Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Geological Society L...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Geological Society London Special Publications
Article . 2009 . Peer-reviewed
License: STM Policy #2
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

The history of the doctrine of creation; a Catholic perspective

Authors: Martin Ostermann;

The history of the doctrine of creation; a Catholic perspective

Abstract

AbstractThe history of the emancipation of modern science can be traced in the history of the relationship between creation and evolution, but this is also an example of the growing importance of scholarly–theoretical issues within theology, especially in relation to the interpretation of the Bible. Three phases can be distinguished: (1) the time when teachings about creation were the dominant model; (2) the time when the scientific model of evolution clashed with the theological doctrine of creation; (3) a phase of open dialogue. The third phase began with the recognition of the scientific method by the encyclicals ofPope Pius XII in 1943and1950. However, only in the recent past, initiated by the second Vatican Council, was room made for a fruitful collaboration and the instigation of complementary scientific–theological models. The basic openness to dialogue and the recognition of the working methods of theology and science highlight extreme positions that, from their method of argumentation, must be called fundamentalist. ‘Creationism’ insists upon a literal–naive understanding of the Bible, which cannot be supported by scholarly–theological means, whereas the ‘intelligent design movement’, under the guise of empirical science, tries to present religiously motivated statements as empirical facts. Both groups are characterized by a closed world view and the use of arguments that do not follow from their premises. The present attempts at a scientific–theological synthesis are diverse and show that creation and evolution can be thought of together without inconsistency. For this dialogue to be successful, the open demonstration of one's own methods and the recognition of the theoretically accounted for methods of the dialogue partner are essential. This paper endeavours to demonstrate some of the theological methods relevant to the question of creation and evolution.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    2
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
2
Average
Average
Average
Beta
sdg_colorsSDGs:
Related to Research communities
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!