Father Andrew Greeley: Protecting science from religion

Posted 6 August 2005 by PvM

↗ The current version of this post is on the live site: https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/08/father-andrew-g.html

Father Andrew Greeley who is described as:

Father Greeley wrote:

One of the most influential Catholic thinkers and writers of our time, priest, sociologist, author and journalist Father Andrew M. Greeley has built an international assemblage of devout fans over a career that spans five decades. He is the author of over 50 best-selling novels and more than 100 works of non-fiction and his writing has been translated into 12 languages. A Professor of Sociology at the University of Arizona and a Research Associate with the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, Father Greeley is a respected scholar whose current research focuses on the Sociology of Religion.

has written a powerful article on the Schoenborn comments.

Hat tip to Frank Schmidt

Father Greeley wrote:

The cardinal has muddied the waters of the discourse between science and religion. Religion, he seems to be saying, much to the delight of the Evangelicals, can dictate scientific conclusions – such as it once dictated that the sun revolved around the Earth on the basis of a couple of verses in the book of Exodus.

The cardinal’s assertion will upset most Catholic scientists and confuse many of the educated laity (something that the present pope has always deplored). Moreover, it provides the New York Times another chance to pursue its anti-Catholic bias. The cardinal has “redefined” the issue. Now a political alliance between Catholics and Evangelicals will be easier to achieve. A cardinal can’t do that. Only the pope and/or a Gen eral Council (acting in union with the pope) defines anything. The traditional bias against Catholics among conservative Christians (which my research shows still exists) makes such a political coalition most unlikely.

At night, the sound of the waves pounding against the beach lulls me to sleep. Although I know the physics and the meterology behind that sound, the beauty of the surf on the beach assures me that there is Beauty in the universe of which that sound is a reflection. Love too. Good night, lake. Good night, God.

13 Comments

Jaime Headden · 6 August 2005

Supposedly, Schönborn only "clarified" an issue that may have confused Catholics, that of the equitability of church doctrine and any contradicting science, with the Papal sanction being quiet, rather than official. This would suggest that where science would determine something that contradicts doctrine, then doctrine trumps science. This doesn't mean scripture trumps science, since many Catholics understand the Bible has a large allegorical quality to it. It is a story, after all, the "greatest story ever told". Where scripture holds contradictions (and it does, between the Gospels and in the very opening verses of Genesis), Catholics at least understand that there is no literalism here and to adopt anything like that as literal leads to transgressions. Rather, doctrine allows much room for interpretation of these, allowing Catholic priests SOME (if little) leeway interpretively. Most religious folks I have talked to have no problem with evolution, though some do repeat the same addages; and most that disagree have no desire to argue the issue, they hold it as a faith that doesn't require preaching or conversion to affirm, unlike members of the recent conference.

puzzled · 6 August 2005

Father Andrew Greeley who is described as: Father Greeley Wrote: One of the most influential Catholic thinkers and writers of our time, priest, sociologist, author and journalist Father Andrew M. Greeley has built an international assemblage of devout fans over a career that spans five decades. He is the author of over 50 best-selling novels and more than 100 works of non-fiction and his writing has been translated into 12 languages. A Professor of Sociology at the University of Arizona and a Research Associate with the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, Father Greeley is a respected scholar whose current research focuses on the Sociology of Religion.

So Father Greeley thinks he is very influential. That's nice. I've never heard of him.

ts · 7 August 2005

Supposedly, Schönborn only "clarified" an issue that may have confused Catholics, that of the equitability of church doctrine and any contradicting science, with the Papal sanction being quiet, rather than official.

But this is patently false -- just read his NYT editorial, which starts out

EVER since 1996, when Pope John Paul II said that evolution (a term he did not define) was "more than just a hypothesis," defenders of neo-Darwinian dogma have often invoked the supposed acceptance - or at least acquiescence - of the Roman Catholic Church when they defend their theory as somehow compatible with Christian faith. But this is not true....

ts · 7 August 2005

Here's a URL for the editorial:
http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/catholic/schonborn-NYTimes.html

a maine yankee · 7 August 2005

Never heard of Father A? What dark age have you been living in over the last 40 years or so? WOW!

Pierce R. Butler · 7 August 2005

Greeley: The traditional bias against Catholics among conservative Christians (which my research shows still exists) makes such a political coalition most unlikely.

What political planet has Greeley been living on for the last quarter-century? The Catholic-evangelical alliance has been growing steadily in the US since at least the 1970s, when the National Conference of Bishops spun off its "Right to Life" committee and set up a Protestant as its chair after it was pointed out that the new organization looked exactly like a Catholic front group.

Dave Carlson · 7 August 2005

The Catholic-evangelical alliance has been growing steadily in the US since at least the 1970s, when the National Conference of Bishops spun off its "Right to Life" committee and set up a Protestant as its chair after it was pointed out that the new organization looked exactly like a Catholic front group.
— Pierce R. Butler

Certainly the cooperation between the Catholics and some of the evangelicals has grown, but I think that there are still plenty of Chick Tract-reading, Falwell-following fundamentalist types out there who think that Catholics aren't Christians.

ts · 7 August 2005

Certainly the cooperation between the Catholics and some of the evangelicals has grown, but I think that there are still plenty of Chick Tract-reading, Falwell-following fundamentalist types out there who think that Catholics aren't Christians.

Pierce didn't say Greeley was wrong about a fundie bias against Catholics; it was the bit about "makes such a political coalition most unlikely" that he rejected.

Frank Schmidt · 7 August 2005

In their eagerness to get their political opinions into law (theocracy), the fundies are trying to use the same strategies that they use with the IDC'ers, i.e., paper over the differences until the movement is triumphant. Then "deal with" the problems within the movement. It's hard to get a definitive answer from Protestants, since they don't have a Pope, but I googled the question "Are Catholics Christian?" and got lots of goodies: From Grace and Truth Ministries [sic]

Roman Catholics who believe their church's teachings regarding salvation cannot be Christians since their church's doctrine contradicts the Biblical doctrine of salvation.

Or from Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry - CARM

CARM's position is simple. If a Roman Catholic believes in the official Roman Catholic teaching on salvation, then he is not a Christian since the official RCC position is contrary to scripture.

Or this gem from BornAgain Christian Info:

10 Proofs Roman Catholics Are NOT Christian The politically correct attitude is 'Don't offend them or rock the ecumenical boat. Just accept all Catholics as brothers and sisters in Christ, no questions asked.' But what about these blatantly unscriptural Catholic doctrines? Roman Catholics place their hope for eternal life in their church, the pope, good works, Mary, the Eucharist ... almost everything except the Lord Jesus Christ, who said: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No-one comes to the Father except through me Holy Bible John 14:6

And finally, our good buddy Jack Chick

In the modern world, the Vatican (The Whore of Babylon) is responsible for:All Satanic Bible Versions

Now a gedankenexperiment: Substitute the question "Can a Christian accept biological evolution?" and guess what they'd say. (Hint)We already know what Jack Chick says about evolution.)

Pierce R. Butler · 7 August 2005

The coalition exists. Try to find anyone active in pro-choice politics who doesn't laugh if someone suggests otherwise.

I have collected Jack Chick comics (rarely) and Catholic literature (often) from picketers & "sidewalk counselors" outside the same clinic, though probably not on the same day.

On higher hierarchical levels, Catholic-Baptist/etc collaboration can be seen in campaigns against abortion rights, sex ed, gay rights, stem cell research, etc. They also share a pragmatic alliance on issues such as church property taxation, church school regulation, liability policies, and other things that keep lobbyists & lawyers employed.

Pat Robertson even offered to help John Paul II with understanding the intricacies of US politics on a papal visit circa 1990. That JP2 maintained a straight face throughout this conversation may constitute evidence for miracles.

Frank J · 7 August 2005

Father Greeley wrote:

The cardinal also dismissed Pope John Paul II's comments on the issue as being "vague and unimportant" -- something he would never dare to say while the pope was still alive.

Or maybe he could have been duped into saying that while the Pope John Paul II was still alive, but the Discovery Institute chose not to feed him their propaganda until after the pope was not around to defend himself. Giving the cardinal the benefit of the doubt, especially since he is not a scientist, I think that all he meant was that the 1996 speech did not cover much beyond what Pope Pius XII said decades earlier. To me what makes the 1996 speech anything but "vague and unimportant" was not so much the admission that evolution was "more than a hypothesis" (which some detractors like to pretend means "more than one hypothesis") but that the multiple lines of evidence the support evolution are "neither sought nor fabricated." I interpret that as a subtle reminder that all anti-evolution positions are nothing but sought and fabricated.

Tim · 8 August 2005

Jack Chick:

To understand why the Vatican created Communism, one must go back to the time of Constantine... The Communist Party was bankrolled by the Illuminati in order to create another power loyal to the Vatican ... The crafty Jesuits began to plan World War II to this end... A Jesuit priest named Staempfle wrote Mein Kampf for Adolph Hitler, whom the Jesuits were grooming for power...

D'oh! And I thought all of that was a result of evilution!

Uber · 8 August 2005

Look Catholics have about as much in common with protestants as elephants have with rhinos.

They split for a reason. They will join together for political purposes but when push comes to shove the religions are jsut to different.

Myself, I side with the Protestants.