Pope John Paul II

Pope John Paul II begins his message by recalling the work of Pope Pius XII in his attempt to rectify the conflict between the doctrine of faith and the development of scientific research. Pope John Paul II follows the footsteps of his predecessor in by engaging in a dialogue with the Academy of Sciences concerning the origin of life and evolution.

Pope John Paul II recognizes that the conclusion of evolution seems to be a direct contradiction to Revelation. In order to come about a solution, Pope John Paul goes on to clarify the different functions of the scientific and religious views.

The development of scientific research brings the ability to give rise to new inquiries in its attempt to advance towards solutions which benefit all of the human community. If science puts forth a justified true belief, the church ought to be compelled to inspect and interpret the idea. This demands the church be critical of its own interpretations and conclusions in the face of new information. The church has the chance to reinterpret scripture in a new light, and the church is able to discern a value-judgment.

Pope Pius XII argues that there is no conflict between evolution and the doctrine of faith. Because science and religion differ in their epistemology, they differ in the kinds of questions that they are qualified to answer. This distinction explicates the need to be aware of the limitations in following a doctrine in order to prevent erroneous conclusions made outside its own epistemological basis.

In the case of evolution and the origin of life, the biblical account is challenged by evolution theory. Perfectly inspired yet imperfectly written (and interpreted,) the biblical account is believed to be true by the religious....

... middle of paper ...

...ternative Dawkins puts forth is “some kind of liberal consensus of decency and natural justice.” This alternative changes over time, and serves as a substitute for a legitimate source of moral convictions.

Dawkins’ opposition to the church with science is draws similarities to Galileo. Galileo in his time did use his scientific reasoning to dismiss scripture. But, he did so by observation and demonstration in order to disprove scripture by providing a counterexample. He did this in order to show his work of the universe. Galileo was quite bold in his challenging of the church, but does respect it as well. This does differ from Dawkins. In Obscurantism to the Rescue, Dawkins has little substance in his reasoning, and all it seems to do is dismiss religion. His dismissal doesn’t really show any new information, he dismisses religion because he enjoys it.