God and universe are grand concepts we try to grasp

Last month, a federal court judge ruled as unconstitutional the Dover, Pennsylvania, school board's policy to mandate the introduction of "intelligent design" into ninth-grade biology classes.

The judge noted that intelligent design, as defined by the school board, was really an effort to introduce the religious doctrine of creationism (namely, the biblical account found in the Book of Genesis that God created the world in six days) into the science curriculum.

This court ruling, coupled with the debate accompanying it, has prompted many people to ask where the Catholic Church stands on this issue.

Evolution

The controversy stems from the theory of evolution proposed by Charles Darwin in 1859 in his revolutionary work, "On the Origin of the Species." This theory -- that complex organisms evolve from simpler ones -- enjoys overwhelming support within the scientific community as the best scientific explanation for the development of the universe.

While some maintain that evolution is not a fact but only a theory, such a position fails to appreciate that a scientific theory is not a mere hunch, but a model that has endured scrutiny under scientific method, even if it fails to supply all the answers.

Others maintain that the universe and its organisms are so complex that they could only be set in motion by an intelligent designer. Those proponents do not deny the existence of the evolutionary process, but they argue -- much as St. Paul, St. Thomas Aquinas and other Christian philosophers have done -- that the complexity, the splendor and the purposiveness of the process and its products point to the existence of an intelligent cause that designed it all.

More to know

The key to understanding this issue is whether the science-based view of evolution, valid as it may be, is the only way to understand life and its origins.

As the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stated in its 2004 document, "Communion and Stewardship," scientists may debate whether life's development is best explained by intelligent design or by random mutation and natural selection.

That is not an argument theology can settle. God's providence in the world is consistent with either hypothesis.

Papal views

In a much-quoted 1996 comment, Pope John Paul II stated: "New knowledge leads to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis."

But, as a scientific hypothesis, it doesn't say everything which needs to be said.

In other words, as one of John Paul's predecessors, Pius XII, pointed out in his encyclical, "Humani Generis," while the evolutionary theory can be valid to understand certain mechanisms, it can never be seen or accepted as a holistic model to explain the existence of life.

Creation

That is why the origin of the world is one area where scientists, philosophers and theologians must recognize the limits of their own disciplines.

For example, when a scientist refers to evolution as "random," it means that, empirically, evolution's outcome is unpredictable. For a philosopher or theologian, however, that term may mean "without purpose or design."

The Church can accept the former definition (scientific facts about the origin and development of organic life), but certainly not the latter: namely, evolutionism as an ideological system that sees pure chance as the only force in the universe.

How and why

In the final analysis, there need not be a war between religion and science. Both seek truth, but in different ways. One seeks to answer the "who" and "why" questions through faith; the other addresses the "how" through scientific inquiry.

For the dialogue between religion and science to be fruitful, each must respect the limits of its own competence. As Cardinal Paul Poupard of the Pontifical Council for Culture warns, science decoupled from ultimate values can be destructive, as the development of nuclear weapons and human cloning underscores, whereas religion divorced from reason and scientific inquiry runs the risk of ending in fundamentalism.

A Christian believer may say God is maker of heaven and earth. That is a theological affirmation, not a scientific proposition. Evolution is how God does it. That is a scientific statement.

These theological and scientific assertions need not be in conflict with each other as long as neither oversteps its boundaries.

The scientific method cannot establish or disprove the existence of God; nor can philosophy or theology ignore or discount the insights of science about the age of the universe, its evolutionary nature, and the physical, chemical and biological dynamics that have led to its growth and development.

Co-ordinates

Hence, a scientific evolutionary theory drawing upon mathematics, physics and geology, and a religious/philosophical theory, taking into account the wisdom of Scripture studies, theology, philosophy, anthropology, culture and history, are not alternates but co-ordinates.

Public schools then, need not ignore the issue of intelligent design. That theory can be discussed in social studies, humanities or comparative religion courses.

Also, evolution can be challenged or criticized in science classes -- but based upon scientific data, not religious tenets.

Insights

A recent essay in The Tablet (a Catholic magazine in England), authored by Rev. George Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, and the somewhat surprising theological conclusion he draws from well documented scientific research help me put this whole issue of the complexity and magnitude of creation's origins into perspective.

I hope you will find his observations enlightening, or at least provocative.

To assist in appreciating the immensity of the process of creation, Father Coyle suggests that the actual age of the universe, estimated at 13.5 billion years, be reduced in our imagination to one earth year (one rotation of the earth around the sun). In his analysis, the following calendar results:

* 1 January: the Big Bang;

* 7 February: the Milky Way is born;

* 14 August: the Earth is born;

* 4 September: first life on Earth;

* 15 December: the Cambrian explosion;

* 25 December: dinosaurs appear;

* 30 December: extinction of the dinosaurs;

* 31 December, 19.00 (that is, 7 p.m.), first human ancestors; 23.58 (11:58 p.m.), first humans; 23.59.30, age of agriculture; 23.59.47, the pyramids; 23.59.58, Jesus Christ is born; 23.59.59, Galileo is born; 24.00 (midnight), today.

Perspectives

We see that:

* the dinosaurs, although having the good fortune to have been born on Christmas Day, lived for only five days;

* it took 60 per cent of the age of the universe for the first life to appear on the Earth;

* once the Earth was formed, it took only 21 days or about six per cent of the age of the universe for life to appear; and

* then it took about three months for the first humans.

The last day of the year provides startling news: Jesus Christ was born only two seconds before the end of the year; and Galileo, one second.

We now have some idea of where we humans stand with respect to the age of the universe.

Needing God?

How are we to interpret this scientific picture of life's origins in terms of religious belief? Do we need God to explain this? Very succinctly, my answer is no. In fact, to need God would be a very denial of God. God is not the response to a need.

One gets the impression from certain religious believers that they fondly hope for the durability of certain gaps in our scientific knowledge of evolution, so that they can fill them with God.

That is the exact opposite of what human intelligence is all about. We should not need God; we should accept Him when He comes to us.

Creator God

But the personal God I have described is also God, the creator of the universe. It is unfortunate that, especially in America, "creationism" has come to mean some fundamentalistic, literal, scientific interpretation of Genesis.

Judaic-Christian faith is radically creationist, but in a totally different sense. It is rooted in a belief that everything depends upon God, or, better, all is a gift from God.

The universe is not God, and it cannot exist independently of God. Neither pantheism nor naturalism is true. God is working with the universe.

Vitality

The universe has a certain vitality of its own, as a child does. It has the ability to respond to words of endearment and encouragement. You discipline a child, but you try to preserve and enrich the individual character of the child and its own passion for life. A parent must allow the child to grow into adulthood, to come to make its own choices, to go on its own way in life.

Words that give life are richer than mere commands or information. In such wise ways does God deal with the universe -- the infinite, ever-expanding universe.

That is why, it seems to me, that the Intelligent Design Movement, a largely American phenomenon, diminishes God and makes Him a designer rather than a lover.

Happy New Year -- and happy thinking!

(Search for Father Coyne's article at www.thetablet.co.uk.)

(1/5/06) [[In-content Ad]]