Updated 12:19 pm.EST, Mon November 23, 2009

Education|Fri, Mar. 06 2009 04:50 PM EST

Darwin Conference Does Not Speak for Vatican, Says Intelligent Design Proponent

By Katherine T. Phan|Christian Post Reporter

A leading intelligent design proponent said Friday that views expressed this week at a Darwin conference in Rome should not be confused with the Vatican's position on intelligent design and Darwinism.

Organizers of the March 3-7 conference, "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories," at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome had declined to invite intelligent design speakers because they felt the theory lacked scientific merit.

Bruce Chapman, president of the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, an intelligent design think tank, said he believes the Pope remains in serious "fruitful dialogue" with intelligent design even though speakers of the conference, sponsored by a Catholic Church-related agency, may be critical of the theory.

"The views of the Pope and views of people holding the conference are not the same," Chapman told The Christian Post on Friday. "A large purpose of this conference was to criticize and trash intelligent design and try to make it seem like it's the Vatican's [point of view]. They are intentionally trying to confuse people."

He added, "Not only is the Papal household keeping its distance from this conference, the Pope has said some things friendly to intelligent design and critical of Darwinism."

The intelligent design proponent said Pope Benedict XVI was critical of evolution as a random process during the first homily he delivered. At his coronation, the Pope said, "We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God."

Chapman, a Roman Catholic himself, emphasized that the conference's sponsor, The Pontifical Council on Culture, is an office of the Vatican but represented neither the Vatican nor the Pope himself.

"Just because someone has money to come to Rome and have a conference doesn't mean they speak for the Catholic Church, anymore than some Committee in the Senate or the House can speak for the United States government," he said.

Moreover, Chapman pointed out that the event was funded by the John Templeton Foundation, which publicly opposes intelligent design.

In an article published Thursday, the Rev. Tomasz Tramfe, an official of the Pontifical Council on Culture and a Templeton representative told the Associated Press that Templeton did not place any restrictions on who was invited to speak.

"They sent us the proposal after they had most of the speakers already. We decided to make the grant in part because it is a really good speakers' list," Paul Wason, director of the Templeton Foundation's science and religion programs, told AP.

Chapman, however, disputed the report, saying he was told by Tramfre in 2007 that it was the Templeton Foundation that prohibited scientists with views supporting intelligent design from speaking at the conference.

The restriction, according to Chapman, prevented intelligent design proponents such as Michael Behe, author of Darwin's Black Box, who is also Catholic, from defending their views at the conference.

Chapman indicated it wasn't fair for organizers of the Darwin conference to allow staunch critics of intelligent design to speak while silencing a pro-ID voice.

"We are calling attention to their hypocrisy," said Chapman. "You can't attack people and not allow them to defend themselves."

In their announcement of the conference last Fall, organizers emphasized that proponents of creationism and intelligent design would not be invited to participate. Continue »

Pages: 12
Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    More anti-Catholic gibberish from believer. He can tie his anti-Catholic bias to any subject matter whether its relevant or not.

    Isa extaq Biblical the best you've got? The Catholic Church has always been more than, solely, the Bible. Since the earliest days of Christianity the Church has maintained the importance of Tradition as an inspired path to knowing God. Without Tradition, there is no Aquinas, no Augustine, no Ignatius. None of the great early Christian thinkers, movers and shakers would be held in the esteem they are today if we stopped looking for revelation from God after the last Gospel was written.

    Extra means something more, something special, a bonus. It is a positive thing to think that God has continued to inspire great and holy men throughout history to this present day. His revelation to us didn't end with Scripture, but is a continuous, ongoing and glorious thing, if we don't blind ourselves to it. .

  • Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:44 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    bryan90new hi
    just one point
    1. gravity does exist in space and throughout the universe

  • Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:56 pm Agree: 7   Disagree: 0

    Why am I not surprised that when the Vatican declares its support for the reality of evolution, someone somewhere has to say that's not what they said. Even though that's exactly what they said.
    Evangelists and apologetics never cease to amuse me.

  • Fri Mar 13, 2009 5:55 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I have always figured,after reading and living history that Man was not related to the monk but the jack...!!!! The wealthy ruling class wants and needs a secular humanistic society to then convince the peasants to buy,buy,buy their trinkets..since this world is all there is..see.its that simple..thats why Jesus was ignored till He whipped the money changers out of the temple.then it was off to Calvary...

  • Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:23 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    I agree with Prof X in the sense that what many claim to be "science" is, in my humble opinion, not as "scientific".

    And I don't believe as well that "science" is objective while religion is subjective.

    The distinction of "true science" in my opinion is the element of "why?"

    "True science" seeks to understand, to reconcile knowledge, to figure things out.

    Kind of like, "Why did the apple fall?" "Gravity? How come gravity doesn't exist in space?" And so forth.

    Evolution is a possible answer to "How did human beings get created." But not wanting to answer the question "Can evolution co-exist with God" and by asserting "Evolution is random and proves that God doesn't exist" is far from "scientific".

    An element of religion is a sort of science in my opinion. At least I treat religion as a sort of science - in trying to understand God, and our relationship with God; reconciling our knowledge with God's intentions.

    In my opinion, it ceases to be science when we stop asking "why?"

  • Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:20 am Agree: 8   Disagree: 0

    Hello t1
    I've re read the article, could you point out the lie's contained in it? I know you won't mind me asking.
    Thanks
    Steve

  • Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:55 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 16

    As usual and as is a part of their tactic, evolutionists have to resort to lies and deception to sell their shrouded snake oil.

  • Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:40 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 10

    The first misconception is that the scientific method is the only reliable means of obtaining knowledge about the world.

    The statement "the scientific method is the only reliable means of obtaining knowledge of the world" is itself a statement which can not be known through the scientific method. By its own standards, then, scientism is a position which must be accepted solely on the basis of blind faith, and one which cannot be known to be true.

    Second, this position is false because it contradicts many things in our own experience. How do you know that you are in love with someone or that someone genuinely loves you? How do you know that things like racism and the killing of innocent people are wrong? How can you verify scientifically that life is meaningful and worth getting up in the morning for? None of these things are things that can be verified scientifically, but that does not seem to make any of them any less meaningful or less knowable.

    Another misconception that many people have about science and religion is that science deals solely with the objective whereas religion deals solely with the subjective.

    First of all, science is not a wholly objective enterprise. Scientific research is guided by theories, working hypotheses, operational frameworks, and the like. Scientists not only make observations to formulate theories, they also use theories to guide them in making observations and to interpret what they are seeing, and these theories and the manner in which they guide observations, reflect the biases of the scientific community at the time.

    A second reason why it is false to maintain that science deals solely with the objective whereas religion deals solely with the subjective is that religion often has objective components to it. Those of us who are Christians, for example, believe that God has objectively revealed certain things about Himself in nature, history, the Bible, and primarily and most definitively in the person and work of Jesus Christ, and that because of this, those of us in the Christian community cannot just believe what we want to about God or whatever it is that feels right to us, but we must seek to conform our beliefs about God to what God has revealed about Himself through these sources. Just as the scientific community must "test" its theories against what nature reveals through observation, the Christian community is called to "test" what it believes about God against what God has objectively revealed about Himself.

    http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com

  • Sat Mar 07, 2009 8:30 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 4

    c, considering how much the catholic church depends more on extra-biblical teaching than biblical teaching to develop the doctrines of their church, then we should not be surprised they have no problem with evolution as opposed to ID or creationism. Simply more false and accommodating theology and beliefs.

  • Fri Mar 06, 2009 10:54 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Chapman indicated it wasn't fair for organizers of the Darwin conference to allow staunch critics of MAGIC to speak while silencing a pro-MAGIC voice.

  • Fri Mar 06, 2009 10:01 pm Agree: 10   Disagree: 4

    This is a scientific, theological conference that has the backing of the Vatican. It placed ID in a cultural interest category because it does not recognize it as science, as it does Evolution. Chapman would like to think the Vatican supports ID, but it does not. ID seeks to discredit evolution while the Church does not.

    The Church's position is that there is no conflict between science and faith, evolution and the teachings of the Church. While Darwn as a scientist might be prohibited from introducing God into a scientific theory, Catholics can see the hand of God in the natural selection that Darwin considered random.

    This does not mean that the Vatican teaches that God's role has a place in scientific theory, like the proponents of ID do. The Church teaches that as a matter of faith Catholics understand that God is behind every creation mechanism, evolution included, but that faith and science are two different realms that are, nonetheless, compatible.

    It is a nuanced teaching that seems to be confusing for those from the "either/or" school of thought about creation. It is actually an enlightened view that doesn't seek to deny what is powerful scientific evidence for the origin of species and doesn't needlessly pit faith against science when the two actually compliment each other. The scientific discipline may not allow the mention of God due to it's very nature, but that doesn't prevent the faithful from doing so. Science may not accept faith, but that doesn't preclude faith from accepting the science.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • DVD
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links