[ 0 → 10] Part 1 of Episode 3 explained that the Church Fathers unanimously held the Creation Providence [ 10 → 11] Framework. [ 11 → 16] Learning of this agreement among the Fathers is perhaps surprising to Catholic viewers [ 16 → 21] who may have been taught that some Fathers held views compatible with Evolution Theory. [ 21 → 27] Remarkably, St. Augustine is often portrayed as a Church Father who would have no qualms [ 27 → 32] about accepting Darwinism or that he objected to an historical interpretation of chapters [ 32 → 35] 1 and 2 of Genesis. [ 35 → 41] This claim, however, is completely false and grossly misrepresents St. Augustine's actual [ 41 → 41] writings. [ 57 → 80] Part 2 of Episode 3 refutes four specific claims about St. Augustine's views on origins. [ 87 → 95] The first false claim asserts that St. Augustine did not regard Genesis 1 and 2 as a true historical [ 95 → 97] account of origins. [ 97 → 103] For example, evolutionary biologist Kenneth Miller of Brown University claims, [ 118 → 124] Here we see an attempt to discredit those holding to the historicity of Genesis, dismissing [ 124 → 129] them as a splinter group that has departed from the historical Church view. [ 129 → 135] Yet even a cursory examination of St. Augustine's writings exposes this claim as false. [ 135 → 141] For example, what title did St. Augustine select for his most extensive work on Genesis? [ 141 → 144] It was the literal meaning of Genesis. [ 144 → 149] The title alone suggests that he sought to understand Genesis according to the literal [ 149 → 152] historical sense. [ 152 → 159] Indeed, toward the end of his life, St. Augustine reflected upon the many works he had penned [ 159 → 164] and described the literal meaning of Genesis as a title of deliberate design, encompassing [ 164 → 170] the quest to understand Genesis not according to allegorical meanings but according to the [ 170 → 173] proper historical sense. [ 173 → 180] Compiled from 401 to 415 AD, the literal meaning of Genesis is a vast work divided [ 180 → 186] into 12 books that testify to St. Augustine's stance on the historicity of Genesis. [ 186 → 188] He observes, for example, [ 188 → 194] The account in Genesis is written in the style of history, not in that of allegory. [ 194 → 195] And reiterates, [ 195 → 200] The narrative is not written in a literary style proper to allegory, as in the Canticle [ 200 → 202] of Canticles. [ 202 → 208] But from beginning to end, in a style proper to history, as in the Books of Kings. [ 208 → 210] In Book 1, he declares, [ 210 → 215] I have started here to discuss sacred scripture according to the plain meaning of the historical [ 215 → 219] facts, not according to future events which they foreshadow. [ 219 → 227] Here, St. Augustine acknowledges that a scriptural text can include a spiritual or prophetic sense. [ 227 → 233] However, like St. Jerome and the other Church Fathers, he insists that such senses need [ 233 → 237] not eliminate the historical reality of a passage. [ 237 → 241] Referring to Adam, for example, he explains, [ 241 → 246] Adam of course signifies something else where St. Paul speaks of him as a type of the one [ 246 → 247] who was to come. [ 247 → 253] But he is understood here, in Genesis, as a man constituted in his own proper nature, [ 253 → 258] who lived a certain number of years, was the father of numerous children, and died [ 258 → 263] as other men die, although he was not born of parents as other men are, but made from [ 263 → 267] the earth, as was proper for the first man. [ 267 → 273] Consequently, paradise, in which God placed him, should be understood as simply a place, [ 273 → 277] that is, a land, where an earthly man would live. [ 277 → 281] St. Augustine maintained this perspective until his death. [ 281 → 286] His last word on Genesis is found in Book 8 of the City of God. [ 286 → 289] In this work, begun in 413, he declares, [ 289 → 297] The spiritual interpretation of the Paradise of Eden does not conflict with its historical truth. [ 297 → 302] It is very important to recognize that interpreting Genesis as an account of true history does [ 302 → 305] not result in a crude literalism. [ 305 → 310] For example, the Church Fathers understood that the sacred authors may sometimes describe [ 310 → 316] God by using a figure of speech, or through language familiar to readers. [ 316 → 321] In such instances, the text is not to be taken in the straightforward sense. [ 321 → 326] St. Augustine explains, for example, that when Scripture refers to the hand of God, [ 326 → 332] the inspired author is describing the power of God, and is not teaching that God has bodily [ 332 → 337] hands, as this, he writes, would constitute a childish interpretation. [ 337 → 341] He specifically warns that when interpreting Scripture, [ 341 → 347] We must first drive from our minds all anthropomorphic concepts that men might have. [ 347 → 352] Contrast this sensible method with Ken Miller's approach of asking those who view Genesis [ 352 → 354] as an historical narrative. [ 354 → 361] When the psalmist says, O Lord, thou art my rock and my fortress, what kind of rock is God? [ 361 → 366] Is he sedimentary, metamorphic, or igneous rock? [ 366 → 371] While St. Augustine tells us that chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis are true history, he also [ 371 → 376] explains that we are not compelled to take everything in sacred Scripture exactly as [ 376 → 383] written if there are sound reasons to depart from a straightforward interpretation. [ 383 → 389] In paragraph 15 of Providentissimus Deus, Pope Leo XIII references St. Augustine's [ 389 → 394] great principle, which holds that we are not to depart from the straightforward and obvious [ 394 → 399] sense of sacred Scripture unless reason dictates or necessity requires. [ 399 → 405] Now, due to the influence of Darwinism, many Catholics mistakenly assume that reason and [ 405 → 410] necessity require Genesis to be viewed as a myth or allegory. [ 410 → 416] However, subsequent episodes will show that it is evolution that is a myth, not God's [ 416 → 419] revealed word in the sacred history of Genesis. [ 424 → 436] A second error concerning St. Augustine is that his writings allowed for the introduction [ 436 → 442] of new animal kinds after the six days of creation had passed or allowed secondary natural [ 442 → 446] causes to have a hand in the creation of animal kinds. [ 446 → 451] If this were the case, it would mean that St. Augustine departed from the creation-providence [ 451 → 457] framework that holds all animal kinds were specially created by God during the six-day [ 457 → 459] creation period. [ 459 → 464] Once again, however, this claim is directly refuted by St. Augustine's writings. [ 464 → 469] In the literal meaning of Genesis, he reflects repeatedly upon the fullness of creation at [ 469 → 472] the end of the six days and writes, [ 472 → 479] Let us therefore believe and, if possible, also understand that God is working even now, [ 479 → 484] so that if his actions should be withdrawn from his creatures, they would perish. [ 484 → 489] But if we should suppose that God now makes a creature without having implanted its kind, [ 489 → 494] genus, in his own original creation, we should flatly contradict sacred scripture, which [ 494 → 499] says that on the sixth day God finished all his works. [ 499 → 506] Likewise, it could also be said that God rested from creating because he did not create henceforward [ 506 → 511] any new kinds of creatures, and that even until now and beyond, he works by governing [ 511 → 513] the kinds that he then made. [ 513 → 519] Nonetheless, even on the seventh day his powers ceased not from ruling heaven and earth and [ 519 → 524] all that he had made, for otherwise they would have perished immediately. [ 524 → 530] Again, we understand that God rested from all the works that he made, in the sense that [ 530 → 535] from then on he did not produce any other new nature, not that he ceased to hold and [ 535 → 538] govern what he had made. [ 538 → 543] Hence it is true that God rested on the seventh day, and it is also true that he works even [ 543 → 547] until now. [ 547 → 552] And again, we ought not to think of these creatures at the moment they were produced [ 552 → 558] as subject to the processes of nature which we now observe in them, but rather as under [ 558 → 564] the wonderful and unutterable power of the wisdom of God. [ 564 → 568] In the City of God, this father and doctor writes, [ 568 → 574] We have nothing to do in this work with those who hold that the divine mind does not create [ 574 → 577] and has no interest in this world. [ 577 → 583] For it is out of question to hold and assert that any creature, however small and mortal, [ 583 → 588] has any other creator than God, even before anything can be known about him. [ 588 → 593] I attribute the creation and establishment of all natures, that which makes them exist [ 593 → 598] as natures at all, to God. [ 598 → 604] St. Augustine's teachings on the creation-providence framework and the creation of all animal kinds [ 604 → 609] during the six days of creation are abundant and unambiguous. [ 609 → 614] Why then do so many Catholics struggle to detect and accept the framework held by St. [ 614 → 618] Augustine and all church fathers and doctors? [ 618 → 624] St. Augustine gave us a simple but profound insight into why even truth-seekers sometimes [ 624 → 631] find it difficult to accept the historicity of the supernatural creative acts in Genesis. [ 631 → 637] He explains that it can be challenging to accept Genesis as a historical narrative simply [ 637 → 643] because having passed from the period of creation, we now reside in the period of providence. [ 643 → 649] In other words, Genesis 1 and 2 seem foreign to us because we do not now observe the direct, [ 649 → 654] immediate creation of man or animal kinds by God. [ 654 → 659] Even so, in the literal meaning of Genesis, St. Augustine provides the following sound [ 659 → 665] reason why we are not to reject the framework on this account. [ 665 → 670] I say that the creation of natures narrated here is something unfamiliar because it is [ 670 → 673] the creation of things for the first time. [ 673 → 677] But surely we are not to believe that God did not make the world because He does not [ 677 → 684] make worlds today, or that He did not make the sun because He does not make suns today. [ 684 → 689] And this response should be given not just to those who question the creation of paradise, [ 689 → 693] but also to those who question the creation of man. [ 693 → 699] St. Augustine carries this line of thought into the city of God where in book 12 he comments [ 699 → 705] on Adam's infilling with the breadth of life and the supernatural creation of Eve [ 705 → 708] from Adam's side. [ 708 → 710] This He did as God. [ 710 → 714] Some people use the standards of their own daily experience to measure the power and [ 714 → 720] wisdom of God, by which He has the knowledge and the ability to make seeds even without [ 720 → 721] seeds. [ 721 → 725] And so they regard the account of man's creation as fable, not fact. [ 725 → 733] And because the first created works are beyond their experience, they adopt a skeptical attitude. [ 733 → 739] Here some 1,200 years before philosopher Rene Descartes emerged on the scene, St. Augustine [ 739 → 745] is warning against the tendency to drift toward a type of rationalism that views supernatural [ 745 → 748] events as non-historical. [ 748 → 753] As explained further in episode 13, the fact that so many present-day scholars embrace [ 753 → 759] such an anti-supernatural bias is an indication that they have returned to an ancient tendency [ 759 → 766] and error, which they nevertheless claim to be the product of modern scholarship. [ 778 → 783] A third false claim concerning the writings of St. Augustine is that he opposed interpreting [ 783 → 789] Genesis in the straightforward, obvious sense due to the fear that conflicts with natural [ 789 → 794] science would result and prevent unbelievers from accepting the faith. [ 794 → 800] Proponents of this error often cite two passages from the literal meaning of Genesis to support [ 800 → 802] their position. [ 802 → 804] From Book 1 [ 813 → 815] From Book 2 [ 815 → 817] From Book 3 [ 844 → 851] Looking at this excerpt more closely, we see that St. Augustine cautions against interpreting [ 851 → 857] scripture in a way that would contradict that which can be known from reason and experience. [ 857 → 862] In other words, that which is a legitimate subject for natural science. [ 862 → 868] But once we recognize that Darwinism is counter to reason and experience, that it is really [ 868 → 874] a disguised philosophical attack on the truth about origins, it becomes clear that St. Augustine [ 874 → 879] in no way implies that we must somehow reject the straightforward meaning of Genesis with [ 879 → 885] regard to the supernatural origin of the universe, mankind and the animal kinds. [ 885 → 891] Indeed, using St. Augustine's own words, one can argue that the real danger and the true [ 891 → 897] disgrace occur when Christians presume to reinterpret the meaning of Holy Scripture [ 897 → 903] and talk nonsense about origins due to false evolutionary claims that violate both reason [ 903 → 905] and experience. [ 905 → 910] It is also obvious that St. Augustine does not apply this text to the origin of man and [ 910 → 912] the animal kinds. [ 912 → 917] We know this because he continually discusses the special creation of man and the animal [ 917 → 921] kinds in the literal meaning of Genesis. [ 921 → 926] If it is reasonable to assume that he would not violate his own principle, then it is [ 926 → 932] clear that he did not intend for the paragraph under discussion to mean that origins of man [ 932 → 937] and the universe are a proper subject for natural science or that special creation should [ 937 → 941] not be found in the Genesis narrative. [ 941 → 946] In fact, in the literal meaning of Genesis, St. Augustine declares, [ 946 → 951] The one characteristic that distinguishes Adam from other men is that he was not born [ 951 → 954] of parents but made from the earth. [ 954 → 960] Man, like all other creatures, was made by the word of God. [ 960 → 967] There is, of course, no doubt about the kinds of animals that the earth produced at God's word. [ 967 → 973] St. Augustine's understanding carries over to his last word on origins contained in the [ 973 → 980] city of God where he insists that God willed to create the first man as a new act of creation [ 980 → 987] and notes that from the evidence of the Holy Scriptures, fewer than 6,000 years have passed [ 987 → 989] since man's first origin. [ 989 → 994] I believe that the most important insight regarding the paragraph from Book 1 under [ 994 → 1000] discussion is that the paragraph is followed by a discussion of even more serious dangers [1000 → 1007] that spring from attacks on truth from irreligious critics in the domain of science. [1007 → 1010] Indeed, St. Augustine warns, [1010 → 1015] Critics full of worldly learning should restrain themselves from attacking as ignorant and [1015 → 1020] uncultured these utterances that have been made to nourish all devout souls. [1020 → 1024] But more dangerous is the error of certain weak brethren who faint away when they hear [1024 → 1031] these irreligious critics learnedly and eloquently discoursing on the theories of astronomy or [1031 → 1035] on any of the questions relating to the elements of this universe. [1035 → 1040] With a sigh, they esteem these teachers as superior to themselves, looking upon them [1040 → 1046] as great men, and they return with disdain to the books, written for the good of their [1046 → 1053] souls, turning away in disgust from the unattractive wheat field they long for the blossoms on [1053 → 1056] the thorn. [1056 → 1061] This description anticipates the reaction to evolutionary biologists in modern times [1061 → 1063] remarkably well. [1063 → 1068] It was almost as if St. Augustine foresaw the myriad of Catholics who would be swayed [1068 → 1074] by the eloquent discourses of evolutionists, who are often viewed as the supreme authority [1074 → 1081] about origins, while Genesis is looked upon with disdain and even embarrassment. [1081 → 1085] But here is the most important point. [1085 → 1091] After discussing all of these potential errors, St. Augustine forms his conclusion as to how [1091 → 1096] the faithful should properly approach apparent conflicts between sacred scripture and the [1096 → 1101] claims of critics who would misuse science. [1101 → 1109] In wording that would be adopted by Leo XIII in paragraph 18 of Providisimus Teus, St. [1109 → 1110] Augustine explains, [1110 → 1116] A man is not in any difficulty in making a reply according to his faith which he ought [1116 → 1120] to make to those who try to defame our holy scripture. [1120 → 1125] When the irreligious critics are able, from reliable evidence, to prove some fact of physical [1125 → 1130] science, we shall show that it is not contrary to our scripture. [1130 → 1135] But when they produce from any of their books a theory contrary to scripture, and therefore [1135 → 1140] contrary to the Catholic faith, either we shall have some ability to demonstrate that [1140 → 1147] it is absolutely false, or at least we ourselves will hold it so without any shadow of a doubt, [1147 → 1152] and we will so cling to our mediator, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom [1152 → 1158] and knowledge, that we will not be led astray by the glib talk of false philosophy. [1158 → 1164] When we read the inspired books, let us choose that one interpretation which appears as certainly [1164 → 1167] the meaning intended by the author. [1167 → 1172] But if this is not clear, then at least we should choose an interpretation in keeping [1172 → 1180] with the context of scripture, and in harmony with our faith. [1180 → 1184] Since St. Augustine clearly believed that Genesis was intended to convey the special [1184 → 1191] creation of man and the animal kinds, it is safe to conclude that he would have sided [1191 → 1198] with those who defend the account of special creation against those who try to reduce Genesis [1198 → 1204] to a myth or allegory through the use of evolution theory, which is the product not [1204 → 1210] of reason and observation, but of the glib talk of false philosophy. [1210 → 1215] A second quote from St. Augustine used by those who would fence off the study of origins [1215 → 1221] for natural science alone is from Book 2 of the literal meaning of Genesis, where he writes [1221 → 1227] It is also frequently asked what our belief must be about the form and shape of heaven [1227 → 1230] according to sacred scripture. [1230 → 1235] Such subjects are of no profit for those who seek beatitude, and they take up very precious [1235 → 1240] time that ought to be given to what is spiritually beneficial. [1240 → 1245] What concern of mine whether heaven is like a sphere and the earth is enclosed by it, [1245 → 1251] or whether heaven like a disk above the earth? [1251 → 1256] Here St. Augustine explains that we are not to draw more out of sacred scripture than [1257 → 1259] what the sacred author intends. [1259 → 1265] But he is not inferring that topics such as the origin of mankind are exclusively subjects [1265 → 1266] for natural science. [1266 → 1273] In fact, it is very clear from the quotations already given in this episode that St. Augustine [1273 → 1279] considered the origin of mankind and of the animal kinds to be from God's supernatural [1279 → 1287] activity during the six-day creation period, and this puts origins squarely in the realm [1287 → 1291] of historical theology, not natural science. [1291 → 1297] His writings on Genesis consistently convey the reality that God wished to chronicle and [1297 → 1304] communicate the supernatural creation of man that is the intent of the inspired author, [1304 → 1310] and this information is profitable for our belief and for our salvation. [1310 → 1316] You must also understand that the quotation from St. Augustine under discussion is addressing [1316 → 1321] a very specific question posed in chapter 9 of book 2. [1321 → 1326] This chapter is entitled, The Shape of the Material Heaven. [1326 → 1331] To extrapolate his response to this specific issue and conclude that anything related to [1331 → 1338] origins is a matter of natural science and not theology must be rejected. [1338 → 1344] Such an extrapolation must be rejected because it would violate St. Augustine's own writings, [1344 → 1351] namely that the origin of mankind and the animal kinds were the result of God's direct [1351 → 1357] creative action and were not the result of natural processes. [1361 → 1375] A fourth misrepresentation of St. Augustine's writings is the assertion that because he [1375 → 1381] did not adhere to the view that the days of Genesis were 24-hour days or short periods [1381 → 1387] of time, he did not subscribe to the straightforward and obvious meaning of Genesis and that his [1387 → 1392] concept of the seminal reasons is compatible with evolution theory. [1392 → 1397] We have repeatedly established in this episode that St. Augustine was a firm believer in [1397 → 1403] the creation providence framework, in other words, that he believed supernatural processes [1403 → 1408] accounted for the origins of the universe, man and the animal kinds. [1408 → 1413] This is clearly incompatible with evolution theory, which extrapolates theoretical but [1413 → 1418] unobserved natural processes back to the beginning of creation. [1418 → 1423] Questions surrounding St. Augustine's views on the straightforward and obvious meaning [1423 → 1426] of Genesis do not adhere, however. [1426 → 1432] One particular area of debate concerns his perspective on the time frame of creation. [1432 → 1438] The basic question to be resolved is why St. Augustine did not interpret the days of Genesis [1438 → 1444] to mean days of normal length or short periods of time as did the other fathers. [1444 → 1450] Instead, while viewing Genesis in the historical sense and avoiding allegorical interpretations, [1450 → 1456] he believed that the Genesis mention of light referred to the angels while the Genesis references [1456 → 1462] to the day, morning and evening described various stages of the angels' contemplation [1462 → 1468] of the word of God about their knowledge of creatures. [1468 → 1472] To solve this question, some background is required. [1472 → 1477] As explained in the Ancient Christian Writers series, which includes a translation of the [1477 → 1481] literal meaning of Genesis, St. Augustine did not know Hebrew, the original language [1481 → 1482] of Genesis. [1482 → 1488] Moreover, his command of Greek was less than fluent, and by the time he began work on the [1488 → 1493] literal meaning of Genesis, he remained unable to read the Greek fathers in the original. [1493 → 1498] In examining the puzzle before us, we must be mindful of this limitation and recognize [1498 → 1505] that this does not take away from the accomplishment of this church father, doctor, and saint. [1505 → 1511] Added to this fundamental difficulty, in chapter 33, book 4 of the literal meaning of Genesis, [1511 → 1517] St. Augustine writes of an apparent conflict in sacred scripture involving chapters 1 and [1517 → 1520] 2 of Genesis that he seeks to resolve. [1520 → 1522] He states, [1522 → 1527] In this narrative of creation, Holy Scripture has said of the Creator that He completed [1527 → 1530] His works in six days. [1530 → 1534] And elsewhere, without contradicting this, it has been written of the same Creator that [1534 → 1537] He created all things together. [1537 → 1546] St. Augustine's allusion to God creating all things together is a reference to Sirach 18.1. [1546 → 1549] This book is also called Ecclesiasticus. [1549 → 1551] This text declares that, quote, [1551 → 1555] He who lives forever created all things together, unquote. [1555 → 1561] However, St. Augustine, in this instance, drew his interpretation from the Vetus Latina [1561 → 1563] translation of the Bible. [1563 → 1566] And here, it seems, lies the root of the difficulty. [1566 → 1573] The term simul, which means at one time or all together in the Latin version, is an ambiguous [1573 → 1579] translation of the Greek word koine, which means in common or without exception. [1579 → 1583] Scholars suggest that a more accurate translation would read, quote, [1583 → 1588] He who lives forever created the whole universe, unquote. [1588 → 1594] In the theory of evolution, judged by reason and faith, Cardinal Ernesto Ruffini expounds [1594 → 1598] upon the significance of this mistranslation. [1598 → 1601] The text on which St. Augustine appears to base his opinion, [1601 → 1607] He who lives forever created all things together, does not mean that God created all things [1607 → 1614] at the same time, but rather that He has created all things equally, namely, without any exception. [1614 → 1621] Such is the sense of the Greek term koine, rendered in Latin in the ambiguous manner, simul. [1621 → 1625] It cannot be denied that this great genius, St. Augustine, who studied the beginning of [1625 → 1632] Genesis for thirty and more years, preferred to adapt the Genesis text to the first sense [1632 → 1639] of the text of Ecclesiasticus, that God created all things at the same time. [1639 → 1646] Once St. Augustine accepted the translation that all things were created together or simultaneously, [1646 → 1649] difficulties with the Genesis text emerged. [1649 → 1653] Not only was an alternative interpretation of the Genesis day required, but he had to [1653 → 1659] explain the apparent time lapse regarding the appearance of various animal kinds. [1659 → 1665] This dilemma led, in turn, to the creation of St. Augustine's concept of seminal reasons [1665 → 1667] or causal reasons. [1667 → 1673] According to this concept, God created all animal kinds at the same time, during the [1673 → 1679] creation period, though some kinds would emerge from the earth and pass from potential into [1679 → 1682] actual existence at a future time. [1682 → 1683] He writes, [1683 → 1688] For through wisdom all things were made, and the motion we now see in creatures measured [1688 → 1693] by the lapse of time, as each one fulfills its proper function, comes to creatures from [1693 → 1699] those causal reasons implanted in them, which God scattered as seeds at the moment of creation [1699 → 1706] when he spoke and they were made, he commanded and they were created. [1707 → 1712] As noted in the Ancient Christian Writers series, a number of factors led St. Augustine [1712 → 1718] to this concept, including his interpretation of Sirach chapter 18 verse 1 as meaning that [1718 → 1724] God created all things simultaneously, simul. [1724 → 1729] These considerations led him to conclude that when God created, he did indeed create all [1729 → 1735] things simultaneously, but that living things made in that original creative act were not [1735 → 1742] made in actuality in their own proper substances, but only potentially in their causal reasons [1742 → 1745] placed in the earth by the Creator. [1745 → 1749] Given the appropriate conditions of earth and moisture, these powers would produce the [1749 → 1755] living creatures intended by God, which would come into being in time according to the plan [1755 → 1757] of his providence. [1757 → 1762] Thus, God rests from all his works in the sense that he does not create any new kinds [1762 → 1768] of creatures that were not in the original creation, either actually or potentially. [1768 → 1773] And at the same time, he is working by reason of the fact that he governs the world he has [1773 → 1777] made, according to the words of Christ who says, [1777 → 1781] My Father works even until now, and I work. [1781 → 1786] John 5.17 [1786 → 1792] Not surprisingly, with the rise of Darwinism, many Catholics latched on to St. Augustine's [1792 → 1798] seminal reasons to show that there was no conflict between scripture and evolution. [1798 → 1805] However, St. Augustine's concept, which involved both the instant creation of all animal kinds [1805 → 1811] and the later introduction or actualization of some animal kinds over time through the [1811 → 1819] divine will, not natural processes, was made necessary precisely because of his belief [1819 → 1826] in the six-day creation period and the order of creation, order of providence framework. [1826 → 1832] His approach was an attempt to reconcile the framework with a mistranslation of Sirach [1832 → 1835] chapter 18 verse 1. [1835 → 1841] But understanding that God alone supernaturally created all animal kinds during the period [1841 → 1849] of creation, St. Augustine's views were clearly incompatible with naturalistic evolution. [1849 → 1857] As he stated, outside of the period of creation, we cannot believe that God establishes a new [1857 → 1864] kind since he finished all his work on the sixth day. [1864 → 1870] Commenting on this incompatibility, Cardinal Ruffini observes, [1870 → 1875] The evolutionists maintain, one, that the differentiation of the species is the product [1875 → 1880] of successive generation, two, that God's activity in regard to the world is restricted [1880 → 1882] to the initial creative act. [1882 → 1886] St. Augustine's doctrine is diametrically opposed. [1886 → 1893] One, corresponding to every species or different nature is a particular ratio seminalis, placed [1893 → 1898] in the world by God the Creator as a scheme or invisible image, but capable of actuality [1899 → 1902] in the course of time by his omnipotent word. [1902 → 1909] Two, in the beginning, God created all organisms together in a quasi-seminal state, but it [1909 → 1915] is he and he alone who causes them to arise in the course of the centuries. [1915 → 1920] That is, he causes them to pass from the seminal state into the actual state according to a [1920 → 1926] fixed plan, by means of that providential government to which Jesus refers in the gospel, [1926 → 1931] The Father works even until now, and I work. [1931 → 1938] Finally, we note that St. Augustine was extremely cautious about his interpretation of Genesis. [1938 → 1945] In his confessions, he discusses the criticism he received for his early writings on Genesis [1945 → 1950] and in the literal meaning of Genesis, he encourages alternative views as long as they [1950 → 1955] are literal and do not contravene the scriptures. [1955 → 1959] Whoever then does not accept the meaning that my limited powers have been able to discover [1959 → 1965] or conjecture, but seeks in the enumeration of the days of creation a different meaning, [1965 → 1970] which might be understood not in a prophetical or figurative sense, but literally and more [1970 → 1977] aptly in interpreting the works of creation, let him search and find a solution with God's help. [1977 → 1983] I myself may possibly discover some other meaning more in harmony with the words of scripture. [1983 → 1989] I certainly do not advance the interpretation given above in such a way as to imply that [1989 → 1994] no better one can ever be found. [1994 → 2000] When we look more closely at the details, the claims that St. Augustine was an evolutionist [2000 → 2006] or that he did not view Genesis as a historical narrative are revealed as baseless, and these [2006 → 2012] claims come no closer to the truth when tabled by Ph.D. evolutionary biologists or theology [2012 → 2015] professors at Catholic universities. [2015 → 2019] Why then are such claims so commonly made and accepted? [2019 → 2026] Because many Catholics, having accepted evolutionary hypothesis as the source of truth about origins, [2026 → 2031] even treating evolution as a first principle to which everything else must conform, are [2031 → 2036] in such a rush to reconcile Darwinism with Catholic teaching that they fail to study [2036 → 2042] the original writings in the domains of theology, science, and philosophy, and they fail to think [2042 → 2044] critically on this issue. [2044 → 2050] Ignoring sound principles of scriptural interpretation and starting with the false premises of naturalism, [2050 → 2054] many have departed from what God has clearly communicated in sacred scripture and through [2054 → 2056] sacred tradition. [2056 → 2061] This is a doomed approach that leads not to the harmony of truth, but to a synthesis of [2061 → 2065] philosophical, theological, and scientific falsehood. [2065 → 2072] Sadly, it is not difficult to envision the father of lies who fully understands the leverage [2072 → 2077] to be gained from the doubts about God's word, standing in the corner nodding his approval [2077 → 2083] and mouthing the words, did God really say, as the false synthesis about origins is taught [2083 → 2087] to trusting students in seminaries and Catholic institutions. [2090 → 2094] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2132 → 2138] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2138 → 2144] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2144 → 2150] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2150 → 2156] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2156 → 2162] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2162 → 2168] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2168 → 2174] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2174 → 2180] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2180 → 2186] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2186 → 2192] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2192 → 2198] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2198 → 2204] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2204 → 2210] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2210 → 2216] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2216 → 2222] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2222 → 2228] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2228 → 2234] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2234 → 2240] Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas pray for us. [2252 → 2262] www.circlelineartschool.com