CrossCurrents

CrossCurrents A Catholic Reflects on Faith in Our Times

Bernard F. Swain, Ph.D.

God versus Darwin?

Every time I hear about “Intelligent Design,” I think of my godmother.

My “Aunt Vi” lived on a small farm in northern New Hampshire that backed up against the Connecticut River. Her kitchen window looked out over the river, so she could gaze on the Vermont hills rising up from the opposite bank. In early fall those hills would burst into the flaming reds, oranges, golds and yellows that make New England autumns unforgettable.

One October she explained why that view mattered to her. “When I see those hills ablaze with all those colors,” she told me, “I see a work of art no one could pay for. And nobody will ever convince me there’s no Artist at work there.”

That’s the kind of comment Catholic tradition calls “natural theology” – a way of talking about God that’s based on observation and reason, rather than on Biblical revelation. This idea that faith fits reason is an ancient part of Catholic identity, but the current controversy over teaching evolution might confuse us. How does the Catholic tendency to link faith and reason affect our view of the relationship between science and religion?

First we hear President Bush opine that “intelligent design” should be taught in our schools. Next we read that a Vatican official suggests a possible conflict between evolution theory and Catholic faith. And the controversy over school textbooks shows no sign of going away soon. No wonder many Catholics can be confused about what they ought to think. I can’t claim expertise in science, but as an informed layman I’d like to offer my views on a very messy topic.

There is no basic conflict between evolution and Catholic faith. Long ago the Church realized that the Biblical creation stories are not literal explanations of how humans came to be on earth. The theory of evolution does not compete with the Book of Genesis.

Most of our confusion results, I think, when we’re not clear about the questions we’re asking. That leads directly to confusion about the answers we’re getting. The Catechism of the Catholic Church offers great clarity about those questions:

The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding of the wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers. [283]

Evolution’s scope is limited. Notice that the catechism clearly distinguishes scientific knowledge about three things: (1)The origin of the human species, (2)The emergence of life, and (3)The cosmos itself. The theory of evolution is a theory about “the origin of the species” (#1), not the origin of life itself (#2), let alone the origin of the universe (#3). It tries to explain how complex life forms (like us) could emerge from simpler ones.

So how did life begin? Evolution does not answer that question, and I don’t think Intelligent Design does either. The same is true for the third question –“how did the universe begin?” – which is also beyond the scope of the evolution debate. As Paul Gross (Professor Emeritus of Life Sciences at the University of Virginia) wrote:

“Neither Darwin’s theory nor any other modern biology is about how the universe began. That’s a question in cosmology. Whether of not science makes further progress in research on the origin of life…today [it] is a busy independent discipline.”

Perhaps someday science will build a consensus explanation of life’s origin, and then that theory can be added to science texts.

“Intelligent Design” also fits Catholic faith. Obviously, we believe that the creative force behind all existence is an all-knowing personal God. So it comes as no surprise to us that the natural world might show traces of our divine Designer’s intelligence.

But is “intelligent design” good science? Should it be included in science texts and teaching? In my view, those are questions for the scientific community, not for theologians or church leaders. Certainly, intelligent design theory so far has failed to prove “robust” enough to withstand critique and earn consensus support among scientists: As Professor Gross put it: “Darwinian evolution is the only robust scientific explanation we have for the history of life.”

Maybe someday “intelligent design” will achieve that kind of consensus; otherwise, it will be missing from textbooks just like hundreds of other discarded theories.

The Real Debate. The legitimate question is not whether to believe in evolution or not. Nor is it whether science texts should include reference to a design. To me, the question is whether the evolutionary process should be understood as random and accidental, or as something patterned (as if by design), or a combination of both?

If we confine this debate to the science itself (the HOW of our emergence), there is no problem. Any natural process could be random, patterned, or both, and it seems to me that faith is neutral on the question. After all, since we believe God is the author of all creation, and of every natural process within it, God is certainly capable of fitting both random and patterned elements into his plan.

But many thoughtful people will always want to augment any scientific explanation of “how” these things happen with their own account of “why” they happen. And here is where faith faces the real competition.

The Catechism points out that “since the beginning the Christian faith has been challenged by responses to the questions of origins that differ from its own.” Philosophies like Pantheism, Dualism, Gnosticism, Deism, and Materialism have all competed to explain the meaning behind the Cosmos. “All these attempts,” the Catechism says, “bear witness to the permanence and universality of the question of origins. This inquiry is distinctly human.” [285]

But none of these are scientific responses. Here is where the Vatican gets worried: when a philosophy like Materialism (or any other worldview) claims to have scientific proof that there is no purpose or intelligence behind creation.

Is “Intelligent Design” merely a prop to impose faith on science? Is “Evolution” merely a prop for atheists? I’m afraid both things are sometimes true. Some atheists do seek support from evolution theory, while some Christians seek support from intelligent design. In my view, they’re both wrong if they think science will prove their belief system. That’s not what science is for – and bad science is no basis for sound beliefs.

The Catechism points out that science may trigger questions it cannot answer:

The great interest accorded to these studies is strongly stimulated by a question of another order, which goes beyond the proper domain of the natural sciences. It is not only a question of knowing when and how the universe arose physically, or when man appeared, but rather of discovering the meaning of such an origin: is the universe governed by chance, blind fate, anonymous necessity, or by a transcendent intelligent and good Being called “God”? [284]

Evolution does not prove there is no God. Nor does “intelligent design” prove Christian beliefs in one good God of all creation. Ancient Egyptians, for example, believed there was intelligence behind all of creation. And so their faith included a sun god, a moon god, and a god of earth and rain and harvests. The Christian God is none of these, because Christian belief goes well beyond what science may determine.

In faith’s eyes, the remarkable thing is that God not only created the universe where the marvelous is a natural occurrence, God also willed a human spirit that would not stop exploring nature until its mysteries were understood.

But while nature might eventually yield its mysteries to human inquiry, the mind behind nature—the mind of God—will always be beyond natural understanding. My Aunt Vi knew very well that, while we may appreciate and even understand the art in nature’s beauty, we will never put the Artist under a microscope.

Send Your Comments and Questions to bfswain@juno.com