Tag Archives: Catholic

Evolution

Coinciding nicely with a discussion
about evolution and intelligent design
between Jerry and Theomoroph, here are
two interesting stories.

Evolutionism
and the Limits of Science

Interview With Professor Mariano Artigas (Zenit)

Science marks a key achievement in human history, says a philosopher who nevertheless warns of an “imperialism” that tries to judge everything through the sciences. Mariano Artigas, a member of Brussels’ International Academy of the Philosophy of Sciences and of the Vatican’s St. Thomas Pontifical Academy, has just published a book on evolutionism and its relationship with philosophy and religion. Entitled “The Frontiers of Evolutionism” and published by Eunsa, the book states that there are questions that science cannot resolve. Artigas, a professor of philosophy of nature and of sciences at the University of Navarre, spoke with ZENIT.

Engineering
God in a Petri Dish

By Kari Lynn Dean

On a steep, narrow street above Chinatown works Jonathon Keats, a tweed-suited, bow-tied 32-year-old who, with assistance from a phalanx of scientists, is genetically engineering God in his apartment. Advisers to Keats’ organization, the International Association for Divine Taxonomy, include biochemists, biophysicists, ecologists, geneticists and zoologists from the University of California at Berkeley, the Smithsonian and other institutions of scientific repute. The mission: to determine where on the phylogenetic map — the scientific tree of life — to put God.

Engaged Encounter Part II: Three to Get Married?

The first Catholic Engaged Encounter (CEE) weekend was given in Detroit in 1974 with the aide of the Marriage Encounter Resource Community. In 1975 CEE became a self-sustaining National Ministry. CEE has had astonishing growth throughout our country and also throughout the world. CEE is now taking place in more than 30 countries around the world. It has become the rpeferred Marriage Preparation Program for the Catholic Church, and today many other Christian denominations also offer Engaged Encounter programs. Engaged Encounter teams are all volunteers.

Earlier this month, my fiance and I attended a Catholic Engaged Encounter weekend. I've already written about the site and the Masses. This part is about the content.

Continue reading

Catholic Carnival, Where Art Thou?

Why is there no Catholic carnival? Jollyblogger, a nice guy and a good
blogger, is organizing a Carnival of the Reformation. We need a
Carnival of the Counter-reformation! I don’t mean that in a spiteful
“me too” way. Carnivals are an excellent way to share ideas and promote
blogs.

From what I’ve seen in the blogosphere, the Protestants are beating the
pants off us. We’re fewer in number. We spend more time knocking each
other or the Church than defending the Faith. We are barely computer
literate, and in some cases borderline luddite. Where has “the new
evangelization” JP2 called for gone? Apparently not very far.

Conversations on the Catechism: “I Believe” – “We Believe”

"There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church, which is, of course, quite a different thing." – Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

A recent post by Jollyblogger got me thinking. He’s trying to start a League of Reformed Bloggers with an eventual Carnival of the Reformed. I’ve seen a few "merely" Christian and Protestant carnivals. I haven’t seen any Catholic carnivals. Does anyone know of one? Maybe someone within St. Blog’s could organize one (I wouldn’t have a clue where to start.).

Anyhow, I’d like get people to discuss the broader issues of Catholicism (as opposed to gluten-free wafers). In particular, I’d like to invite my Protestant readers to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. To those ends, I’m going to write posts that highlight sections of the Catechism. This will be the first.

I invite all of my Christian readers to read Part One, Section One: "I Believe" – "We Believe" (paragraphs 26 through 184). What statements do you agree with? What parts would you disagree with? Why?