What do you think?
Rate this book
Did Darwin Get It Right?: Catholics and the Theory of Evolution
George Sim Johnston Sort out the facts about evolution by discovering that Catholic belief about God's creation and scientific evidence about the origins of the universe are mutually compatible.
175 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 1998
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 22, 2023
There is a lot that Mr. Johnston misses. I am not Catholic, not even a Christian actually. When I was a Christian, I always viewed the Genesis story as a story aimed at an ancient illiterate agrarian society, not history. I was always in trouble with clergy for having this attitude - "What do you do? Pick and choose from His word what you want to believe? It's all true or none of it's true." They convinced me on the second point.
The book is already 25 years old and in a scientific discussion that can be a real decisive point against you. He cites "scientists" who have since been discredited as using flawed methodologies and using poor arguments. He cites lack of transitional fossils when anyone who is even remotely involved in this field has heard on at least a couple of well documented transitional species that have been discovered within the last 10 years or so. These two points stood out to me, but one that I couldn't get past was his continual reference to Darwin and not to a modern interpretation of evolution. Additionally, he complains about how flawed Darwin's explanation of how life got started is so inadequate. Other than one short off-hand remark Darwin made no effort to explain how life started, just how it changes.
Another odd characteristic of Mr. Johnston is that he complains about the scientific community starting off with the idea that everything should be explained by way of some naturalistic means and not have to refer to some supernatural force. He is frustrated that scientists are now meddling in philosophy which is not their purview. But in the next breath he will seem to think that since we have not been able to create life artificially, then we need to accept that some sort of Prime Mover, or God must have started life. He says it is important to not resort to a God of the gaps argument, but he does this before the horses are even out of the gate. He is all philosophy and no science, in my humble opinion.
Anyone familiar with both sides of the evolution/creationism discussion will not be persuaded buy his weak, outdated, and frankly, laughable arguments. Other than being a good mental exercise this book was a waste of time. I'm glad I only paid $1.00 for it at a thrift store.
The book is already 25 years old and in a scientific discussion that can be a real decisive point against you. He cites "scientists" who have since been discredited as using flawed methodologies and using poor arguments. He cites lack of transitional fossils when anyone who is even remotely involved in this field has heard on at least a couple of well documented transitional species that have been discovered within the last 10 years or so. These two points stood out to me, but one that I couldn't get past was his continual reference to Darwin and not to a modern interpretation of evolution. Additionally, he complains about how flawed Darwin's explanation of how life got started is so inadequate. Other than one short off-hand remark Darwin made no effort to explain how life started, just how it changes.
Another odd characteristic of Mr. Johnston is that he complains about the scientific community starting off with the idea that everything should be explained by way of some naturalistic means and not have to refer to some supernatural force. He is frustrated that scientists are now meddling in philosophy which is not their purview. But in the next breath he will seem to think that since we have not been able to create life artificially, then we need to accept that some sort of Prime Mover, or God must have started life. He says it is important to not resort to a God of the gaps argument, but he does this before the horses are even out of the gate. He is all philosophy and no science, in my humble opinion.
Anyone familiar with both sides of the evolution/creationism discussion will not be persuaded buy his weak, outdated, and frankly, laughable arguments. Other than being a good mental exercise this book was a waste of time. I'm glad I only paid $1.00 for it at a thrift store.
September 3, 2024
A "MIDDLE GROUND" CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OF EVOLUTION
George Sim Johnston wrote in the "Note to the Reader" of this 1998 book, "This book was written in response to the widespread confusion among Catholics about how to deal with the theory of evolution. While the book may be read with profit by scholars, it is aimed at the general reader..."
Here are some quotations from the book:
"As is often the case, there is a reasonable Catholic middle ground between the poles of biblical and scientific absolutism. It is a ground that was claimed by St. Augustine and is comfortably occupied by modern Catholic thinkers like Chesterton, Maritain, and Gilson. It is also where the Magisterium locates itself, especially during the pontificate of John Paul II, who has a keen interest in science." (Pg. 14)
"(St. Augustine) speculated that in the beginning God had planted 'rational seeds' ... in nature that eventually fructified into plants and animals. This would be 'evolution' in the strict sense of the word... however, St. Augustine's version of evolution is utterly non-Darwinian; it is, rather, creation on the installment plan." (Pg. 24)
"G.K. Chesterton remarked at the time that the Catholic Church, which does not have a philosophical problem with evolution (properly understood), and does not treat the Book of Genesis as a sourcebook of scientific data, was entirely outside the fray." (Pg. 72)
"On October 22, 1996, Pope John Paul II delivered a message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences regarding the theory of evolution... that produced screaming headlines around the world, 'Pope Vindicates Darwin!' The pope, in fact, did no such thing. Darwin's name was nowhere mentioned in the document, and the pope made it clear that Darwinism in its pure, materialistic form is not acceptable to Catholics." (Pg. 111)
"The creation account in Genesis is true, but it is not scientifically 'true.'" (Pg. 123)
George Sim Johnston wrote in the "Note to the Reader" of this 1998 book, "This book was written in response to the widespread confusion among Catholics about how to deal with the theory of evolution. While the book may be read with profit by scholars, it is aimed at the general reader..."
Here are some quotations from the book:
"As is often the case, there is a reasonable Catholic middle ground between the poles of biblical and scientific absolutism. It is a ground that was claimed by St. Augustine and is comfortably occupied by modern Catholic thinkers like Chesterton, Maritain, and Gilson. It is also where the Magisterium locates itself, especially during the pontificate of John Paul II, who has a keen interest in science." (Pg. 14)
"(St. Augustine) speculated that in the beginning God had planted 'rational seeds' ... in nature that eventually fructified into plants and animals. This would be 'evolution' in the strict sense of the word... however, St. Augustine's version of evolution is utterly non-Darwinian; it is, rather, creation on the installment plan." (Pg. 24)
"G.K. Chesterton remarked at the time that the Catholic Church, which does not have a philosophical problem with evolution (properly understood), and does not treat the Book of Genesis as a sourcebook of scientific data, was entirely outside the fray." (Pg. 72)
"On October 22, 1996, Pope John Paul II delivered a message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences regarding the theory of evolution... that produced screaming headlines around the world, 'Pope Vindicates Darwin!' The pope, in fact, did no such thing. Darwin's name was nowhere mentioned in the document, and the pope made it clear that Darwinism in its pure, materialistic form is not acceptable to Catholics." (Pg. 111)
"The creation account in Genesis is true, but it is not scientifically 'true.'" (Pg. 123)
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews