Mike Hartigan took me for a Protestant

Mike Hartigan took me for a Protestant · I don't take Francis Marsden for a Catholic · Mutually Small Respect with Susan Kelly · Mikey Clarke Thinks YEC is American Protestants Only, Austin Middleton That Heliocentrism was Proven by Parallax (or he thought so, at least) · Own Answer, Same Question

Mike Hartigan

Fri

Code Monkey (1979–present)

The pope now accepts evolution. What consequences will follow? I see the universe and us created in 6 days will now come under question and the consequences from this acceptance being the collapse of faith?

The Pope now accepts evolution.

Given that evolution is not inconsistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church, I fail to see why you think there will be consequences or a ‘collapse of faith.’ Genesis spoke of evolution thousands of years before Darwin was born. This isn’t new.

FYI, the Catholic Church doesn’t subscribe to a literal interpretation of the 6 day thing. You may try reading a little more.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Sun

“the Catholic Church doesn’t subscribe to a literal interpretation of the 6 day thing”

Since when?

Mike Hartigan

22h ago

Since forever. Keep in mind we're talking specifically about the Catholic Church (the largest Christian denomination in the world, FWIW). I can't speak for other Christian denominations. Catholics are not fundamentalists. We teach that much of the Old Testament is allegorical — the 6 day thing, for example.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“Since forever.”

Forever meaning since you went to catechism after Vatican II?

“Catholics are not fundamentalists.”

Someone forgot to hand Sts Robert Bellarmine and Thomas Aquinas, not to mention Augustine of Hippo that memo?

“We teach that much of the Old Testament is allegorical”

St Thomas taught all of OT history was literal truth and all of it was allegorical.

Littera gesta docet, quid credas allegoria
Moralis quid agas, quo tendas anagogia.

Not his words, but a seminary saying from his time.

Mike Hartigan

2m ago

If you need to mischaracterize the teachings of the Catholic Church to make a point, then it's probably not a point worth making.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

I’d say you are mischaracterising the historical teachings of the Catholic Church by believing they are identic to your modernist catechist’s teaching.

Update

next day.

Mike Hartigan

21h ago

As you wish to believe. I'm not inclined to defend a position l that I didn't take* — specifically, the fundamentalism thing. If you want to debate that issue, you'll need to find someone who doesn't understand the Catholic Church's teachings on that. There are plenty of atheists on Quora who will be more than happy to engage.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

You are the one not understanding the Catholic Church’s teaching on that. Unless you mischaracterise the Vatican II Sect as the Catholic Church. AND it was not “condemning” Fundamentalism up to the early 90’s. When I converted in 88, I had been told I didn’t need to be a Fundie, not that I couldn’t be.

* Did he imagine I attributed to him the statement that the proper Catholic understanding is Fundamentalist? I never stated I took him for St Augustine or St. Thomas Aquinas! Ah, he did. Here is an update the day after above:

Mike Hartigan

21h ago

I'm not going to defend a fundamentalist position, since, as a Catholic, I'm not a fundamentalist. You can believe in a 6,000 year old earth and a universe that was built in 6 days, if you like. I'm not going to change your mind, nor have I been trying to. I only ask that you show me the same courtesy.

Bottom line is that the teachings of the Catholic Church don't contradict Darwin, and vice-versa, so there's no crisis of faith resulting from the Pope's words on that subject.

With that, this conversation is over.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

1:28 pm

From your side.

“I'm not going to defend a fundamentalist position”

I wasn’t asking you to.

“as a Catholic, I'm not a fundamentalist.”

That’s what I am challenging you to defend from Catholic magisterium prior to 1990’s.

“Bottom line is that the teachings of the Catholic Church don't contradict Darwin,”

That so called bottom line is also what I am attacking and by implication asking you to defend if you like.

Neither need to “try to change” the other’s “mind” - more like sparring.

It is distinctly discourteous of you to pretend I challenged you to something I didn’t and pretend to represent the Catholic position when I am pretending to be precisely Catholic. It is distinctly discourteous of you to ask me to take that as a final statement which I can’t contradict.

And it’s a bit stupid to think you know the history of the Catholic Church better than a Latinist, with plenty of opportunities to read both St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine. At least if your profile qualifications are not hiding things.