In necessariis, Unitas. (Evolution? Non-essential.)

Pope Benedict has issued a statement saying that the clash between Evolution and Creation is an "absurdity." I think he's going to get a lot of flack for that, from both Protestants and Catholics alike.

However, I would be one to agree with him.

Evolution, in and of itself, does not lead to the death of G-d, or of G-d's domain over creation. Evolution doesn't even challenge Creationism in its purest form. It does however, necessitate a demise of using Scripture as a science text book, challenging the modernist post-enlightenment framework of interpretation.

In its proper form, evolution should not carry philosophical baggage that it has acquired. Historically, in the Fundamentalist's fight to adhere to a supernatural Chr-stianity (to whom we owe much, as recognized by Mark Noll), and in an effort of the Naturalists to discount G-d through science, evolution has been viewed as a weapon by one side and a tool by the other, neither of which should be the case.

A belief that says it is not impossible for G-d to work through such means does nothing to undermine the authority of Scripture in terms of faith and practice (infallibility of Scripture versus Inerrancy). It says nothing about the work of redemption or of Chr-st's atoning sacrifice, nor of His historicity. It is not (or rather, should not be) an all-or-nothing "if we concede this point, then our whole faith is going to fall apart" sort of slippery slope argument.

Personally, I have reservations about the theory. Behe's Darwin's Black Box was quite convincing, though that spoke of nothing concerning the nature of Biblical creationism. Creationism, in the sense of, "In the beginning, G-d...." is critical to an orthodox Chr-stian faith. "In the beginning, G-d did it in six literal days, and certainly not through evolution" is not essential.

A Chr-stian has every right to believe in a literal interpretation of the Creation narrative. Most conservative Chr-stians believe it in the States and in the rest of the world. I will respect those who do. But in the post-modern context that is Western Chr-stianity, I would say it would behoove us to re-examine whether or not this battle so many people vehemently fight is a straw man. Perhaps if the effort spent in proving and perpetuating Young Earth Creationism were spent on living and preaching essential G-spel, we might not (at least in the West) be viewed as having smaller brains (which, again, Mark Noll argues in Scandal of the Ev-ngelical Mind, is not a far from being incorrect). This is not for the sake of avoiding persecution or compromising truth to appease those who challenge us... this is for the sake of tearing down unnecessary and imaginary stumbling blocks. J-sus himself is enough to be their stumbling stone. We don't need to impose our (in my opinion, incorrect) requirements on others.