As I surveyed how the land was slowly growing in beauty and in in its ability to serve our needs, I couldn’t help to think of Eden. How beautiful it must have been to work in God’s garden with perfect knowledge of Creation. Adam & Eve knew where to plant each plant so that it would best serve humanity and Creation. They worked with nature instead of against her, cooperating with God’s Creative Power to participate in His Divine Life. How sweet the fruit of their labor must have tasted!

Even in this fallen world, we are still invited to participate in God’s Creative Power to complete and perfect creation. The difference is that now we have to overcome a fallen world. Our relationship with creation has been damaged by sin. Our knowledge about creation is also clouded. Most of the time I have no idea if I’m doing the right thing to make my plants grow. I am now facing a suddenly shortened growing period. It’s frustrating sometimes, but mostly gardening is a beautiful reminder of God’s invitation to participate in His love expressed through creation.

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

However, Bush’s open-mindedness has its critics. The Boston Globe article quotes the following statement from the National Academy of Sciences: “‘The claim that equity demands balanced treatment of evolutionary theory and special creation in science classrooms reflects a misunderstanding of what science is and how it is conducted,’ the academy said in a 1999 assessment. ‘Creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science.’” This statement is technically accurate, but it betrays the loss of a true conception of science. The reason this debate is even occurring in public schools is because public schools are built on the philosophies of the Enlightenment and, increasingly, Modernism. Contrary to popular belief, science does not have its origins in the Enlightenment. Rather, the origins of science can be found in the Catholic conceptualization of the world, and indeed in Catholic history. That is why such a debate in a Catholic school would be ridiculous.

“Bush endorses ‘intelligent design’” contends theory should be taught with evolution” by Ron Hutcheson, Knight Ridder. Boston Globe August 2, 2005.

Let’s take a closer look at this debate, then see why you don’t (or at least shouldn’t) hear it in Catholic schools. The National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science both support the idea that supernatural intervention in the creation of life is not provable by science, and therefore should not be presented in high schools as science. We can agree with this statement for the most part. Science is the study of the tangible world, using tools of sense perception and measurement. God cannot be perceived by the senses and so science cannot directly prove or disprove anything about Him. However, while this statement is technically accurate, it is also insufficient for two reasons.

1. First, science is not the only method at our disposal for knowing truth. The Enlightenment did not create science, as is commonly believed, but it did isolate science from the other paths to truth. Before the Enlightenment, scientific exploration occurred hand-in-hand with philosophical and theological investigation. The Enlightenment judged theology as an unreliable tool for knowing truth, based solely on opinion. Modernism threw out Aristotelian philosophy, claiming that it was based on premises that could not be proven. Neither of these judgments is fair. Theology and philosophy are strict disciplines that are extremely useful in pondering truth. The only “problem” is that these disciplines help us to ponder truths about aspects of the world that are not tangible and measurable, so they are less acceptable to people who believe only what their eyes can see. However, does it take much to prove that there is more to this life than can be detected by the physical senses? Moreover, philosophy and theology provide theories (and the tools to test those theories) about how the scientific facts fit together, what they mean, and why they are significant. Without such an exercise, science can do no more than present us with meaningless digits of information. In the exploration of creation, ignoring philosophy and theology would be foolhardy. No, supernatural considerations are not science. But they are valid approaches to the discovery of truth.
2. Second, there seems to be an assumption that only provable science is taught in high school science classrooms today. This assumption is disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst. The Boston Globe article states the common misconception that the theory of evolution was “first articulated by British naturalist Charles Darwin in 1859.” This is not accurate. In fact, Saint Augustine talked about creation as an act of God that slowly unfolded in history. He was probably not the first to do so. What was articulated by Charles Darwin was the atheistic notion of natural selection, the idea that evolutionary changes were passed through history by a process of mutation and competition for survival, all without the guiding hand of a Creator. While evolution and genetic mutation can be studied and measured by science, natural selection cannot. Even to the extent that it can, the claim that no Creator guided the process can be proven by science no more than the claim that Creation had supernatural origins. So, science classes are already teaching unscientific beliefs. Make no mistake about it, atheistic natural selection, known as Darwinism, is being taught in our schools. Look at any of a number of science videos for proof, or read a Biology textbook.

Of course, President Bush’s statement is not above reproach either. Don’t get me wrong, I am all for a multiplicity of ideas being presented to high school students. However, before we do that, we really need to give high school students the tools they need to analyze various theories and to judge where the truth lies. In other words, we need to teach high school students how to think. This is not a focus in public schools. Unfortunately, President Bush’s educational policies, which emphasize standardized testing, do not promote teaching students how to think either. Until students are taught how to think critically about various theories, to judge their strengths and weaknesses, presenting them with multiple theories does nothing more than cause them to despair that truth can ever be known. Of course, this is an outcome that Modernists and Post-Modernists would applaud, but most Americans don’t want tax dollars paying for schools that do nothing but confuse our children.

Why should this debate be foreign to a Catholic school? The immediate sardonic response would be that Catholic schools can get away with brainwashing students with propaganda, and therefore do not have to teach evolution at all. Catholic high schools do teach evolution. However, if a Catholic school is true to Catholic intellectual tradition, it does not isolate science from philosophy or theology. So, while students are learning the scientific facts about the origins of life, they are also learning critical thinking so they can explore the various philosophies that try to explain how the scientific facts fit together and what they mean. Catholics have nothing to fear from the truth. All truth comes from God, and therefore all authentic exploration of truth leads to God. Catholic schools should explore science, philosophy, and theology with the sole objective of discerning the truth. If Catholic schools were to do that, we would be able to offer the world a solution to this tired debate.

In the love of Christ,

Brother Thomas

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The first step to answering this question is to realize that the “Image of God” does not refer to a physical resemblance, or to appearance of any kind. God the Father does not have a physical body. Neither does God the Holy Spirit. God the Son did not have a body when human beings were created in God’s image. This is no small point. The belief that the Image of God is a physical resemblance has the potential to lead to all sorts of problems. For example, which race is most completely in God’s Image? Are women less in God’s Image because we refer to God in male terms? Are people with physical disabilities less in the Image of God because they lack the completeness of physical health? The fact is that all of humanity is created in the Image of God. God’s Image is instilled within our very nature.

There are three basic elements of human nature that are specifically in God’s Image. Two of these elements are faculties, potentials for specific abilities that are endowed by virtue of the human soul. No matter how well these faculties are actuated through our physical bodies, they invariably exist within the soul of every human being. The first such faculty is the intellect. The intellect is the human faculty to think in spiritual ways. The ability to think about abstract ideas, the ability to ponder mysteries of the spiritual world, and ultimately the ability to ponder the true essence of existence are all abilities that arise from the intellect. Before the Fall, when we lost the Likeness of God (but retained His Image), we were able learn easily and readily, without limit, all of God’s Truth. Such powers reflect the omniscience of God. The second faculty given to us in the Image of God is the will. The will allows us to choose freely. This free choice gives us the power to create who we become. Our choices help to create our character, and ultimately our destinies. Before the Fall, our wills were perfectly free, meaning that we were able to unfailingly choose the best possible good in every situation. This power reflects God’s omnipotence. Finally, humankind is meant to live in relationships of love with each other, in reflection of the relationship of Divine Love inherent in the Holy Trinity. Just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit exist together in a unity of perfect self-giving to each other, human beings are meant to give themselves as gifts to one another. This is evident from the very beginning, in the book of Genesis. The only time God says that something is not good in the stories of creation is “It is not good that man should be alone.” Why is this not good? It’s not good, not only because Adam was lonely, but also because he was not a true Image of God by himself. God created Eve so that Adam could Image God’s Trinitarian love. This reflection of Trinitarian love is most completely seen in the marital relationship. However, Christ reveals definitively that our love is to be universal. We are to love our neighbor, and even our enemy. We are to love them as Christ loved us, being willing to give our very lives for them. Christ reaffirms the special character of marriage (and thus the Church receives marriage as a sacrament), but also calls all of us to share this love with everyone else.

Why is it so important that human beings be created in the Image of God? One answer is to make God’s full glory present to the physical, visible world. However, human beings are more than just art pieces expressing God’s presence. We are created to live in relationship with God. The Imago Dei (Latin for Image of God) is an inherent part of the original covenant. God’s entire creation is His gift to humanity – His love and beneficence given to us in ways that our nature as human beings can readily receive. The intellect and will are created in the Image of God precisely to allow us to receive the greatest gifts that God wants to offer us. God’s omniscience is not simply (as is commonly assumed) that God knows everything. It is much greater than that. What God “knows” actually becomes reality. God’s omniscience creates truth, which He offers to us. The human intellect is our ability to receive God’s truth. In the same way, God’s omnipotence is His power to create goodness. The human will is our ability to receive his goodness, to freely choose it. The Imago Dei is human nature’s ability to be the receivers of God’s love, truth, and goodness within the covenant.

God does not want us to be passive receivers of His love, truth, and goodness either. He wants us to use what He gives us in order to participate in His very life. God wants us to cooperate with Him. When we work, we receive God’s goodness, truth, and love, and cooperate with His power of creation to make part of our world better for others. God calls us to love our neighbor so that we can use the love He gives to us in order to cooperate with Him in showing His love to others.

Yes, sin and ignorance make our ability to reflect, receive, and cooperate with God’s love imperfect. However, the grace won for us by Christ’s death and resurrection makes it possible for us to exercise the Imago Dei. Christ’s grace also helps us to begin the healing process of our souls so that we can regain the likeness of God.
That means that the Imago Dei is not passive. We must live it out every day. Holiness means gaining that healing, striving toward that perfection, and cooperating with God so that the Imago Dei He placed in our souls can shine forth His glory.

In the love of Christ,

Brother Thomas

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.