I also am Catholic, and did a boatload of study before converting
5 years ago. I did not state that we don't believe in God or in
the authority of Scripture. I stated that these are not assumptions,
but are instead proven through historical analysis. That is one of
the strengths of our faith: we don't start with an unproven assumption
and continue on; we start with a proof that the Bible is accurate and
a proof that Jesus is who he claimed to be.
> > Catholism begins by approaching the Bible as any other ancient work,
> > and from textual criticism concludes that the accuracy of the
> > text is more certain than the accuracy of any other ancient work.
>
> All liberal theologians (protesants and Catholics) do that, but that is
> not exactly mainstream.
Unfortunately it's not mainstream knowledge. But it is absolutely
orthodox, as am I. Check out Karl Keating's "Catholicism and
Fundamentalism", Ward and Sheed's "Catholic Evidence Training
Outlines" (in which you'll find many references supporting this),
as well as any orthodox Catholic apologetics manual, and you
should find what I stated above about proving the authority
of the Bible and the divinity of Christ, not simply assuming it.
I think we're getting somewhat off the topic at this point. I'd
like to continue this, however, if you're interested. Let me know
if you also feel it's getting too far from the evolution topic.
Steve Stolz
steves@uccs.com