All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/
Commentary

What should a Roman Catholic think about naturalism and evolution?

56 Comments

Charles Pope on the Archdiocese of Washington web site. (H/T Joe Carter on First Things)

Excerpt:

It is common to experience a rather simplistic notion among Catholics that the Theory of Evolution can be reconciled easily with the Biblical accounts and with our faith. Many will say something like this: “I have no problem with God setting things up so that we started as one-celled organisms and slowly evolved into being human beings. God could do this and perhaps the Genesis account is just simplifying evolution and telling us the same thing as what Evolution does.”

There are elements of the truth in this sort of a statement. Surely God could have set things up to evolve and directed the process so that human beings evolved and then, at some time he gave us souls. God could have done that.

The problem with the statement above is less theological than scientific because there is a word in that sentence that is “obnoxious” to evolutionary theory: “God.” The fact is that most Catholics who speak like this over-simplify evolutionary theory and hold a version of it that most Evolutionary Theorists do not hold. They accept the Theory of Evolution uncritically.

Yeah, because what evolutionists mean by “evolution” is that GOD HAD NO DETECTABLE EFFECT ON THE PROCESS. They mean that THE PROCESS OF EVOLUTION OCCURRED ENTIRELY WITHOUT DIVINE INTERVENTION. That’s what evolution means – fully materialistic, fully random, no intelligence needed, emergence of all the diversity of life we see.

Now what this means is that God is excluded as a cause by evolutionary theory. It would be fine if evolutionists (as natural scientists) were either silent on the question of God. Or, perhaps if they simply stated that things may be acted upon by an outside force or intelligence but that is beyond the scope of their discipline. But that is not what is being said by most proponents of evolutionary theory. They are saying that biodiversity results MERELY from natural selection and random (i.e. non intended or non-purposeful) genetic mutations. They are saying that observable effects of biodiversity are wholly caused by something natural, random and without any ultimate goal or plan.

But a Catholic cannot accept all of this. Even if a Catholic wants to accept that things have evolved in some way (whether through macro or microevolution) a Catholic cannot say that this process is simply random, chance, blind, or with no purpose. We believe that God alone created all things, and that he sustains all things. Neither do we confess some sort of “deist” God who merely started things off and then lets them take their own course. Rather, God sustains and carries out every detail.

Joe Carter adds:

In my experience, most people haven’t considered the issue of how the theological and scientific claims can be compatible. For instance, to be a “theistic evolutionist” in the sense that modern scient will accept, requires one to adhere to polygensism (the theory that Adam was not one historical man but, rather, a euphemism for “mankind”). That position, however, is not compatible with the teachings of the Bible, the Church, or of Jesus.

The dividing line between theists and non-theists is as follows: did God act in history in a way that his creative agency and intelligent agency is discernable to us using the objective methods of science? Atheists (and theistic evolutionists) say that God’s creative agency and intelligent (selection/sequencing) agency is neither necessary to explain what we observe in the universe, nor are the effects of agency detectable through science. Theists (and deists) say that God’s creative agency and intelligent agency is necessary in order to explain what we observe in the universe, and these effects of agency are detectable through science.

That is the dividing line. I don’t how I could be much clearer.

News

Boeing announces higher health care premiums for 90,000 workers

Leave a comment

From the Chicago Tribune.

Excerpt:

Aerospace giant Boeing is joining the list of companies that say the new health care law could have a potential downside for their workers.

In a letter mailed to employees late last week, the company cited the overhaul as part of the reason it is asking some 90,000 nonunion workers to pay significantly more for their health plan next year. A copy of the letter was obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

“The newly enacted health care reform legislation, while intended to expand access to care for millions of uninsured Americans, is also adding cost pressure as requirements of the new law are phased in over the next several years,” wrote Rick Stephens, Boeing’s senior vice president for human resources.

[…]Spokeswoman Karen Forte said the Boeing plan is more generous than what its closest competitors offer, and the company was concerned it would get hit with a new tax under the law.

The tax on so-called “Cadillac” health plans doesn’t take effect until 2018, but employers are already beginning to assess their exposure because it is hefty: at 40 percent of the value above $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for a family plan.

[…]Boeing said annual deductibles and copayments will increase for all its plans next year.

Deductibles, the share of medical costs that employees pay annually before their plan kicks in, will go up to $300 for individuals, an increase of $100. For families, the new deductible will be $900, an increase of $300.

In addition, Boeing is instituting a copayment of 10 percent after the deductible has been met. The copayment will rise to 20 percent in 2012.

You can read more about companies affected by Obamacare here.

News

Can government spend tax money more efficiently than you can?

Leave a comment

Here’s a scary article from The American Spectator. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

The Social Security Administration sent out $250 checks — $18 million in all — to 72,000 dead people.

Alan Hevesi, former Controller for New York State, who was the sole trustee for the state’s large public pension fund, pled guilty to a charge of receiving $1 million in gifts and contributions from a money manager for steering $250 million of investments his way.

California, all but bankrupt, reported that last year it spent $467 million in taxpayer funds on scholarships to students at four-year colleges who failed to return for a second year.

The U.S. Postal Service, losing millions of dollars a month, has been giving cushy, non-bid contracts to former USPS executives. The USPS Inspector General found 17 of these contracts were given to former postal executives within a year of their retirement. One person received a no-bid $260,000 “knowledge transfer” contract. The IG reported, “These contracts were put in place even though highly experienced postal executives filled the positions vacated by the former executives.”

[…]Seventy-three people, led by a man who lived in the former Soviet Union, were rounded up for defrauding Medicare of $35 million-plus through phony clinics and stolen doctor and patient identities. This coast-to-coast crime ring gave their invented clinics P.O. box addresses and filed fake claims. Medicare fell for it.

[…]Thousands of Medicaid recipients in California were given debit cards with which to buy food. Instead, more than a few of them hied themselves to Las Vegas and ran up gambling losses on the debit cards. This brings to mind the periodic revelations in Washington that credit cards issued by federal government agencies have been used for – surprise — vacations, jewelry, expensive dinners, etc.

This is why conservatives value limited government. We taxpayers are paying these bureaucrats to waste our money. The private sector is a lot less corrupt and inefficient – the money needs to stay there.