NATIONAL CATHOLiC REPORTER
WORLD
C atholic experts urge
caution iu evolution debate
Scientists^ theologians take issue with Sehonbom^s op-ed article
By JOHN L.ALLEN JR.
Rome
A recent article by Cardinal
Christoph Schonbom in The New York
Times, asserting that "unguided,
unplanned" evolution is inconsistent
with Catholic faith, should be read
with caution warn a number of
Catholic scientists and theologians,
including the head of the Pontifical
Academy of Sciences.
Most ofthe experts interviewed said
the article can offer a useful alert if
taken at a theological level. Evolution,
they point out, has sometimes been
invoked to justify atheism, as weU as
inunanentism (that God is a vague life
force) or deism (that God set the uni-
verse in motion and has nothing more
to do with it).
To the extent Schonbom's point is
that Christianity cannot accept a uni-
verse without an active, personal God,
they say, there's little to dispute.
If taken as a scientific statement, on
the other hand, these observers warn
that Schonbom's insistence on seeing
-"purpose and design" in nature could
steer the Catholic church towards cre-
ationism in the hitter cultural debate,
especially prominent in the United
States, between evolution and intelli-
gent design. Doing so, they say, risks
overstepping the bounds of the
church's competence, as well as
reopening a divide between science
and the Catholic church that had
seemed largely overcome.
Several said Schonbom's July 7
piece should be read in the context of a
2004 document of the International
Theological Commission, an advisory
body ofthe Congregation for the Doc-
trine ofthe Faith, the most recent Vat-
ican document to treat evolution.
The document, titled "Communion
and Stewardship," argues that
Catholic theology does not commit the
church to one side or the other in the
strictly scientific dispute between evo-
lution and design. Even if evolution
appears "random" and "undirected"
from an empirical point of view, the
document asserts, it could stiU be part
of God's providence.
That view is welcomed by many
Catholic scientists, who
Keeping'divine causality'
in the process
Excerpt from the Vatican's Interna- cess can nonetheless fall within God's
tiona! Theological Commission docu- providential plan for creation. Accord-
ment "Communion and Stewardship: ing to St. Thomas Aquinas: "The effect
Human Persons Created in the Image of divine providence is not only that
of God."
69. The current scientific debate
about the mechanisms at work in evo-
lution requires theological comment in-
sofar as it sometimes implies a misun-
derstanding of the nature of divine
causality. Many neo-Darwinian scien-
tists, as well as some of their critics,
have concluded that, if evolution is a
radically contingent materialistic pro-
cess driven by natural selection and
random genetic variation, then there
can be no place in it for divine provi-
dential causality. A growing body of sci-
entific critics of neo-Darwinism point to
evidence of design (e.g., biological
structures that exhibit specified com-
plexity) that, in their view, cannot be ex- evolutionary mechanism that is contin-
plained in terms of a purely contingent
process and that neo-Darwinians have
ignored or misinterpreted. The nub of
this currently lively disagreement in-
volves scientific observation and gen-
eralization concerning whether the
available data support inferences of de-
sign or chance, and cannot be settled
by theology. But it is important to note
that, according to the Catholic under-
standing of divine causality, true con-
tingency in the created order is not in-
compatible with a purposeful divine
say the problem with evolution is not
so much the theory itself, hut the philo-
sophical applications some make of it.
"The theory of evolution can be dis-
turbing to Christians because it seems to
clash with the idea of divine creation,"
said Nicola Cabibbo, president of the
Pontifical Academy of Sciences, a 78-
member body of academics who advise
the pope on scientific matters. Cabibbo
is a professor of particle physics at
Rome's La Sapienza University.
"However, this clash is false. What
clashes with divine creation is an
extension ofthe theory of evolu-
tion into materialistic inter-
providence. Divine causality and creat-
ed causality radically differ in kind and
not only in degree. Thus, even the out-
come of a truly contingent natural pro-
things should happen somehow, but
that they should happen either by ne-
cessity or by contingency. Therefore,
whatsoever divine providence ordains
to happen infallibly and of necessity
happens infallibly and of necessity; and
that happens from contingency, which
the divine providence conceives to
happen from contingency" (Summa
theologiae. I, 22,4 ad 1). In the Catholic
perspective, neo-Darwinians who ad-
duce random genetic variation and nat-
ural selection as evidence that the pro-
cess of evolution is absolutely unguid-
ed are straying beyond what can be
demonstrated by science. Divine
causality can be active in a process that
is both contingent and guided. Any
gent can only be contingent because
God made it so. An unguided evolu-
tionary process — one that falls outside
the bounds of divine providence — sim-
ply cannot exist because "the causality
of God, Who is the first agent, extends
to all being, not only as to constituent
principles of species, but also as to the
individualizing principles.... It necessar-
ily follows that all things, inasmuch as
they participate in existence, must like-
wise be subject to divine providence"
iSumma theologiae. 1.22.2).
pretations, so-called 'evolutionism,' "
Cabbibo told NCR July 18. "That's not
science, it's metaphysics."
This distinction between evolution as
a scientific hypothesis, and "Darwin-
ism" or "neo-Darwinism" as a philo-
sophical system, is crucial, observers
say, to understanding Catholic t h o t ^ t
on the subject.
Long history of
compatibility
Cabibbo's confidence in the compat-
ibility of evolution with Catholic faith
reflects a long history.
In 1950, Pope Pius XII, in his encycli-
cal Humani Generis, signaled accep-
tance of the basic principles of evolu-
tionary theory.
"The chiirch does not forbid
that... research and discus-
JULY 2&, 2005
sions, on the part of men experienced
in both fields, take place with regard to
the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it
inquires into the origin ofthe human
body as coming from preexistent and
living matter," Pius wrote.
Commenting on the creation
accounts in Genesis during a 1986 gen-
eral audience. Pope John Paul n
extended this idea.
"The theory of natural evolution,
understood in a sense that does not
exclude divine causality, is not in prin-
ciple opposed to the truth about the cre-
ation ofthe visible world as presented
in the Book of Genesis," the pope said.
John Paul went further in a 1996
message to the Pontifical Academy of
Sciences, referring to evolution as
"more than a hypothesis."
"It is indeed remarkable that this
theory has been progressively accept-
ed by researchers, following a series of
discoveries in various fields of knowl-
edge," John Paul wrote. "The conver-
gence, neither sought nor fabricated, of
the results of work that was conducted
independently is in itself a significant
argument in favor of this theory."
Yet in conservative Catholic intel-
lectual circles, critics for some time
have been questioning this formula.
They argue that it is not so simple to
separate evolution from its philosoph-
ical applications — that atheism, in
effect, may be part ofthe genetic code
of evolutionary theory.
One voice making that argument has
been Philip Johnson, a law professor at
the University of California in Berke-
ley. Thougji a Presbyterian, Johnson's
work has been featured in First
Things, an influential journal of Amer-
ican Catholic opinion.
"It is the alleged absence of divine
intervention throughout the history of
life — the strict materialism of the
orthodox [Darwinian] theory — that
explains why a great many people, only
some of whom are biblical fundamen-
talists, think that Darwinian evolution
(beyond the micro level) is basically
materialistic philosophy disguised as
scientific fact," Johnson wrote in First
Things in 1997.
Another important contributor to a
Catholic reappraisal of evolution is
Michael Behe, professor of biochem-
istry at Lehigh University and author
of Darwin's Black Box, perhaps the
most-read scientific challenge to evo-
lutionary theory.
Behe is a Catholic, and a senior fel-
low at the Seattle-based Discovery Insti-
tute, a think tank that supports
 NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER
6 WORLD
Continued from Page 5 XVI. He did postdoctoral work with
then-Fr. Joseph Ratzinger at the Uni-
the intelligent design argument. A pub- versity of Regensburg in Germany in
lic relations firm associated with the the late 1970s, and was one of the
Discovery Institute, according to "grand electors" in the April conclave
reporting in The New York Times, that made Ratzinger pope.
helped place Schonbom's piece in the His views, therefore, could be influ-
newspaper. ential in shaping the thinking of Bene-
Schonbom's July 7 article, therefore, dict's pontificate.
did not come out ofthe blue. Charles Townes, a Nobel laureate in
"The Catholic church, while leaving physics at the University of California in
to science many details about the his- Berkeley, has been a member ofthe Vat-
tory of life on earth, proclaims that by ican's Pontifical Academy of Science for
the l j ^ t of reason the human intellect more than 20 years. A Protestant,
can readily and clearly discern pur- Townes told NCR July 18 that he found
pose and design in the natural world, Schonbom's piece "disappointing."
including the world of living things," "Some materialists may use evolu-
Schonbom wrote. tion in the sense Schonbom talks
"Evolution in the sense of common about, but there's no necessary con-
ancestry might be true, but evolution nection," he said.
in the neo-Darwinian sense — an Behe, however, disagreed.
•onguided, unplanned process of ran- "Most people don't realize that Dar-
dom variation and natural selection— winian evolution makes a very radical
claim," Behe said.
is not. Any system of thought that
denies or seeks to explain away the "Not only does evolution work by
overwhelming evidence for design in natural selection, hut it was totally
biology is ideology, not science." unintended by anyone or anything....
Schonbom referred to the 1996 state- I think that any Christian, any theist,
ment of John Paul n as' 'rather v^ue and would have to say that life was intend-
unimportant." He cited other statements ed hy God," he said.
of the pope to the effect that evolution Behe hints at the key question—does
presents an "internal finality" that leads the theological afiirmation that life
one to suppose the existence of a creator. comes from God also obligate Catholics
to insist, as a scientific matter, that
intelligent design is evident in nature?
Weighing Schonbom's Townes said that things are not so
words clear-cut. Even processes that appear
random, he said, can have an underly-
In the wake of the Times piece, some ing logic.
observers have noted that there are 181 "The idea that calling something
cardinals in the world, which means 'random' means that it's without direc-
that Schonbom's views on evolution, tion is a mistake," Townes said. "In a
while they may be interesting, are not gas, for example, random interaction
determinative of the church's stance. among particles ensures uniform dis-
Indeed, just four days after Schonbom's tribution and temperature. In other
piece appeared, Cardinal Theodore words, an unplanned process produces
McCarrick of Washington told an audi- an orderly outcome."
ence at the National Press Club that as "Evolution," Townes said, "is like
long as scientists leave room for God in that. It's a random process that pro-
the evolutionary process, the church duces spectacular things."
can "work with that and accept that in Jesuit Fr. George Coyne, head ofthe
principle." Vatican observatory, agreed.
Yet Schonbom is not just any cardi- "Chance is the way we scientists see
nal. A polyglot intellectual, a Domini- the universe. It has nothing to do with
can, and the scion of old Bohemian God. It's not chancy to God, it's chancy
nobility, he is widely regarded as one to us," Coyne said.
of the leading theologians at the Coyne told NCR in a July 20 inter-
senior levels ofthe church, and served view that far from implying atheism,
as general editor ofthe 1992 Catechism evolution "can equally well be inter-
of the Catholic Church. He is also a preted to the glory of God."
member of the Congregation for the "I see a God who caresses the uni-
Doctrine of the Faith, the church's verse, who puts into the universe some
doctrinal agency. of his own creativity and dynamism,"
Perhaps more to the point, Schon- Coyne said. Cabbibo said he would call
bom is a close friend of Pope Benedict evolution "self-directed" rather than
Don't divide the scientific and tiie religious, scientists say
Three prominent U.S. scientists have author of Finding Danvin's God, which deals
asked Pope Benedict XVI to reaffirm the with the relationship of faith and evolution.
compatibility of evolution with the Catholic The three scientists, in a July 13 open
faith in light of a critical article by Austrian letter to the pope, said it is not the task
Cardinal Christoph Schonbom of Vienna. of scientists to draw spiritual conclu-
In an article in the July 7 New York sions from their data, but that this data
Times, the cardinal "appeared to dan- can help theologians understand the
gerously redefine the church's view on purpose of human life.
evolution," they said. Pope John Paul II "rightly recognized
The three scientists are Lawrence that the spiritual significance that one
Krauss, physics and astronomy professor draws from scientific observations and
at Case Western Reserve University in theory lies outside of the scientific theo-
Cleveland; Francisco Ayala, evolutionary ries themselves," they said referring to a
biology and philosophy professor at the 1996 papal message to the Pontifical
University of California-Irvine; and Ken- Academy of Sciences.
neth Miller, biology professor at Brown "Claiming that evolution definitely
University in Providence. R.I. implies a lack of divinity and/or divine
Ayala and Miller are Catholics. Ayala is a purpose in nature is as much an affront to
former Dominican priest and Miller is the science as it is to the church," they said.
-CNS
Cardinal Christoph Schonbom
"undirected." The point is that random
genetic mutation, coupled with natural
selection, does not require anything
external to direct the process.
This does not exclude, Cabibbo said,
the faith conviction that God arranged
things this way.
"As a scientist, what I can say is this:
If the will of God was to create man, he
certainly oi^anized things in a beauti-
ful way to do it," Cabibbo said.
Some Catholic theologians point to
"Communion and Stewardship,"
issued with the approval of then-Cardi-
nal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Bene-
dict XVI, in 2004, as offering a different
approach.
The debate between evolution and
intelligent design, the document notes
in paragraph 69, "involves scientific
observation and generalization con-
cerning whether the available data
support inferences of design or chance,
and cannot be settled by theology."
"But it is important to note," it says,
"that according to the Catholic under-
standing of divine causality, true con-
tingency in the created order is not
incompatible with a purposeful divine
providence.... Thus, even the outcome
of a truly contingent natural process
can nonetheless fall within God's prov-
idential plan for creation."
The document then warns against
philosophical abuse of evolutionary
theory.
"Any evolutionary mechanism that
is contingent can only be contingent
because God made it so," it says. "An
A papal clarification is needed "so that
it will be clear that Cardinal Schonbom's
remarks do not reflect the views of the
Holy See," they said.
"Since scientific investigations have
repeatedly confirmed evolution by natu-
ral selection as a guiding principle for
understanding the development of the
diversity of life on earth, theologians who
are interested in exploring such ques-
tions as human dignity and purpose must
take this mechanism Into account in their
considerations," they said.
"It is vitally important, however, that in
these difficult and contentious times the
Catholic church not build a new divide,
long ago eradicated, between the scien-
tific method and religious belief."
—Catholic News Service
JULY 29, 2005
unguided evolutionary process — one
that falls outside the bounds of divine
providence — simply cannot exist."
The document, according to experts
such as Cabibbo, provides a basis for
Catholics to accept evolution as it is
understood by modem scientists, with-
out thereby surrendering belief in God
as the ultimate cause of life.
One Catholic scholar who worked on
"Communion and Stewardship" E^ees.
"There's quite a strong element in
the natural sciences who simply don't
approve of any transcendental cause as
a matter of philosophy," said Jesuit Fr.
Shun ichi Takayanagi of Sophia Uni-
versity in Tokyo.
"That doesn't mean, however, that
evolution as such is incompatible with
Christianity," T-akayanagi said in a
July 17 phone interview. "We are not
against evolution as such, but the mate-
rialist use of evolutionary theory."
Even Behe, who believes the scientific
data does not support evolution, never-
theless said he believes a faithful Catholic
could accept evolutionary theory.
"I'm a biochemist, not a theologian,"
he said. "But it seems to me that belief
in mutation and natural selection is
compatible with Catholicism, as long
as the underlying premise is that God
set it up that way. That seems to me an
orthodox Catholic position."
"I'm critical of evolutionary theory
not because it's unorthodox," he said,
"but because it can't do what it pur-
ports to do."
What does the pope think?
A fmal question about Schonbom's
piece is the extent to which it reflects
the thinking of Pope Benedict XVI.
Schonbom told The New York Times
that he wrote the article after being
encouraged to look into the issue of
evolution by then-Cardinal Joseph
Ratzinger, prior to his election as pope.
Moreover, the new pope himself
struck a note not dissimilar to Schon-
bom's in the homily at his April 24
installation Mass:
"We are not some casual and mean-
ingless product of evolution," Benedict
XVI said. "Each of us is the result of a
thougjit of God. Each of us is willed, each
of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Yet "Communion and Stewardship,"
which clearly distinguishes between a
scientific and a theological analysis of
evolution, was published in 2004 with
Ratzinger's authority. That permission
was given in forma specifica, which gen-
erally means the one giving permission
makes the conclusions his own.
. Cabibbo also pointed out that as pre-
fect, Ratzinger opened the archives of
the Congregation for the Doctrine ofthe
Faith to scientific research, and chose
to announce the move during a meeting
of a secular scientific academy in Italy.
Moreover, Cabibbo said, Ratzinger
himself had been a member ofthe Pon-
tifical Academy of Science since 2003.
"He certairUy seems to have an
appreciation of science," Cabibbo said.
"I'm optimistic."
In the end, Cabibbo argued, the trick
is for both scientists and theologians to
respect the limits of their competence.
"We know that God wanted to create
man by revelation," Cabibbo said, "but
we don't know how he did it. This is
what science attempts to explain.
There should be no clash between sci-
ence and religion, because they do dif-
ferent things."
[John L. Allen Jr, is the NCR Rome
correspondent. His e-mail address is
jallenfoinatcath.org.]