Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Roman Catholic Church

2016-05-31T23:35:18Z

Crusadestudent:

{{Christianity}}
The '''Catholic Church''', sometimes known informally as the '''Roman Catholic Church''', is a denomination of [[Christianity]] headquartered in [[Vatican City]]. The Catholics Church teaches the divinity of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and worship the God of [[Abraham]]. The Catholic Church has a single leader, the [[pope]], the [[Bishop]] of [[Rome]]. The current pope is [[Pope Francis|Francis]]. Present day governance of the Church is divided hierarchically into dioceses, each overseen by a diocesan bishop, who in turn oversees diocesan priests and deacons on the level of the individual parish.

The word "Catholic" means "universal." It's use as a name for the Church comes from Nicene-Constantinople Creed of 381, which defines the church as, "one, holy, catholic and apostolic." In the Christological controversy of the fourth century, Catholics opposed the heresy of [[Arianism]].

The Church has always been [[pro-life]] and its leadership is mostly [[conservative]], as illustrated by how it "launched a crackdown on the umbrella group that represents most of [[America]]'s 55,000 [[Catholic]] nuns" for "a prevalence of certain radical [[feminist]] themes incompatible with the Catholic [[faith]]." The Church noted that "the group was not speaking out strongly enough against" [[abortion]].<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-04-18/american-nuns-vatican/54396560/1?csp=hf</ref>

Members believe that theirs is the oldest [[Christian]] denomination in the world. It is certainly the largest, with more than 1.3 billion officially baptized adherents, or 17.4% of the world's population; over 64 million of these are in the [[United States]]. In recent years growth has been greatest in Africa and Latin America, while membership and influence have declined in Europe.

The Catholic Church asserts that the Pope is the divinely-chosen successor of [[St. Peter]], believing him to be the 'rock' ([[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 16:18) upon whom Jesus built his Church. The Catholic Church consists of those Christians who are in full communion with the Pope. This includes members both of the Latin Church and of the 23 Eastern Catholic Churches. The Eastern Catholic Churches were once known as the "Uniate" Churches; though once used with pride at remaining in union with Rome after the [[Great Schism|East-West Schism]], this term has fallen out of use due to derogatory connotations that have come to be associated with it over the centuries.

The Catholic Church has suffered several schisms over its history. Most notable are those involving the Church of the East following the First Ephesian Council, the [[Oriental Orthodoxy|Oriental Orthodox]] churches following the [[Council of Chalcedon]], the [[Eastern Orthodoxy|Eastern Orthodox Church]] following the [[Great Schism]] of 1054, and the several [[Reformation]]s of the 16th century leading to the development of [[Protestantism]].

The Protestants made the most radical break. Two of the principal issues raised by Protestants were
''[[sola scriptura]],'' the doctrine that the Bible alone is the final authority for Christians (which is also a denial of the infallibility of Sacred Tradition, the Pope, and the infallibility of ecumenical Church councils) and ''sola fide,'' the doctrine popularized by [[Martin Luther]] that faith alone, as opposed to faith and good works both, is sufficient for salvation.

[[Image:Cathpop.jpg|right|thumb|350px|Catholics in the world.]]

==Organization==

The Pope and the the international leadership of the Church are based in [[Vatican City]], a sovereign elective monarchy and an enclave of [[Rome]] established by the 1929 Lateran Treaty.

The Catholic Church has a complex hierarchy of clergy, including (in descending order of rank):

* The [[Pope]]
*[[Cardinal]]s
*[[Archbishop]]s
*[[Bishop]]s
*[[Abbot]]s
*Monsignor|Monsignori
*Archpriests
*[[Priest]]s
*[[Deacon]]s

The key roles are played by the Pope and the bishops, and the question of whether secular governments should play a major role in ecclesiastical appointments has been a major issue for centuries. The [[Investiture Controversy]] in the [[Holy Roman Empire]] was over this question, as was the dispute between [[Gallicanism]] and [[ultramontanism]] in France.

==Teachings==
[[Image:JpII.jpg|right|thumb|[[Pope John Paul II]] reigned 1978-2005]]
The chief teachings of the Catholic church are set out in the [[Catechism of the Catholic Church]] in order to foster and promote the Profession of the Faith (first part), the Celebration of the Christian Mystery (second part), the Life in Christ (third part), and Christian Prayer (fourth part). They are:

* God’s objective existence.
* God’s interest in individual human beings, who can enter into relations with God through direct and intercessory prayer and through the intercession of a priest ordained by Holy Orders.
* The [[Holy Trinity]] and [[christology|divinity of the person of Jesus Christ]].
* The immortality of the [[soul]] of each human being, each one being accountable at death for his or her actions in life, with the award of Heaven or Hell.
* The resurrection of the dead.
* The historicity of the [[Gospels]].
* The divine commission of the Church and infallibility of revealed scriptural interpretation.

The Catholic Church stresses that since the members, living and dead, share in each other’s merits, the [[Virgin Mary]] and other saints and the dead in Purgatory are never forgotten,<ref>[http://www.bartleby.com/65/ro/RomanCat.html The Columbia Encyclopedia]</ref> may be addressed in prayer, and intercede with God on the behalf of the living. The very physical and spiritual body and blood of Christ are believed to be present in the Eucharist, [[Transubstantiation|the bread and wine being Jesus himself]], replacing the material of bread and wine. The principal sources for the essential beliefs of the Catholic Church are the Sacred Scriptures (the Bible), Sacred Tradition, and the Living Magisterium of the Church.

The term "Catholic" is frequently used as an adjective meaning, "pertaining to the Catholic Church." [[Protestantism|Protestant]]s sometimes take exception to this use, as the defined meaning of "catholic" (the adjective) is "universal" (from the Greek ''καθολικός'', or ''katholikos'', meaning "universal"). The [[Anglican Communion]] and other Protestants also speak of themselves as part of the "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church."<ref>http://www.answers.com/topic/catholic</ref> The Orthodox Church understands herself to be the one universal Catholic Church and rejects the claims of Rome.

The Catholic Church teaches respect for all human life. It opposes the practices of contraception, abortion,<ref>Paul VI, Humanae Vitae (1968) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html</ref> euthanasia and (in most cases) capital punishment.<ref> John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (1995) http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0141/_INDEX.HTM</ref> The Church is in favor of social justice and "the common good."<ref> Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate (2009) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html</ref> Some Catholics take this idea further, espousing a "[[consistent life ethic]]," under which ''all'' killing of humans is said to be unlawful. This position should logically entail [[pacifism]], although the Catholic Church is not opposed to war under all circumstances in the manner of some "peace" churches. (See [[just war]].)

The Catholic Church allows evolutionist research, but not any denial that God was the '''creator''' of all things. The only Evolutionism that Catholics are allowed to believe in is Theistic Evolution.

== History ==

===Early Church===

The original Christian community was founded by Jesus Christ and led by the Apostles. The Catholic Church considers itself to be the sole and uninterrupted continuation of the first-century Church. St. [[Paul|Paul the Apostle]] was the most prolific contributor to the [[New Testament]] and the most notable of the Early Christian missionaries. Christians were subjected to persecution, first under [[Nero]] in A.D. 64 and again, more severely, under the emperors [[Domitian]], [[Marcus Aurelius]], [[Decius]], and [[Diocletian]], in the second and third centuries.

After almost 300 years of persecution against the Church failed to stop the growth of Christianity, the Emperor [[Constantine I]] had a religious experience and, by the [[Edict of Milan]] issued in the early fourth century, legalized Christianity. Going to war with the co-Emperor of the east [[Lucinius]] over his continued persecution of Christians, Constantine won and became sole Emperor. The age of persecution was over.
[[Image:Christians.jpg|thumb|450px]]

===Barbarians converted===

Until the early fourth century AD Christianity enjoyed a mixed reception in the Roman Empire, and Christians were frequently subject to persecution. After its legalization, the Christian Church became increasingly powerful in the Roman Empire, although [[Arianism]] remained strong. In 380 AD, [[Theodosius I]] established the Church as the official religion of the Roman Empire and proscribed the former pagan practices. There was a brief [[pagan]] revival in the West under the usurper [[Eugenius]], but that was brought to an end with his death. While the Empire continued to decline, Christianity continued to grow both among those directly under the Empire and among the barbarians, until the time that Rome was sacked by [[Alaric]] in 410. Alaric was an Arian Christian.

After the collapse of the Western Empire, the Catholic Church became the most powerful political and religious force in Latin-speaking Europe, and by the 8th century it had achieved near total religious dominance.

Aggressive missionary activities accomplished the conversion of most of the pagan tribes in Europe by the year 1000 AD. The last pagan country in Europe to be converted was [[Lithuania]], in 1387.

=== Great Schism ===

Numerous disputes between the eastern and western churches became more pronounced from the ninth century onwards. The Church experienced the [[Great Schism]] in 1054 that divided it into a Western (Latin) branch, which has been called the Catholic Church, and an Eastern branch, which has become known as the [[Orthodox Church|Eastern Orthodox Church]]. Both traced their roots to the time of Jesus, but the Eastern Orthodox Church rejected the claims of the Pope to universal jurisdiction.

The Schism's causes were not purely religious. Cultural and geographic elements also played a role. Later attempts at reconciliation occurred, such as at the [[Council of Basel]], but the two churches remain separate to this day.

=== Late Middle Ages ===

The Crusades, a series of religious wars instigated by the Church against the Muslims and other groups in the Holy Land, began in 1092 and continued until the end of the 13th century. Despite the focus on regaining the Holy Land from Muslim control, the Crusaders also massacred Jews and sacked the Christian city of Constantinople.

During this time period, the [[Inquisition]]s started and would continue through the time of the Protestant Reformation and beyond. The medieval inquisition focused on rooting out [[Cathars]], while the later inquisitions, such as the [[Spanish Inquisition]], focused on people who were believed to be secretly practicing [[Judaism]] or [[Islam]] following the [[Alhambra Decree|legally mandated]] conversion to Christianity of all Jews and Muslims remaining in Spain.

===Reformation and Counter-Reformation===

In 1517, [[Martin Luther]] began the [[Protestant Reformation]] with a public protest against the sale of [[indulgences]]. It grew into a movement that covered a wider variety of issues. Eventually, [[Protestantism|Protestants]] rejected the notions of saintly intercession, the authority of the Pope, and any sacraments other than [[Baptism]] and [[Communion]]. This movement eventually led to a Catholic revival (the "Counter-Reformation") and a series of religious wars in [[Europe]]. The Protestant-Catholic split became one of the dominant themes in European and American events until recent times.

===1815 to 1914===

====Conservatism====

After 1800 the Papacy became the center of conservatism in Europe in reaction against the radicalism of the French Revolution. Pius VII (1800-23) was stripped of powers by [[Napoleon]] but made a striking comeback after Napoleon's fall in 1815. His unusually able Secretary of State Cardinal Consalvi won the restoration to the Pope of most of the territories in Italy which Napoleon had seized. He reinvigorated numerous monastic orders and helped create new societies for men and women, especially those engaged in teaching and missionary work. Most important was the restoration of the Jesuits in 1814. They grew more numerous and even more influential in the 19th century.

The Papacy recognized that throughout Europe millions of peasants and poor folk were devoted to the saints and traditions of the Church; the Popes responded energetically by promoting various Marian devotions (such as the rosary). Rome had fallen into disrepair, and Pius VII began the restoration of the city's artistic glories, an enterprise that continues in the 21st century. <ref> Kelly (1999); Duffy (2006); Latourette (1958) vol 1. </ref>

====Ultramontane vs Gallican====

The "ultramontane" tendency in the Church centralized more power and authority in the Papacy. It was opposed by the "[[Gallican]]" tendency, especially in France, to give national churches more control over their affairs. The ultramontine forces generally won out, especially with the promulgation of [[Papal Infallibility]] at the First Vatican Council in 1870. The ultramontane forces cited the old doctrines of [[Robert Bellarmine]] (1542-1621) and [[Francisco de Suárez]] (1548-1617) to bolster the papal claim to absolute power in spiritual matters.

Gallicanism in France was damaged by the rise of ultramontanism in the 1850s and the devotional revolution that shifted piety to devotions sponsored by Rome. Gallicanism was officially suppressed by the First Vatican Council in 1870, which established the paramount authority of the pope as a matter of dogma. However informal manifestations of Gallicanism continue in some countries, especially China. In Canada, the Irish clergy fought for ultramontanism against the French clergy, who were Gallican. The [[Catholicism in Ireland|Irish]] won out with the support of the Vatican.

====Facing Modernity====

Nineteenth century urbanization brought millions of peasants from the villages to industrial cities where church facilities were few. The Church escaped irrelevance by using the same means as emerging nation-states: promoting a homogeneous culture aided especially by universal use of Latin; authorizing new rites and folk devotions, especially those focused on Mary and other favored saints; promoting pilgrimages to holy sites; encouraging clergy to endorse and lead regional nationalist movements that focused on historic languages and cultures; creating many new teaching orders and schools; supporting intellectuals and publishing houses; cultivating an image of theological, canonical, and moral superiority; and establishing more administrative and doctrinal centralization (in Rome). Of special importance was the missionary activity, based especially in Germany, that was in competition with Protestant missions in China, India, Africa and other non-Christian lands. The Jesuits proved highly adept at promoting the Papal cause.

The resurgence of Papal leadership caused internal dissent among some Catholic intellectuals, such as the historian [[Lord Acton]] in Britain and the theologian Ignaz von Döllinger in Germany, who opposed the declaration of the dogma of papal infallibility. This caused further schisms, with breakaway groups centering on the Archbishop of [[Utrecht]] to form the [[Old Catholic Church]].

=====Syllabus of Errors=====

The [[Syllabus of Errors]] of Pope [[Pius IX]] in 1864 rejected the liberal doctrines of the modern world.<ref> see text at [http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm]</ref> It denounced pantheism, naturalism, nationalism, indifferentism, socialism, communism, freemasonry, theological rationalism, [[separation of church and state]], and removal of [[public school]]s from Church control. The Pope claimed for the Catholic Church total control over science and culture. Liberals viewed this as a declaration of war by the Church on modern civilization. Opponents stressed the Papacy had become intolerant and medieval and largely political in nature.<ref> Latourette (1958) vol 1 ch. 6</ref>

====Facing Liberalism====

In Germany in the 1840s the ultramontane movement used mass meetings and pilgrimages to combat the growth of liberalism and modernism. However, the anti-clerical press attacked these mass meetings, and in response a large number of Catholic newspapers emerged in Germany starting in the 1840s. To ensure their own survival, these newspapers championed a liberal idea--[[Freedom of the press|press freedom]]. In addition, local clubs were established to mobilize the Catholic working class. These clubs tried to end discrimination against ordinary Catholics by advocating other liberal concepts--freedom of religion and freedom of thought--and by entering the electoral process.

With the unification of Germany in 1870, the new nation faced the problems of consolidation, one of which was secularization. The laws dealing with secularization opened a political battle between Chancellor [[Bismarck]] and the Catholics, which struggle is called the "[[Kulturkampf]]." The Catholics organized their own political parties and protected their interests by voting as a bloc into the 1930s, when the Nazis closed down all other parties.

====Freemasons====

Freemasonry is a secret society that was, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, politically active in numerous countries. The Catholic Church opposed Freemasonry and forbade its members to belong to Masonic lodges. The Catholic Church first condemned Freemasonry in 1738. This was partially because Masons were often aligned with popular uprisings that had the objective of replacing traditional monarchs and class privilege with national independence and voting rights. A large number of the signers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence had been Freemasons, for example. Some, though not all, of the French Revolution's leaders were Masons, although Robespierre was not a Mason. The Masonic role in the French Revolution was part of the reason the Catholic Church condemned Freemasonry.

The Papacy coordinated attacks against Masonry in countries such as Brazil, where the religious question in the 1870s centered on Masonry and the struggle between regalist and ultramontane forces. One method of Catholic action was to found Catholic universities. Ignace Bourget, second bishop of Montreal, Canada, founded Laval University, saying that the university would be the principal instrument for "wresting the elite from the clutches of liberalism." At the time, political Liberalism was closely associated with national liberation and democracy.

====Women====

A spiritual revolution took place in the 19th century, moving individuals to a renewed interest in personal piety. There was a new emphasis on the role of Mary and a greatly increased involvement of women in the life of the Church. The number of sisters and nuns increased from 20,000 to 400,000 between 1815 and 1914.

Camp (1990) traced the treatment of women by the Church. In the late 19th century, the papacy began to revise its public teachings about the proper role of women in the Church and society. From Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) to Pope John Paul II (1978-2005), papal social pronouncements revealed an evolution in attitudes from the view that women are passive subordinates to men in all spheres of life to the current teaching that lay and clerical women are equal but complementary partners with men in religious, political, economic, and social endeavors. Nevertheless, the papacy has remained firm in the conviction that ordination is for men only.

====Arts====

[[Image:Cerro_de_Angeles.jpg|right|thumb|230px|Cerro de los Angeles, Madrid, Spain.]]
The arts provided a refuge from modernity in the form of a nostalgic aesthetic. Church architecture saw the revival of the medieval [[Gothic]] style. Romantic literature, for example by Chateaubriand, helped inspire a Catholic revival. In music, Catholic churchgoers were likely to be exposed to an officially sponsored revival of ''a cappella'' singing in the manner of Palestrina. The rapid development of symphonic and operatic forms affected sacred music, resulting in many masses, requiems, and te deums for large orchestra and chorus, sometimes even composed by skeptics such as Berlioz and Verdi.

====Politics====

In politics, as democracy and popular government spread, religious motivations moved people into one party or the other. In Catholic countries such as France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, sharp confrontations emerged between clericals and anti-clericals; in countries with mixed Catholic and Protestant populations such as Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Britain and the U.S., political splits occurred along confessional lines. In the U.S. the great majority of the Catholics became [[Democratic Party|Democrats]]. In Germany the Catholics formed their own Center party to fight off attacks from the Protestants, as during the [[Kulturkampf]].

The British attempt to impose Protestantism on Ireland not only fueled the Catholic revival there but also contributed to its spread via emigration to the U.S. and Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and England itself, all of which increased the Catholic population. The Irish often took control of the Church in each of these countries. The Poles, having lost their nation state in the 1790s, turned to an intense religiosity that preserved national identity and which they carried with them to industrial centers in the U.S. and Germany. In the U.S., some Poles, frustrated with the Irish control of the Church, founded the [[Polish National Catholic Church]].

===20th century===

====Vatican II====

[[File:John-23.jpg|right|thumb|270px|[[Pope John XXIII]] reigned 1958-63]]

The "Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican" (termed [[Vatican II]]), was called by [[Pope John XXIII]] and was in session from 1962 to 1965. It dramatically modernized and transformed church policies, with major changes to official theology and liturgy. Liturgical changes included the introduction of Mass in local languages instead of Latin. Theologically, the council deemphasized the centrality of Mary while also adding a new emphasis on individual and personal holiness. These were ideas previously associated with Protestantism and had, in some cases, been features in the opposition to the Catholic Church since the time of the Protestant Reformation. The Council asserted the Church's support for [[freedom of religion]], declared that the Jews were not guilty of [[deicide]], and recognized the possibility of salvation for Jews, Muslims, and Protestants.

After Vatican II, 1962-65, the controversy among Catholics over papal authority and infallibility largely ended, though some significant degree of opposition to it remains,<ref>such as by historian Garry Wills, author of ''Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit'' (Sophia Institute Press, 2003), and liberal theologian Hans Kung, author of ''Infallible?: An inquiry'' (1970)</ref><ref>David Carlin, ''The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America'',‎ appendix 2</ref><ref>[http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/vatican.htm Raymond Taouk, ''What are Catholics to think of Vatican II?'']</ref> This dissent is mainly manifested in disagreement with Catholic teaching on birth control and abortion.<ref>[http://www.christianethicstoday.com/Issue/014/Infallibility%20in%20Ethical%20Perspective%20By%20John%20M.%20Swomley_014_26_.htm John M. Swomley, ''Infallibility in Ethical Perspective Christian Ethics Today], Issue 014 Volume 4 No 1 February 1996</ref> For example 56% of U.S. Catholics said that the pope is not infallible "when he teaches on matters of morals, such as birth control and abortion"; 80% of Catholics believed it is possible to disagree with the pope on official positions on morality and still be a good Catholic. <ref>Time/CNN nationwide poll of 1,000 adults, conducted by Yankelovich Partners, Sept. 27-28, 1995</ref>

Reactions among Catholics to Vatican II fall into three camps. "Liberal" Catholics, drawing on the established Catholic belief in the "journeying" nature of the Church, see Vatican II and the new period that it marked in Catholic history as representing a significant advancement in man's understanding of the Gospels, which in turn justifies changes in Catholic belief and practice. "Conservative" Catholics (including the most recent popes) hold that the decrees of the Council, properly understood, are wholly in line with the historic Catholic faith, and that they should not be used as an excuse for unwarranted innovations. "Traditional" (or "[[Traditionalist Catholicism|traditionalist]]") Catholics regard the teachings of Vatican II as problematic, or even as heretical. Some of these Catholics created new churches which use the old liturgies.

===21st Century===

Current issues facing the Catholic Church include:

* The effects of Obamacare and other liberal legislation on Catholic hospitals (such as funding for abortion)
* The aftermath of a series of sexual abuse scandals by priests and other clergymen. In the early 2000s, it was found that bishops were privately settling cases of molestation of minors by priests, occurring primarily between the 1940s and 1980s. The attempted cover-up of this abuse by the church has caused many Catholics to become disillusioned with the church.
* Increasing atheism and secularism in Europe

Islam is also increasingly becoming a threat to Catholicism. Sharia Law's rejection of religious freedom and the ongoing genocide of Chaldean Rite Catholics in Iraq are among these threats. There is a very strong trend of Muslim immigration into Europe, which is subverting the judicial system towards a Sharia theocracy. This trend is fueled through assassinations and threats towards anti-Islamic politicians (such as [[Theo Van Gogh]] and [[Geert Wilders]]). While Christianity remains the world's largest religion, all denominations of Islam combined now outnumber Catholicism (the most popular Christian denomination).

The Church has taken stances on recent controversial issues, including opposing the [[Iraq War]]<ref>Richert, Scott P. "What Is the Papacy's Response to the War in Iraq?" About.com Catholicism. http://catholicism.about.com/od/thechurchintheworld/f/popes_on_iraq.htm</ref>, supporting [[universal health care]] (including many aspects of [[Obamacare]])<ref>Clarke, Kevin. "Papal prescription for universal health care." January 16, 2011. U.S. Catholic. http://www.uscatholic.org/culture/social-justice/2011/01/papal-prescription</ref>, and supporting assistance to unauthorized [[immigrant]]s.<ref>Kerwin, Donald. "Immigration Reform and the Catholic Church." May, 2006. Migration Information Source. http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=395</ref> The Church continues to oppose birth control and abortion, as discussed above.

== See also ==

*[[Cafeteria Catholic]]
*[[Catholic views on creationism‎]]
*[[Pope Francis I]]
*[[Vatican City]]
*[[Catholicism in Crisis]]
*[[Revelation, Book of (historical exegesis)]]

==External links==
[[Image:Virgen.jpg|right|thumb|Virgin Mary and Child]]

*[http://www.Vatican.va The Vatican]
*A digital version of [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ ''The Catholic Encyclopedia''].
*[http://www.cua.edu/ The Catholic University of America] Washington, D. C.
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm St. Paul] Catholic Encyclopedia.
*[http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm Catechism of the Catholic Church] Saint Charles Borromeo Catholic Church web site.
*[http://www.pellegrinocattolico.com/index.html Al Pellegrino Cattolico] Italian web site.

==Further reading==
* Bokenkotter, Thomas. ''A Concise History of the Catholic Church'' (2005) [http://www.amazon.com/Concise-History-Catholic-Church/dp/0385516134/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241119912&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
* Brown, Peter. ''The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity 200-1000 AD'' (2002), 640pp
* Chadwick, Owen. ''A History of the Popes, 1830-1914.'' (1998), 616pp; a standard recent history. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=12355195 online edition],
* Holland, Joe. ''Modern Catholic Social Teaching: The Popes Confront the Industrial Age 1740-1958.'' Paulist Press, 2003. 404 pp.
* Kung, Hans. ''The Catholic Church: A Short History'' (2003), by a leading Catholic scholar [http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Church-History-Library-Chronicles/dp/0812967623/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241119912&sr=8-15 excerpt and text search]
* Latourette, Kenneth Scott. ''Christianity in a Revolutionary Age: A History of Christianity in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries'' 5 Vol'' (1958), a detailed history of Christianity 1800-1950 by a Protestant scholar. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=101463833 vol 1 online edition]
* O'Toole, James M. ''The Faithful: A History of Catholics in America'' (2008) [http://books.google.com/books?id=BFlBzSAVW6kC&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:The+intitle:Faithful+intitle:A+intitle:History+intitle:of+intitle:Catholics+intitle:in+intitle:America&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]

===Reference===
* ''New Catholic 'Encyclopedia'' (1967), complete coverage of all topics by Catholic scholars
* ''Catholic Encyclopedia,'' (1913) [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ online edition] complete coverage by Catholic scholars; the articles were written about 100 years ago
* Coppa, Frank J., ed. ''Great Popes through History: An Encyclopedia.'' (2002). 600 pp.
* Kelly, J.N.D. ''The Oxford Dictionary of Popes'' (1988). 349pp; scholarly short biographies; [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=54850171 online edition]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Catholic Church| ]]
[[Category:Christian History]]
[[Category:Christian Denominations]]

Talk:Roman Catholic Church

2016-05-31T23:32:25Z

Crusadestudent: /* Move to "Catholic Church"? */ fix link

==Pope John Paul II image placement==

Perhaps it's just on my particular web browser, but the image of Pope John Paul II is located right next to the section on the abuse controversy. This appears to try to link him to the scandal in a way that I'm sure is unintended. Could it be relocated?[[User:HectorJ|HectorJ]] 19:08, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

:It could be viewed as a subliminal message, and I remember the BBC reporting on a leaked letter by the adjacent Pope John XXIII describing the process and calling for excommunication of victims who went public. Let's move them both. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 23:46, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

==Evolutionism and creationism==
In the "Evolutionism and creationism" section, I can't quite be certain, but if memory serves correctly offences that warrant excommunication are limited to preaching of abortion, ordaining a female into the priesthood, and engaging in schismatic actions. Perhaps someone should look into this. [[User:Pano|Pano]] 00:34, 28 June 2011 (EDT)

==Child abuse scandal==
There should be a full section on the child abuse scandal, if not a full article. At the moment there is just one sentence on it. And it wasn't just in the 90's and 2000's, it's been happening for decades all over the world, and the church tried to cover it as well. I don't think the current sentence on the child abuse scandal addresses the severity and scale of the issue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4 watch this, it will give you an idea of how serious this issue is and why it should not be ignored. [[User:Danielspence]] 14:47, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
:Since this article should be about what the Catholic Church is about, the history of the church would have brief sentences and paragraphs; the child abuse scandal should have a minor sentence here as well. But, main articles on various subjects apply - both good and bad (see Pope [[Formosus]]) - and the child abuse scandal is one of them. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:27, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

::The child abuse/homosexuality scandal does not define what the Church is about. It is a rather horrifying situation and a scourge to Christ's bride. Child abuse rates among the general population happen in greater numbers than Church offenders. There have been 2000 years of the Church surviving various other scandalous attacks. I think expansion beyond a couple sentences is wrong. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 01:37, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
:::If you don't want to fully acknowledge it on this article then a new article should be created about the scandal. Conservapedia has various other articles on much more trivial scandals such as the scandal regarding wikipedia contributor "Essjay". I'm not saying that the wikipedia scandal wasn't a notable one, but the Catholic child abuse scandal was a much more fiery controversy. [[Danielspence]] 14:38, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

== Sex scandal, Da Vinci Code reference, See Also section ==

The note on sex scandals seems to be repeatedly changed to imply that this is the case, was true of at least 200 years, or (most recent edit) always was the case about the Catholic Church. I have changed it to: "The aftermath of a series of sexual abuse scandals. In the early 2000s, it was found that bishops were privately settling cases of molestation of minors by priests, occurring primarily between the 1940s and 1980s." -[[User:Danq|danq]] 19:39, 5 November 2011 (EDT)

:There seems to be one obscure saint who founded an obscure and controversial religious order at the "See Also" which I believe is a derogatory Dan Brown/Da Vinci Code reference. It keeps being put back. Why? -[[User:Danq|danq]] 21:48, 6 November 2011 (EST)

::Just updated "See Also" JPII to Benedict XVI. Putting every Saint, Blessed, Servant of God, and Pope under the heading "See Also" is not only irrelevant to "Roman Catholic Church" but is highly impractical, especially obscure figures like the Opus Dei founder I removed before. Sorry if I got mean before, but people kept changing the proven-true events to a stereotype and conspiracy theory, and the Opus Dei reference was obviously a troll-job. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 22:16, 7 November 2011 (EST)

== Evolution ==

The Catholic Church's take on evolution is more complex than what's written here. It does not officially endorse theistic evolution: no Pope has, so far, spoken ''ex cathedra'' on the issue, neither in favor neither contrarily and the Church's catechism does not mention evolution or Creationism. So Catholics are basically left free of deciding for themselves.

Unofficially, the Church wholly accepts the scientific version of the Earth's forming, which it has substantially helped discovering: geology and sismology are not called "Jesuit sciences" for nothing. The Big Bang theory was also formulated by Fr. Lemaitre, a French priest. Also, the Catholic Church explicitly teaches that the Bible is meant to be read allegorically, and furthermore that theology and science are distinct and compatible - science studies the universe, theology what's beyond it.
So I think that we should mention that Young Earth creationism or any non-scientific theory about the formation of the Earth and the universe aren't generally accepted by the Roman Catholic Church.

Life's genesis is a bit more touchy. Popes Pius XII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have all personally endorsed evolution; study of it has been allowed, starting with the encyclical ''Humani Generis'' in 1950. The Catholic Catechism n.302 says: "Creation has its own goodness and proper perfection, but it did not spring forth complete from the hands of the Creator. The universe was created "in a state of journeying" (in statu viae) toward an ultimate perfection yet to be attained, to which God has destined it." This allows for the universe to evolve... and, implicitly, life.

Mostly, Church theologians generally focus on spiritual subjects, accepting that life evolved gradually and how Darwin described it. I quote an article from the ''Osservatore Romano'', the official newspaper of the Pope, which is unfortunately in Italian: [http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/77264 it's the one marked with 1.] The author calls Darwin's theory "happy intuition" and strongly attacks Intelligent Design, after having summarised and endorsed evolution: "The decision of the Pennsylvania judge, therefore, is correct. Intelligent Design does not belong to science and the pretense that it should be taught alongside Darwinism is not justified. Confusion between religious and scientific points of views is only created. It is not even requested in a religious view of the forming of the universe [...]". It also attacks Darwinist scientists who pass from scientific theory to "ideology" and concludes: "... we can say that we're not men for case or necessity; human history has a superior design".
So it's mostly a spiritual issue about the creation of soul and the Original Sin.

With your permission, I would like to complete this article. Thanks. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 15:48, 10 June 2013 (EDT)

:Please do edit the content entry, but the Catholic Church has expressly forbidden Catholics from teaching anything contrary to one Adam and one Eve, which means that the theory of modern evolution is bunkum according to the Church. Indeed, the [[Passion of Christ]] makes no sense without Adam's Original Sin, and Jesus himself confirmed that the [[Great Flood]] occurred.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:46, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:::"... contrary to one Adam and One even ..." That idea is not in ''Humani Generis'' and is not the Church's teaching. We are shown what we already knew: we are special creations with miraculous souls created by God. The mention of Adam in ''Humani Generis'' addresses the anathema of polygenism, which is really just a denial of God. It's not Catholic creationism.
:::"... which means that the theory of modern evolution is bunkum according to the Church." You are sticking to something you made up. It is even more wrong this time around. You and I have already had this discussion, but your talk page was deleted and recreated, so it has disappeared. Since Humani Generis and John Paul II's teaching, the Church has been openly hostile to intelligent design creationism. Moreover, there has never been anything like a modern Pope, College of Cardinals, Canon Law, section of the Catechism, or any other modern source embracing young earth creationism. In reality, the Pontifical College openly embraces theistic evolution and visiting academics are invited to counsel the Pope and College on matters of science as the First Vatican Counsel exhorts. Pope Benedict wrote often enough of accepting Christian theistic evolution that we know what his position was for sure. Pope Francis has a degree in some scientific field, so it is extremely unlikely that he will embrace this anti-scientific young earth creationism. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 13:41, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Mr. Schlafly, would you please look at the history of your talk page and see if you can find our discussion? I would like to see the citations I made back then so I don't have to do the same research again to expand the simplistic statements about the Church's position on science in this article. I would be grateful. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 13:44, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:::I agree and I was going to say what Nate brillantly said. I can only add one thing: with "theistic evolution," the Church doesn't mean that God made particular interventions to make hominids evolve into humans. That, it's argued, would be proof of an unskilled God - a priest, a very good one, once said to me: "Think of a clock. It can run late, lose time and so we need the clockmaker to come and fix it from time to time. This is because the clock is unperfect, as it's made by imperfect men; now, think of the universe, and life, as a clock: would God be omnipotent if he needed to come over to push things as he wants them? Wouldn't an omnipotent God have foreseen everything from the very start (save for free will, which is a gift to us), even this fly buzzing around us? Yes: this is a truly almight God." In a sense God "designed" humans, but not directly or abruptly: evolution happened following the biological and physical rules of the universe that He creates.
:::This is a theological theory known as "continuous creation" and has been openly embraced by every Pope since ''Humani Generis'' (likely also by Francis), and it's heavily influenced by Leibniz. You can find a beautiful exposition of it on the web, by Fr. George Coyne, SJ, a Jesuit astronomer: [http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=18503 here].
:::What the Church does not accept is polygeny, the belief that humans come from different strains. And guess what - we indeed all come from Africa and from a single common genetic ancestor (mitocondrial Eve). The Original Sin is a subject of debate: likely there were no snakes, apples and fig leaves involved, as [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p7.htm CCC 390] affirms that Genesis is written in a "figurative language." Even St. Augustin said that "nihil ad intelligendum secretius" than the Original Sin (nothing is more obscure than the nature of it) and, boy, he was smart. It can be about the knowledge (intended as the capability of distinguishing) of good and evil. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 16:57, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

'''RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE''': from the [[Humani Generis]], "For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that ... Adam represents a certain number of first parents." Yet that is precisely what the modern theory of evolution pretends. Also, [[Jesus]] acknowledged and referred to the [[Great Flood]], which evolution denies.

At some point, all intelligent people are faced with a choice: question what [[liberals]] taught us in school and be open to what Christ and logic dictate, or forever be a prisoner to what liberals teach. I urge you to choose the former.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:12, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:You are not reading the encyclical correctly. That is very specifically referring to the corollary problem in polygenism of describing Adam as figuratively representing the whole evolution of mankind - in other words, denying that Adam existed in favor of claiming multiple different kinds of "men". But we know Adam existed because without him there would be no original sin. We are taught that God created the souls of men and redeemed us through Jesus Christ. God, as the omnipotent creator of the universe, also created the means by which man would appear so that he could be blessed with a soul. Please re-read at least the sections around your quote so you can see for yourself that Pope Pius is not saying what you claim he is. I don't care whether "evolution denies" the flood if I even understand what that means. I don't think it happened and I'm not alone among the majority serious students of Catholic theology. You are incorrect if you are claiming that Jesus Christ described the flood as an actual event - He's obviously referring to Noah and his family's salvation figuratively - as new "Adams" to foretell Christ's redemption of all mankind. I urge you to reexamine what you're calling logic here. It's not based on Church teaching or Catholic scholarship. Believe what you want but please don't make the insulting claim that Catholics must believe what you say or they're liberal or illogical - I don't agree with you and I've spent my entire adult life studying with some of the most "conservative" lay and ordered Catholic scholars there are. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 18:11, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
::Nate, the Roman Catholic Church does not have great confidence in evolutionism. If they did, they would put all their chips on the table and speak ex-cathedra on this issue. :) And Protestants such as myself remember the [[Galileo Galilei]] incident. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:23, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:::You apparently know zilch about Papal infallibility if you keep repeating this. It's not about "putting chips on the table" because it's not about your kind of vainglorious boasting. It's about narrowly directing the entire body of faithful on matters of critical Church doctrine and there are stepwise considerations to make. Pope Benedict wouldn't even do it. I'd be happy to help you learn something new but somehow I suspect you are still filled with hate and pride. :) [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 18:30, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Nate, Roman Catholics are still free to be young earth creationist and still hold to Roman Catholicism since no Pope has spoken ex-cathedra on evolutionism. Andy Schafly and [[Since33AD]] are both Catholic creationist. Correct me if I am wrong, but to my knowledge, neither has been ex-communicated nor has the Roman Catholic Church threatened ex-communication! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:34, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:Indeed. As far as I gather Sam Brownback is a creationist (although I'm not sure if young earth or old earth) and he hasn't been excommunicated or anything. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 19:21, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
::Nate, "stepwise considerations to make" is just another way of saying that the Roman Catholic Church does not have full confidence in evolutionism and have not spoken ex-cathedra on this matter. You are not fully confident in evolutionism. If you were, you would have challenged the creationist university biology student [[VivaYehshua]] by now. And [[Kenneth Miller]] has yet to respond to GregG's inquiry about the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions] for evolutionists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:24, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

The [[Humani Generis]] is clear, [[Jesus]] was clear, and the logic is clear. There is no logical objection to one Adam, or to the [[Great Flood]]. But once one denies one Adam or the Great Flood, then numerous logical problems arise in explaining what Jesus said and did. Why choose illogic over logic? Well, one reason is because liberals push anti-Jesus theories, and evolution is one of them, and perhaps some would rather be accepted by liberals than ridiculed by them. I choose logic any day and urge others to do likewise. Logic never fails.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:15, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:You are entitled to believe falsehoods if you wish. The words in Humani Generis are printed right there in black and white. People should read them. It is improper to ascribe illogic, being "liberal" or whatever other insults you come up with to people who have justified principled disagreements with you like I have. This has nothing to do with politics. There is no anti-Jesus theory that could appeal to me. I do not care who ridicules me. I care about what's true and justifiable. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 22:33, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

::Nate, you can believe whatever you like, but the logic is with one Adam committing original sin, one Flood cleansing the world of debauchery, and the Passion to redeem the original sin. If there was more than one Adam, then original sin becomes implausible, and the Passion makes no sense. It is very difficult or impossible to make logical sense of both the modern theory of evolution and the [[Passion of Christ]]. And, as a result, most people who promote the theory of evolution reject the divinity and resurrection of Jesus.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:12, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Nate, put all your theistic evolution chips on the table. Debate the creationist university biology student [[VivaYehshua]]. Unless of course, you think he would badly beat you in a debate on the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions] for evolutionists. We both know that he would win such a debate hands down. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:59, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:I've said this over and over, yet you seem to be willfully misrepresenting my position. Let's put this simply. I'm nearly 50 years old. I've been studying theology a long time. I am not an expert by any means but I also don't care about evolution. I care about theology and in particular about the correct representation of Catholic theology and dogma on Conservapedia. Biblical hermeneutics as it relates to Genesis is very interesting. I would like to learn more and showing you to be an ill-informed fool is a great chance to do that. I have no interest in debating an obscure "creationist university biology student" who is a stranger to this discussion. I've repeatedly challenged ''you'' to debate me on the theological basis for ''your'' beliefs because ''you'' are the one who frequently insults me and Greg and shows a very weak grasp of Biblical hermeneutics, but you always tremble like a timorous chicken in your intellectual bunnyhole and demand people debate someone else. Are those the words you use to speak to "obscure internet posers" when you use your ESP to look into their hearts to judge them? That's just silly. There's no sensible excuse for it if you're going to participate in these discussions. Either you put your chips on the table and justify your theological position or you show yourself to be a rank coward with your vain boasting, taunts, and demands that we go talk to someone else about your nonsense. If you want to say I'm not justifying that claim, let's debate it. We are instructed to be defenders of our faith. Do you have the courage and conviction to put some skin in the game? [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 09:48, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::Nate, I welcome any theological insights you may have. If you deny one Adam, then what was original sin? If you think Jesus was speaking only in figurative terms about the [[Great Flood]], then are other miracles in Jesus's teachings and actions also merely figurative in your view?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:02, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Thanks for the questions. I do not deny one Adam. To do so would be anathema by Church law. No, I do not believe one can say that Jesus' miracles are merely figurative, as you say. I am talking about the interpretation of specific verses, not all Gospel accounts of Christ's miracles which I cannot deny as they are described and as I've experienced personally in having Christ in my own life. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 11:45, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::Historical evidence points out to a major regional disaster from which the Flood may have been constructed; surely there was no Ark. Anyway, it's its symbolical meaning that matters. Jesus spoke to be understood from his contemporaries, making parables and allegories that were easy to understand by then-Hebrews. Think about the parable of the ten virgins: it is about a forgotten Eastern tradition which seems unusual to us today, but yet delivers a never-ending message.
::::Miracles are witnessed by the Gospels, descripted in the prose; the Great Flood is in a dialogue by Jesus.
::::What a Catholic cannot deny is the unique fault of Adam for the Original Sin, in other words that it was Adam's sin to condemn the whole human species. Not that Adam popped out ''ex nihilo''... I repeat: the question is spiritual, not biological. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 12:59, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

:::::In response to Nate, the modern theory of evolution does deny one Adam. As a result, most students who are taught and believe the theory of evolution will begin to doubt the purpose of the Passion and the divinity of Christ. Perhaps you're an unusual exception to that rule, but if you accept that there was one Adam, then you reject the modern theory of evolution.

:::::In response to Swordsman, apparently you do reject one Adam, which makes [[original sin]] and the Passion almost impossible to explain in a coherent manner.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:10, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::::Anyway, I regret this discussion went downhill. Let's pick it up another time. I wish I could find my research for that article. Happy Father's Day! [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 19:01, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

NateK, you wrote: "Let's put this simply. I'm nearly 50 years old. I've been studying theology a long time." I realize that you said that you are not an expert, but one of the surest signs of someone erring due to pride is them bragging on how long and hard that they have been studying something. This coupled with you saying you are a proud Irish Catholic with a family line stretching back into Catholicism and family in high places in the Roman Catholic Church is a ripe recipe for error. I had a business owner boss who commented on someone bragging about how long they had been in our industry and how good they were. My boss said something to the effect of: "Has he been in the industry 20 years or one year 20 times?" People have been known to repeat the same errors over and over.

Second, we both know that you are violently shoehorning Darwinism into the biblical text and that you are supposedly "seeing" something that the early Church fathers and Jews for thousands of years "missed". It is like your myriads of "missing links" in the fossil record. Nate, "It is important to note that no major Hebrew scholar says that Genesis is poetry. This is because Genesis has all the grammatical marks of being a historical narrative."[http://creation.com/genesis-poetry-father-hermeutics] Your creation compromises are not at all compelling as can be seen [http://creation.com/is-genesis-poetry-figurative-a-theological-argument-polemic-and-thus-not-history HERE] and [http://creation.com/creation-compromises-questions-and-answers HERE]

So why are you and theistic evolutionists committing fundamental Bible exegesis errors. It is due to valuing scientific consensus in the secular world over the Biblical text. And the history of the scientific consensus argument when weighed against the accuracy and insight/foresight of the biblical text has a very checkered past. See: [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/10/scientific-consensus-and-evolutionary.html Jesus vs. the scientific consensus].

Lastly, creation scientists have a history of consistently winning creation vs. evolution debates dealing with the science and winning those debates hands down. See: [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]. Now evolutionists are very reluctant to debate creationists on the science. Your unwillingness to debate [[VivaYehshua]] is not surprising, but it is very telling. There must be some reason why are unwilling to debate the grassroots champion of the grassroots [[Question evolution! campaign]] who is studying biology at the university level. Is it because you are afraid of badly losing? I think it is. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:13, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::NateK, one other thing. To my knowledge, it has always been the liberal Roman Catholics that I have locked horns with at CP and never the conservative ones. That is because the scientific consensus and evolutionism is such a "golden calf"/"sacred cow" to liberals and to [[liberal Christianity]]. And one of the ironies is that many liberal Catholics rarely read the Bible nor do the liberal Catholic hierarchy in the Western World stress Bible reading as can be seen by this statistic taken from a Roman Catholic website: "Far more disturbing was the poll result that showed that 44 percent of Catholics “rarely or never” read the Bible, while this is true of only 7 percent of Evangelicals and 13 percent of non-Evangelical Protestants. The level of religious vitality must be very low in a Christian church in which 44 percent of the membership almost never bothers to read the Bible."[http://www.crisismagazine.com/2009/why-catholics-dont-read-the-bible]

::Furthermore, the fruits of evolution loving liberal Christianity are quite sour as can be seen at: [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]]. Bill Donahue of the Catholic League recognizes that many liberal Roman Catholics in the hierarchy of the church in the Western World has yielded bad fruit as can be seen [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_pederasty#Roman_Catholic_Church.2C_Homosexuality_and_pederasty HERE]. Of course, this is not surprising. When you value pseudoscience and the scientific consensus over Scripture, the results are going to be bad. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:43, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

:You're really not getting it and I think people can readily tell that by how far away you get from the real points at hand when you launch into these irrelevant screeds. We're talking about theology and Biblical hermeneutics. It's time to step up to the plate, my good man. Instead of talking about other people's exegesis, I've repeatedly challenged ''you'' to debate your own with me. Each time you raise some nonsense that I've told you I don't care about, and continue publicly debasing yourself by showing such cowardice in crowing about an anonymous college kid on a chat site. Assigning him to fight the fights you stirred up with your pride and hatred of those who disagree with you is pathetic. I want to the debate the person who knows very little of what he talks about and vaingloriously accuses me of the worst sin. Let's do this. Then perhaps you'll think twice before you continue personally insulting people just because they disagree with you. That's just awful behavior. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 13:50, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::Conservative, I think we already made very clear that obsessively proposing to debate a creationist blogger is completely out-of-place in this discussion which is about the Catholic church's theological views over evolution, so that we may improve this article. We're not biologists, we would not be suitable foes for any kind of regular debate (that are made between experts, not amateurs). So please: enough.

:::NateK, if I thought discussing Bible exegesis with you was going to yield fruit then of course I would do it length. Instead I provide you with some valid information on biblical exegesis and then call you on the carpet about the fruits of your theology using objective facts/data. For example, you still haven't told me why Roman Catholics have such poor Bible reading habits compared to evangelicals and why the church hierarchy is evidently not leading on the issue to rectify things. I know it must be frustrating for you to be confronted with objective data [http://www.crisismagazine.com/2009/why-catholics-dont-read-the-bible from Catholic websites] showing you the bad fruit of your theology, but nevertheless I will still do it. Jesus said, "By their fruits you shall know them."

:::Liberals hate concrete data which show the inadequacies of their ideologies/theologies. They prefer to wrangle about more subjective matters and speculative matters and then engage in bad faith tactics about such matters and not go where the evidence leads. By the way, evolutionism has been linked to a decline in morals via a university study.[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:47, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::Catholics actually believe that an "Adam" somewhere, sometime existed; that he was the first "man"; that he was the first human to receive a soul by God and that he, and he alone, committed the Original Sin that spread to all mankind after him. This is what we (and I) believe. This is the nucleus of the Genesis, with everything around it being allegory and poetry - from the snake to the fig leaves. Circumstances are not defined by official dogma: we do not know where and when Adam lived, if he was really named "Adam", what the Original Sin was about, what happened next... but again, the question isn't biological or scientifical. It's spiritual. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 13:57, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::::[inserted response] The modern theory of evolution teaches that there was no "first man", and that there was no Adam. All of Christianity, to make sense of the Passion, requires a first man and original sin. It cannot be that there were many humans, Adam sinned, and then the sin somehow spread, because then some would not be descended from Adam and the original sin, which the Catholic Church expressly rejects. Such a model is illogical as well, because there would be people who did not sin, or to whom the original sin did not reach.

::::The bottom line is this: teachings that implicitly contradict Christianity will pull some naive students away from Christianity. But logic is helpful in recognizing the flaws to anti-Christian theories that don't identify themselves as such.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:21, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::::Swordsman, you said the issue is "spiritual". Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits." If evolution loving [[Liberal Christianity]] is so spiritual, then why do they commit adultery more often and theologically conservative Christians? See: [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]]. If evolution loving liberal Catholics and the evolution loving liberal Roman Catholic hierarchy are so spiritual, then why do so many Catholics fail to read the Bible compared to evangelical Christians?[http://www.crisismagazine.com/2009/why-catholics-dont-read-the-bible] If the Western Roman Catholic hierarchy is so spiritual, then why did Bill Donahue of the Catholic League say the Roman Catholic Church pederasty problem was the result of homosexual priests and cite statistics supporting his point? [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_pederasty#Roman_Catholic_Church.2C_Homosexuality_and_pederasty] Anytime you want to stop pretending that liberal Catholics and liberal Protestants (theologically liberal) are godly, that would be fine with me. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:33, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
For God's sake, this is the most appalling and uncoherent ''nonsequitur'' I have ever read. Are you sure to be okay? We are talking about the Catholic Church's view on evolution, not your rubbish. Catholics fail to read the Bible because, banally, there's no Bible-reading culture among common believers. We trust the Church to teach it. There's no "pederasty" problem: it's outright pedophilia (and Jesus said those who made scandal to children should be drowned with a millstone, symbolically), which is a psychiatric criminal disorder; whether it has a source in repressed homosexuality in the clergy could be a subject of discussion but it's not absolutely the point of this topic! --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 14:46, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:Swordsman, I see that your sword is quite dull. Liberals always fails to deliver the goods and that is why you cannot defend the fruits of theological liberalism when stacked up beside the fruits of theological conservatism. You retreat to less objective rhetoric and prefer to sweep the fruits under the rug. Nevertheless, Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits".

:The fruits of economic liberalism and its mountains of debt will lay liberalism in all its forms low and the institutions that support it so I am not worrying about something as weak as liberalism or theological liberalism. Liberal Christianity will continue to shrink in the world while theologically conservative Christianity continues to prosper.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-years-2012-and-2020-key-years.html]

:The historicity of the Bible and conservative Protestantism has evidence supporting it.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/evidence-for-christianity-websites-and.html] Evolution loving, liberal Catholicism on the other hand is a den of iniquity supported by nothing but hot air and blowhards who run away from their fruits and the evidence supporting biblical Christianity. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:13, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::I came here to discuss about the Catholic Church and evolution, to improve this article; we were having a productive discussion with Andrew and Nate until you came over and spawned your... this is supposed to be family-friendly, right?... your rants about the universal woes of "liberalism" (what Americans call liberalism at least). Which has absolutely ZERO pertinence to what we are discussing here, besides pounding the discussion into ridicule for those who read. Your hatred of Catholicism quite sums up your character; I'm tolerant and I will not get dragged into religion wars - just, I always wondered which one of the 41,000/30,000/10,000 protestant churches is right, since they all say they're "the one" that is right?
::By the way, I'm a ''liberale'' in Italy. Before you explode, go seeing what "liberalism" actually is in Europe.
::I will not answer to any other comment which does not return to the main point of discussion: facts about the Catholic Church and evolution. Over. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 15:25, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Darwinism loving, Italian, theologically liberal Catholicism has a bleak future.[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2008/02/demographic-winter.html] France has a history of Catholicism. No doubt what is happening in France will happen to Italy as well.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/08/scholars-say-evangelicalism-is-fast.html] Morals degeneration has been linked belief in evolution via a [http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution university study] and Italy/France are starting to pay a heavy price on the economic front due to their deep indebtedness and other drags on their economy. On the other hand, "Either way, not a single Protestant or Germanic EU country has so far needed a bailout."[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100116846/yet-another-catholic-country-needs-a-bailout-from-the-protestant-north/] See also: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/oct/31/economics-religion-research Protestant work ethic and European countries] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:49, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::That's a parody. That's all a parody. I'm on candid camera. You can't be serious - or sane. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 15:52, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::::When you have to rely on armchair internet psychobabbling and cannot address the fruits of your religion, then something is seriously amiss. Nevertheless, Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits." and liberal Catholics are not "spiritual" to use a term that you used above and were unsuccessful in defending. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:58, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::::You destroyed an interessant discussion over the Catholic Church and evolution with your delusions and obsessions. That's all I'm going to say, Ken. I will not communicate with you anymore unless you revert to the topic at hand. Goodbye. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 16:02, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
Swordsman, you may find comfort in your psychobabbling, but it cannot alter the fact that theological liberalism is imploding and has bad fruit using objective measurements nor does it have any evidence supporting it (the [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/evidence-for-christianity-websites-and.html evidence] is on the side of biblical Christianity). Keep retreating to the subjective world of psychobabbling, but you are not fooling anybody - not even yourself. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:34, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::Really, if that is the case, show me some peer-reviewed papers, from a trustworthy and reputable source! [[User:Brenden|brenden]] 16:35, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Addendum - that isn't from QE.blogspot.com.
Brendon, when you have to rely on the [[genetic fallacy]] and ignore articles which cite relevant data, then you have lost the argument once again. Secondly, I did use other sources in my discussion above (including the liberal'' Guardian''). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:46, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::Cons. when you have to rely on the deliberate misspelling of an editor's name... [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 00:26, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
:::::It's alright, Alan, I never took Mr(s)/Them/Conglomerate/Ms. Cons entirely seriously either. [[User:Brenden|brenden]] 13:32, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
AlanE, it wasn't deliberate. I have never taken him seriously and the misspelling is a reflection of that. I am not saying that to be mean. It is just the way it is.

The more I have been exposed to the left, the less seriously I have taken them. Plus, liberalism is imploding right now (academia, journalism, education, fiscal policies, demographically, etc.). It would surprise me if Obama and European leaders can hold things together economically until the November 2016 elections. To me liberals are like toothless bulldogs right now in terms of the sustainability of the notions which they want to impose on others. I am reading less and less of their material. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:22, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
:If that's how you feel, Cons. Fair enough. Go for it mate. Whatever you reckon. You can't have people trying to impose their views on others, can you? [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 03:40, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
:::The Romans tried to impose their gods on Christians and it didn't last. The atheist/agnostics/liberals attempts to impose their evolutionism religion on Christians won't last either. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:24, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
::::And one brand of Christians tried to impose their particular take on God on other Christians who tried to impose their particular take on God on other Christians who...and the smoke from the faggots got higher and the screams louder ....and on it went! And when the Reformation came, it got no better Cons, because in the first half of the 17th century probably a third of the population of western Europe was forsaken in wars between Christian nations, ostensibly for matters of faith. As G. K. Chesterton wrote about the latter 16th century
:''The north is full of tangled things and texts and aching eyes,''
:''And dead is all the innocence of anger and surprise,''
:''And Christian killeth Christian in a narrow dusty room,''
:''And Christian dreadeth Christ that hath a newer face of doom,''
:''And Christian hateth Mary that God kissed in Galilee,''
:And here we are in some stupid little backwater of a self-described "Christian encyclopedia" and we have you, Cons. you, carrying on the fight that, over the centuries, has tortured and killed so many souls who dared to be a little different in their faith.
:And by the way; Swordsman was banned hours ago. Markman of course. He would have been lighting the fires and mocking the poor wretches in the flames a few centuries ago too!!. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 02:22, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
::AlanE, I haven't killed anyone and I don't hate Mary. Second, you didn't support your claim about Swordsman and I only having small differences in religious matters. Next, you have yet to show that Bible believing Protestant Christianity has a blood stained past relative to other belief systems. If I recall, you are an atheist/agnostic and Darwinist. See: [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]]. Lastly, you are being needlessly melodramatic. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:00, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Cons. I quoted a poem! Don't take it literally! And sure I am being melodramatic - I find the pagan Roman treatment of Christians in the first few centuries of the Church rather lightweight compared to the later treatment of "heretics" by their "christian brothers". Remember, Cons. I am not coming from any particular ideological direction, hard as that may be for an ideological warrior like you to understand. Stop taking each word I write literally and try and understand the whole burden of my argument. And stop citing those ridiculous "Atheism and ...." cites. (I could could go on about "Evangelical Christians and Bedwetting" but I won't.) (And if you cared to check - Swordsman was banned by Markman, unbanned by Ryancsh, who then had second thoughts and rebanned him. And he ain't Italian - he's from quite near you actually - one of the "Boys from Syracuse". (Perhaps he was Falling in Love with Love.)
:::Oh Cons. You never cease to disappoint me!
:To the end... [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 04:08, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
::::AlanE, in terms of murderous hearts, no group holds a candle to the murderous record of atheists in history. About 146 million people lost their lives under 52 atheist leaders. See: [[Atheism and Mass Murder]]. You can't runaway or find excuses for this. Just man up and admit that this is yet another area where Bible believing Protestantism wins hands down over atheism. As much as I hate to do it, I am afraid I am going to have to declare victory.

::::On top of this, you have the Nazis whose [[evolutionary racism]] loving regime who claimed to be the German master race was responsible for millions of people dying. Over 60 million people were killed in World War II. Charles Darwin was an atheist/agnostic (weak atheism). See: [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]].

::::Furthermore, biblical Protestantism is against the killing of unborn children and the majority of atheists/evolutionists favor abortion. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:44, 18 June 2013 (EDT)

Swordsman, by the way, [http://news.riskadvisory.net/index.php/2013/03/italy-the-state-of-corruption/ corruption is endemic in Italy and has been for a long time] and Italy is [http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/italy-debt-idUSL5N0EB1G220130530 buried] in debt. On the other hand, "Either way, not a single Protestant or Germanic EU country has so far needed a bailout."[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100116846/yet-another-catholic-country-needs-a-bailout-from-the-protestant-north/] See also: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/oct/31/economics-religion-research Protestant work ethic and European countries]

Remember, Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruit." Swordsman, Italian liberal Catholicism has a lot of rotten fruit. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:42, 18 June 2013 (EDT)

==Back to the topic at hand ...==
I think the article sums up the Catholic Church's view on evolution quite well with a well balanced amount of space devoted to it. [[User:WilcoxD|WilcoxD]] 02:37, 17 June 2013 (EDT)

==Catholic vs. Arian==
The name "Catholic" arose from the need to distinguish mainstream Christians from Arians during the Christological controversy in the fourth century. So it predates the East/West split. I don't see any explanation of the terminology in the article as it stands. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 06:20, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

== Move to "Catholic Church"? ==

''Catholic Encyclopedia'' has a strongly worded entry that argues in favor of "Catholic Church" as opposed to "Roman Catholic Church."[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13121a.htm] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:04, 25 May 2016 (EDT)
:Catholic Church can refer to the church universal: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/catholic That is Webster's first definition. In other words, all followers of Christ worldwide: http://www.gotquestions.org/universal-local-church.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:31, 25 May 2016 (EDT)
::[[User:Conservative]]: When was the last time anyone actually referred to their non-"Roman" Catholic church as "the Catholic Church"? The "Roman" Catholic Church's name does NOT include the anti-Catholic epithet "Roman". That was added by Anglicans during the English Reformation, originally as "Romish" or "Papist", later softened to "Roman" (but not removed!). The Second Vatican Council states:
:::Haec est unica Christi Ecclesia, quam in Symbolo unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam profitemur(12), quam Salvator noster, post resurrectionem suam Petro pascendam tradidit (cf. Io 21,17), eique ac ceteris Apostolis diffundendam et regendam commisit (cf. Mt 28,18ss.), et in perpetuum ut columnam et firmamentum veritatis erexit (cf. 1Tim 3,15). Haec Ecclesia, in hoc mundo ut societas constituta et ordinata, '''subsistit in Ecclesia catholica''', a successore Petri et Episcopis in eius communione gubernata(13), licet extra eius compaginem elementa plura sanctificationis et veritatis inveniantur, quae ut dona Ecclesiae Christi propria, ad unitatem catholicam impellunt. (''[http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_lt.html Lumen gentium]'' 8)
::No "Romana" to be found. [[User:Crusadestudent|Deus vult! ~Crusadestudent]] ([[User talk:Crusadestudent|talk]]) 17:00, 25 May 2016 (EDT)

It is not much of a surprise that the Roman Catholic Church sees itself as the only valid church (ecclesia catholica). But others may have a different view, like the U.S. DoD, which uses for its [[dog tag]]s "CC: Catholic Churches (excludes Roman Catholic Church)" and "CR: Roman Catholic Church"... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 19:29, 26 May 2016 (EDT)
:A U.S. soldier can put whatever religion he likes on his tag, so long as it fits in the allotted space. [https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/004/110/for_gallery_v2/e6337196-0c60-4440-9333-7e520e1a21f5.jpg?1401713028 This guy] put "Jedi pimp." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:11, 27 May 2016 (EDT)

::You are absolutely right - how fascinating. I erroneously believed that a soldier had to choose one of the faith group codes ([http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/773054m_vol2.pdf p. 12]), but the U.S. military doesn't touch this can of worms - how very wise. When I was in the ''Bundeswehr'', there were only a few abbreviations for the dog tags, ''ev'' (protestant) ''rk'' (roman catholic) two of them. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 09:47, 27 May 2016 (EDT)
:::[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] Would you name the page on [[Protestantism]] "Heretical Christian sects" or "Crybabies who think they know better than the Holy Spirit" just because others might have those "different" views? Would you call the page on the [[Eastern Orthodox Church]] "Schismatic Christian sects" or "Crybabies who don't want to listen to the pope"? Would you name the page on [[African Americans]] with the n-word? No? Then there is equally no reason to add "Roman" to the name of the page on the Catholic Church—it's an epithet, whether most people alive today are aware of its history or not. [[User:Crusadestudent|Deus vult! ~Crusadestudent]] ([[User talk:Crusadestudent|talk]]) 19:30, 31 May 2016 (EDT)

Talk:Roman Catholic Church

2016-05-31T23:30:19Z

Crusadestudent: /* Move to "Catholic Church"? */ re

==Pope John Paul II image placement==

Perhaps it's just on my particular web browser, but the image of Pope John Paul II is located right next to the section on the abuse controversy. This appears to try to link him to the scandal in a way that I'm sure is unintended. Could it be relocated?[[User:HectorJ|HectorJ]] 19:08, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

:It could be viewed as a subliminal message, and I remember the BBC reporting on a leaked letter by the adjacent Pope John XXIII describing the process and calling for excommunication of victims who went public. Let's move them both. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 23:46, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

==Evolutionism and creationism==
In the "Evolutionism and creationism" section, I can't quite be certain, but if memory serves correctly offences that warrant excommunication are limited to preaching of abortion, ordaining a female into the priesthood, and engaging in schismatic actions. Perhaps someone should look into this. [[User:Pano|Pano]] 00:34, 28 June 2011 (EDT)

==Child abuse scandal==
There should be a full section on the child abuse scandal, if not a full article. At the moment there is just one sentence on it. And it wasn't just in the 90's and 2000's, it's been happening for decades all over the world, and the church tried to cover it as well. I don't think the current sentence on the child abuse scandal addresses the severity and scale of the issue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4 watch this, it will give you an idea of how serious this issue is and why it should not be ignored. [[User:Danielspence]] 14:47, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
:Since this article should be about what the Catholic Church is about, the history of the church would have brief sentences and paragraphs; the child abuse scandal should have a minor sentence here as well. But, main articles on various subjects apply - both good and bad (see Pope [[Formosus]]) - and the child abuse scandal is one of them. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:27, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

::The child abuse/homosexuality scandal does not define what the Church is about. It is a rather horrifying situation and a scourge to Christ's bride. Child abuse rates among the general population happen in greater numbers than Church offenders. There have been 2000 years of the Church surviving various other scandalous attacks. I think expansion beyond a couple sentences is wrong. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 01:37, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
:::If you don't want to fully acknowledge it on this article then a new article should be created about the scandal. Conservapedia has various other articles on much more trivial scandals such as the scandal regarding wikipedia contributor "Essjay". I'm not saying that the wikipedia scandal wasn't a notable one, but the Catholic child abuse scandal was a much more fiery controversy. [[Danielspence]] 14:38, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

== Sex scandal, Da Vinci Code reference, See Also section ==

The note on sex scandals seems to be repeatedly changed to imply that this is the case, was true of at least 200 years, or (most recent edit) always was the case about the Catholic Church. I have changed it to: "The aftermath of a series of sexual abuse scandals. In the early 2000s, it was found that bishops were privately settling cases of molestation of minors by priests, occurring primarily between the 1940s and 1980s." -[[User:Danq|danq]] 19:39, 5 November 2011 (EDT)

:There seems to be one obscure saint who founded an obscure and controversial religious order at the "See Also" which I believe is a derogatory Dan Brown/Da Vinci Code reference. It keeps being put back. Why? -[[User:Danq|danq]] 21:48, 6 November 2011 (EST)

::Just updated "See Also" JPII to Benedict XVI. Putting every Saint, Blessed, Servant of God, and Pope under the heading "See Also" is not only irrelevant to "Roman Catholic Church" but is highly impractical, especially obscure figures like the Opus Dei founder I removed before. Sorry if I got mean before, but people kept changing the proven-true events to a stereotype and conspiracy theory, and the Opus Dei reference was obviously a troll-job. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 22:16, 7 November 2011 (EST)

== Evolution ==

The Catholic Church's take on evolution is more complex than what's written here. It does not officially endorse theistic evolution: no Pope has, so far, spoken ''ex cathedra'' on the issue, neither in favor neither contrarily and the Church's catechism does not mention evolution or Creationism. So Catholics are basically left free of deciding for themselves.

Unofficially, the Church wholly accepts the scientific version of the Earth's forming, which it has substantially helped discovering: geology and sismology are not called "Jesuit sciences" for nothing. The Big Bang theory was also formulated by Fr. Lemaitre, a French priest. Also, the Catholic Church explicitly teaches that the Bible is meant to be read allegorically, and furthermore that theology and science are distinct and compatible - science studies the universe, theology what's beyond it.
So I think that we should mention that Young Earth creationism or any non-scientific theory about the formation of the Earth and the universe aren't generally accepted by the Roman Catholic Church.

Life's genesis is a bit more touchy. Popes Pius XII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have all personally endorsed evolution; study of it has been allowed, starting with the encyclical ''Humani Generis'' in 1950. The Catholic Catechism n.302 says: "Creation has its own goodness and proper perfection, but it did not spring forth complete from the hands of the Creator. The universe was created "in a state of journeying" (in statu viae) toward an ultimate perfection yet to be attained, to which God has destined it." This allows for the universe to evolve... and, implicitly, life.

Mostly, Church theologians generally focus on spiritual subjects, accepting that life evolved gradually and how Darwin described it. I quote an article from the ''Osservatore Romano'', the official newspaper of the Pope, which is unfortunately in Italian: [http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/77264 it's the one marked with 1.] The author calls Darwin's theory "happy intuition" and strongly attacks Intelligent Design, after having summarised and endorsed evolution: "The decision of the Pennsylvania judge, therefore, is correct. Intelligent Design does not belong to science and the pretense that it should be taught alongside Darwinism is not justified. Confusion between religious and scientific points of views is only created. It is not even requested in a religious view of the forming of the universe [...]". It also attacks Darwinist scientists who pass from scientific theory to "ideology" and concludes: "... we can say that we're not men for case or necessity; human history has a superior design".
So it's mostly a spiritual issue about the creation of soul and the Original Sin.

With your permission, I would like to complete this article. Thanks. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 15:48, 10 June 2013 (EDT)

:Please do edit the content entry, but the Catholic Church has expressly forbidden Catholics from teaching anything contrary to one Adam and one Eve, which means that the theory of modern evolution is bunkum according to the Church. Indeed, the [[Passion of Christ]] makes no sense without Adam's Original Sin, and Jesus himself confirmed that the [[Great Flood]] occurred.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:46, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:::"... contrary to one Adam and One even ..." That idea is not in ''Humani Generis'' and is not the Church's teaching. We are shown what we already knew: we are special creations with miraculous souls created by God. The mention of Adam in ''Humani Generis'' addresses the anathema of polygenism, which is really just a denial of God. It's not Catholic creationism.
:::"... which means that the theory of modern evolution is bunkum according to the Church." You are sticking to something you made up. It is even more wrong this time around. You and I have already had this discussion, but your talk page was deleted and recreated, so it has disappeared. Since Humani Generis and John Paul II's teaching, the Church has been openly hostile to intelligent design creationism. Moreover, there has never been anything like a modern Pope, College of Cardinals, Canon Law, section of the Catechism, or any other modern source embracing young earth creationism. In reality, the Pontifical College openly embraces theistic evolution and visiting academics are invited to counsel the Pope and College on matters of science as the First Vatican Counsel exhorts. Pope Benedict wrote often enough of accepting Christian theistic evolution that we know what his position was for sure. Pope Francis has a degree in some scientific field, so it is extremely unlikely that he will embrace this anti-scientific young earth creationism. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 13:41, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Mr. Schlafly, would you please look at the history of your talk page and see if you can find our discussion? I would like to see the citations I made back then so I don't have to do the same research again to expand the simplistic statements about the Church's position on science in this article. I would be grateful. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 13:44, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:::I agree and I was going to say what Nate brillantly said. I can only add one thing: with "theistic evolution," the Church doesn't mean that God made particular interventions to make hominids evolve into humans. That, it's argued, would be proof of an unskilled God - a priest, a very good one, once said to me: "Think of a clock. It can run late, lose time and so we need the clockmaker to come and fix it from time to time. This is because the clock is unperfect, as it's made by imperfect men; now, think of the universe, and life, as a clock: would God be omnipotent if he needed to come over to push things as he wants them? Wouldn't an omnipotent God have foreseen everything from the very start (save for free will, which is a gift to us), even this fly buzzing around us? Yes: this is a truly almight God." In a sense God "designed" humans, but not directly or abruptly: evolution happened following the biological and physical rules of the universe that He creates.
:::This is a theological theory known as "continuous creation" and has been openly embraced by every Pope since ''Humani Generis'' (likely also by Francis), and it's heavily influenced by Leibniz. You can find a beautiful exposition of it on the web, by Fr. George Coyne, SJ, a Jesuit astronomer: [http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=18503 here].
:::What the Church does not accept is polygeny, the belief that humans come from different strains. And guess what - we indeed all come from Africa and from a single common genetic ancestor (mitocondrial Eve). The Original Sin is a subject of debate: likely there were no snakes, apples and fig leaves involved, as [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p7.htm CCC 390] affirms that Genesis is written in a "figurative language." Even St. Augustin said that "nihil ad intelligendum secretius" than the Original Sin (nothing is more obscure than the nature of it) and, boy, he was smart. It can be about the knowledge (intended as the capability of distinguishing) of good and evil. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 16:57, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

'''RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE''': from the [[Humani Generis]], "For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that ... Adam represents a certain number of first parents." Yet that is precisely what the modern theory of evolution pretends. Also, [[Jesus]] acknowledged and referred to the [[Great Flood]], which evolution denies.

At some point, all intelligent people are faced with a choice: question what [[liberals]] taught us in school and be open to what Christ and logic dictate, or forever be a prisoner to what liberals teach. I urge you to choose the former.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:12, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:You are not reading the encyclical correctly. That is very specifically referring to the corollary problem in polygenism of describing Adam as figuratively representing the whole evolution of mankind - in other words, denying that Adam existed in favor of claiming multiple different kinds of "men". But we know Adam existed because without him there would be no original sin. We are taught that God created the souls of men and redeemed us through Jesus Christ. God, as the omnipotent creator of the universe, also created the means by which man would appear so that he could be blessed with a soul. Please re-read at least the sections around your quote so you can see for yourself that Pope Pius is not saying what you claim he is. I don't care whether "evolution denies" the flood if I even understand what that means. I don't think it happened and I'm not alone among the majority serious students of Catholic theology. You are incorrect if you are claiming that Jesus Christ described the flood as an actual event - He's obviously referring to Noah and his family's salvation figuratively - as new "Adams" to foretell Christ's redemption of all mankind. I urge you to reexamine what you're calling logic here. It's not based on Church teaching or Catholic scholarship. Believe what you want but please don't make the insulting claim that Catholics must believe what you say or they're liberal or illogical - I don't agree with you and I've spent my entire adult life studying with some of the most "conservative" lay and ordered Catholic scholars there are. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 18:11, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
::Nate, the Roman Catholic Church does not have great confidence in evolutionism. If they did, they would put all their chips on the table and speak ex-cathedra on this issue. :) And Protestants such as myself remember the [[Galileo Galilei]] incident. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:23, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:::You apparently know zilch about Papal infallibility if you keep repeating this. It's not about "putting chips on the table" because it's not about your kind of vainglorious boasting. It's about narrowly directing the entire body of faithful on matters of critical Church doctrine and there are stepwise considerations to make. Pope Benedict wouldn't even do it. I'd be happy to help you learn something new but somehow I suspect you are still filled with hate and pride. :) [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 18:30, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Nate, Roman Catholics are still free to be young earth creationist and still hold to Roman Catholicism since no Pope has spoken ex-cathedra on evolutionism. Andy Schafly and [[Since33AD]] are both Catholic creationist. Correct me if I am wrong, but to my knowledge, neither has been ex-communicated nor has the Roman Catholic Church threatened ex-communication! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:34, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:Indeed. As far as I gather Sam Brownback is a creationist (although I'm not sure if young earth or old earth) and he hasn't been excommunicated or anything. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 19:21, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
::Nate, "stepwise considerations to make" is just another way of saying that the Roman Catholic Church does not have full confidence in evolutionism and have not spoken ex-cathedra on this matter. You are not fully confident in evolutionism. If you were, you would have challenged the creationist university biology student [[VivaYehshua]] by now. And [[Kenneth Miller]] has yet to respond to GregG's inquiry about the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions] for evolutionists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:24, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

The [[Humani Generis]] is clear, [[Jesus]] was clear, and the logic is clear. There is no logical objection to one Adam, or to the [[Great Flood]]. But once one denies one Adam or the Great Flood, then numerous logical problems arise in explaining what Jesus said and did. Why choose illogic over logic? Well, one reason is because liberals push anti-Jesus theories, and evolution is one of them, and perhaps some would rather be accepted by liberals than ridiculed by them. I choose logic any day and urge others to do likewise. Logic never fails.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:15, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:You are entitled to believe falsehoods if you wish. The words in Humani Generis are printed right there in black and white. People should read them. It is improper to ascribe illogic, being "liberal" or whatever other insults you come up with to people who have justified principled disagreements with you like I have. This has nothing to do with politics. There is no anti-Jesus theory that could appeal to me. I do not care who ridicules me. I care about what's true and justifiable. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 22:33, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

::Nate, you can believe whatever you like, but the logic is with one Adam committing original sin, one Flood cleansing the world of debauchery, and the Passion to redeem the original sin. If there was more than one Adam, then original sin becomes implausible, and the Passion makes no sense. It is very difficult or impossible to make logical sense of both the modern theory of evolution and the [[Passion of Christ]]. And, as a result, most people who promote the theory of evolution reject the divinity and resurrection of Jesus.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:12, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Nate, put all your theistic evolution chips on the table. Debate the creationist university biology student [[VivaYehshua]]. Unless of course, you think he would badly beat you in a debate on the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions] for evolutionists. We both know that he would win such a debate hands down. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:59, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:I've said this over and over, yet you seem to be willfully misrepresenting my position. Let's put this simply. I'm nearly 50 years old. I've been studying theology a long time. I am not an expert by any means but I also don't care about evolution. I care about theology and in particular about the correct representation of Catholic theology and dogma on Conservapedia. Biblical hermeneutics as it relates to Genesis is very interesting. I would like to learn more and showing you to be an ill-informed fool is a great chance to do that. I have no interest in debating an obscure "creationist university biology student" who is a stranger to this discussion. I've repeatedly challenged ''you'' to debate me on the theological basis for ''your'' beliefs because ''you'' are the one who frequently insults me and Greg and shows a very weak grasp of Biblical hermeneutics, but you always tremble like a timorous chicken in your intellectual bunnyhole and demand people debate someone else. Are those the words you use to speak to "obscure internet posers" when you use your ESP to look into their hearts to judge them? That's just silly. There's no sensible excuse for it if you're going to participate in these discussions. Either you put your chips on the table and justify your theological position or you show yourself to be a rank coward with your vain boasting, taunts, and demands that we go talk to someone else about your nonsense. If you want to say I'm not justifying that claim, let's debate it. We are instructed to be defenders of our faith. Do you have the courage and conviction to put some skin in the game? [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 09:48, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::Nate, I welcome any theological insights you may have. If you deny one Adam, then what was original sin? If you think Jesus was speaking only in figurative terms about the [[Great Flood]], then are other miracles in Jesus's teachings and actions also merely figurative in your view?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:02, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Thanks for the questions. I do not deny one Adam. To do so would be anathema by Church law. No, I do not believe one can say that Jesus' miracles are merely figurative, as you say. I am talking about the interpretation of specific verses, not all Gospel accounts of Christ's miracles which I cannot deny as they are described and as I've experienced personally in having Christ in my own life. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 11:45, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::Historical evidence points out to a major regional disaster from which the Flood may have been constructed; surely there was no Ark. Anyway, it's its symbolical meaning that matters. Jesus spoke to be understood from his contemporaries, making parables and allegories that were easy to understand by then-Hebrews. Think about the parable of the ten virgins: it is about a forgotten Eastern tradition which seems unusual to us today, but yet delivers a never-ending message.
::::Miracles are witnessed by the Gospels, descripted in the prose; the Great Flood is in a dialogue by Jesus.
::::What a Catholic cannot deny is the unique fault of Adam for the Original Sin, in other words that it was Adam's sin to condemn the whole human species. Not that Adam popped out ''ex nihilo''... I repeat: the question is spiritual, not biological. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 12:59, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

:::::In response to Nate, the modern theory of evolution does deny one Adam. As a result, most students who are taught and believe the theory of evolution will begin to doubt the purpose of the Passion and the divinity of Christ. Perhaps you're an unusual exception to that rule, but if you accept that there was one Adam, then you reject the modern theory of evolution.

:::::In response to Swordsman, apparently you do reject one Adam, which makes [[original sin]] and the Passion almost impossible to explain in a coherent manner.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:10, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::::Anyway, I regret this discussion went downhill. Let's pick it up another time. I wish I could find my research for that article. Happy Father's Day! [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 19:01, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

NateK, you wrote: "Let's put this simply. I'm nearly 50 years old. I've been studying theology a long time." I realize that you said that you are not an expert, but one of the surest signs of someone erring due to pride is them bragging on how long and hard that they have been studying something. This coupled with you saying you are a proud Irish Catholic with a family line stretching back into Catholicism and family in high places in the Roman Catholic Church is a ripe recipe for error. I had a business owner boss who commented on someone bragging about how long they had been in our industry and how good they were. My boss said something to the effect of: "Has he been in the industry 20 years or one year 20 times?" People have been known to repeat the same errors over and over.

Second, we both know that you are violently shoehorning Darwinism into the biblical text and that you are supposedly "seeing" something that the early Church fathers and Jews for thousands of years "missed". It is like your myriads of "missing links" in the fossil record. Nate, "It is important to note that no major Hebrew scholar says that Genesis is poetry. This is because Genesis has all the grammatical marks of being a historical narrative."[http://creation.com/genesis-poetry-father-hermeutics] Your creation compromises are not at all compelling as can be seen [http://creation.com/is-genesis-poetry-figurative-a-theological-argument-polemic-and-thus-not-history HERE] and [http://creation.com/creation-compromises-questions-and-answers HERE]

So why are you and theistic evolutionists committing fundamental Bible exegesis errors. It is due to valuing scientific consensus in the secular world over the Biblical text. And the history of the scientific consensus argument when weighed against the accuracy and insight/foresight of the biblical text has a very checkered past. See: [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/10/scientific-consensus-and-evolutionary.html Jesus vs. the scientific consensus].

Lastly, creation scientists have a history of consistently winning creation vs. evolution debates dealing with the science and winning those debates hands down. See: [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]. Now evolutionists are very reluctant to debate creationists on the science. Your unwillingness to debate [[VivaYehshua]] is not surprising, but it is very telling. There must be some reason why are unwilling to debate the grassroots champion of the grassroots [[Question evolution! campaign]] who is studying biology at the university level. Is it because you are afraid of badly losing? I think it is. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:13, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::NateK, one other thing. To my knowledge, it has always been the liberal Roman Catholics that I have locked horns with at CP and never the conservative ones. That is because the scientific consensus and evolutionism is such a "golden calf"/"sacred cow" to liberals and to [[liberal Christianity]]. And one of the ironies is that many liberal Catholics rarely read the Bible nor do the liberal Catholic hierarchy in the Western World stress Bible reading as can be seen by this statistic taken from a Roman Catholic website: "Far more disturbing was the poll result that showed that 44 percent of Catholics “rarely or never” read the Bible, while this is true of only 7 percent of Evangelicals and 13 percent of non-Evangelical Protestants. The level of religious vitality must be very low in a Christian church in which 44 percent of the membership almost never bothers to read the Bible."[http://www.crisismagazine.com/2009/why-catholics-dont-read-the-bible]

::Furthermore, the fruits of evolution loving liberal Christianity are quite sour as can be seen at: [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]]. Bill Donahue of the Catholic League recognizes that many liberal Roman Catholics in the hierarchy of the church in the Western World has yielded bad fruit as can be seen [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_pederasty#Roman_Catholic_Church.2C_Homosexuality_and_pederasty HERE]. Of course, this is not surprising. When you value pseudoscience and the scientific consensus over Scripture, the results are going to be bad. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:43, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

:You're really not getting it and I think people can readily tell that by how far away you get from the real points at hand when you launch into these irrelevant screeds. We're talking about theology and Biblical hermeneutics. It's time to step up to the plate, my good man. Instead of talking about other people's exegesis, I've repeatedly challenged ''you'' to debate your own with me. Each time you raise some nonsense that I've told you I don't care about, and continue publicly debasing yourself by showing such cowardice in crowing about an anonymous college kid on a chat site. Assigning him to fight the fights you stirred up with your pride and hatred of those who disagree with you is pathetic. I want to the debate the person who knows very little of what he talks about and vaingloriously accuses me of the worst sin. Let's do this. Then perhaps you'll think twice before you continue personally insulting people just because they disagree with you. That's just awful behavior. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 13:50, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::Conservative, I think we already made very clear that obsessively proposing to debate a creationist blogger is completely out-of-place in this discussion which is about the Catholic church's theological views over evolution, so that we may improve this article. We're not biologists, we would not be suitable foes for any kind of regular debate (that are made between experts, not amateurs). So please: enough.

:::NateK, if I thought discussing Bible exegesis with you was going to yield fruit then of course I would do it length. Instead I provide you with some valid information on biblical exegesis and then call you on the carpet about the fruits of your theology using objective facts/data. For example, you still haven't told me why Roman Catholics have such poor Bible reading habits compared to evangelicals and why the church hierarchy is evidently not leading on the issue to rectify things. I know it must be frustrating for you to be confronted with objective data [http://www.crisismagazine.com/2009/why-catholics-dont-read-the-bible from Catholic websites] showing you the bad fruit of your theology, but nevertheless I will still do it. Jesus said, "By their fruits you shall know them."

:::Liberals hate concrete data which show the inadequacies of their ideologies/theologies. They prefer to wrangle about more subjective matters and speculative matters and then engage in bad faith tactics about such matters and not go where the evidence leads. By the way, evolutionism has been linked to a decline in morals via a university study.[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:47, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::Catholics actually believe that an "Adam" somewhere, sometime existed; that he was the first "man"; that he was the first human to receive a soul by God and that he, and he alone, committed the Original Sin that spread to all mankind after him. This is what we (and I) believe. This is the nucleus of the Genesis, with everything around it being allegory and poetry - from the snake to the fig leaves. Circumstances are not defined by official dogma: we do not know where and when Adam lived, if he was really named "Adam", what the Original Sin was about, what happened next... but again, the question isn't biological or scientifical. It's spiritual. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 13:57, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::::[inserted response] The modern theory of evolution teaches that there was no "first man", and that there was no Adam. All of Christianity, to make sense of the Passion, requires a first man and original sin. It cannot be that there were many humans, Adam sinned, and then the sin somehow spread, because then some would not be descended from Adam and the original sin, which the Catholic Church expressly rejects. Such a model is illogical as well, because there would be people who did not sin, or to whom the original sin did not reach.

::::The bottom line is this: teachings that implicitly contradict Christianity will pull some naive students away from Christianity. But logic is helpful in recognizing the flaws to anti-Christian theories that don't identify themselves as such.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:21, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::::Swordsman, you said the issue is "spiritual". Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits." If evolution loving [[Liberal Christianity]] is so spiritual, then why do they commit adultery more often and theologically conservative Christians? See: [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]]. If evolution loving liberal Catholics and the evolution loving liberal Roman Catholic hierarchy are so spiritual, then why do so many Catholics fail to read the Bible compared to evangelical Christians?[http://www.crisismagazine.com/2009/why-catholics-dont-read-the-bible] If the Western Roman Catholic hierarchy is so spiritual, then why did Bill Donahue of the Catholic League say the Roman Catholic Church pederasty problem was the result of homosexual priests and cite statistics supporting his point? [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_pederasty#Roman_Catholic_Church.2C_Homosexuality_and_pederasty] Anytime you want to stop pretending that liberal Catholics and liberal Protestants (theologically liberal) are godly, that would be fine with me. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:33, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
For God's sake, this is the most appalling and uncoherent ''nonsequitur'' I have ever read. Are you sure to be okay? We are talking about the Catholic Church's view on evolution, not your rubbish. Catholics fail to read the Bible because, banally, there's no Bible-reading culture among common believers. We trust the Church to teach it. There's no "pederasty" problem: it's outright pedophilia (and Jesus said those who made scandal to children should be drowned with a millstone, symbolically), which is a psychiatric criminal disorder; whether it has a source in repressed homosexuality in the clergy could be a subject of discussion but it's not absolutely the point of this topic! --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 14:46, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:Swordsman, I see that your sword is quite dull. Liberals always fails to deliver the goods and that is why you cannot defend the fruits of theological liberalism when stacked up beside the fruits of theological conservatism. You retreat to less objective rhetoric and prefer to sweep the fruits under the rug. Nevertheless, Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits".

:The fruits of economic liberalism and its mountains of debt will lay liberalism in all its forms low and the institutions that support it so I am not worrying about something as weak as liberalism or theological liberalism. Liberal Christianity will continue to shrink in the world while theologically conservative Christianity continues to prosper.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-years-2012-and-2020-key-years.html]

:The historicity of the Bible and conservative Protestantism has evidence supporting it.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/evidence-for-christianity-websites-and.html] Evolution loving, liberal Catholicism on the other hand is a den of iniquity supported by nothing but hot air and blowhards who run away from their fruits and the evidence supporting biblical Christianity. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:13, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

::I came here to discuss about the Catholic Church and evolution, to improve this article; we were having a productive discussion with Andrew and Nate until you came over and spawned your... this is supposed to be family-friendly, right?... your rants about the universal woes of "liberalism" (what Americans call liberalism at least). Which has absolutely ZERO pertinence to what we are discussing here, besides pounding the discussion into ridicule for those who read. Your hatred of Catholicism quite sums up your character; I'm tolerant and I will not get dragged into religion wars - just, I always wondered which one of the 41,000/30,000/10,000 protestant churches is right, since they all say they're "the one" that is right?
::By the way, I'm a ''liberale'' in Italy. Before you explode, go seeing what "liberalism" actually is in Europe.
::I will not answer to any other comment which does not return to the main point of discussion: facts about the Catholic Church and evolution. Over. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 15:25, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Darwinism loving, Italian, theologically liberal Catholicism has a bleak future.[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2008/02/demographic-winter.html] France has a history of Catholicism. No doubt what is happening in France will happen to Italy as well.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/08/scholars-say-evangelicalism-is-fast.html] Morals degeneration has been linked belief in evolution via a [http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution university study] and Italy/France are starting to pay a heavy price on the economic front due to their deep indebtedness and other drags on their economy. On the other hand, "Either way, not a single Protestant or Germanic EU country has so far needed a bailout."[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100116846/yet-another-catholic-country-needs-a-bailout-from-the-protestant-north/] See also: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/oct/31/economics-religion-research Protestant work ethic and European countries] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:49, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::That's a parody. That's all a parody. I'm on candid camera. You can't be serious - or sane. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 15:52, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::::When you have to rely on armchair internet psychobabbling and cannot address the fruits of your religion, then something is seriously amiss. Nevertheless, Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits." and liberal Catholics are not "spiritual" to use a term that you used above and were unsuccessful in defending. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:58, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::::You destroyed an interessant discussion over the Catholic Church and evolution with your delusions and obsessions. That's all I'm going to say, Ken. I will not communicate with you anymore unless you revert to the topic at hand. Goodbye. --[[User:Swordsman|Swordsman]] 16:02, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
Swordsman, you may find comfort in your psychobabbling, but it cannot alter the fact that theological liberalism is imploding and has bad fruit using objective measurements nor does it have any evidence supporting it (the [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/evidence-for-christianity-websites-and.html evidence] is on the side of biblical Christianity). Keep retreating to the subjective world of psychobabbling, but you are not fooling anybody - not even yourself. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:34, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::Really, if that is the case, show me some peer-reviewed papers, from a trustworthy and reputable source! [[User:Brenden|brenden]] 16:35, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Addendum - that isn't from QE.blogspot.com.
Brendon, when you have to rely on the [[genetic fallacy]] and ignore articles which cite relevant data, then you have lost the argument once again. Secondly, I did use other sources in my discussion above (including the liberal'' Guardian''). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:46, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
::::Cons. when you have to rely on the deliberate misspelling of an editor's name... [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 00:26, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
:::::It's alright, Alan, I never took Mr(s)/Them/Conglomerate/Ms. Cons entirely seriously either. [[User:Brenden|brenden]] 13:32, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
AlanE, it wasn't deliberate. I have never taken him seriously and the misspelling is a reflection of that. I am not saying that to be mean. It is just the way it is.

The more I have been exposed to the left, the less seriously I have taken them. Plus, liberalism is imploding right now (academia, journalism, education, fiscal policies, demographically, etc.). It would surprise me if Obama and European leaders can hold things together economically until the November 2016 elections. To me liberals are like toothless bulldogs right now in terms of the sustainability of the notions which they want to impose on others. I am reading less and less of their material. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:22, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
:If that's how you feel, Cons. Fair enough. Go for it mate. Whatever you reckon. You can't have people trying to impose their views on others, can you? [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 03:40, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
:::The Romans tried to impose their gods on Christians and it didn't last. The atheist/agnostics/liberals attempts to impose their evolutionism religion on Christians won't last either. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:24, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
::::And one brand of Christians tried to impose their particular take on God on other Christians who tried to impose their particular take on God on other Christians who...and the smoke from the faggots got higher and the screams louder ....and on it went! And when the Reformation came, it got no better Cons, because in the first half of the 17th century probably a third of the population of western Europe was forsaken in wars between Christian nations, ostensibly for matters of faith. As G. K. Chesterton wrote about the latter 16th century
:''The north is full of tangled things and texts and aching eyes,''
:''And dead is all the innocence of anger and surprise,''
:''And Christian killeth Christian in a narrow dusty room,''
:''And Christian dreadeth Christ that hath a newer face of doom,''
:''And Christian hateth Mary that God kissed in Galilee,''
:And here we are in some stupid little backwater of a self-described "Christian encyclopedia" and we have you, Cons. you, carrying on the fight that, over the centuries, has tortured and killed so many souls who dared to be a little different in their faith.
:And by the way; Swordsman was banned hours ago. Markman of course. He would have been lighting the fires and mocking the poor wretches in the flames a few centuries ago too!!. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 02:22, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
::AlanE, I haven't killed anyone and I don't hate Mary. Second, you didn't support your claim about Swordsman and I only having small differences in religious matters. Next, you have yet to show that Bible believing Protestant Christianity has a blood stained past relative to other belief systems. If I recall, you are an atheist/agnostic and Darwinist. See: [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]]. Lastly, you are being needlessly melodramatic. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:00, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
:::Cons. I quoted a poem! Don't take it literally! And sure I am being melodramatic - I find the pagan Roman treatment of Christians in the first few centuries of the Church rather lightweight compared to the later treatment of "heretics" by their "christian brothers". Remember, Cons. I am not coming from any particular ideological direction, hard as that may be for an ideological warrior like you to understand. Stop taking each word I write literally and try and understand the whole burden of my argument. And stop citing those ridiculous "Atheism and ...." cites. (I could could go on about "Evangelical Christians and Bedwetting" but I won't.) (And if you cared to check - Swordsman was banned by Markman, unbanned by Ryancsh, who then had second thoughts and rebanned him. And he ain't Italian - he's from quite near you actually - one of the "Boys from Syracuse". (Perhaps he was Falling in Love with Love.)
:::Oh Cons. You never cease to disappoint me!
:To the end... [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 04:08, 18 June 2013 (EDT)
::::AlanE, in terms of murderous hearts, no group holds a candle to the murderous record of atheists in history. About 146 million people lost their lives under 52 atheist leaders. See: [[Atheism and Mass Murder]]. You can't runaway or find excuses for this. Just man up and admit that this is yet another area where Bible believing Protestantism wins hands down over atheism. As much as I hate to do it, I am afraid I am going to have to declare victory.

::::On top of this, you have the Nazis whose [[evolutionary racism]] loving regime who claimed to be the German master race was responsible for millions of people dying. Over 60 million people were killed in World War II. Charles Darwin was an atheist/agnostic (weak atheism). See: [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]].

::::Furthermore, biblical Protestantism is against the killing of unborn children and the majority of atheists/evolutionists favor abortion. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:44, 18 June 2013 (EDT)

Swordsman, by the way, [http://news.riskadvisory.net/index.php/2013/03/italy-the-state-of-corruption/ corruption is endemic in Italy and has been for a long time] and Italy is [http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/italy-debt-idUSL5N0EB1G220130530 buried] in debt. On the other hand, "Either way, not a single Protestant or Germanic EU country has so far needed a bailout."[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100116846/yet-another-catholic-country-needs-a-bailout-from-the-protestant-north/] See also: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/oct/31/economics-religion-research Protestant work ethic and European countries]

Remember, Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruit." Swordsman, Italian liberal Catholicism has a lot of rotten fruit. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:42, 18 June 2013 (EDT)

==Back to the topic at hand ...==
I think the article sums up the Catholic Church's view on evolution quite well with a well balanced amount of space devoted to it. [[User:WilcoxD|WilcoxD]] 02:37, 17 June 2013 (EDT)

==Catholic vs. Arian==
The name "Catholic" arose from the need to distinguish mainstream Christians from Arians during the Christological controversy in the fourth century. So it predates the East/West split. I don't see any explanation of the terminology in the article as it stands. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 06:20, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

== Move to "Catholic Church"? ==

''Catholic Encyclopedia'' has a strongly worded entry that argues in favor of "Catholic Church" as opposed to "Roman Catholic Church."[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13121a.htm] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:04, 25 May 2016 (EDT)
:Catholic Church can refer to the church universal: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/catholic That is Webster's first definition. In other words, all followers of Christ worldwide: http://www.gotquestions.org/universal-local-church.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:31, 25 May 2016 (EDT)
::[[User:Conservative]]: When was the last time anyone actually referred to their non-"Roman" Catholic church as "the Catholic Church"? The "Roman" Catholic Church's name does NOT include the anti-Catholic epithet "Roman". That was added by Anglicans during the English Reformation, originally as "Romish" or "Papist", later softened to "Roman" (but not removed!). The Second Vatican Council states:
:::Haec est unica Christi Ecclesia, quam in Symbolo unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam profitemur(12), quam Salvator noster, post resurrectionem suam Petro pascendam tradidit (cf. Io 21,17), eique ac ceteris Apostolis diffundendam et regendam commisit (cf. Mt 28,18ss.), et in perpetuum ut columnam et firmamentum veritatis erexit (cf. 1Tim 3,15). Haec Ecclesia, in hoc mundo ut societas constituta et ordinata, '''subsistit in Ecclesia catholica''', a successore Petri et Episcopis in eius communione gubernata(13), licet extra eius compaginem elementa plura sanctificationis et veritatis inveniantur, quae ut dona Ecclesiae Christi propria, ad unitatem catholicam impellunt. (''[http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_lt.html Lumen gentium]'' 8)
::No "Romana" to be found. [[User:Crusadestudent|Deus vult! ~Crusadestudent]] ([[User talk:Crusadestudent|talk]]) 17:00, 25 May 2016 (EDT)

It is not much of a surprise that the Roman Catholic Church sees itself as the only valid church (ecclesia catholica). But others may have a different view, like the U.S. DoD, which uses for its [[dog tag]]s "CC: Catholic Churches (excludes Roman Catholic Church)" and "CR: Roman Catholic Church"... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 19:29, 26 May 2016 (EDT)
:A U.S. soldier can put whatever religion he likes on his tag, so long as it fits in the allotted space. [https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/004/110/for_gallery_v2/e6337196-0c60-4440-9333-7e520e1a21f5.jpg?1401713028 This guy] put "Jedi pimp." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:11, 27 May 2016 (EDT)

::You are absolutely right - how fascinating. I erroneously believed that a soldier had to choose one of the faith group codes ([http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/773054m_vol2.pdf p. 12]), but the U.S. military doesn't touch this can of worms - how very wise. When I was in the ''Bundeswehr'', there were only a few abbreviations for the dog tags, ''ev'' (protestant) ''rk'' (roman catholic) two of them. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 09:47, 27 May 2016 (EDT)
:::[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] Would you name the page on [[Protestantism]] "Heretical Christian sects" or "Crybabies who think they know better than the Holy Spirit" just because others might have those "different" views? Would you call the page on the Eastern [[Orthodox Church]] "Schismatic Christian sects" or "Crybabies who don't want to listen to the pope"? Would you name the page on [[African Americans]] with the n-word? No? Then there is equally no reason to add "Roman" to the name of the page on the Catholic Church—it's an epithet, whether most people alive today are aware of its history or not. [[User:Crusadestudent|Deus vult! ~Crusadestudent]] ([[User talk:Crusadestudent|talk]]) 19:30, 31 May 2016 (EDT)

2016-05-08T21:44:27Z

Crusadestudent:

Talk:Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation

2016-05-08T21:42:17Z

Crusadestudent:

2016-05-07T23:15:53Z

Crusadestudent: Fixed the name

{{Christianity}}
The '''Catholic Church''', sometimes known informally as the '''Roman Catholic Church''', is a denomination of [[Christianity]] headquartered in [[Vatican City]]. Roman Catholics believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, and worship the God of [[Abraham]]. The Roman Catholic Church has a single leader, the [[Pope]], who is also the [[Bishop]] of [[Rome]]. The current Pope is [[Pope Francis|Francis]]. Present day governance of the Church is divided hierarchically into Dioceses overseen by a Diocesan Bishop, who in turn oversees Diocesan priests and deacons on the level of the individual Church.

The word "Catholic" means "universal." It's use as a name for the Church comes from Nicene-Constantinople Creed of 381, which defines the church as, "one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic." In the Christological controversy of the fourth century, Catholics opposed the heresy of [[Arianism]].

The Church has always been [[pro-life]] and its leadership is mostly [[conservative]], as illustrated by how it "launched a crackdown on the umbrella group that represents most of [[America]]'s 55,000 [[Catholic]] nuns" for "a prevalence of certain radical [[feminist]] themes incompatible with the Catholic [[faith]]." The Church noted that "the group was not speaking out strongly enough against" [[abortion]].<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-04-18/american-nuns-vatican/54396560/1?csp=hf</ref>

Members believe that theirs is the oldest [[Christian]] denomination in the world. It is certainly the largest, with more than 1.3 billion officially baptized adherents, or 17.4% of the world's population; over 64 million of these are in the [[United States]]. In recent years growth has been greatest in Africa and Latin America, while membership and influence have declined in Europe.

The Roman Catholic Church asserts that the Pope is the divinely-chosen successor of [[St. Peter]], believing him to be the 'rock' ([[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 16:18) upon whom Jesus built his Church. The Catholic Church consists of those Christians who are in full communion with the Pope. This includes members both of the Latin Church and of the 23 Eastern Catholic Churches. The Eastern Catholic Churches were once known as the "Uniate" Churches; though once used with pride at remaining in union with Rome after the [[Great Schism|East-West Schism]], this term has fallen out of use due to derogatory connotations that have come to be associated with it over the centuries.

The Roman Catholic Church has suffered several schisms over its history. Most notable are those involving the Church of the East following the First Ephesian Council, the [[Oriental Orthodoxy|Oriental Orthodox]] churches following the [[Council of Chalcedon]], the [[Eastern Orthodoxy|Eastern Orthodox Church]] following the [[Great Schism]] of 1054, and the several [[Reformation]]s of the 16th century leading to the development of [[Protestantism]].

The Protestants made the most radical break. Two of the principal issues raised by Protestants were
''[[sola scriptura]],'' the doctrine that the Bible alone is the final authority for Christians (which is also a denial of the infallibility of Sacred Tradition, the Pope, and the infallibility of ecumenical Church councils) and ''sola fide,'' the doctrine popularized by [[Martin Luther]] that faith alone, as opposed to faith and good works both, is sufficient for salvation.

[[Image:Cathpop.jpg|right|thumb|350px|Catholics in the world.]]

==Organization==

The Pope and the the international leadership of the Church are based in [[Vatican City]], a sovereign elective monarchy and an enclave of [[Rome]] established by the 1929 Lateran Treaty.

The Catholic Church has a complex hierarchy of clergy, including (in descending order of rank):

* The [[Pope]]
*[[Cardinal]]s
*[[Archbishop]]s
*[[Bishop]]s
*[[Abbot]]s
*Monsignor|Monsignori
*Archpriests
*[[Priest]]s
*[[Deacon]]s

The key roles are played by the Pope and the bishops, and the question of whether secular governments should play a major role in ecclesiastical appointments has been a major issue for centuries. The [[Investiture Controversy]] in the [[Holy Roman Empire]] was over this question, as was the dispute between [[Gallicanism]] and [[ultramontanism]] in France.

==Teachings==
[[Image:JpII.jpg|right|thumb|[[Pope John Paul II]] reigned 1978-2005]]
The chief teachings of the Catholic church are set out in the [[Catechism of the Catholic Church]] in order to foster and promote the Profession of the Faith (first part), the Celebration of the Christian Mystery (second part), the Life in Christ (third part), and Christian Prayer (fourth part). They are:

* God’s objective existence.
* God’s interest in individual human beings, who can enter into relations with God through direct and intercessory prayer and through the intercession of a priest ordained by Holy Orders.
* The [[Holy Trinity]] and [[christology|divinity of the person of Jesus Christ]].
* The immortality of the [[soul]] of each human being, each one being accountable at death for his or her actions in life, with the award of Heaven or Hell.
* The resurrection of the dead.
* The historicity of the [[Gospels]].
* The divine commission of the Church and infallibility of revealed scriptural interpretation.

The Roman Catholic Church stresses that since the members, living and dead, share in each other’s merits, the [[Virgin Mary]] and other saints and the dead in Purgatory are never forgotten,<ref>[http://www.bartleby.com/65/ro/RomanCat.html The Columbia Encyclopedia]</ref> may be addressed in prayer, and intercede with God on the behalf of the living. The very physical and spiritual body and blood of Christ are believed to be present in the Eucharist, [[Transubstantiation|the bread and wine being Jesus himself]], replacing the material of bread and wine. The principal sources for the essential beliefs of the Catholic Church are the Sacred Scriptures (the Bible), Sacred Tradition, and the Living Magisterium of the Church.

The term "Catholic" is frequently used as an adjective meaning, "pertaining to the Roman Catholic Church." [[Protestantism|Protestant]]s sometimes take exception to this use, as the defined meaning of "catholic" (the adjective) is "universal" (from the Greek ''καθολικός'', or ''katholikos'', meaning "universal"). The [[Anglican Communion]] and other Protestants also speak of themselves as part of the "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church."<ref>http://www.answers.com/topic/catholic</ref> The Orthodox Church understands herself to be the one universal Catholic Church and rejects the claims of Rome.

The Roman Catholic Church teaches respect for all human life. It opposes the practices of contraception, abortion,<ref>Paul VI, Humanae Vitae (1968) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html</ref> euthanasia and (in most cases) capital punishment.<ref> John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (1995) http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0141/_INDEX.HTM</ref> The Church is in favor of social justice and "the common good."<ref> Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate (2009) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html</ref> Some Catholics take this idea further, espousing a "[[consistent life ethic]]," under which ''all'' killing of humans is said to be unlawful. This position should logically entail [[pacifism]], although the Catholic Church is not opposed to war under all circumstances in the manner of some "peace" churches. (See [[just war]].)

The Catholic Church allows evolutionist research, but not any denial that God was the '''creator''' of all things. The only Evolutionism that Catholics are allowed to believe in is Theistic Evolution.

== History ==

===Early Church===

The original Christian community was founded by Jesus Christ and led by the Apostles. The Roman Catholic Church considers itself to be the sole and uninterrupted continuation of the first-century Church. St. [[Paul|Paul the Apostle]] was the most prolific contributor to the [[New Testament]] and the most notable of the Early Christian missionaries. Christians were subjected to persecution, first under [[Nero]] in A.D. 64 and again, more severely, under the emperors [[Domitian]], [[Marcus Aurelius]], [[Decius]], and [[Diocletian]], in the second and third centuries.

After almost 300 years of persecution against the Church failed to stop the growth of Christianity, the Emperor [[Constantine I]] had a religious experience and, by the [[Edict of Milan]] issued in the early fourth century, legalized Christianity. Going to war with the co-Emperor of the east [[Lucinius]] over his continued persecution of Christians, Constantine won and became sole Emperor. The age of persecution was over.
[[Image:Christians.jpg|thumb|450px]]

===Barbarians converted===

Until the early fourth century AD Christianity enjoyed a mixed reception in the Roman Empire, and Christians were frequently subject to persecution. After its legalization, the Christian Church became increasingly powerful in the Roman Empire, although [[Arianism]] remained strong. In 380 AD, [[Theodosius I]] established the Church as the official religion of the Roman Empire and proscribed the former pagan practices. There was a brief [[pagan]] revival in the West under the usurper [[Eugenius]], but that was brought to an end with his death. While the Empire continued to decline, Christianity continued to grow both among those directly under the Empire and among the barbarians, until the time that Rome was sacked by [[Alaric]] in 410. Alaric was an Arian Christian.

After the collapse of the Western Empire, the Roman Church became the most powerful political and religious force in Latin-speaking Europe, and by the 8th century it had achieved near total religious dominance.

Aggressive missionary activities accomplished the conversion of most of the pagan tribes in Europe by the year 1000 AD. The last pagan country in Europe to be converted was [[Lithuania]], in 1387.

=== Great Schism ===

Numerous disputes between the eastern and western churches became more pronounced from the ninth century onwards. The Church experienced the [[Great Schism]] in 1054 that divided it into a Western (Latin) branch, which has been called the Catholic Church, and an Eastern branch, which has become known as the [[Orthodox Church|Eastern Orthodox Church]]. Both traced their roots to the time of Jesus, but the Eastern Orthodox Church rejected the claims of the Pope to universal jurisdiction.

The Schism's causes were not purely religious. Cultural and geographic elements also played a role. Later attempts at reconciliation occurred, such as at the [[Council of Basel]], but the two churches remain separate to this day.

=== Late Middle Ages ===

The Crusades, a series of religious wars instigated by the Church against the Muslims and other groups in the Holy Land, began in 1092 and continued until the end of the 13th century. Despite the focus on regaining the Holy Land from Muslim control, the Crusaders also massacred Jews and sacked the Christian city of Constantinople.

During this time period, the [[Inquisition]]s started and would continue through the time of the Protestant Reformation and beyond. The medieval inquisition focused on rooting out [[Cathars]], while the later inquisitions, such as the [[Spanish Inquisition]], focused on people who were believed to be secretly practicing [[Judaism]] or [[Islam]] following the [[Alhambra Decree|legally mandated]] conversion to Christianity of all Jews and Muslims remaining in Spain.

===Reformation and Counter-Reformation===

In 1517, [[Martin Luther]] began the [[Protestant Reformation]] with a public protest against the sale of [[indulgences]]. It grew into a movement that covered a wider variety of issues. Eventually, [[Protestantism|Protestants]] rejected the notions of saintly intercession, the authority of the Pope, and any sacraments other than [[Baptism]] and [[Communion]]. This movement eventually led to a Catholic revival (the "Counter-Reformation") and a series of religious wars in [[Europe]]. The Protestant-Catholic split became one of the dominant themes in European and American events until recent times.

===1815 to 1914===

====Conservatism====

After 1800 the Papacy became the center of conservatism in Europe in reaction against the radicalism of the French Revolution. Pius VII (1800-23) was stripped of powers by [[Napoleon]] but made a striking comeback after Napoleon's fall in 1815. His unusually able Secretary of State Cardinal Consalvi won the restoration to the Pope of most of the territories in Italy which Napoleon had seized. He reinvigorated numerous monastic orders and helped create new societies for men and women, especially those engaged in teaching and missionary work. Most important was the restoration of the Jesuits in 1814. They grew more numerous and even more influential in the 19th century.

The Papacy recognized that throughout Europe millions of peasants and poor folk were devoted to the saints and traditions of the Church; the Popes responded energetically by promoting various Marian devotions (such as the rosary). Rome had fallen into disrepair, and Pius VII began the restoration of the city's artistic glories, an enterprise that continues in the 21st century. <ref> Kelly (1999); Duffy (2006); Latourette (1958) vol 1. </ref>

====Ultramontane vs Gallican====

The "ultramontane" tendency in the Church centralized more power and authority in the Papacy. It was opposed by the "[[Gallican]]" tendency, especially in France, to give national churches more control over their affairs. The ultramontine forces generally won out, especially with the promulgation of [[Papal Infallibility]] at the First Vatican Council in 1870. The ultramontane forces cited the old doctrines of [[Robert Bellarmine]] (1542-1621) and [[Francisco de Suárez]] (1548-1617) to bolster the papal claim to absolute power in spiritual matters.

Gallicanism in France was damaged by the rise of ultramontanism in the 1850s and the devotional revolution that shifted piety to devotions sponsored by Rome. Gallicanism was officially suppressed by the First Vatican Council in 1870, which established the paramount authority of the pope as a matter of dogma. However informal manifestations of Gallicanism continue in some countries, especially China. In Canada, the Irish clergy fought for ultramontanism against the French clergy, who were Gallican. The [[Catholicism in Ireland|Irish]] won out with the support of the Vatican.

====Facing Modernity====

Nineteenth century urbanization brought millions of peasants from the villages to industrial cities where church facilities were few. The Church escaped irrelevance by using the same means as emerging nation-states: promoting a homogeneous culture aided especially by universal use of Latin; authorizing new rites and folk devotions, especially those focused on Mary and other favored saints; promoting pilgrimages to holy sites; encouraging clergy to endorse and lead regional nationalist movements that focused on historic languages and cultures; creating many new teaching orders and schools; supporting intellectuals and publishing houses; cultivating an image of theological, canonical, and moral superiority; and establishing more administrative and doctrinal centralization (in Rome). Of special importance was the missionary activity, based especially in Germany, that was in competition with Protestant missions in China, India, Africa and other non-Christian lands. The Jesuits proved highly adept at promoting the Papal cause.

The resurgence of Papal leadership caused internal dissent among some Catholic intellectuals, such as the historian [[Lord Acton]] in Britain and the theologian Ignaz von Döllinger in Germany, who opposed the declaration of the dogma of papal infallibility. This caused further schisms, with breakaway groups centering on the Archbishop of [[Utrecht]] to form the [[Old Catholic Church]].

=====Syllabus of Errors=====

The [[Syllabus of Errors]] of Pope [[Pius IX]] in 1864 rejected the liberal doctrines of the modern world.<ref> see text at [http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm]</ref> It denounced pantheism, naturalism, nationalism, indifferentism, socialism, communism, freemasonry, theological rationalism, [[separation of church and state]], and removal of [[public school]]s from Church control. The Pope claimed for the Catholic Church total control over science and culture. Liberals viewed this as a declaration of war by the Church on modern civilization. Opponents stressed the Papacy had become intolerant and medieval and largely political in nature.<ref> Latourette (1958) vol 1 ch. 6</ref>

====Facing Liberalism====

In Germany in the 1840s the ultramontane movement used mass meetings and pilgrimages to combat the growth of liberalism and modernism. However, the anti-clerical press attacked these mass meetings, and in response a large number of Catholic newspapers emerged in Germany starting in the 1840s. To ensure their own survival, these newspapers championed a liberal idea--[[Freedom of the press|press freedom]]. In addition, local clubs were established to mobilize the Catholic working class. These clubs tried to end discrimination against ordinary Catholics by advocating other liberal concepts--freedom of religion and freedom of thought--and by entering the electoral process.

With the unification of Germany in 1870, the new nation faced the problems of consolidation, one of which was secularization. The laws dealing with secularization opened a political battle between Chancellor [[Bismarck]] and the Catholics, which struggle is called the "[[Kulturkampf]]." The Catholics organized their own political parties and protected their interests by voting as a bloc into the 1930s, when the Nazis closed down all other parties.

====Freemasons====

Freemasonry is a secret society that was, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, politically active in numerous countries. The Catholic Church opposed Freemasonry and forbade its members to belong to Masonic lodges. The Catholic Church first condemned Freemasonry in 1738. This was partially because Masons were often aligned with popular uprisings that had the objective of replacing traditional monarchs and class privilege with national independence and voting rights. A large number of the signers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence had been Freemasons, for example. Some, though not all, of the French Revolution's leaders were Masons, although Robespierre was not a Mason. The Masonic role in the French Revolution was part of the reason the Catholic Church condemned Freemasonry.

The Papacy coordinated attacks against Masonry in countries such as Brazil, where the religious question in the 1870s centered on Masonry and the struggle between regalist and ultramontane forces. One method of Catholic action was to found Catholic universities. Ignace Bourget, second bishop of Montreal, Canada, founded Laval University, saying that the university would be the principal instrument for "wresting the elite from the clutches of liberalism." At the time, political Liberalism was closely associated with national liberation and democracy.

====Women====

A spiritual revolution took place in the 19th century, moving individuals to a renewed interest in personal piety. There was a new emphasis on the role of Mary and a greatly increased involvement of women in the life of the Church. The number of sisters and nuns increased from 20,000 to 400,000 between 1815 and 1914.

Camp (1990) traced the treatment of women by the Church. In the late 19th century, the papacy began to revise its public teachings about the proper role of women in the Church and society. From Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) to Pope John Paul II (1978-2005), papal social pronouncements revealed an evolution in attitudes from the view that women are passive subordinates to men in all spheres of life to the current teaching that lay and clerical women are equal but complementary partners with men in religious, political, economic, and social endeavors. Nevertheless, the papacy has remained firm in the conviction that ordination is for men only.

====Arts====

[[Image:Cerro_de_Angeles.jpg|right|thumb|230px|Cerro de los Angeles, Madrid, Spain.]]
The arts provided a refuge from modernity in the form of a nostalgic aesthetic. Church architecture saw the revival of the medieval [[Gothic]] style. Romantic literature, for example by Chateaubriand, helped inspire a Catholic revival. In music, Catholic churchgoers were likely to be exposed to an officially sponsored revival of ''a cappella'' singing in the manner of Palestrina. The rapid development of symphonic and operatic forms affected sacred music, resulting in many masses, requiems, and te deums for large orchestra and chorus, sometimes even composed by skeptics such as Berlioz and Verdi.

====Politics====

In politics, as democracy and popular government spread, religious motivations moved people into one party or the other. In Catholic countries such as France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, sharp confrontations emerged between clericals and anti-clericals; in countries with mixed Catholic and Protestant populations such as Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Britain and the U.S., political splits occurred along confessional lines. In the U.S. the great majority of the Catholics became [[Democratic Party|Democrats]]. In Germany the Catholics formed their own Center party to fight off attacks from the Protestants, as during the [[Kulturkampf]].

The British attempt to impose Protestantism on Ireland not only fueled the Catholic revival there but also contributed to its spread via emigration to the U.S. and Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and England itself, all of which increased the Catholic population. The Irish often took control of the Church in each of these countries. The Poles, having lost their nation state in the 1790s, turned to an intense religiosity that preserved national identity and which they carried with them to industrial centers in the U.S. and Germany. In the U.S., some Poles, frustrated with the Irish control of the Church, founded the [[Polish National Catholic Church]].

===20th century===

====Vatican II====

[[File:John-23.jpg|right|thumb|270px|[[Pope John XXIII]] reigned 1958-63]]

The "Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican" (termed [[Vatican II]]), was called by [[Pope John XXIII]] and was in session from 1962 to 1965. It dramatically modernized and transformed church policies, with major changes to official theology and liturgy. Liturgical changes included the introduction of Mass in local languages instead of Latin. Theologically, the council deemphasized the centrality of Mary while also adding a new emphasis on individual and personal holiness. These were ideas previously associated with Protestantism and had, in some cases, been features in the opposition to the Catholic Church since the time of the Protestant Reformation. The Council asserted the Church's support for [[freedom of religion]], declared that the Jews were not guilty of [[deicide]], and recognized the possibility of salvation for Jews, Muslims, and Protestants.

After Vatican II, 1962-65, the controversy among Catholics over papal authority and infallibility largely ended, though some significant degree of opposition to it remains,<ref>such as by historian Garry Wills, author of ''Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit'' (Sophia Institute Press, 2003), and liberal theologian Hans Kung, author of ''Infallible?: An inquiry'' (1970)</ref><ref>David Carlin, ''The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America'',‎ appendix 2</ref><ref>[http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/vatican.htm Raymond Taouk, ''What are Catholics to think of Vatican II?'']</ref> This dissent is mainly manifested in disagreement with Roman Catholic teaching on birth control and abortion.<ref>[http://www.christianethicstoday.com/Issue/014/Infallibility%20in%20Ethical%20Perspective%20By%20John%20M.%20Swomley_014_26_.htm John M. Swomley, ''Infallibility in Ethical Perspective Christian Ethics Today], Issue 014 Volume 4 No 1 February 1996</ref> For example 56% of U.S. Catholics said that the pope is not infallible "when he teaches on matters of morals, such as birth control and abortion"; 80% of Catholics believed it is possible to disagree with the pope on official positions on morality and still be a good Catholic. <ref>Time/CNN nationwide poll of 1,000 adults, conducted by Yankelovich Partners, Sept. 27-28, 1995</ref>

Reactions among Catholics to Vatican II fall into three camps. "Liberal" Catholics, drawing on the established Catholic belief in the "journeying" nature of the Church, see Vatican II and the new period that it marked in Catholic history as representing a significant advancement in man's understanding of the Gospels, which in turn justifies changes in Catholic belief and practice. "Conservative" Catholics (including the most recent popes) hold that the decrees of the Council, properly understood, are wholly in line with the historic Catholic faith, and that they should not be used as an excuse for unwarranted innovations. "Traditional" (or "[[Traditionalist Catholicism|traditionalist]]") Catholics regard the teachings of Vatican II as problematic, or even as heretical. Some of these Catholics created new churches which use the old liturgies.

===21st Century===

Current issues facing the Catholic Church include:

* The effects of Obamacare and other liberal legislation on Catholic hospitals (such as funding for abortion)
* The aftermath of a series of sexual abuse scandals by priests and other clergymen. In the early 2000s, it was found that bishops were privately settling cases of molestation of minors by priests, occurring primarily between the 1940s and 1980s. The attempted cover-up of this abuse by the church has caused many Catholics to become disillusioned with the church.
* Increasing atheism and secularism in Europe

Islam is also increasingly becoming a threat to Catholicism. Sharia Law's rejection of religious freedom and the ongoing genocide of Chaldean Rite Catholics in Iraq are among these threats. There is a very strong trend of Muslim immigration into Europe, which is subverting the judicial system towards a Sharia theocracy. This trend is fueled through assassinations and threats towards anti-Islamic politicians (such as [[Theo Van Gogh]] and [[Geert Wilders]]). While Christianity remains the world's largest religion, all denominations of Islam combined now outnumber Catholicism (the most popular Christian denomination).

The Church has taken stances on recent controversial issues, including opposing the [[Iraq War]]<ref>Richert, Scott P. "What Is the Papacy's Response to the War in Iraq?" About.com Catholicism. http://catholicism.about.com/od/thechurchintheworld/f/popes_on_iraq.htm</ref>, supporting [[universal health care]] (including many aspects of [[Obamacare]])<ref>Clarke, Kevin. "Papal prescription for universal health care." January 16, 2011. U.S. Catholic. http://www.uscatholic.org/culture/social-justice/2011/01/papal-prescription</ref>, and supporting assistance to unauthorized [[immigrant]]s.<ref>Kerwin, Donald. "Immigration Reform and the Catholic Church." May, 2006. Migration Information Source. http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=395</ref> The Church continues to oppose birth control and abortion, as discussed above.

== See also ==

*[[Cafeteria Catholic]]
*[[Catholic views on creationism‎]]
*[[Pope Francis I]]
*[[Vatican City]]
*[[Catholicism in Crisis]]
*[[Revelation, Book of (historical exegesis)]]

==External links==
[[Image:Virgen.jpg|right|thumb|Virgin Mary and Child]]

*[http://www.Vatican.va The Vatican]
*A digital version of [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ ''The Catholic Encyclopedia''].
*[http://www.cua.edu/ The Catholic University of America] Washington, D. C.
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm St. Paul] Catholic Encyclopedia.
*[http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm Catechism of the Catholic Church] Saint Charles Borromeo Catholic Church web site.
*[http://www.pellegrinocattolico.com/index.html Al Pellegrino Cattolico] Italian web site.

==Further reading==
* Bokenkotter, Thomas. ''A Concise History of the Catholic Church'' (2005) [http://www.amazon.com/Concise-History-Catholic-Church/dp/0385516134/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241119912&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
* Brown, Peter. ''The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity 200-1000 AD'' (2002), 640pp
* Chadwick, Owen. ''A History of the Popes, 1830-1914.'' (1998), 616pp; a standard recent history. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=12355195 online edition],
* Holland, Joe. ''Modern Catholic Social Teaching: The Popes Confront the Industrial Age 1740-1958.'' Paulist Press, 2003. 404 pp.
* Kung, Hans. ''The Catholic Church: A Short History'' (2003), by a leading Catholic scholar [http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Church-History-Library-Chronicles/dp/0812967623/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241119912&sr=8-15 excerpt and text search]
* Latourette, Kenneth Scott. ''Christianity in a Revolutionary Age: A History of Christianity in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries'' 5 Vol'' (1958), a detailed history of Christianity 1800-1950 by a Protestant scholar. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=101463833 vol 1 online edition]
* O'Toole, James M. ''The Faithful: A History of Catholics in America'' (2008) [http://books.google.com/books?id=BFlBzSAVW6kC&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:The+intitle:Faithful+intitle:A+intitle:History+intitle:of+intitle:Catholics+intitle:in+intitle:America&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]

===Reference===
* ''New Catholic 'Encyclopedia'' (1967), complete coverage of all topics by Catholic scholars
* ''Catholic Encyclopedia,'' (1913) [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ online edition] complete coverage by Catholic scholars; the articles were written about 100 years ago
* Coppa, Frank J., ed. ''Great Popes through History: An Encyclopedia.'' (2002). 600 pp.
* Kelly, J.N.D. ''The Oxford Dictionary of Popes'' (1988). 349pp; scholarly short biographies; [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=54850171 online edition]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Catholic Church| ]]
[[Category:Christian History]]
[[Category:Christian Denominations]]

User talk:Jpatt

2016-05-07T22:21:44Z

Crusadestudent: Forgot to sign...

== Archive 2008 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/Subway_Troll Here]

== Archive 2009 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2009]

== Archive 2010 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2010]

== Archive 2011 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2011‎]

== Archive 2012 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2012]

== Archive -present==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/present]

== Please unlock ==

Please unlock the [[Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity]] page. I need to reinstate (uncomment) item #22, to track the reinstated item #22 in the main counterexamples page. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:00, 24 April 2016 (EDT)

:Wow! That was the fastest response I've ever gotten. 0 minutes. Thanks a lot. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:08, 4 May 2016 (EDT)

== Welcome message ==

Hello, Jpatt. I received your welcome message on my talk page—thank you! So we're on the same page, is it a standard welcome to include the editor's guide links, or did I make an inappropriate edit? Thanks! [[User:Crusadestudent|Crusadestudent]] ([[User talk:Crusadestudent|talk]]) 18:09, 7 May 2016 (EDT)
:I've perused the guidelines, and have a question remaining: is there any policy or widespread consensus on the use of "Catholic" versus "Roman Catholic"? Other editors on Wikipedia have engaged in edit wars with me over this, and I would prefer to avoid the dispute here. [[User:Crusadestudent|Crusadestudent]] ([[User talk:Crusadestudent|talk]]) 18:21, 7 May 2016 (EDT)

User talk:Jpatt

2016-05-07T22:18:00Z

Crusadestudent: New message

User talk:Jpatt

2016-05-07T22:09:53Z

Crusadestudent: /* Welcome message */ new section

John Henry Cardinal Newman

2016-05-07T06:30:02Z

Crusadestudent:

'''John Henry Newman''' (1801–1890), or '''Cardinal Newman''', as he is often known, was an [[Anglican]] priest and accomplished poet and author who famously [[convert]]ed to [[Roman Catholicism]]. The [[Catholic Church]] later elevated him to the status of a [[cardinal]], and he was declared to be "venerable" in 1991, the first step in the process of [[canonization]].

Before his conversion, Cardinal Newman was a leader in the [[Oxford Movement]], which sought to bring the [[Church of England]] closer to its pre-[[Henry VIII]] [[Catholic]] roots. He attributed his study of history to persuade him to become Catholic.

He was the author of many influential books, including the Apologia Pro Vita Sua, the Grammar of Assent, Via Media, and Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Newman, John Henry Cardinal}}

[[Category:Cardinals]]
[[Category:Catholic Leaders]]

Canonization

2016-05-07T06:29:51Z

Crusadestudent:

'''Canonization''' is the process adopted by the [[Catholic Church]] of declaring a nominated person to be a [[saint]]. The process requires proof that the individual in question was holy, both in life and in how he or she died, and documented proof of miracles performed by God in response to prayers to the deceased individual to intercede in heaven and join in prayer to God for help. See James 5:16 "...The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects." See also Matthew 22:31-32 "Have you not read ...'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."

[[Category:Christianity]]

Transubstantiation

2016-05-06T23:07:10Z

Crusadestudent: Clarified some things in the intro; added a bit of historical context w/ refs; corrected a historical error.

'''Transubstantiation''' is the [[doctrine]] of the [[Roman Catholic Church]] which, since the [[Apostolic Age]], has held that during the [[consecration]] of the [[sacrificial offerings]] of bread and wine at the [[Mass]], that the bread and wine are literally changed into the body and blood of [[Christ]]. The use of the term ''transubstantiation'' to describe this sacred mystery dates from the 11th century, when it was used by Hildebert de Lavardin, Archbishop of Tours<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=u-4Z9zBMQwsC&pg=PA37&dq=transubstantiation+Hildebert&hl=en&sa=X&ei=x8rNUe-_FY_Y7Aayk4EQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=transubstantiation%20Hildebert&f=false John Cuthbert Hedley, ''Holy Eucharist'' (Kessinger 2003 ISBN 978-0-76617494-8), p. 37]</ref><ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=iN2NgXRAXnkC&pg=PA134&dq=transubstantiation+Hildebert&hl=en&sa=X&ei=x8rNUe-_FY_Y7Aayk4EQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=transubstantiation%20Hildebert&f=false John N. King, ''Milton and Religious Controversy'' (Cambridge University Press 2000 ISBN 978-0-52177198-6), p. 134]</ref>; it was in common use by the 12th century.<ref name="ODCC">Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005 ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3), article ''Transubstantiation''</ref> The doctrine of transubstantiation holds that while the outward, sensible characteristics (called the ''accidents'') of the bread and wine remain, the reality (called the ''substance'') is transformed into that of Christ. It should be noted also that Christ's body and soul are united in Heaven and cannot be separated, so that not only the body and blood, but the soul and divinity—the whole of Christ—are believed to be made present under the ''species'' of bread and wine.

This is a view that contrasts with the beliefs of the Protestant churches. Most of the Reformers during the [[Protestant Reformation]] taught one version or another of the "Real Presence" in the Eucharist, instead of a purely symbolic view. In the Lutheran, Reformed, Presbyterian, and Anglican churches, the doctrine of the Real Presence is affirmed, but not the additional doctrine called Transubstantiation.

In other words, those churches accept that Christ's body and blood are truly present in the [[Eucharist]] or Lord's Supper, but not that the bread and wine consumed by the minister and the congregation alike have ceased to be bread and wine.

For other Protestants (mostly Evangelical, Fundamentalist, and Pentecostal) who also celebrate Christ's [[Last Supper]], the belief is that the wine and bread merely symbolize or represent the body and blood of Jesus.

Transubstantiation was a contentious issue during the [[Protestant Reformation]], a historical period of conflict and warfare among Christians over a number of issues of [[scriptural interpretation]], doctrine, [[philosophy]], and both ecclesiastical and secular [[politics]].

==The Bible and Transubstantiation==

Catholics believe the doctrine of Transubstantiation can be validated by Scripture.

In John 6, Jesus promises to His followers the Bread of Life, His flesh. (John 6:51) When the Jews began to argue over how Jesus could give them His flesh, He responded by repeating the necessity of doing so: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you have no life within you” (John 6:53). When His disciples said “This is a hard teaching; who can follow it?” (John 6:60), Jesus allowed them to go and even asked His 12 apostles if they too would leave. Catholics note that Jesus did not claim to be speaking symbolically or metaphorically when His disciples left, even though they seemed to take Him literally. Thus, it is concluded, Jesus was speaking literally. Then, at the Last Supper when He said “This is my body” and “This is my blood,” He was fulfilling His literal promise made in John 6:51, according to Catholics, to give His followers His body and blood.

As noted above, most Protestants do not dispute the fact that Jesus intended to give his body and blood to his followers. That is not the issue involved in the doctrine called "Transubstantation."

As to whether or not the Communion bread and wine cease to be bread and wine (i.e. Transubstantiation, a change-over of substance into another substance) while taking on the presence of Christ, Protestants maintain that there is no Biblical evidence which supports that speculation.

==In Roman Catholic theology==

"Substance" here means what something is in itself, its "essence". A hat's shape is not the hat itself, nor is its colour, size, softness to the touch, nor anything else about it perceptible to the senses. The hat itself (the "substance") ''has'' the shape, the color, the size, the softness and the other appearances, but is distinct from them.<ref>This illustration is given in [http://books.google.com/books?ei=DfqWTNTxIpHBswb30Yxb&ct=result&id=4cU9AAAAIAAJ&dq=Catholic+Evidence+Training+Outlines&q=hat#search_anchor Maisie Ward and F. J. Sheed, ''Catholic Evidence Training Outlines'' (Sheed & Ward, third edition 1935), p. 240.]</ref> While the appearances, which are also referred to, though not in the Church's [[Dogma|official teaching]], by the philosophical term "accidents",<ref>See [http://www.aquinasonline.com/Topics/substacc.html Natural Philosophy: Substance and Accidents] (aquinasonline.com)</ref> are perceptible to the senses, the substance is not.<ref>"The word 'substance' as here used is not a technical philosophical term, such as might be found in the philosophy of Aristotle. It was used in the early Middle Ages long before the works of Aristotle were current. 'Substance' in common-sense usage denotes the basic reality of the thing, i.e., what it is in itself. Derived from the Latin root 'sub-stare', it means what stands under the appearances, which can shift from one moment to the next while leaving the subject intact. Appearances can be deceptive. You might fail to recognize me when I put on a disguise or when I become seriously ill, but I do not cease to be the person that I was; my substance is unchanged. There is nothing obscure, then, about the meaning of 'substance' in this context" ([http://www.30giorni.it/us/articolo.asp?id=9352 [[Avery Dulles]]: Christ's Presence in the Eucharist: True, Real and Substantial).]</ref>

Consider the classic example<ref>[[Plato]], [[Aristotle]], [[Augustine]], [[Plotinus]], [[Thomas Aquinas]], [[Duns Scotus]], [[Bonaventure]], et al. ''For more detailed treatment and bibliographical links and references see'' [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11090c.htm The Catholic Encyclopedia, ''"Nominalism, Realism, and Conceptualism"''], [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/universals-medieval/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ''"The Medieval Problem of Universals"''], and [http://www.friesian.com/universl.htm "Meaning and the Problem of Universals, ''A Kant-Friesian Approach''"]</ref> of the [[Human nature|human body]]. All of the separate chemical compounds, minerals and water—which when piled together constitute the sum total of the actual physical matter of the human body—are not of themselves a human body, however much they may be physically compounded and mixed and rearranged in the laboratory, since they are still only a pile of [[Organic chemistry|organic chemicals]], minerals and water in a particular complex configuration. If this has never been alive it is not a human body. If they are ''participant'' <ref>See [http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/87-fallacy-of-composition Logical fallacy of Composition (Modo hoc fallacy)] (logicallyfallacious.com)</ref> in the integral physical expression of a living human being who has absorbed and metabolized them, or if they are now the physical remains of a once-living human being, the substance of what they actually are is human, hence, a human body. The substantial reality of what is before us is human. The ''substance'' (substantial reality) of what is seen is not solely that of a complex organization of organic chemical compounds, but is (or has been) someone. The chemical elements of the food a person eats become in a few hours part of that person's human body and are no longer food but have been turned into the human flesh and blood and bone of that person, yet the physical chemical elements of what was once food remain the same (calcium, copper, salt, protein, sugars, fats, water, etc.). The ''substance'' of any matter that has become an integral part of any human being has ceased to be the ''substance'' or ''reality'' of ''food'' and has become incorporated as an integral part of the physical manifestation or expression of that ''human person''. To touch that matter now is not to touch a batch of chemical compounds or food but to touch that person.<ref>''see also'' [[Moderate realism]] ''and'' [[Ontologism]] ''for influences found within the specifically Catholic interpretation of the reality of the human person underlying the outward physical appearance that is the human body. see also ''[[soul]]'' and ''[[incarnation]].</ref>

When at his [[Last Supper]], [[Jesus]] said: "This is my body",<ref>[http://biblehub.com/multi/matthew/26-26.htm Matthew26:26,] [http://biblehub.com/multi/mark/14-22.htm Mark 14:22,] [http://biblehub.com/multi/luke/22-19.htm Luke 22:19,] [http://biblehub.com/multi/1_corinthians/11-24.htm 1 Corinthians 11:24.]</ref> what he held in his hands still had all the ''appearances'' of bread: the "species" remained unchanged. However, the Roman Catholic Church [[Dogma|teaches]] that, when Jesus made that declaration,<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1356-1381,'' number '''1376''']</ref> the ''underlying reality'' (the "substance") of the bread was changed into that of his body. In other words, it ''actually was'' his body, while all the appearances open to the senses or to scientific investigation were still those of bread, exactly as before. Jesus united it entirely to his person. The Catholic Church holds that the same change of the substance of the bread and of the wine occurs at the [[consecration]] of the Eucharist<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1356-1381,'' number '''1377''']; ''and'' [http://www.30giorni.it/us/articolo.asp?id=9352 Christ's Presence in the Eucharist: True, Real and Substantial]</ref> when the [[Words of Institution|words]] are spoken ''[[in persona Christi]]'' "This is my body ... this is my blood." In Orthodox confessions, the change is said to start during the [[Liturgy of Preparation]] and be completed during the [[Epiklesis]]. Using the instrumentality of the ministerial office of the celebrating priest, and acting through him, Jesus unites the consecrated and offered elements entirely to his own person.

Teaching that [[Christ]] is risen from the dead and is alive, the Catholic Church holds that when the bread is changed into his body, not only his body is present, but Christ as a whole is present (i.e. body and blood, soul and divinity.) The same holds for the wine changed into his blood.<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P44.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1406-1409,'' number '''1413''']</ref> This teaching goes beyond the doctrine of transubstantiation, which directly concerns only the transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

In accordance with the dogmatic teaching that Christ is really, truly and substantially present under the remaining appearances of bread and wine, and continues to be present as long as those appearances remain, the Catholic Church preserves the consecrated elements, generally in a [[Tabernacle (Catholic)|church tabernacle]], for administering Holy Communion to the sick and dying, and also for the secondary, but still highly prized, purpose of [[Worship|adoring]] Christ [[Real presence|present]] in the [[Eucharist]].

The Roman Catholic Church declares that the doctrine of transubstantiation is concerned with ''what'' is changed, and not ''how'' the change occurs; it teaches that the appearances (the "species") that remain are real, not an illusion, and that Christ is "really, truly, and ''substantially'' present" in the Eucharist.<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1356-1381,'' number '''1374''']</ref> To touch the smallest particle of the [[Sacramental bread|host]] or the smallest droplet from the [[chalice]] is to touch Jesus Christ himself, as when one person touches another on the back of the hand with only a fingertip and in so doing touches not merely a few skin cells but touches the whole person: "Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ."<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1356-1381,'' number '''1377'''], '''''Cf.''''' [[Council of Trent]]: DS 1641: "Nor should it be forgotten that Christ, whole and entire, is contained not only under either species, but also in each particle of either species. ''Each,'' says St. Augustine, ''receives Christ the Lord, and He is entire in each portion. He is not diminished by being given to many, but gives Himself whole and entire to each.''" (Quoted in Gratian, p. 3, dist. ii. c. 77; Ambrosian Mass, Preface for Fifth Sunday after Epiph.) —''[[Roman Catechism|The Catechism of the Council of Trent]] for Parish Priests, issued by order of Pope Pius V, translated into English with Notes by John A. McHugh, O.P., S.T.M., Litt. D., and Charles J. Callan, O.P., S.T.M., Litt. D.'', © 1982 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., Rockford, Illinois 61105, p. 249 "Christ Whole and Entire Present in Every Part of Each Species" ISBN 978-0-89555-185-6.</ref>

In the arguments which characterised the relationship between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism in the 16th century, the [[Council of Trent]] declared subject to the ecclesiastical penalty of [[Anathema#Roman Catholic Church|anathema]] anyone who:
:"'''denieth''', that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; '''but saith''' that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue" and anyone who "'''saith''', that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, '''and denieth''' that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood - the species only of the bread and wine remaining - which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation, let him be anathema."<ref name="history.hanover.edu">[http://history.hanover.edu/early/trent/ct13ce.htm Council of Trent, The Thirteenth Session]</ref>

Protestant denominations have not generally subscribed to belief in transubstantiation or [[consubstantiation]].

As already stated, the Roman Catholic Church [[Truth|asserts]] that the "species" that remain are real. In the sacrament these are the ''[[sign]]s'' (evidence, visible presence) of the reality <ref>For example, smoke and heat are active signs of a real fire, and not just a symbol. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross is the active sign of God's love, and not just a symbol representing something else.</ref> that they efficaciously (actively) signify,<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3Z.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1333-1344,'' numbers '''1333-1336'''] ''under the heading'' "'''III. The Eucharist in the Economy of Salvation''' The signs of bread and wine".</ref> not [[symbol]]s. And by definition [[sacrament]]s are "efficacious signs of grace,<ref>[http://studybible.info/strongs/G5485 Study Bible: Strong's number 5485 χάρις ''charis''] grace, especially, the gift of "the divine '''influence''' upon the heart" (literally, "''in-flowing''", much more than the meaning of "approval"). [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' 1996, 1997] "Grace is favor, the free and undeserved '''help''' that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life. Grace is a '''participation in the life of God'''. It introduces us into the intimacy of Trinitarian life: by Baptism the Christian participates in the grace of Christ, the Head of his Body. As an "adopted son" he can henceforth call God "Father," in union with the only Son. He receives the '''life''' of the Spirit who '''breathes charity into him''' and who forms the Church. (''boldface emphasis added'')</ref> instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Catholic Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us."<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P35.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1131-1134,'' number '''1131'''] (The Sacraments) IN BRIEF. 1131. </ref>

In ''The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist: The Eucharist and Its Effects'' (2000-2012), James H. Dobbins, citing the work ''This Tremendous Lover'' (1989), by Dom Eugene Boylan,<ref>Boylan, Dom Eugene, ''This Tremendous Lover'', Christian Classics, Westminster, Maryland, 1989, pp. 159-170</ref> expresses the paradox of Holy Communion:
:"Ordinary food is consumed and becomes that which consumes it. In the Eucharist, we consume God and become that which we consume."<ref>[http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/realpres/eucheff.html ''The Eucharist and Its Effects—The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist'', James H. Dobbins.] (therealpresence.org) Copyright © 2000-2012 by www.therealpresence.org, Real Presence Eucharistic Education and Adoration Association, 718 Liberty Lane, Lombard, IL 60148, Phone: 815-254-4420</ref>

According to Catholic teaching, the whole of Christ, body and blood, soul and divinity, is in the sacrament, under each of the appearances of bread and wine and in each part of the appearances of bread and wine (since the substance of bread or wine is in each part of ordinary bread or wine, and the substance of Christ is in each part of the consecrated and transubstantiated elements of the [[sacramental bread|host]] and the [[blood of Christ|cup]] of the sacrament), but he is not in the sacrament as in a place and is not moved when the sacrament is moved. He is perceptible neither by the sense nor by the imagination, but only by the [[Reason|intellect]].<ref>[http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum528.htm Thomas Aquinas, ''Summa Theologica'', III, Question 76] See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08066a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: Intellect]</ref>

St. Thomas Aquinas gave poetic expression to this perception in the devotional hymn ''[[Adoro te devote]]'':
:Godhead here in hiding, whom I do adore,
:Masked by these bare shadows, shape and nothing more,
:See, Lord, at thy service low lies here a heart
:Lost, all lost in wonder at the God thou art.

:Seeing, touching, tasting are in thee deceived:
:How says trusty hearing? that shall be believed.
:What God's Son has told me, take for truth I do;
:Truth himself speaks truly or there's nothing true.
:::—[http://www.chantcd.com/lyrics/godhead_here_hiding.htm English translation of Adoro Te Devote]

==Evidence in the early Church==

See [[Epistles of Ignatius#Quotations from Ignatius supporting transubstantiation|Epistles of Ignatius (A.D. 107): Witness to belief in transubstantiation in the early church.]]

==References==

{{reflist}}

==See Also==

[[Eucharist]]

[[Real presence]]

[[Catholic Church]]

[[Category:Christian Theology]]

Roman Catholic Church

2016-05-06T22:54:40Z

Crusadestudent: Fixed improper use of "Uniate"

{{Christianity}}
The '''Roman Catholic Church''' is a denomination of [[Christianity]] headquartered in [[Vatican City]]. Roman Catholics believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, and worship the God of [[Abraham]]. The Roman Catholic Church has a single leader, the [[Pope]], who is also the [[Bishop]] of [[Rome]]. The current Pope is [[Pope Francis|Francis]]. Present day governance of the Church is divided hierarchically into Dioceses overseen by a Diocesan Bishop, who in turn oversees Diocesan priests and deacons on the level of the individual Church.

The word "Catholic" means "universal." It's use as a name for the Church comes from Nicene-Constantinople Creed of 381, which defines the church as, "one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic." In the Christological controversy of the fourth century, Catholics opposed the heresy of [[Arianism]].

The Church has always been [[pro-life]] and its leadership is mostly [[conservative]], as illustrated by how it "launched a crackdown on the umbrella group that represents most of [[America]]'s 55,000 [[Catholic]] nuns" for "a prevalence of certain radical [[feminist]] themes incompatible with the Catholic [[faith]]." The Church noted that "the group was not speaking out strongly enough against" [[abortion]].<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-04-18/american-nuns-vatican/54396560/1?csp=hf</ref>

Members believe that theirs is the oldest [[Christian]] denomination in the world. It is certainly the largest, with more than 1.3 billion officially baptized adherents, or 17.4% of the world's population; over 64 million of these are in the [[United States]]. In recent years growth has been greatest in Africa and Latin America, while membership and influence have declined in Europe.

The Roman Catholic Church asserts that the Pope is the divinely-chosen successor of [[St. Peter]], believing him to be the 'rock' ([[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 16:18) upon whom Jesus built his Church. The Catholic Church consists of those Christians who are in full communion with the Pope. This includes members both of the Latin Church and of the 23 Eastern Catholic Churches. The Eastern Catholic Churches were once known as the "Uniate" Churches; though once used with pride at remaining in union with Rome after the [[Great Schism|East-West Schism]], this term has fallen out of use due to derogatory connotations that have come to be associated with it over the centuries.

The Roman Catholic Church has suffered several schisms over its history. Most notable are those involving the Church of the East following the First Ephesian Council, the [[Oriental Orthodoxy|Oriental Orthodox]] churches following the [[Council of Chalcedon]], the [[Eastern Orthodoxy|Eastern Orthodox Church]] following the [[Great Schism]] of 1054, and the several [[Reformation]]s of the 16th century leading to the development of [[Protestantism]].

The Protestants made the most radical break. Two of the principal issues raised by Protestants were
''[[sola scriptura]],'' the doctrine that the Bible alone is the final authority for Christians (which is also a denial of the infallibility of Sacred Tradition, the Pope, and the infallibility of ecumenical Church councils) and ''sola fide,'' the doctrine popularized by [[Martin Luther]] that faith alone, as opposed to faith and good works both, is sufficient for salvation.

[[Image:Cathpop.jpg|right|thumb|350px|Catholics in the world.]]

==Organization==

The Pope and the the international leadership of the Church are based in [[Vatican City]], a sovereign elective monarchy and an enclave of [[Rome]] established by the 1929 Lateran Treaty.

The Catholic Church has a complex hierarchy of clergy, including (in descending order of rank):

* The [[Pope]]
*[[Cardinal]]s
*[[Archbishop]]s
*[[Bishop]]s
*[[Abbot]]s
*Monsignor|Monsignori
*Archpriests
*[[Priest]]s
*[[Deacon]]s

The key roles are played by the Pope and the bishops, and the question of whether secular governments should play a major role in ecclesiastical appointments has been a major issue for centuries. The [[Investiture Controversy]] in the [[Holy Roman Empire]] was over this question, as was the dispute between [[Gallicanism]] and [[ultramontanism]] in France.

==Teachings==
[[Image:JpII.jpg|right|thumb|[[Pope John Paul II]] reigned 1978-2005]]
The chief teachings of the Catholic church are set out in the [[Catechism of the Catholic Church]] in order to foster and promote the Profession of the Faith (first part), the Celebration of the Christian Mystery (second part), the Life in Christ (third part), and Christian Prayer (fourth part). They are:

* God’s objective existence.
* God’s interest in individual human beings, who can enter into relations with God through direct and intercessory prayer and through the intercession of a priest ordained by Holy Orders.
* The [[Holy Trinity]] and [[christology|divinity of the person of Jesus Christ]].
* The immortality of the [[soul]] of each human being, each one being accountable at death for his or her actions in life, with the award of Heaven or Hell.
* The resurrection of the dead.
* The historicity of the [[Gospels]].
* The divine commission of the Church and infallibility of revealed scriptural interpretation.

The Roman Catholic Church stresses that since the members, living and dead, share in each other’s merits, the [[Virgin Mary]] and other saints and the dead in Purgatory are never forgotten,<ref>[http://www.bartleby.com/65/ro/RomanCat.html The Columbia Encyclopedia]</ref> may be addressed in prayer, and intercede with God on the behalf of the living. The very physical and spiritual body and blood of Christ are believed to be present in the Eucharist, [[Transubstantiation|the bread and wine being Jesus himself]], replacing the material of bread and wine. The principal sources for the essential beliefs of the Catholic Church are the Sacred Scriptures (the Bible), Sacred Tradition, and the Living Magisterium of the Church.

The term "Catholic" is frequently used as an adjective meaning, "pertaining to the Roman Catholic Church." [[Protestantism|Protestant]]s sometimes take exception to this use, as the defined meaning of "catholic" (the adjective) is "universal" (from the Greek ''καθολικός'', or ''katholikos'', meaning "universal"). The [[Anglican Communion]] and other Protestants also speak of themselves as part of the "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church."<ref>http://www.answers.com/topic/catholic</ref> The Orthodox Church understands herself to be the one universal Catholic Church and rejects the claims of Rome.

The Roman Catholic Church teaches respect for all human life. It opposes the practices of contraception, abortion,<ref>Paul VI, Humanae Vitae (1968) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html</ref> euthanasia and (in most cases) capital punishment.<ref> John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (1995) http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0141/_INDEX.HTM</ref> The Church is in favor of social justice and "the common good."<ref> Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate (2009) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html</ref> Some Catholics take this idea further, espousing a "[[consistent life ethic]]," under which ''all'' killing of humans is said to be unlawful. This position should logically entail [[pacifism]], although the Catholic Church is not opposed to war under all circumstances in the manner of some "peace" churches. (See [[just war]].)

The Catholic Church allows evolutionist research, but not any denial that God was the '''creator''' of all things. The only Evolutionism that Catholics are allowed to believe in is Theistic Evolution.

== History ==

===Early Church===

The original Christian community was founded by Jesus Christ and led by the Apostles. The Roman Catholic Church considers itself to be the sole and uninterrupted continuation of the first-century Church. St. [[Paul|Paul the Apostle]] was the most prolific contributor to the [[New Testament]] and the most notable of the Early Christian missionaries. Christians were subjected to persecution, first under [[Nero]] in A.D. 64 and again, more severely, under the emperors [[Domitian]], [[Marcus Aurelius]], [[Decius]], and [[Diocletian]], in the second and third centuries.

After almost 300 years of persecution against the Church failed to stop the growth of Christianity, the Emperor [[Constantine I]] had a religious experience and, by the [[Edict of Milan]] issued in the early fourth century, legalized Christianity. Going to war with the co-Emperor of the east [[Lucinius]] over his continued persecution of Christians, Constantine won and became sole Emperor. The age of persecution was over.
[[Image:Christians.jpg|thumb|450px]]

===Barbarians converted===

Until the early fourth century AD Christianity enjoyed a mixed reception in the Roman Empire, and Christians were frequently subject to persecution. After its legalization, the Christian Church became increasingly powerful in the Roman Empire, although [[Arianism]] remained strong. In 380 AD, [[Theodosius I]] established the Church as the official religion of the Roman Empire and proscribed the former pagan practices. There was a brief [[pagan]] revival in the West under the usurper [[Eugenius]], but that was brought to an end with his death. While the Empire continued to decline, Christianity continued to grow both among those directly under the Empire and among the barbarians, until the time that Rome was sacked by [[Alaric]] in 410. Alaric was an Arian Christian.

After the collapse of the Western Empire, the Roman Church became the most powerful political and religious force in Latin-speaking Europe, and by the 8th century it had achieved near total religious dominance.

Aggressive missionary activities accomplished the conversion of most of the pagan tribes in Europe by the year 1000 AD. The last pagan country in Europe to be converted was [[Lithuania]], in 1387.

=== Great Schism ===

Numerous disputes between the eastern and western churches became more pronounced from the ninth century onwards. The Church experienced the [[Great Schism]] in 1054 that divided it into a Western (Latin) branch, which has been called the Catholic Church, and an Eastern branch, which has become known as the [[Orthodox Church|Eastern Orthodox Church]]. Both traced their roots to the time of Jesus, but the Eastern Orthodox Church rejected the claims of the Pope to universal jurisdiction.

The Schism's causes were not purely religious. Cultural and geographic elements also played a role. Later attempts at reconciliation occurred, such as at the [[Council of Basel]], but the two churches remain separate to this day.

=== Late Middle Ages ===

The Crusades, a series of religious wars instigated by the Church against the Muslims and other groups in the Holy Land, began in 1092 and continued until the end of the 13th century. Despite the focus on regaining the Holy Land from Muslim control, the Crusaders also massacred Jews and sacked the Christian city of Constantinople.

During this time period, the [[Inquisition]]s started and would continue through the time of the Protestant Reformation and beyond. The medieval inquisition focused on rooting out [[Cathars]], while the later inquisitions, such as the [[Spanish Inquisition]], focused on people who were believed to be secretly practicing [[Judaism]] or [[Islam]] following the [[Alhambra Decree|legally mandated]] conversion to Christianity of all Jews and Muslims remaining in Spain.

===Reformation and Counter-Reformation===

In 1517, [[Martin Luther]] began the [[Protestant Reformation]] with a public protest against the sale of [[indulgences]]. It grew into a movement that covered a wider variety of issues. Eventually, [[Protestantism|Protestants]] rejected the notions of saintly intercession, the authority of the Pope, and any sacraments other than [[Baptism]] and [[Communion]]. This movement eventually led to a Catholic revival (the "Counter-Reformation") and a series of religious wars in [[Europe]]. The Protestant-Catholic split became one of the dominant themes in European and American events until recent times.

===1815 to 1914===

====Conservatism====

After 1800 the Papacy became the center of conservatism in Europe in reaction against the radicalism of the French Revolution. Pius VII (1800-23) was stripped of powers by [[Napoleon]] but made a striking comeback after Napoleon's fall in 1815. His unusually able Secretary of State Cardinal Consalvi won the restoration to the Pope of most of the territories in Italy which Napoleon had seized. He reinvigorated numerous monastic orders and helped create new societies for men and women, especially those engaged in teaching and missionary work. Most important was the restoration of the Jesuits in 1814. They grew more numerous and even more influential in the 19th century.

The Papacy recognized that throughout Europe millions of peasants and poor folk were devoted to the saints and traditions of the Church; the Popes responded energetically by promoting various Marian devotions (such as the rosary). Rome had fallen into disrepair, and Pius VII began the restoration of the city's artistic glories, an enterprise that continues in the 21st century. <ref> Kelly (1999); Duffy (2006); Latourette (1958) vol 1. </ref>

====Ultramontane vs Gallican====

The "ultramontane" tendency in the Church centralized more power and authority in the Papacy. It was opposed by the "[[Gallican]]" tendency, especially in France, to give national churches more control over their affairs. The ultramontine forces generally won out, especially with the promulgation of [[Papal Infallibility]] at the First Vatican Council in 1870. The ultramontane forces cited the old doctrines of [[Robert Bellarmine]] (1542-1621) and [[Francisco de Suárez]] (1548-1617) to bolster the papal claim to absolute power in spiritual matters.

Gallicanism in France was damaged by the rise of ultramontanism in the 1850s and the devotional revolution that shifted piety to devotions sponsored by Rome. Gallicanism was officially suppressed by the First Vatican Council in 1870, which established the paramount authority of the pope as a matter of dogma. However informal manifestations of Gallicanism continue in some countries, especially China. In Canada, the Irish clergy fought for ultramontanism against the French clergy, who were Gallican. The [[Catholicism in Ireland|Irish]] won out with the support of the Vatican.

====Facing Modernity====

Nineteenth century urbanization brought millions of peasants from the villages to industrial cities where church facilities were few. The Church escaped irrelevance by using the same means as emerging nation-states: promoting a homogeneous culture aided especially by universal use of Latin; authorizing new rites and folk devotions, especially those focused on Mary and other favored saints; promoting pilgrimages to holy sites; encouraging clergy to endorse and lead regional nationalist movements that focused on historic languages and cultures; creating many new teaching orders and schools; supporting intellectuals and publishing houses; cultivating an image of theological, canonical, and moral superiority; and establishing more administrative and doctrinal centralization (in Rome). Of special importance was the missionary activity, based especially in Germany, that was in competition with Protestant missions in China, India, Africa and other non-Christian lands. The Jesuits proved highly adept at promoting the Papal cause.

The resurgence of Papal leadership caused internal dissent among some Catholic intellectuals, such as the historian [[Lord Acton]] in Britain and the theologian Ignaz von Döllinger in Germany, who opposed the declaration of the dogma of papal infallibility. This caused further schisms, with breakaway groups centering on the Archbishop of [[Utrecht]] to form the [[Old Catholic Church]].

=====Syllabus of Errors=====

The [[Syllabus of Errors]] of Pope [[Pius IX]] in 1864 rejected the liberal doctrines of the modern world.<ref> see text at [http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm]</ref> It denounced pantheism, naturalism, nationalism, indifferentism, socialism, communism, freemasonry, theological rationalism, [[separation of church and state]], and removal of [[public school]]s from Church control. The Pope claimed for the Catholic Church total control over science and culture. Liberals viewed this as a declaration of war by the Church on modern civilization. Opponents stressed the Papacy had become intolerant and medieval and largely political in nature.<ref> Latourette (1958) vol 1 ch. 6</ref>

====Facing Liberalism====

In Germany in the 1840s the ultramontane movement used mass meetings and pilgrimages to combat the growth of liberalism and modernism. However, the anti-clerical press attacked these mass meetings, and in response a large number of Catholic newspapers emerged in Germany starting in the 1840s. To ensure their own survival, these newspapers championed a liberal idea--[[Freedom of the press|press freedom]]. In addition, local clubs were established to mobilize the Catholic working class. These clubs tried to end discrimination against ordinary Catholics by advocating other liberal concepts--freedom of religion and freedom of thought--and by entering the electoral process.

With the unification of Germany in 1870, the new nation faced the problems of consolidation, one of which was secularization. The laws dealing with secularization opened a political battle between Chancellor [[Bismarck]] and the Catholics, which struggle is called the "[[Kulturkampf]]." The Catholics organized their own political parties and protected their interests by voting as a bloc into the 1930s, when the Nazis closed down all other parties.

====Freemasons====

Freemasonry is a secret society that was, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, politically active in numerous countries. The Catholic Church opposed Freemasonry and forbade its members to belong to Masonic lodges. The Catholic Church first condemned Freemasonry in 1738. This was partially because Masons were often aligned with popular uprisings that had the objective of replacing traditional monarchs and class privilege with national independence and voting rights. A large number of the signers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence had been Freemasons, for example. Some, though not all, of the French Revolution's leaders were Masons, although Robespierre was not a Mason. The Masonic role in the French Revolution was part of the reason the Catholic Church condemned Freemasonry.

The Papacy coordinated attacks against Masonry in countries such as Brazil, where the religious question in the 1870s centered on Masonry and the struggle between regalist and ultramontane forces. One method of Catholic action was to found Catholic universities. Ignace Bourget, second bishop of Montreal, Canada, founded Laval University, saying that the university would be the principal instrument for "wresting the elite from the clutches of liberalism." At the time, political Liberalism was closely associated with national liberation and democracy.

====Women====

A spiritual revolution took place in the 19th century, moving individuals to a renewed interest in personal piety. There was a new emphasis on the role of Mary and a greatly increased involvement of women in the life of the Church. The number of sisters and nuns increased from 20,000 to 400,000 between 1815 and 1914.

Camp (1990) traced the treatment of women by the Church. In the late 19th century, the papacy began to revise its public teachings about the proper role of women in the Church and society. From Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) to Pope John Paul II (1978-2005), papal social pronouncements revealed an evolution in attitudes from the view that women are passive subordinates to men in all spheres of life to the current teaching that lay and clerical women are equal but complementary partners with men in religious, political, economic, and social endeavors. Nevertheless, the papacy has remained firm in the conviction that ordination is for men only.

====Arts====

[[Image:Cerro_de_Angeles.jpg|right|thumb|230px|Cerro de los Angeles, Madrid, Spain.]]
The arts provided a refuge from modernity in the form of a nostalgic aesthetic. Church architecture saw the revival of the medieval [[Gothic]] style. Romantic literature, for example by Chateaubriand, helped inspire a Catholic revival. In music, Catholic churchgoers were likely to be exposed to an officially sponsored revival of ''a cappella'' singing in the manner of Palestrina. The rapid development of symphonic and operatic forms affected sacred music, resulting in many masses, requiems, and te deums for large orchestra and chorus, sometimes even composed by skeptics such as Berlioz and Verdi.

====Politics====

In politics, as democracy and popular government spread, religious motivations moved people into one party or the other. In Catholic countries such as France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, sharp confrontations emerged between clericals and anti-clericals; in countries with mixed Catholic and Protestant populations such as Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Britain and the U.S., political splits occurred along confessional lines. In the U.S. the great majority of the Catholics became [[Democratic Party|Democrats]]. In Germany the Catholics formed their own Center party to fight off attacks from the Protestants, as during the [[Kulturkampf]].

The British attempt to impose Protestantism on Ireland not only fueled the Catholic revival there but also contributed to its spread via emigration to the U.S. and Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and England itself, all of which increased the Catholic population. The Irish often took control of the Church in each of these countries. The Poles, having lost their nation state in the 1790s, turned to an intense religiosity that preserved national identity and which they carried with them to industrial centers in the U.S. and Germany. In the U.S., some Poles, frustrated with the Irish control of the Church, founded the [[Polish National Catholic Church]].

===20th century===

====Vatican II====

[[File:John-23.jpg|right|thumb|270px|[[Pope John XXIII]] reigned 1958-63]]

The "Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican" (termed [[Vatican II]]), was called by [[Pope John XXIII]] and was in session from 1962 to 1965. It dramatically modernized and transformed church policies, with major changes to official theology and liturgy. Liturgical changes included the introduction of Mass in local languages instead of Latin. Theologically, the council deemphasized the centrality of Mary while also adding a new emphasis on individual and personal holiness. These were ideas previously associated with Protestantism and had, in some cases, been features in the opposition to the Catholic Church since the time of the Protestant Reformation. The Council asserted the Church's support for [[freedom of religion]], declared that the Jews were not guilty of [[deicide]], and recognized the possibility of salvation for Jews, Muslims, and Protestants.

After Vatican II, 1962-65, the controversy among Catholics over papal authority and infallibility largely ended, though some significant degree of opposition to it remains,<ref>such as by historian Garry Wills, author of ''Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit'' (Sophia Institute Press, 2003), and liberal theologian Hans Kung, author of ''Infallible?: An inquiry'' (1970)</ref><ref>David Carlin, ''The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America'',‎ appendix 2</ref><ref>[http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/vatican.htm Raymond Taouk, ''What are Catholics to think of Vatican II?'']</ref> This dissent is mainly manifested in disagreement with Roman Catholic teaching on birth control and abortion.<ref>[http://www.christianethicstoday.com/Issue/014/Infallibility%20in%20Ethical%20Perspective%20By%20John%20M.%20Swomley_014_26_.htm John M. Swomley, ''Infallibility in Ethical Perspective Christian Ethics Today], Issue 014 Volume 4 No 1 February 1996</ref> For example 56% of U.S. Catholics said that the pope is not infallible "when he teaches on matters of morals, such as birth control and abortion"; 80% of Catholics believed it is possible to disagree with the pope on official positions on morality and still be a good Catholic. <ref>Time/CNN nationwide poll of 1,000 adults, conducted by Yankelovich Partners, Sept. 27-28, 1995</ref>

Reactions among Catholics to Vatican II fall into three camps. "Liberal" Catholics, drawing on the established Catholic belief in the "journeying" nature of the Church, see Vatican II and the new period that it marked in Catholic history as representing a significant advancement in man's understanding of the Gospels, which in turn justifies changes in Catholic belief and practice. "Conservative" Catholics (including the most recent popes) hold that the decrees of the Council, properly understood, are wholly in line with the historic Catholic faith, and that they should not be used as an excuse for unwarranted innovations. "Traditional" (or "[[Traditionalist Catholicism|traditionalist]]") Catholics regard the teachings of Vatican II as problematic, or even as heretical. Some of these Catholics created new churches which use the old liturgies.

===21st Century===

Current issues facing the Catholic Church include:

* The effects of Obamacare and other liberal legislation on Catholic hospitals (such as funding for abortion)
* The aftermath of a series of sexual abuse scandals by priests and other clergymen. In the early 2000s, it was found that bishops were privately settling cases of molestation of minors by priests, occurring primarily between the 1940s and 1980s. The attempted cover-up of this abuse by the church has caused many Catholics to become disillusioned with the church.
* Increasing atheism and secularism in Europe

Islam is also increasingly becoming a threat to Catholicism. Sharia Law's rejection of religious freedom and the ongoing genocide of Chaldean Rite Catholics in Iraq are among these threats. There is a very strong trend of Muslim immigration into Europe, which is subverting the judicial system towards a Sharia theocracy. This trend is fueled through assassinations and threats towards anti-Islamic politicians (such as [[Theo Van Gogh]] and [[Geert Wilders]]). While Christianity remains the world's largest religion, all denominations of Islam combined now outnumber Catholicism (the most popular Christian denomination).

The Church has taken stances on recent controversial issues, including opposing the [[Iraq War]]<ref>Richert, Scott P. "What Is the Papacy's Response to the War in Iraq?" About.com Catholicism. http://catholicism.about.com/od/thechurchintheworld/f/popes_on_iraq.htm</ref>, supporting [[universal health care]] (including many aspects of [[Obamacare]])<ref>Clarke, Kevin. "Papal prescription for universal health care." January 16, 2011. U.S. Catholic. http://www.uscatholic.org/culture/social-justice/2011/01/papal-prescription</ref>, and supporting assistance to unauthorized [[immigrant]]s.<ref>Kerwin, Donald. "Immigration Reform and the Catholic Church." May, 2006. Migration Information Source. http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=395</ref> The Church continues to oppose birth control and abortion, as discussed above.

== See also ==

*[[Cafeteria Catholic]]
*[[Catholic views on creationism‎]]
*[[Pope Francis I]]
*[[Vatican City]]
*[[Catholicism in Crisis]]
*[[Revelation, Book of (historical exegesis)]]

==External links==
[[Image:Virgen.jpg|right|thumb|Virgin Mary and Child]]

*[http://www.Vatican.va The Vatican]
*A digital version of [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ ''The Catholic Encyclopedia''].
*[http://www.cua.edu/ The Catholic University of America] Washington, D. C.
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm St. Paul] Catholic Encyclopedia.
*[http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm Catechism of the Catholic Church] Saint Charles Borromeo Catholic Church web site.
*[http://www.pellegrinocattolico.com/index.html Al Pellegrino Cattolico] Italian web site.

==Further reading==
* Bokenkotter, Thomas. ''A Concise History of the Catholic Church'' (2005) [http://www.amazon.com/Concise-History-Catholic-Church/dp/0385516134/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241119912&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
* Brown, Peter. ''The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity 200-1000 AD'' (2002), 640pp
* Chadwick, Owen. ''A History of the Popes, 1830-1914.'' (1998), 616pp; a standard recent history. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=12355195 online edition],
* Holland, Joe. ''Modern Catholic Social Teaching: The Popes Confront the Industrial Age 1740-1958.'' Paulist Press, 2003. 404 pp.
* Kung, Hans. ''The Catholic Church: A Short History'' (2003), by a leading Catholic scholar [http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Church-History-Library-Chronicles/dp/0812967623/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241119912&sr=8-15 excerpt and text search]
* Latourette, Kenneth Scott. ''Christianity in a Revolutionary Age: A History of Christianity in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries'' 5 Vol'' (1958), a detailed history of Christianity 1800-1950 by a Protestant scholar. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=101463833 vol 1 online edition]
* O'Toole, James M. ''The Faithful: A History of Catholics in America'' (2008) [http://books.google.com/books?id=BFlBzSAVW6kC&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:The+intitle:Faithful+intitle:A+intitle:History+intitle:of+intitle:Catholics+intitle:in+intitle:America&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]

===Reference===
* ''New Catholic 'Encyclopedia'' (1967), complete coverage of all topics by Catholic scholars
* ''Catholic Encyclopedia,'' (1913) [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ online edition] complete coverage by Catholic scholars; the articles were written about 100 years ago
* Coppa, Frank J., ed. ''Great Popes through History: An Encyclopedia.'' (2002). 600 pp.
* Kelly, J.N.D. ''The Oxford Dictionary of Popes'' (1988). 349pp; scholarly short biographies; [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=54850171 online edition]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Catholic Church| ]]
[[Category:Christian History]]
[[Category:Christian Denominations]]