Another Missing Link
Back in the September 24, 1999, Commonweal, John F. Haught, a professor of theology at Georgetown, had an article titled, “The Darwinian Struggle: Catholics, Pay Attention.” An apologist for Darwinism, Haught nonetheless stated some of the problems many theists have with the Darwinian vision: “The variations that compose the raw material for evolution are said to be completely accidental, undirected by any divine intelligence. Next, the competitive ‘struggle’ in which weaker organisms…are ruthlessly eliminated exposes a universe apparently untended by divine compassion. And the disinterested manner of natural selection strongly suggests that we live in a remorselessly uncaring universe….” Haught continued: “The evolutionary process is, in the words of David Hull, ‘rife with happenstance, contingency, incredible waste, death, pain, and horror.’ Any God who would devise or watch over a Darwinian world must be ‘careless, indifferent, almost diabolical.’ This is not, says Hull, ‘the sort of God to whom anyone would be inclined to pray.'”
Strangely, Haught concluded by saying that “the Darwinian picture of life is more or less what we should expect if the world’s creator is a God of infinite love.”
So how does an almost diabolical God become infinitely loving? There’s a huge missing link in Haught’s argument, but we held off saying anything because Commonweal promised a “subsequent article” by Haught which, we presumed, would solve the riddle.
And in the January 28, 2000, Commonweal, the article, called “Evolution & God’s Humility: How Theology Can Embrace Darwin,” finally appeared. Haught praises Darwin as “brilliant” and dismisses those — such as Michael Behe — who see life as a result of “intelligent design” (and an intelligent and powerful Designer). According to Haught, God set the world in motion and then just let it evolve in a “random” and “aimless” way. (Apparently, God didn’t create man in His own image, for man just happened by accident.) Amazingly, it’s this “letting be” that, for Haught, defines God’s love, which he calls a “mysteriously humble love.” Says Haught: “A God of love concedes to the world its own autonomous principles” and “releases the world into the realm of liberty.” Although Haught denies being a Deist — for he claims that God’s power resides in an “open and incalculable future,” whatever that could possibly mean — he is for all intents and purposes a Deist.
You May Also Enjoy
The fantasy notion that the Pope was complicit in abuse cover-ups was considered nearly everywhere in the media to be a solidly established fact.
How can men, who are forced to compete against women, still serve as family breadwinners in these conditions? Do American women want this?
A problem arises when someone unfamiliar with Catholic history composes a study of eminent Catholics who lived under persecution.