing things about the Catholics; detailing some of the many abuses to which nuns were subjected, including routine starvation.

Also, "It wasn't house arrest, although he was imprisoned in a house, there were guards, that means it's not house arrest" you do understand that's what House Arrest is right? Mandela was under heavy guard too, he was also under House Arrest. House Arrest is not parole.

which would be rather cruel thing to do, don't you think?

But it gets worse, when Galileo contracted eye sickness he was forbidden to go to doctor and locked in home until he went blind. Had this happened with political prisoner today world would be full of howls of outrage. "Merciful" indeed...

I never said merciful, I said exaggerated. Would you like me to link you to quotes of people in the popular conciousness claiming that Galileo was imprisoned in a dungeon, tortured, or even burned at the stake (confusion with the far more obscure Giordano Bruno perhaps?)

Third claim is also suspect. Yes, he redacted two works but these were just refinements of his earlier work. His more important paper, imperfect version of Second law of motion was abandoned. Yes, that's right - had fucking church weren't so blind and backward, Galileo could have solved Newton's equation a century earlier. That's 100 years Church possibly dragged science back just thanks to bruised ego of an asshole surrounded by clackers. Even without it, just banning publishing all Galileo's works for 300 years was incredibly harmful to science in all Catholic countries with active Inquisition.

The cavalcade of depravity that can be rightly attributed to the Catholic church is so long that it would take me a day to recite even the examples I know of, but even I'd be pretty peeved off if someone I was paying to write a science textbook inserted me as a character called 'The Idiot' in it and stole my money.

Mendeleev did the similar to Russian tzars. When priests urged to send him to prison, for bigamy, lack of morals and defraudation, tzar replied "Mendeleev has two wives, yes, but I have only one Mendeleev". When backward feudal/religious despot with more power than Pope ever had shows more common sense than you, maybe, just maybe the problem was in Pope and the church and not in (alleged) Galileo's "crimes"

On the other hand, Mendeleev created explosives for the Tsar to use in his wars, built his logistics, and various other things that had direct, immediate practical use to the Tsar. That quote is referring to Mendeleev's immense utility to the tsar's regime, Galileo, to my knowledge, did not do anything of immediate (military!) use for the pope's regime.

Not to mention the two hundred years between the two.

Hell, the Pope was even so petty to deny Galileo burial with honours next to his family organized by secular powers.

No one managed to ever prove Galileo intended the insult, far from it, Galileo's reaction proves it was unexpected and we know obscurantist people on Pope's court tried their best to have Galileo's branded. I also wouldn't give Pope any credit for funding the book, as Galileo needed to gut it after criticism (going so far to deleting any mention of 'tides', in book concerning movement of the water, just because it was proof for heliocentrism) making it nearly useless.

Have you actually read it? Day IV (the fourth and final section of the book) is all about the tides. It is an excellent and convincing (not that this reader needed any convincing given that heliocentrism is now well established in education) book. It has its wrong steps, notably the claim that it is impossible to fully predict the effect of the moon's motion on the tides, but it is very much there. In no way is the book useless.

The Inquisition censors made him change the title from 'Dialogue on the Tides.'

To spite them, he gave it a comically long official title, something that fills a whole page from which we usually only excerpt 'Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems.'

In fact, the book alone is best proof just how stupid and ignorant the church was, not testament to its enlightenment.

Of course it, or more properly the whole affair. It is however, also proof that they, or at least Urban VIII were at least open to some consideration of heliocentrism.

Of course, the truth is yet more complex; Urban VIII's flirtation with accepting heliocentrism was soon followed by a return to actively promoting geocentrism, however, characterizing it as a period of undiluted geocentrism and ignorance is not wholly accurate either.


When I say that the persecution of Galileo is often exaggerated, I do not mean that he was not persecuted, I mean that the extent of it is overstated by many, you demonstrate my point there, by claiming a level of editing that did not happen, prior to the outright ban at least, and that the Inquisition somehow forced his daughters to become nuns, when in fact they had been nuns for over a decade.