What do you think?
Rate this book
Thomistic Evolution: A Catholic Approach To Understanding Evolution In The Light Of Faith
Evolutionary theory has raised numerous disputed questions among Catholics and other Christians concerning the relationship between faith and reason and between religion and science. Thomistic Evolution shows that the Thomistic intellectual tradition, grounded in the philosophical and theological synthesis of St. Thomas Aquinas, provides insightful and compelling responses to these questions. The novelty and brilliance of these Thomistic responses will surprise believers and skeptics alike, transcending and reconciling the dichotomies that shape the contemporary science and religion debate. Unfortunately, the Thomistic responses to these disputed questions in science and religion are neither well known nor well understood. This new book, along with its companion website, www.thomisticevolution.org, seeks to remedy this.
278 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2016
26 people are currently reading
138 people want to read
About the author
Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco
5 books3 followersAustriaco first attended the University of Pennsylvania where he earned a Bachelor of Science Engineering (B.S.E.) in 1989. He went on to earn a Ph.D in biology from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1996. In 1997, he entered the Order of Friars Preachers, from where he was able to attend the Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception at the Dominican House of Studies where he earned his Master of Divinity degree and licentiate in theology. From there he also earned his Doctorate in Sacred Theology, through the University of Fribourg, 2005.
In 2001 he joined the National Catholic Bioethics Center as a scientific adviser. Since 2005, Austriaco has served on the faculty of Providence College as a tenured associate professor of biology. In the same year he became an investigator at the National Health Institute-Rhode Island Idea Network of Biomedical Research Excellence Program. One year later, in 2006, he was hired as a staff ethicist at The Dominican Friars Health Care Ministry of New York.
In addition to his other work and publications, Austriaco is the founder and chief researcher at the Austriaco Lab. The laboratory is located at Providence College and is composed of both students and faculty. The laboratory researches programmed cell death (PCD) such as cell senescence and apoptosis. Research is done on yeast cells, which are genetically manipulated and observed in order to better understand PCD.
In 2001 he joined the National Catholic Bioethics Center as a scientific adviser. Since 2005, Austriaco has served on the faculty of Providence College as a tenured associate professor of biology. In the same year he became an investigator at the National Health Institute-Rhode Island Idea Network of Biomedical Research Excellence Program. One year later, in 2006, he was hired as a staff ethicist at The Dominican Friars Health Care Ministry of New York.
In addition to his other work and publications, Austriaco is the founder and chief researcher at the Austriaco Lab. The laboratory is located at Providence College and is composed of both students and faculty. The laboratory researches programmed cell death (PCD) such as cell senescence and apoptosis. Research is done on yeast cells, which are genetically manipulated and observed in order to better understand PCD.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
October 19, 2022
Muito esclarecedor sobre o equívoco - ou penosa ignorancia - metafísico que é a teoria evolucionista, larga e prontamente advogada hoje em dia para desacreditar o dogma de fé da monogenia.
O evolucionismo é, já dizia Chesterton num parágrafo discreto da Ortodoxia, necessariamente e por inerência materialista. Quer isto dizer que o evolucionismo pressupõe uma compreensão basilar das coisas reais segundo a qual a sua autonomização ontológica não é de natureza - formal -, mas antes material, onde a diferença entre uma cadeira e o sol é a arrumação arbitrária do material.
A monogenia, pelo contrário, decorre de uma evidência metafísica básica: de um macaco, de natureza animal, nunca poderá nascer um homem, de natureza humana. Entre um macaco e um homem existe um divórcio hostil, não conceptual ou mental, mas sim de natureza. É que o ser das coisas tem um princípio elementar que é o da radicalidade, quer dizer, ou se é, ou nao se é. Não há mais ou menos homens. Há homens, há macacos, há ornitorrincos, etc. Esta proposição é, à boa moda aristotélica, uma evidência empírica - todos sabemos que o Júlio César era tão ser humano como um homem das cavernas, ou como o Elon Musk. Existe algo - a forma adiante-se - que nos obriga a dizer que, embora cheios de diferenças, há algo de nuclear e de radicalmente humano em todos, algo imutável e resistente ao tempo - à dita evolução. Negar isto é violar a razão e o seu namorado bom senso.
Eis, portanto, a deficiência grave da tese evolucionista: ao dizer que o homem é fruto de um longo processo evolutivo, o que se está a afirmar consequentemente é a gradação do ser, ou pior, que os acidentes definem a substância.
Vejamos: se o homem enquanto ser é filho de um processo evolutivo, por muuuuuuuito paulatino que este seja, quer isto dizer das duas uma: ou, i) radical e miraculosamente, houve um dia em que podemos afirmar que o macaco deixou de ser macado, e o homem passou a ser homem ou; ii) o homem é uma evolução constante.
A Segunda tese é falsa e levanta obviamente um problema - que Chesterton alias aponta gozando e dizendo que assim sendo tudo é tudo e nada é nada -, onde se levanta a questão de saber quais as qualidades que, por mais ou menos evoluídas, humanizam o macaco e a questão ainda mais desumana e hitlariana que é a de saber se, apontadas as ditas qualidades humanizantes, não haverá homens mais homens que outros, na medida da mais perfeita actualização dessas potências. Desta forma, torna-se necessário que eu seja, ainda que milimetricamente, por natureza mais homem que o meu pai, e este mais que o meu avô.
Resta, diante desta pseudo-filosofia mascarada de observação científica, uma solução, que é desde já a mais científica e mais racional de todas, e que para variar é assentida pela sempre sabia e Santa Madre Igreja: houve um momento da história - ainda que no âmbito de um processo evolutivo de um ser animal e com inúmeros acidentes semelhantes aos nossos humanos -, que a radicalidade do ser humano foi criada em natureza, de modo a assim poder continuar até ao fim dos tempos.
Diz-se, por aí, que houve um tal de Deus que criou duas alminhas.
O evolucionismo é, já dizia Chesterton num parágrafo discreto da Ortodoxia, necessariamente e por inerência materialista. Quer isto dizer que o evolucionismo pressupõe uma compreensão basilar das coisas reais segundo a qual a sua autonomização ontológica não é de natureza - formal -, mas antes material, onde a diferença entre uma cadeira e o sol é a arrumação arbitrária do material.
A monogenia, pelo contrário, decorre de uma evidência metafísica básica: de um macaco, de natureza animal, nunca poderá nascer um homem, de natureza humana. Entre um macaco e um homem existe um divórcio hostil, não conceptual ou mental, mas sim de natureza. É que o ser das coisas tem um princípio elementar que é o da radicalidade, quer dizer, ou se é, ou nao se é. Não há mais ou menos homens. Há homens, há macacos, há ornitorrincos, etc. Esta proposição é, à boa moda aristotélica, uma evidência empírica - todos sabemos que o Júlio César era tão ser humano como um homem das cavernas, ou como o Elon Musk. Existe algo - a forma adiante-se - que nos obriga a dizer que, embora cheios de diferenças, há algo de nuclear e de radicalmente humano em todos, algo imutável e resistente ao tempo - à dita evolução. Negar isto é violar a razão e o seu namorado bom senso.
Eis, portanto, a deficiência grave da tese evolucionista: ao dizer que o homem é fruto de um longo processo evolutivo, o que se está a afirmar consequentemente é a gradação do ser, ou pior, que os acidentes definem a substância.
Vejamos: se o homem enquanto ser é filho de um processo evolutivo, por muuuuuuuito paulatino que este seja, quer isto dizer das duas uma: ou, i) radical e miraculosamente, houve um dia em que podemos afirmar que o macaco deixou de ser macado, e o homem passou a ser homem ou; ii) o homem é uma evolução constante.
A Segunda tese é falsa e levanta obviamente um problema - que Chesterton alias aponta gozando e dizendo que assim sendo tudo é tudo e nada é nada -, onde se levanta a questão de saber quais as qualidades que, por mais ou menos evoluídas, humanizam o macaco e a questão ainda mais desumana e hitlariana que é a de saber se, apontadas as ditas qualidades humanizantes, não haverá homens mais homens que outros, na medida da mais perfeita actualização dessas potências. Desta forma, torna-se necessário que eu seja, ainda que milimetricamente, por natureza mais homem que o meu pai, e este mais que o meu avô.
Resta, diante desta pseudo-filosofia mascarada de observação científica, uma solução, que é desde já a mais científica e mais racional de todas, e que para variar é assentida pela sempre sabia e Santa Madre Igreja: houve um momento da história - ainda que no âmbito de um processo evolutivo de um ser animal e com inúmeros acidentes semelhantes aos nossos humanos -, que a radicalidade do ser humano foi criada em natureza, de modo a assim poder continuar até ao fim dos tempos.
Diz-se, por aí, que houve um tal de Deus que criou duas alminhas.
December 20, 2021
This collection of essays didn’t even scratch the surface of the topic it was supposed to cover. To title this book “Thomistic” Evolution is quite misleading given that the authors fail to address any robust objections to their thesis which someone familiar with Thomistic philosophy would make. There was no discussion of how to reconcile hylemorphic dualism with the special creation of a human soul to inform an evolved humanoid body. There was no discussion of how accidental changes in biological material can modify the nature of a creature. There was no discussion of how evolution can account for ontological leaps from non-life to life, or from single- to multi-cellular organisms. If their position is that God intervened at certain points in the evolutionary process then they should state that; but they don’t even acknowledge these major problems that their thesis introduces.
I found the dismissal of the authoritative Magisterial teaching against polygenism in Humani Generis to be problematic and unconvincing. The evidence offered for evolution was extremely brief, consisting of no more than a few paragraphs.
I was hoping to be presented with a robust, Thomistic defense of theistic evolution, but I’m left less sympathetic to their thesis than before I read the book.
I found the dismissal of the authoritative Magisterial teaching against polygenism in Humani Generis to be problematic and unconvincing. The evidence offered for evolution was extremely brief, consisting of no more than a few paragraphs.
I was hoping to be presented with a robust, Thomistic defense of theistic evolution, but I’m left less sympathetic to their thesis than before I read the book.
February 13, 2023
This is a decent, if mostly introductory treatment of the question of Evolution and a broadly Thomistic understanding of philosophy and theology. There is not much new here for readers who are familiar with the territory, though it is fairly succinct and clearly written. The authors should consider a follow-up which delves more deeply into the science and philosophy, and address more common objections.
March 9, 2025
I'm new to the theology side of evolution, and I found this to be a refreshing, concise perspective of Aquinas and how both he and Catholicism can integrate with the truths found in evolutionary theory.
Quick comments:
While this book is by no means exhaustive, I don't think it was meant to be, so I'm not mad at it's length. It was given to me as a way to introduce me to the topic so I think it was supposed to be more of a summary than a dissertation. That being said, I did find it quite coherent in spite of it's length.
I read the second edition, which directly addresses some of the critiques from other professionals, some of which are also levelled in the comments for this book, so I do think this is a book that will "evolve," you could say.
While there are some who are frustrated that the biology wasn't addressed in entirety, again, I think this was more a 100 ft view as opposed to a 10 in view. And while a page or two is enough to point out true flaws in some of Behe's work (😉) it just isn't enough space to go over all the evidence for evolution.
Overall, nice intro to the topic, looking forward to reading more and on subsequent editions to the book.
Quick comments:
While this book is by no means exhaustive, I don't think it was meant to be, so I'm not mad at it's length. It was given to me as a way to introduce me to the topic so I think it was supposed to be more of a summary than a dissertation. That being said, I did find it quite coherent in spite of it's length.
I read the second edition, which directly addresses some of the critiques from other professionals, some of which are also levelled in the comments for this book, so I do think this is a book that will "evolve," you could say.
While there are some who are frustrated that the biology wasn't addressed in entirety, again, I think this was more a 100 ft view as opposed to a 10 in view. And while a page or two is enough to point out true flaws in some of Behe's work (😉) it just isn't enough space to go over all the evidence for evolution.
Overall, nice intro to the topic, looking forward to reading more and on subsequent editions to the book.
February 20, 2021
I really wanted more from this book. The first 18 chapters are akin to essays pulled together for this book - different authors touching on various points. Only chapters 19 - 31 really delve into theistic evolution and even then it was a survey rather than a deep dive.
Only one chapter was devoted to a response to Intelligent Design and another offered as a response to other Thomist scholars - and those responses offered explanations that left much to be desired - a single chapter as a refute to books simply cannot, with any integrity, truly prove a point.
I feel the last 12 chapters should have been expanded to offer what was originally promised, "[it] will surprise readers and skeptics alike, transcending and reconciling the dichotomies that shape contemporary science and religion debate." While this certainly is a good place to start, I was looking for more depth and transcendence.
Only one chapter was devoted to a response to Intelligent Design and another offered as a response to other Thomist scholars - and those responses offered explanations that left much to be desired - a single chapter as a refute to books simply cannot, with any integrity, truly prove a point.
I feel the last 12 chapters should have been expanded to offer what was originally promised, "[it] will surprise readers and skeptics alike, transcending and reconciling the dichotomies that shape contemporary science and religion debate." While this certainly is a good place to start, I was looking for more depth and transcendence.
August 29, 2025
New to the topic of Thomistic evolution, and how Catholics should view evolution. This book was a great way, to get my head around the topic, and all the issues and debates that involved in this area.
May be a heavy read for some, if a person lacks a good scientific or theology background. I struggled with some of the scientific elements of the book, as I have more a theologian background. Even so, gland to have read it, yet I'm still confused about the topic.
Was Man apart of the evolution progress? O did God, just make us?
May be a heavy read for some, if a person lacks a good scientific or theology background. I struggled with some of the scientific elements of the book, as I have more a theologian background. Even so, gland to have read it, yet I'm still confused about the topic.
Was Man apart of the evolution progress? O did God, just make us?
April 22, 2022
I found the book to be a great resource and a good reconciliation between evolutionary theory and Christianity. However, I would've liked to see more of a treatment on how Thomistic philosophy in particular is reconcilable with evolution. A lot of time was spent on Biblical interpretation and general Thomistic metaphysics (which was all great material), but little attention was paid to the objections that have been raised by other Thomistic philosophers.
April 29, 2021
This book offers an excellent analysis of the theory of evolution from a Catholic perspective. It doesn't have all the answers, but it does present the available evidence in a fairly clear way (although already having some background in philosophy does help) and it addresses some of the criticisms of theistic evolution.
November 17, 2023
A topic of great interest to me. I gave only 2 stars because it’s so difficult to read. I’ll try to read again while taking notes. This was above my head and I’m an avid reader. Just not a theologian. I wish it was more accessible to non-philosophers.
December 2, 2020
Pretty much a little summary of Thomism.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews