TTTTT rtlT i R T i I X XIJL v^Xl U IVv^Il 
and 

r i ^ n r f ì 

The Existence of God 
j I 

HUMAN EVOLUTION 

America Press 
New York, N. Y. 

• 



A meeting of Minds 

THE CATHOLIC MIND • 70 E. 45th ST., N. Y. 17, N. Y, 

where the best of Catholic readers 

find the best of Catholic thought. 

You meet the outstanding Catholic writers and thinkers, 

both clerical and lay, in the pages of T H E CATHOLIC MIND, 

the reprint monthly. As a special service to you, all Papal 

pronouncements are published as they appear—outstand-

ing speeches, radio addresses, sermons and Pastoral let-

ters, and all the new Encyclicals. Every feature is reprinted 

in full. Digest size but not a digest, T H E CATHOLIC MIND 

is a publication of contemporary and traditional signifi-

cance which becomes a ready reference file of the best 

Catholic thought of today, tomorrow. 

25c A COPY : $3.00 A YEAR $5.50 fo r 
C a n a d a a n d F o r e i g n 



THE CHURCH 

and 

MODERN SCIENCE 

THE AMERICA PRESS 
70 East 45th Street 

New York 17, N. Y. 



C O N T E N T S 

1. Evolution of the Human Body 

Cyril Vollerl, S.J. 3 

Father Votiert is Dean of the Faculty and Pro-
fessor of Sacred Theology, Saint Mary's College, 
Saint Marys, Kansas. 

This chapter is reprinted from the Proceedings of 
the Sixth Annual Convention of the Catholic 
Theological Society of America with permission 
of the author and ecclesiastical approval. 

Nihil Obstat: John M. A. Fearns, S.T.D., P.A., 
Censor Librorum 

Imprimatur: Francis Cardinal Spellman, D.D. 

Archbishop of New York 

New York, December 3, 1951 

The Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur are official declarations that a 
book or pamphlet is free of doctrinal or moral error. No impli-
cation is contained therein that those who have granted the Nihil 
Obstat and Imprimatur agree with the contents, opinions, or state-
ments expressed. 

2. Modern Science and the Existence of God 

Pope Pius XII 31 

Address of the Holy Father to the Pontifical 
Academy of Science, November 22, 1951, re-
printed from THE CATHOLIC MIND, March, 
1952. 

tesrdfffed 



1. Evolution of the Human Body: 
Scientific Status Quo and 
Theological Implications 

TLHE HYPOTHESIS of evolution is far more complex 
and presents much greater difficulties than was suspected 
half a century ago. As exhibited in schematic outline, the 
evolutionary process used to be depicted as a tree. Now 
it is more often likened to an extremely bushy shrub; and 
the points where the branches divide and subdivide are 
generally hidden under heavy layers of moss. 

FOSSIL M E N 

The following summary will be limited to some im-
portant items of evidence that bear on the evolution of the 
human body.1 The intermediary links leading morpho-
logically from the-anthropoids to Homo sapiens are con-
veniently classified according to three stages: first, the 
group known as Australopithecus; secondly, the "pre-
humans," Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus; thirdly, 

1 Many works were consulted in the preparation of this summary. 
Some of the more useful among recent studies are: R. W. Murray, 
Man's Unknown Ancestors (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1943) ; G. Goury, 
Origine et évolution de Fhomme (Paris: Picard, 1948) ; G. L. 
Jepsen, G. G. Simpson, E. Mayr, Genetics, Paleontology and Evo-
lution (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1949) ; G. G. Simpson, 
The Meaning of Evolution (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1950) ; 
W. K. Gregory, Evolution Emerging (New York: Macmillan, 
1951) ; R. Mouterde, "L'évolution chez les primates supérieurs et 
chez l'homme," Mélange de science religieuse, VII (1950), 139-53. 
The best work to consult for chronology is F. E. Zeuner, Doling 
the Past (London: Methuen, 1950). 

3 



Neanderthal man. In addition, account must be taken of 
a number of other forms that are harder to classify. 

The most ancient simian fossil in which a human 
orientation can be discerned was discovered in South 
Africa in 1924, when Raymond A. Dart of Witwatersrand 
University found at Taungs the skull of a young animal 
with a well-preserved face. Later, in 1936, 1938, and 
1947 the same region yielded up other fragments con-
firming the importance of the first discovery, which had 
been difficult to interpret because of the creature's tender 
age at death. Despite their evident relationship, these 
fossils received various names, Australopithecus, Plesian-
thropus, Paranthropus; but they belong to the same group 
of hominoids, and are morphologically closer to man than 
our present apes. The cranial capacity of about 600 cubic 
centimeters is superior to that of modern apes of the 
same size (450 to 500 cc.). The development of the lobes 
resembles that of the human cranium; the face is less 
projecting and the prognathism is less pronounced than 
is the case with modern apes; the dentition presents a 
curious mixture of simian traits, human traits, and more 
specialized traits. The supraorbital ridge is less devel-
oped than in Pithecanthropus; some remnants of long 
bones seem to indicate an upright stature. The antiquity 
of the fossils has not been accurately established, but they 
are situated near the limit of the Tertiary and Quaternary 
eras, more or less a million years ago. 

This is the most advanced branch of great apes known 
to us. Australopithecus africanus exhibits a number of 
human traits, striking in detail, associated with predom-
inantly simian traits. Although this creature is not man's 
ancestor, it is structurally a close relation, and is one of 
the first forms of the branch of anthropoids orientated 
toward man. 

A further effort toward the direction of man is marked 
by two forms that are often referred to as prehominids; 

4 



these are Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus. 
The first discovery in this group was made in 1891 

and the following year by a young Netherlands doctor 
named Eugene Dubois, who had sailed for Indonesia for 
the express purpose of finding the intermediary being, 
the "ape-man," demanded by the evolutionist theory. 
Soon after his arrival in Java Dr. Dubois unearthed the 
top part of a skull, a thighbone, and two molars in the 
prehistoric volcanic stratum of the dried-up bed of the 
Solo River near the village of Trinil. These fragments, 
found some yards apart during an interval of several 
months, enabled the scientist to assemble Pithecanthropus 
erectus. The audacious reconstruction was hotly debated 
in anthropological circles; the teeth have often been 
attributed to an ape, and the thighbone to a man. To shed 
light on the controversy, Dr. G. H. R. von Koenigswald, 
research associate of the Carnegie Institute, undertook a 
series of excavations from 1936 to 1941. The volcanic 
strata of Sangiran, contemporaneous with those of Trinil 
and some thirty-seven miles distant, gave up half of a 
lower jaw, then three rather complete skulls, and finally 
a whole lower jaw. The various pieces belong either to 
Pithecanthropus erectus or to a related, more primitive 
species, Pithecanthropus robustus. Because of its extra-
ordinary size, the lower jaw discovered in 1941 has re-
ceived the name Meganthropus; it seemingly belongs to 
a type more ancient and primitive than Pithecanthropus. 
These fragments tend to confirm the bold reconstruction 
made by Dubois, although the brain capacity is less than 
that of Pithecanthropus, which is 900 cc. A mixture of 
human and simian traits is discernible in the teeth; the 
upper jaw, with its disposition of teeth, their strength, 
and the diastema, is very simian, while the dentition of 
the lower jaw is more human and approaches that of 
Sinanthropus. The fragmentary skull of an infant of 
several years of age, discovered in Modjokerto in 1936, 

5 



has an estimated cranial capacity of 650 cc., which is 
more than two-thirds the size of that of a modern baby 
one year old. This fossil is generally associated with the 
group of Pithecanthropus. 

Even if all these fragments do not belong to the same 
species, a series of primates much closer to man than any 
living anthropoid lived in Java at the beginning of the 
Quaternary era. This is clear from the development and 
convolutions of the brain as well as from the dentition. 
Whether the Java hominids were endowed with true intel-
ligence is still uncertain. 

During the period of hesitation about the nature of 
Pithecanthropus, a more important discovery was made 
in China to the west of Peking, in the famous bed of 
Chou Kou Tien. Excavations were conducted in 1927 
and the following years under the direction of Dr. David-
son Black, with the collaboration of Père Teilhard de 
Chardin. The prehistoric fossils that were found go un-
der the name of Sinanthropus pekinensis. Remains of 
twenty-five adult skeletons and of fifteen infants were 
unearthed; the teeth are very numerous. Five of the 
skulls are well preserved. From the discovery of the first 
cranium in 1929, scientists were struck by its relationship 
with what was then known of Pithecanthropus. If these 
two forms do not belong to the same species, they at least 
belong to the same genus, that of Peking being less remote 
from modern man than that of Java. The brain capacity 
is greater in Sinanthropus, with a mean of 1,043 cc., and 
one cranium reaches 1,225 cc. The skulls are low-vaulted, 
with heavy continuous brow ridges. The cheek bones are 
prominent. The face projects in a sort of muzzle and 
the chin recedes. The teeth are strong but the series is 
unbroken, without diastema; they reveal a mixture of 
human and simian characteristics in the same jaw, and 
the first lower molar is quite human. Only a few pieces 
of long bones were turned up, and they are not so close 

6 



to their modern counterparts as the famous thighbone of 
Pithecanthropus; yet agreement that Sinanthropus walked 
erect is unanimous. The many animal fossils found in 
the neighborhood of the bones of Sinanthropus are at-
tributed to the Middle Pleistocene, suggesting an age of 
more than 400,000 years, although Teilhard de Chardin 
is content to say "several hundred thousand years." 

A last witness of the "prehominids" was discovered in 
1935, at Tanganyika, Africa. This creature, called Afri-
canthropus, is represented by several incomplete skulls 
that have a brain capacity of some 1,100 cc. The cranial 
vault is low, the brow ridges are prominent, and the strong 
teeth lack a diastema. These traits suggest a close simi-
larity with Sinanthropus. 

Many authors relate to these fossils the Mauer jaw, 
discovered in 1907, eighty feet from the surface in an 
ancient stratum of a sand pit at Mauer, near Heidelberg. 
The jaw is massive and, like many Neanderthal speci-
mens, lacks a chin; yet the teeth and dental arch are 
human and do not differ greatly from some primitive 
types of living races. Whether Heidelberg man goes with 
the Pithecanthropus-Sinanthropus group is extremely 
doubtful; he is better classified as pre-Neanderthal. The 
geological age is put at about 450,000 years ago. 

In any case, during the ancient Quaternary era, there 
lived in Asia and Africa, and perhaps in Europe also, a 
morphological type with traits still partly simian, but 
clearly on the road to humanity and probably arriving. 

The last of the intermediary stages is occupied by the 
Neanderthal man, who flourished during the Middle 
Paleolithic period, some 75,000 to 125,000 years ago, but 
lived on until long after that. About a hundred skeletons 
of this type are known, and many of them are complete. 
Neanderthal man was a short, stocky individual with a 
large head having a mean brain capacity of 1,400 cc., the 
maximum exceeding 1,600 cc. The forehead recedes 

7 



somewhat, the skull is low but higher than that of Sinan-
thropus, the brow ridges are thick, the face projects 
slightly, and the lower jaw is heavy with undeveloped 
chin. The teeth are very strong, yet clearly human. Nean-
derthal man used well-made flint tools and had definite 
religious convictions; he carefully interred his dead with 
attention to precise rites, such as East-West position of 
the corpse, protection for the head, and provisions for 
the next life. 

This type is widely spread throughout Europe, North 
Africa, Asia, China, and Java, where the Homo soloensis 
seems to be a Neanderthal man not far removed from 
Pithecanthropus. The most interesting cases are those 
in which an attenuation or even effacement of certain 
typical traits occurs. The fossils discovered in Palestine 
since 1925, especially those of Nazareth and Mount Car-
mel, exhibit a mixture of Neanderthal and Homo sapiens 
characteristics. Many of them combine heavy brow 
ridges with a high skull and a well-marked chin. The 
tendency today is to consider such specimens as an inter-
mediary group representing Neanderthal men on the road 
toward the heights of Homo sapiens, or else to regard 
them as genetic crosses between these two forms. The lat-
ter hypothesis receives confirmation from the fact that 
certain fossils of the Cro-Magnon group of Homo sapiens, 
for example those found in Moravia, have certain Nean-
derthal traits, such as brow ridges. This indicates that 
the Neanderthal type had relations with Homo sapiens 
and is not isolated. 

Beginning with the Upper Paleolithic period, some 
eighteen or nineteen thousand years ago, Homo sapiens 
is well known; he is represented by tall men having high 
foreheads, no brow ridges, and well-marked chins. But 
men of the modern type are far older than that; their his-
tory may even go back to the Lower Paleolithic, that is, 
to a period when the Neanderthal man did not yet exist 

8 



or at least had not taken on his characteristic features. 
In 1912, strata probably pertaining to early glaciation 

times yielded up important fragments of a skull and half 
a jaw that permit a tentative reconstruction of the Pilt-
down man. The cranium of this famous "dawn man" is 
remarkably like that of modern man, and has a brain 
capacity of 1,350 cc., although doubt still persists whether 
the ape-like jaw belongs to the skull. Swanscombe man, 
pertaining to the Middle Pleistocene, in his preserved 
remains resembles modern man. In the opinion of F. E. 
Zeuner, this fossil man alone is sufficient to settle the 
issue that Homo sapiens existed some 250,000 years ago; 
accordingly he would be more ancient than the entire 
datable Neanderthal group, with the possible exception 
of the Heidelberg jaw. 

L. S. B. Leakey holds that both the Kanam jaw and 
the fragments of the Kanjera skull found in East Africa 
are of Lower Pleistocene age; others regard their anti-
quity as uncertain. Fresh evidence will very likely come 
from this important area. If Leakey is correct, the Kanam 
man goes back to 500,000 or more years ago. In any 
case, a being with the cranium of Homo sapiens lived in 
ancient Paleolithic times. Further confirmation is afforded 
by Mile. Germaine Henri-Martin's discovery, in 1947 and 
1948, of two skulls of modern type in a grotto of Char-
ente at Fontechevade in France. The fossils are dated at 
about 180,000 years ago, although the age of the stratum 
has not been established on strictly geological grounds. 
Of great interest was the announcement in The New York 
Times, April 28, 1951, of three "Hotu man" skeletons, 
found by Prof. Carleton S. Coon in northern Iran. The 
skulls, including the chins, are of the same form as those 
of modern man, although the cranial capacity is smaller, 
about 1,150 cc. Preliminary study of the geological evi-
dence indicates that Hotu man lived about 75,000 years 
ago. 

9 



One of the most striking facts to be noted in the fossils 
known to us is the increase of the brain capacity, which 
is 450 to 600 cc. for anthropoid apes, 600 cc. for Austra-
lopithecus, 800 to 900 cc. for Pithecanthropus, 1,043 
with a maximum of 1,250 cc. for Sinanthropus, 1,450 cc. 
for Neanderthal man, and 1,550 as the mean for the 
modern European or American male. The complications 
of the brain convolutions also increase. This rather regu-
lar progression seems to indicate a steady march toward 
a greater brain. 

If the shapes of skulls and faces, especially of jaws and 
teeth, are studied, the problem becomes more complicated. 
Strange combinations turn up. A bestial jaw can carry 
a very human dentition, as in the Mauer jaw and Sinan-
thropus; of two related forms, Pithecanthropus and Sinan-
thropus, the former has a diastema, the latter lacks it; in 
Pithecanthropus a lower jaw with quite human teeth 
seems to be associated with an upper jaw that is very 
simian; in the Piltdown man a modem-type skull may be 
associated with a simian jaw. In the present state of our 
knowledge, the indications are that the human branch did 
not pass through the stages of Australopithecus, Pithecan-
thropus, Sinanthropus, and Neanderthal man before ar-
riving at the Homo sapiens level. For, as our summary of 
fossil evidence has brought out, some stages are more 
specialized in certain details than the stages that follow, 
or a so-called "progressive" stage appears before the ad-
vent of a more "primitive" one. In particular, some items 
of evidence suggest that men of the modern type may be 
the most ancient of all. 

T H E WITNESS OF SACRED SCRIPTURE 

The Book of Genesis proposes two accounts of man's 
origin. These fundamental texts do not require a slavishly 
literal exegesis; they can bear an evolutionist interpreta-
tion. Yet neither of them favors evolution; on the con-

10 



trary, they stress a special intervention of God in the pro-
duction of the human body. According to the first ac-
count, "God created man to His own image; to the image 
of God He created him; male and female He created 
them" (Gen. i. 27). Three times the author uses the verb 
bora, which is employed exclusively of God's activity; 
and the divine causality extends to the production of the 
body, since a distinction between the sexes is brought 
about by it. Nothing in the text suggests the idea of the 
origin of the human body from pre-existing, living beings. 
Indeed, if this were the only text we had, we should be 
inclined to suppose that God directly created the first 
pair, body and soul. 

The other narrative is anthropomorphic in expression: 
"And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth, 
and breathed into his face the breath of life; and man 
became a living soul" (Gen. ii. 7). God is represented as 
fashioning the first man from the clay of the earth in 
the way a potter makes a vase. God then ascertained that 
it was not good for man to be alone, and decided to give 
to His creature a companion similar to him. To this end 
He created all the animals and led them in parade before 
the man. The latter did not find in the animal world the 
desired associate, so God again set to work and derived 
the woman from the man himself, to be his mate and 
partner. The popular character of this narrative is obvi-
ous ; yet it clearly does not describe the origin of the first 
human couple as a climax in the evolution of living 
species. 

MIND OF THE MAGISTERIUM 

Nevertheless evolution of man's body from some sub-
human species is not excluded; this is plain from the care-
fully chosen words of the reigning Holy Father in his 
1941 allocution to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences: 

Only from a man could there proceed another man 
who would call him father and progenitor; and the help-

11 



»mate given by God to the first man also conies from him 
and is flesh of his flesh, formed to be his companion, who 
receives her name from the man, because she was derived 
from him. Man, endowed with a spiritual soul, was placed 
by God at the summit of the ladder of living beings, to 
be the head and lord of the animal kingdom. The many 
researches conducted in the field of paleontology or of 
biology and morphology have not yet furnished any posi-
tively clear and certain evidence bearing on other prob-
lems respecting man's origins. Therefore we can only leave 
to the future the answer to the question whether science, 
illuminated and guided by revelation, may some day be 
able to present secure and definite results with regard to 
so important a subject.2 

In this passage the Holy Father asserts, first, that man 
is not the son of a brute animal; secondly, that the first 
woman was made from the body of the first man; thirdly, 
that man is endowed with a rational, spiritual soul. With 
regard to other problems, including the manner in which 
the first man's body was formed, acknowledgment is made 
that the natural sciences may some day come forward 
with certain evidence, although as yet such is not the 
case. A point to be noted in the Pope's address is thé 
statement that a brute animal cannot be regarded as the 
father of the first man. The human father and mother 
are true parents of their children, for, although they do 
not produce the soul, they induce by their generative 
causality a disposition in their offspring's body that calls 
for the creation and infusion of the soul by God. Since 
such an effect transcends the causality exercised by sub-
human animals in their mating, a special intervention on 
the part of God would be required, in the evolutionist 
hypothesis, to make the organism produced by them fit 
for the reception of the human soul. 

Another document of great interest in this discussion 
is the letter written January 16, 1948, by J. M. Vosté, 
O.P., secretary of the Pontifical Commission for Biblical 

2 Acta Apostolicae Sedis, XXXIII (1941), 506. 

12 



Studies, to Cardinal Suhard, then Archbishop of Paris. 
The author observes that the official responses of the 
Biblical Commission, including the very important ones 
of June 30, 1909, on the historical character of the first 
three chapters of Genesis, "by no means block the way 
to a further, truly scientific investigation of these prob-
lems, in accord with the findings of the past forty years." 
However, the contention that the first eleven chapters of 
Genesis do not contain history in the modern sense of the 
word might give the false impression that they do not 
convey history in any sense at all, "whereas they recount, 
in simple and figurative language, adapted to the minds 
of less cultured men, the basic truths that are presupposed 
by the economy of salvation, along with a popular de-
scription of the origins of the human race and of the 
chosen people."3 

The encyclical Humani generis refers to the question of 
the origin of the human body from organic matter, and 
expressly teaches that the direct creation of the human 
soul by God pertains to Catholic faith. The Supreme 
Pontiff repeats what he had said in 1941, that the deriva-
tion of man's body from organic matter has not yet been 
proved. Discussion of the problem may continue, but with 
certain restrictions that ought not to be overlooked; this 
freedom is meant for professionals in theology and the 
sciences, and is not left indiscriminately to preachers, 
lecturers, and popular writers. Further, the investigation 
should be conducted seriously and the results presented 
without exaggeration; and all who take part in such de-
bates must be ready to submit to the judgment of the 
Church, if that should be forthcoming in the future. No 
one should speak as though the animal origin of the 
human body were a demonstrated fact, and no one should 
proceed as though the sources of revelation contained 

8 Acta Apostolicae Sedis, XL (1948), 46 f. 

13 



nothing that cautions to prudence and moderation.4 Con-
sequently the derivation of the human body from a living 
organism cannot be designated as a freely disputed theo-
logical question, if by that is meant a view which no 
longer interests the teaching authority of the Church.6 

CAUSALITY AND HUMAN EVOLUTION 

A cause is a sufficient principle of its effect, for what 
is greater cannot arise from what is less. And the cause 
not only produces its effect but in some way assimilates 
the effect to itself. The likeness may fall short of the 
specific perfection proper to the cause, or it may attain 
to specific identity with the cause. But the effect can 
never excel its adequate cause in metaphysical richness; 
if the proximate cause is not sufficient to account for the 
perfection found in the effect, the reason is that it served 
merely as an instrument employed by some higher cause. 

In the generation of living beings the specific nature 
of the parents is communicated to their offspring. The 
latter cannot surpass its parents in the perfection of its 
specific nature. Nevertheless, the specific nature surpasses 
any of its particular realizations; since matter is the prin-
ciple of individuation and limitation, the species always 
contains more perfections and capacities for development 
than can be possessed by individuals or definite groups. 
That is at least a partial reason why living beings may, 
in the course of many successive generations, progress or 
regress within the same specific nature, or even, on the 
empirical level, may pass from one biological species to 
another. 

The case of man presents incomparably greater diffi-
culties. Human generation requires the creative activity 
of the first Cause; the spiritual soul can come into exist-
ence only by direct creation. God's intervention in the 

* Acta Apostolicae Sedis, XLII (1950), 562, 575 f. 
6 A . Bea, S.J., "Die Enzyklika 'Humani generis, '" Scholastik, 

XXVI (1951), 52. 

14 



creation of the soul is an activity of His ordinary provi-
dence and is called for by the disposition engendered in 
matter by the parents. And the latter are truly parents; 
even though their causality does not extend to the produc-
ion of the substantial form of their child, except by the 
requirement of the disposition they introduce into matter, 
their generative act terminates in an individual who sub-
sists in the same nature as their own. 

On the other hand, the generative causality of animal 
parents cannot endow living matter with the power to 
form a human body, that is, an organism whose act is the 
spiritual soul. The disposition for the human soul is essen-
tially superior to anything that such a cause can produce, 
and, in the absence of a proportionate generative cause, 
would require the intervention of God Himself as the 
immediate cause. But there is no reason why the animal 
act, exercised under the action of the first Cause, should 
not be elevated so as to contribute instrumentally to such 
a disposition; God can at will utilize secondary causes 
for a transition to higher forms. The instrumental causal-
ity envisaged bears only on the disposition for the soul, 
which remains a pure effect of creation to the exclusion 
of all instrumentality. The soul itself could be infused 
into an embryo organism or even into a fully developed 
adult body. Since the spiritual soul does not coexist with 
lower forms, it would be the only substantial form pres-
ent; but the previous preparation would not on that ac-
count be superfluous. St. Thomas perceived no difficulty 
in admitting a succession of forms in the development 
of the human embryo; he favored the doctrine that ani-
mation by the human soul was not immediate precisely 
because he thought that some preparation was needed, 
in the ordinary course of divine providence, for so great 
an effect as the infusion of the spiritual soul. If the hy-
pothesis of evolution were to be confirmed, this idea 
could readily be transferred to the history of life, and in 

15 



the progressive advance of animal organisms to higher 
morphological perfection we could discern a gradual 
preparation for the reception of the human soul.8 

T H E FIRST MAN AS DEPICTED IN THEOLOGY 

In common with his contemporaries, St. Thomas had 
a sublime notion of man's original state, the state of inno-
cence. Man, as he came forth from the hands of God, is 
pictured as a splendid creature enjoying God's intimate 
friendship from the first moment of his life and as en-
dowed with the aggregate of gifts constituting original 
justice. This state is repeatedly described by St. Thomas 
as a perfect harmony, an integrity of internal concord 
comprising mainly three levels of submission. The first 
and most important was the submission of the soul and 
especially of the will to God; on this depended all the 
rest; this was the principle, the "root" or original justice.7 

The second, flowing from the first, was the submission of 
the lower powers, particularly of sensibility, to reason. 
The third was the complete submission of the body to the 
soul as principle of life, and this assured immortality. 
The beautiful harmony was crowned by the submission 
of all external nature to man. Such was the gratuitous 
gift of God which, in Adam, was conferred on human 
nature.8 

Adam possessed more than the supernatural and pre-
ternatural gifts he was to transmit to his descendants. 
He was the first man: not only the first in time but the 
first in eminence, the father in whom had to be found, as 
in their cause, all the perfections of human nature. The 
idea of progressive evolution has penetrated so deeply 
into the modern mind that this view is quite strange to 
us, if not bizarre. St. Thomas, indeed, also teaches that, 

6 Cf. M. Labourdette, 0 P., "Le péché originel et les origines de 
l'homme," Revue Thomiste, L (1950), 502 ff. 

7 Compendium, of Theology, c. 192. 
s Ibid., c. 187. 

16 



in the order of generation, the perfect comes at the term, 
not at the beginning. But that is not the way he repre-
sents history. Although Adam stands at the source of 
human history, he is not the germ of perfections to come 
but their active cause, already enjoying them to a degree 
never to be reached by his posterity. Our original ances-
tor is not only the first in a long series, but is the most 
perfect member of the human family; he is excelled by 
the second Adam alone. In particular, the first man is 
endowed with infused knowledge that puts him in posses-
sion of all truth which the human mind can naturally 
know and which his children could ever learn.9 

Such, in brief, is the description of the first man com-
monly proposed by theology. Is the description valid? 
Can we still retain it, in view of the problems raised in 
modern times by the sciences of nature and prehistory? 
Fossil men did not reveal Adonis in beauty and, to judge 
from the dimension and convolutions of their brains, did 
not possess the intellectual genius of Aristotle. We can-
not recognize in them the perfections ascribed to the 
first men by theology. 

SOME THEORIES 

Theology cannot be expected to provide an immediate 
and triumphant response to all the challenges offered by 
the evolutionist hypothesis. In the present state of our 
knowledge such a demand would impose an impossible 
task. The sciences of prehistory are very young; in spite 
of notable achievements, they have as yet brought forward 
skimpy evidence about human origins. A more funda-
mental difficulty, which may never be overcome, is the 
fact that the data unearthed do not take us back to the 
cradle of the race either in space or in time. 

Where did man first appear? Certainly not in America 
or Europe. Africa has a number of partisans. Many con-

9 Summa, la , q. 94, a. 3 et ad 1. 

17 



jecture that Asia is the birthplace of mankind. Some 
favor southern Asia, India, or the islands of Indonesia. 
Others believe that the great central plateau may be the 
starting point for the dispersal of the human family. The 
regions that might furnish precious relics, possibly en-
abling us to push farther toward the origins, have not 
yet been systematically explored, and will very likely 
guard their secret for centuries. 

We have no means of ascertaining when man began 
to inhabit the earth. The fossils we possess are few and 
may be tremendously remote from the original father. 
Vast stretches of time were required to enable bold ad-
venturers of ancient eras to occupy the various continents. 
Behind any prehistoric man whose bones have been 
brought to light, long series of unknown ancestors lived 
and died and have left no trace. The existence of Tertiary 
man has been much discussed, although the proofs alleged 
have slight value. Yet man may have lived during the 
latter part of the Tertiary era; the hypothesis is not en-
tirely lacking in probability. No fossil remains have been 
discovered; but that may be owing, among other causes, 
to the fact that the cradle of the race has never been the 
object of methodical research; indeed, it could not be, 
because we do not even know where it is. 

Since the problems raised by the existence of prehis-
toric men cannot now be solved with any assurance of 
certitude, we can do no better than propose various theo-
ries designed to reconcile faith or theology with the prob-
able conclusions of the sciences of prehistory. These 
theories are interesting and merit attention; but none of 
them can be imposed.10 Nothing obliges us to take a 

10 For a fuller discussion of some aspects of the theories briefly 
presented below, see: P. M. Perrier, Le transformisme (Paris: 
Beauchesne, 1938), 305-21; R. W. Murray, Man's Unknown An-
cestors (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1943), 335-56; E. Amann, "Trans-
formisme," Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, XV, (1946), 
1388-94; C. Journet, Introduction a la théologie (Paris: Desclee 
de Brouwer, 1947), 213-26. 

18 



definite stand; indeed, the future may well reserve em-
barrassing surprises for those who hastily commit them-
selves to this or that hypothesis on the basis of our present 
flimsy evidence. Moreover, precipitate speculation en-
counters the risk of rashness by anticipating the judg-
ment of the Church, which alone is competent to settle 
controversies having theological implications. 

1. First hypothesis: the regression theory. According 
to this theory, certain human races whose fossil remains 
have been discovered by paleontologists are not primitive 
but degenerate. The sin of the first man entailed the pri-
vation of the supernatural and preternatural gifts that 
had perfected him. With the loss of immortality, the soul 
ceased to dominate the body and man's earthly life closed 
with death. With the loss of integrity, reason could no 
longer fully control the passions, and disorders arose in 
sense life. Moreover, the earth which had been presented 
to man as a paradise ceased to be subservient to him, with 
the result that conflicts between him and outer nature 
inevitably ensued. 

The men reconstructed by the sciences of prehistory as 
bearing pithecoid traits in their anatomy, yet as capable 
of shaping tools, using fire, and even of burying their 
dead, are regarded as descendants of the first biblical 
couple. Endowed with the prerogatives of original jus-
tice, the first man had possessed a refined bodily structure 
and a high level of culture.11 After the Fall, Adam and 
Eve retained their physical and cultural perfections, and 
to some extent transmitted them to their children by gen-
eration and education. In the endless ages that followed, 
repeated migrations carried great masses of human beings 
into a progressive degradation and engaged them in a 
process of bestialization capable of modifying their skulls, 
brow ridges, and other skeletal details. Under the crush-
ing weight of a hostile universe, man descended down to 

1 1 Cf. St. Thomas, Summa, la, q. 94, a. 3. 

19 



the limits separating humankind from animality. In his 
organism that was still plastic he underwent anatomical 
alterations that made him morphologically akin to the 
great anthropoids and, thus degraded, entered into the 
long night of prehistory. 

The theory here outlined does not imply polygenism. 
The ancestors of all men who have lived on the earth are 
the single couple who, adorned by God with marvelous 
gifts, did not guard their treasure but, on the contrary, 
by their sin released evil upon the world. Certain of the 
descendants of this one pair, such as Sinanthropus, Heidel-
berg man, and Neanderthal man, are considered to be 
degenerate races. 

The moral fault committed by the first father is evi-
dently not the direct cause but only the occasion of the 
physical decadence.. Whatever regression occurred was 
owing to the influence of environment and all the new 
conditions in which the despoiled descendants of the 
original couple found themselves during their protracted 
wanderings. So little is known about evolution that such 
regression cannot be declared impossible. "Whatever 
criterion you choose to adopt, you are sure to find that 
by it the history of life provides examples not only of 
progress but also of retrogression or degeneration. . . . 
The expansion of life has not been constant and there have 
even been points where it has lost ground temporarily, 
at least."12 Evolution implies the existence of some ascen-
sional principle within the living being; this principle 
tends to modify anatomy in a definite direction, although 
no satisfactory explanation of the process is available. 
Alongside this principle, another and contrary principle 
seems to lie dormant; when circumstances stimulate its 
operation, the antagonistic principle, instead of pushing 
the organism farther ahead, tends to let it degenerate. 

1 2 G. G. Simpson, The Meaning of Evolution (New Haven: Yale 
University Press, 1950), 243. 

20 



Thus the history of the origins of life brings to light three 
phenomena: a slow, ascending evolution, sudden emer-
gence, and regression followed by extinction; and none 
of them may be ignored. Examples of recession are nu-
merous. The Shetland pony, for instance, is the product 
of close inbreeding under controlled conditions within a 
restricted area. Another instance is provided by the 
dwarfed horses of American Indians in post-Spanish 
times, discovered at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. 
Among men, an indication that retrogression has oc-
curred is the fact that Neanderthal skulls exhibiting the 
most accentuated pithecoid traits are chronologically 
among the most recent. Even in historical times, unfavor-
able diet and climate have often brought about physical 
degeneration on a limited scale. Such degeneration may 
proceed so far as to have repercussions not only on man's 
physiology, but even on his anatomy. Vast stretches of 
time would be required for such changes; but the human 
race is extremely ancient. Although a definite number of 
millennia cannot be assigned, the, various peoples dis-
covered by paleontology had all the time that might be 
necessary to achieve differentiation and to disperse over 
the earth. 

The theory encounters no, obstacle on the part of the-
ology. The degeneration of mankind was the fatal conse-
quence of original sin. Bereft of the preternatural gifts 
that were designed to perfect him, man fell under the 
unfavorable influence of a harsh environment. Rebel 
against his Creator, he was challenged by the rebellion 
of nature of which he ought to have been lord and 
master. The moral fall was followed by repercussions 
affecting the organism itself, sensitive as it was to the 
action of external causes. As the conditions of life varied 
enormously in the different areas reached by the migrat-
ing peoples, multiple races were gradually formed. 

2. Second hypothesis: the "homo faber" theory. The 

21 



fossils which prehistorians regard as the remains of primi-
tive human races perhaps belong to beings morphologic-
ally close to man, although they do not pertain to the 
human species. Such animals would not be true men but 
only pre-men, rough sketches of human beings. Lacking 
spiritual souls, they would also lack reason and free will. 
They would occupy a place intermediate between true 
men and the highest anthropoids. 

We can easily imagine such creatures. God can, at His 
good pleasure, draw the gradations of the scale of being 
closer and closer. Theoretically, nothing is opposed to 
the existence of higher animals endowed with an organ-
ism almost as perfect as that of man and reaching, by 
the power of their senses, memory, and imagination the 
extreme limits that mark an essential separation between 
highly refined sense cognition and intellectual knowledge. 
Their psychological faculties would far surpass those of 
the great apes; their abilities and resources, no longer 
met with even among domesticated animals, would ex-
plain the whole of Lower Paleolithic industry. The first 
man in the philosophical sense, endowed with a spiritual, 
immortal soul, pertaining morphologically to the race of 
Homo sapiens and raised by God to the supernatural state, 
would appear on earth subsequent to them. 

In the realm of the imagination anything that is not 
at odds with a sane philosophy is possible. But can we 
actually maintain that the primitive races not classed as 
Homo sapiens were only hominids without reason and 
free will? The prehistorians, A. and J. Bouyssonie, seri-
ously entertain the hypothesis. "Does the industry of 
Sinanthropus prove reason and freedom, that is, a prop-
erly human nature? Some hasten to reply in the affirma-
tive. It is more prudent to ask whether the association 
of images, which is a purely empirical and animal opera-
tion, without being necessarily rational, cannot explain 
the usage of fire or the shaping of stone and wood. . . . 

22 



Homo faber is not necessarily Homo sapiens. We daily 
see animals performing complicated actions without be-
ing tempted to attribute to them the notion of cause and 
the acceptance of the principle of causality, which would 
point to reason properly so called."13 

However attractive this suggestion about beings pos-
sessing a human skeleton but lacking a human nature 
may seem to be at first sight, it has won few adherents. 
The general verdict of prehistorians is that the existence 
of clearly marked fireplaces and the discovery of tools 
suffice to indicate the presence of man. No one has ever 
seen an animal make a fire or even try to keep a flame 
going by adding fuel. The most marvelous accomplish-
ments of animals are directed to the conservation of the 
individual or of the species and are governed by an in-
stinct that is quite different from reflective consciousness. 
Bees and beavers perform minute and delicate tasks with 
their own bodily members, instruments supplied by na-
ture; they have no use for artificial tools. Birds build 
their nests in such a way that they almost seem to exercise 
a judicious choice in the materials they employ. But for 
such actions no reasoned knowledge of an end is needed; 
all that is required is an image: "an end present to the 
imagination, not an end proposed by reason."14 The 
manufacture of artificial tools, on the contrary, implies 
true intelligence; the intelligibility of the means is 
grasped in the end, the reason for tools is perceived in 
their destined use. Burial of the dead, such as practiced 
by Neanderthal man, clearly rules out instinct; if the 
dead are the object of special care, the only reason is 
that survivors are persuaded that earthly existence is 
prolonged in a future world where consciousness of per-
sonality is retained. 

1 3 "Polygenisme," Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, XII 
(1935), col. 2533. 

1 4 St. Thomas, Summa, la Ilae, q. 1, a. 1 ad 3. 

23 



The Homo faber theory seems to bog down under the 
weight of the growing awareness of Neanderthal man's 
intellectual ability and the realization that even the very 
primitive Sinanthropus had a culture and industry far 
surpassing any phenomena observed on the level of sub-
human life. 

3. Third hypothesis: the theory of pre-Adamites in a 
state of pure nature. This proposal implies the existence 
of true men not elevated to the supernatural state and 
living prior to the first pair, Adam and Eve, who were 
chosen to receive the matchless gifts of original justice. 
The wonderful benefit of divine adoption with its call to 
eternal beatitude was preceded by a long preparation. 
The appearance on earth of the privileged couple who 
possessed an anatomical and psychical perfection suited 
to their higher vocation was foreshadowed during untold 
thousands of years by precursors who were less perfect 
and were closer to anthropoid forms. Into their bodies, 
which from the evolutionist point of view were incom-
pletely disengaged from animality, God had infused spir-
itual souls. Whether the soul was imprisoned for many 
generations in an organism incapable of giving it access 
to the outside world, as in the case of an infant or a 
mentally undeveloped man, or whether it enabled pre-
Adamite man to exercise fully human functions from the 
first generation, is a subject for speculation. At any rate 
these primitive human beings, who were vastly inferior 
to Adam and Eve in their psychological faculties as well 
as in their anatomy, were capable of progressive evolu-
tion, as may be attested by the fossil forms preceding the 
races of the New Stone Age and by Lower Paleolithic cul-
tures. Yet they were destined to die out completely before 
the advent of the first couple mentioned in the Bible; for 
the coexistence of descendants of these primitive races 
and descendants of Adam and Eve is incompatible with 
the fundamental dogma of original sin. Thus they are 

24 



not our brethren; they were not responsible for the Fall 
and they did not receive the promise of a Redeemer. The 
part they played in the general economy of the world is 
highly mysterious; perhaps their supreme role, in the 
infinite variety of God's designs, was to mark the place 
of pure nature in the world to come. 

Needless to say, such pre-Adamites are an entirely hy-
pothetical people; no reference to them occurs in the 
Bible. The hypothesis seemed to have some plausibility 
as long as prehistorical evidence indicated a sharp break 
between Paleolithic and Neolithic cultures. But the dis-
covery of a transitional Mesolithic culture closing the gap 
between the Old and New Stone Ages, as well as the 
extreme antiquity of some Homo sapiens fossils, have 
tended to discredit the theory. 

4. Fourth hypothesis: reconsideration of original 
man's natural perfection. This theory supposes that the 
gifts of original justice eminently supplied for the natural 
qualities of bodily perfection and cultural refinement 
which theologians have traditionally attributed to Adam 
and Eve. When grace deserted the first man at the mo-
ment of the Fall, it did not leave him either bodily and 
culturally developed or anatomically and psychologically 
degraded. The privation of original justice merely laid 
bare the initial poverty of a human nature remaining un-
cultured but endowed with great plasticity and with un-
actuated potentialities that would awaken on contact with 
the world and with the first warming rays of Christ's 
redemptive grace. When this nature began to evolve in 
the course of the following ages, it did not proceed in a 
single direction; for, as is scientifically established, the 
vital tendency underlying evolution develops in the form 
of a branching bush. Thus the hypothesis does not en-
visage a purely regressive evolution, although the traces 
of bestialization noted in some ancient branches of the 
human family would appear as recessive characteristics. 

25 



The state of innocence does not seem to be incompati-
ble with a process of human development, whether bodily, 
intellectual, or moral. "These gifts [integrity, impassi-
bility, immortality, and infused knowledge] did not in 
any way transport mankind to a region of fairy tales. 
Humanity thus described was real and concrete, and was 
not necessarily at variance with the human origins which 
paleontology and prehistory are able dimly to discern."15 

The first man's body, free from the scars of degeneracy 
disfiguring some fossil races, may well have been closer 
to the primitive types described by prehistorians than to 
the beautiful models fashioned by Greek sculptors. His 
intellect, though functioning in a condition of notional 
simplicity and inexperience, was strong in its original 
energy, and its efficient operation was facilitated by the 
harmonious subordination of the lower powers. God's 
inspiration, descending without hindrance from reason to 
the nethermost fringes of sensibility, could at each mo-
ment guide the activity of the natural faculties and could 
further raise the unspoiled mind to the highest reaches 
of contemplation. Man's will was untrammeled in its free 
exercise by disorderly concupiscence, and was naturally as 
well as supernaturally turned toward God. Cultural sim-
plicity did not impede moral advertence or responsibility 
in a man whose easy mastery over his acts was guaranteed 
by the preternatural gift of integrity. Besides, the power 
of free will is not gauged by the richness of conceptual ex-
perience. The three children of Fatima, to select one of 
countless instances, stood undaunted in their purpose in 
spite of threats of torture and death which, though de-
ceptive, were frighteningly graphic to them ; yet they were 
quite artless and unacquainted with formal schooling. 

We know almost nothing about the physical appearance 
of our original human father. The first chapter of Gene-

1 5 E. Mersch, The Theology of the Mystical Bodv (St. Louis: 
Herder, 1951), 143. 

26 



sis informs us that he was made according to the image 
and likeness of God; but this refers to his spiritual soul, 
not to his body, for Scripture attributes no bodily quali-
ties to the Creator. Whether the first men were white, 
yellow, brown, or black is not narrated in the Bible and 
escapes the probings of paleontology. So far as revela-
tion and science are concerned, the colored peoples are 
no less ancient or Godlike than the Caucasian race; in-
deed, some prehistorians believe that the Negro is more 
ancient than the other branches of mankind. Not only 
the color of Adam's skin, but his build and the shape of 
his head are left undescribed in Genesis, and, for all that 
we know, may have resembled the bodily characteristics 
of primitive fossil men. 

The earliest known eoliths or "dawn stones," that is, 
pieces of chipped gravel which some archaelogists re-
garded as the first human tools, suggest that man made 
his appearance on earth, in Asia or Africa, toward the 
end of the Tertiary era. Through force of economic ne-
necessity or the attractions of opportunity, augmented 
perhaps by tribal quarrels, their descendants gradually 
drew apart and set out on their wanderings. During the 
ebb and flow of the ice ages of the Quaternary era the 
migrants, continually increasing in numbers, scattered 
over the various continents. Under the influence of radi-
cal changes in geographical environment, climate, food, 
and occupation, along with natural selection and gene mu-
tations brought about by factors not yet fully under-
stood, physical characteristics became altered and new 
races were developed. Owing to such causes and others 
that can only be conjectured, the "different fossil men of 
Quaternary Europe, such as the Piltdown, Swanscombe, 
Neanderthal, and Cro-Magnon types, appear to be the 
chief known representatives of Adam's early descendants 
who wandered westward, while the Java and Peking fos-

27 



sils seem to be the earliest known relics of those who wan-
dered eastward."18 

This theory stresses the truth that man's real greatness 
is found in his soul, which was furthermore enriched 
with all the prerogatives of original justice. Whatever 
may have been the first man's antecedents, whether he 
was fashioned by God from inanimate matter or from a 
living organism, the dogma of original justice is not en-
dangered. Man started to be man when he received a 
spiritual soul. Since God gave this soul, why could He 
not have created it in the state of original justice? Such 
privileges may surprise us more in human beings capable 
of evolving into more perfect types than they would in 
a couple who emerged from God's hands in the fullness 
of physical beauty and intellectual culture; but such an 
impression is purely subjective,17 and may eventually 
have to yield to objective evidence. 

A POSSIBLE CLUE TO SOLUTION 

In his stimulating book, Introduction a la théologie, 
Charles Journet has a section on "Themes" which requires 
further investigation by scholars working in the area of 
historical theology. One of these themes deals with "The 
Condition of Man at His Entrance Into Historical Time."18 

The author closes his discussion of this topic with the 
following suggestion: 

From the point of view that is ours, the main thing is 
to recall the key which in this matter opens all locks and 
without which, however competent and learned he may 
be, the Christian will forever labor in vain. The key is 
this: when there is question of the appearance of the 
world or of the appearance of life or of the appearance 
of the human soul or of the appearance of the sanctifying 
grace of the first Adam, we have to consider prior to all 
else the movement of descent by which the divinity, break-

1 6 R. W. Murray, Man's Unknown Ancestors, p. 357. 
17 Cardinal Achille Liénart, "Le chrétien devant les progrès de la 

science," Etudes, CCLV (1947), 289 f. 
1 8 Pp. 213-26. 

28 



ing with all that went before, inaugurates a new, higher 
order that is discontinuous; there then follows, but only 
as a consequence, the movement of ascent by which a 
pre-existing being sets out in a continuous march toward 
its proportionate ends, or prepares, under the influence 
of an elevating motion, an order that surpasses it. Such 
is the principle which, considered by St. Thomas in its 
supreme application, permits him to explain, under its 
various aspects, the very mystery of the appearance of the 
"second Adam." It was of a sudden, he writes, and not 
progressively, that the body of Christ was assumed by 
the Word (Summa, Ilia, q. 33, a. 3 ad 3 ) ; it was also of 
a sudden, not progressively, that Christ possessed sancti-
fying grace (ibid., q. 34, a. 1 ad 1). 

That is the extent of the suggestion; but the inference 
may be drawn out. The sudden assumption of the incar-
nate Word's body, along with the God-man's perfect pos-
session of sanctifying grace from the outset, is followed 
by the gradual assumption of Christ's members into His 
body to form the Whole Christ. That process, the fashion-
ing of the Whole Christ, is the most exalted "evolution" 
occurring in the world of men; it is still going on and it 
will continue until the end of time. Likewise, the sudden 
appearance of the primeval chaotic mass was followed by 
the slow evolution of the constellations with their count-
less stars and solar systems; the sudden appearance of 
life was followed, if the transformist hypothesis is cor-
rect, by the evolution of plant and animal species; the 
sudden appearance of grace in the first man was to be 
followed by an ascent to the heights of sanctity. Continu-
ation of the parallel indicates that the sudden appearance 
of the human soul in the body of the first man was fol-
lowed by an evolution of the original stock into many di-
versified races: those that are familiar to us among the 
men of historical times as well as their prehistoric an-
cestors, some of whose remains have been unearthed and 
tentatively classified. 

But the final word has not been said and cannot now 
be said. The problem of human origins is still unsolved, 

29 



and perhaps never will be wholly solved. Yet we do know 
this: an evolution that is purely materialist is unscientific 
from beginning to end. Furthermore, a theistic, finalistic 
evolution that recognizes nothing beyond a special divine 
causality in the creation of the soul, while excluding such 
causality from the formation of the first man's body, is 
philosophically and theologically unacceptable. But an 
evolution which admits that God, in infusing a soul into 
an animal organism, likewise effected all the modifications 
necessary to fit that organism for union with a human 
soul, seems to run afoul of no exegetical or theological 
objection. Catholics do not have to spurn such an expla-
nation; no conflict with their religion can arise from 
the facts brought forward by anthropology and paleon-
tology. Nevertheless we should be wasting our time if 
we desired at present to settle all difficulties and to estab-
lish perfect agreement between the faith and the sciences 
of prehistory that are far from being in agreement about 
the import of their own discoveries. 

30 



2. Modern Science and the 
Existence of God 

POPE PIUS XII 

Address of the Holy Father to the Pontifical 
Academy of Science, November 22, 1951 

TTHIS meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Science 
brings Us an hour of serene happiness, for which We 
are grateful to the Almighty. At the same time it affords 
Us the welcome opportunity to spend some time in the 
company of a select group of eminent Cardinals, illus-
trious diplomats, outstanding personages and of your-
selves, the members of the Pontifical Academy, who are 
indeed worthy of the solemnity of this gathering. For, 
by your research, your unveiling of the secrets of nature 
and your teaching of men to direct the forces of nature 
towards their own welfare, you preach at the same time, 
in the language of figures, formulae and discoveries, the 
unspeakable harmony of the work of an all-wise God. 

In fact, according to the measure of its progress, and 
contrary to affirmations advanced in the past, true science 
discovers God in an ever-increasing degree—as though 
God were waiting behind every door opened by science. 
We would even say that from this progressive discovery 
of God, which is realized in the increase of knowledge, 
there flow benefits not only for the scientist himself when 
he reflects as a philosopher—and how can he escape such 

31 



THE AMERICA PRESS 

is pleased to send you 

this Review Copy 

of its latest publication 

THE CHURCH AMD 

MODERN SCIENCE 

W e will appreciate 

receiving two copies 

of your review. 

The America Press 
70 East 45th Street 
New York 17, N.Y. 





reflection?—but also for those who share in these new 
discoveries or make them the object of their own con-
siderations. 

Genuine philosophers profit from these discoveries in 
a very special way, because when they take these scien-
tific conquests as the basis for their rational speculations, 
their conclusions thereby acquire greater certainty, while 
they are provided with clearer illustrations in the midst 
of possible shadows, and more convincing assistance in 
establishing an ever more satisfying response to difficulties 
and objections. 

PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD 

Thus stimulated and guided, the human intellect ap-
proaches that demonstration of the existence of God 
which Christian wisdom recognizes in those philosophical 
arguments which have been carefully examined through-
out the centuries by giants in the world of knowledge, and 
which are already well known to you in the presentation 
of the "five ways" which the Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas, 
offers as a speedy and safe road to lead the mind to God. 
We have called these arguments "philosophical." This 
does not mean that they are a prioristic, as they are ac-
cused of being by a narrow-minded and incoherent Posi-
tivism. Even though they draw their demonstrative force 
from the power of human reason, they are nevertheless 
based on concrete realities established by the senses and 
by science. 

In this way both philosophy and the sciences, by means 
of activities and methods which are analogous and mutu-
ally compatible, carry on their work. Though in different 
measures, they all make use of both empirical and ra-
tional elements and cooperate in harmonious unity for 
the discovery of truth. 

But if the primitive experience of the ancients could 
provide human reason with sufficient arguments to dem-

32 



onstrate the existence of God, then with the expanding 
and deepening of the field of human experiments, the 
vestiges of the Eternal One are discernible in the visible 
world in ever more striking and clearer light. Hence it 
seems helpful to re-examine on the basis of new scientific 
discoveries the classical proofs of the Angelic Doctor, 
especially those based on motion and the order of the 
universe {S.Th., 1 p., q. 2, art. 3) , that is to say, to inquire 
if, and in what degree, a very profound knowledge of the 
structure of the macrocosm and the microcosm contributes 
towards strengthening these philosophical arguments. 

It is also helpful to consider, on the other hand, if and 
to what degree these proofs have been weakened, as is 
not infrequently affirmed, by the fact that modern physics 
has formulated new basic principles, ruled out or modi-
fied certain ancient ideas, whose content was perhaps 
judged in the past to be fixed and definitive, such as time, 
space, motion, causality, substance—all of which con-
cepts are supremely important for the question which now 
occupies us. 

The question, then, is not one of revising the philo-
sophical proofs, but rather of inquiring into the physical 
foundations from which they flow—although limitations 
of time will oblige Us to restrict Our attention to only 
some few of these foundations. There is no reason to be 
fearful of surprises. Not even science itself aims to go 
outside that world which today, as yesterday, presents 
itself through these "five modes of being," whence the 
philosophical demonstration of the existence of God pro-
ceeds and draws its force. 

T w o ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF T H E COSMOS 

From these "modes of being" of the world around us 
which, in greater or less degrees of comprehension, are 
noted with equal evidence by both the philosopher and 

33 



the human mind in general, there are two which modern 
science has, in a marvelous degree, fathomed, verified 
and deepened beyond all expectations: 1) the mutability 
of things, including their origin and their end; and 2) 
the teleological order which stands out in every corner of 
the cosmos. The contribution thus made by science to the 
two philosophical arguments which hinge on these facts, 
and which constitute the first and the fifth ways of St. 
Thomas, is most notable. 

To the first way physics, especially has provided an in-
exhaustible mine of experiments, revealing the fact of 
mutability in the deepest recesses of nature, where pre-
viously no human mind could ever even suspect its exist-
ence and vastness. Thus physics has provided a multipli-
city of empirical facts which are of tremendous assistance 
to philosophical reasoning. We say "assistance," because 
the very direction of these same transformations, precisely 
in view of the certainty afforded by physics, seems to Us 
to surpass the value of a mere confirmation and acquires 
almost the structure and dignity of a physical argument 
which is in great part new and more acceptable, per-
suasive and welcome to many minds. 

With similar richness other sciences, especially the as-
tronomical and the biological sciences, have in our own 
day contributed to the argument from order such a vast 
array of knowledge and, so to speak, so stupefying a 
vision of the conceptual unity animating the cosmos, and 
of the teleology directing its movements, as to anticipate 
for modern man the joy which the Poet (Dante) imagined 
in the empyrean heaven when he beheld in God 

"Into one volume bound by love, the same that 
the universe holds scattered through its maze" 
(Par. 33, 85-87). 

Nevertheless, Providence has disposed that just as the 
notion of God, which is so essential to the life of each 

34 



individual, can be gathered easily from a simple look at 
the world—in such a way that not to understand the voice 
of creation is foolishness (Wis., 13, 1-2)—so also this 
same idea of God finds confirmation in every new devel-
opment and progress of scientific knowledge. 

Wishing to give here only a rapid summary of the price-
less services rendered by modern science to the demon-
stration of the existence of God, We shall limit Ourselves, 
first of all, to the fact of changes, pointing out principally 
their amplitude and vastness and, so to speak, their total-
ity which modern physics meets in the inanimate cosmos. 
We shall then dwell on the significance of their direction, 
which is likewise verified by science. Thus, in Our treat-
ment of these points, We shall, so to speak, be lending 
an ear to a miniature concert of the immense universe, 
which nevertheless has a voice strong enough to sing "the 
glory of Him who moveth all that is" (Par., 1 , 1 ) . 

A . T H E MUTABILITY OF THE COSMOS: T H E FACT 

OF MUTABILITY 

a) in the macrocosm: 

At first sight it is rightly a source of wonderment to 
recognize how the knowledge of the fact of mutability 
has gained ever greater ground, both in the macrocosm 
and in the microcosm, according as science has made new 
progress, as though confirming with new proofs the theory 
of Heraclitus: "Everything is in flux": panta rhei. As is 
known, our own everyday experience brings to light an 
immense number of transformations in the world around 
us, both near and far away, particularly the local move-
ments of bodies. But, over and above all these local move-
ments strictly so-called, the manifold chemico-physical 
changes which take place in the world are equally notice-
able, as, for example, the change in the physical state of 
water in its three phases of steam, liquid and ice. We are 

35 



aware also of the far-reaching chemical effects produced 
by the use of fire, the knowledge of which goes back to 
pre-historic times, and of the weathering of rocks and 
the corruption of vegetable and animal life. 

This common experience is corroborated by the natural 
sciences, which have taught people to understand these 
and other similar changes as processes of destruction and 
construction of corporeal substances in their chemical 
elements, that is to say, in their tiniest parts, the chemical 
atoms. Going still farther, natural science made known 
that this chemico-physical mutability is not, as the 
ancients thought, restricted to terrestrial bodies, but even 
extends to all the bodies of our solar system and of the 
great universe, which the telescope, and still more the 
spectroscope, have demonstrated to be composed of the 
same kind of atoms. 

b) in the microcosm: 

Nevertheless, in the face of the undeniable mutability 
of even inanimate nature, there still rises the enigma of 
the unexplored microcosm. It seemed, in fact, that, unlike 
the organic world, inorganic matter was in a certain sense 
immutable. Its tiniest parts, the chemical atoms, were 
indeed capable of combining in most diversified man-
ners, but they appeared to be endowed with a privilege 
of eternal stability and indestructibility, since they em-
erged unchanged from every chemical synthesis and ana-
lysis. A hundred years ago, the elementary particles were 
still regarded as simple, indivisible and indestructible. 

The same idea prevailed regarding the material energy 
and forces of the cosmos, especially on the basis of the 
fundamental laws of the conservation of mass and energy. 
Some natural scientists went so far as to consider them-
selves authorized to formulate in the name of their science 
a fantastic monistic philosophy whose sorry memory is 
linked up, among others, with the name of Ernst Haeckel. 

36 



But in the very life-time of the latter, towards the end 
of the last century, even this over-simplified conception 
of the chemical atom was shattered by modern science. 
The growing knowledge of the periodic system of chemical 
elements, the discovery of the corpuscular radiations of 
radioactive elements, along with many other similar facts, 
have demonstrated that the microcosm of the chemical 
atom, with dimensions as small as ten-millionths of a 
millimeter, is a theater of continuous mutations, no less 
than the macrocosm known to all. 

It was in the sphere of electronics that the character of 
mutability was first established. From the electronic 
structure of the atom there emanate radiations of light 
and heat, which are absorbed by outside bodies, corre-
sponding to the energy level of the electronic orbits. In 
the exterior parts of this sphere there take place the 
ionization of the atom and the transformation of energy 
in the synthesis and analysis of chemical combinations. 
At that time, however, it was possible to suppose that 
these chemico-physical transformations provided one last 
refuge' for stability, since they did not reach the very 
nucleus of the atom, which is the seat of its mass and of 
the positive electric charge which determine the place of 
the chemical atom in the natural system of the elements, 
and where it seemed science had found, so to speak, an 
example of an absolutely stable and invariable being. 

But already at the dawn of the new century, the obser-
vation of radio-active processes, which, in their last analy-
sis, were connected with a spontaneous breaking down of 
the nucleus, began to exclude any such example. Hence, 
once science had established the fact of instability reach-
ing down into the deepest depths of known nature, there 
still remained one further perplexing fact, since the atom 
was apparently unattackable, at least by human forces, 
because in the beginning all efforts to hasten or to retard 
its natural radioactive disintegration, or even to break 

37 



down inactive nuclei, had failed. The first very modest 
attempt to break down the nucleus (of nitrogen) goes 
back to hardly more than three decades ago, and it is only 
in recent years that it has been possible, by bringing into 
play tremendous forces, to produce very numerous pro-
cesses involving the formation and the breaking down 
of nuclei. 

Although this result—which, insofar as it contributes 
to the cause of peace, is certainly to be inscribed among 
the glories of our century—represents in the field of prac-
tical nuclear physics no more than a preliminary step, 
nevertheless, it provides for our consideration an im-
portant conclusion, namely, that atomic nuclei are indeed, 
by many orders of magnitude, more firm and stable than 
ordinary chemical compositions, but this notwithstand-
ing, they are also, in principle, subject to similar laws of 
transformation, and hence are mutable. 

At the same time it was possible to establish that such 
processes have the greatest importance in the economy of 
energy of the fixed stars. In the center of our sun, for 
example, according to Bothe, and in the midst of a tem-
perature which goes as high as some twenty million de-
grees, there takes place a chain-reaction returning upon 
itself, in which four hydrogen nuclei combine with one 
nucleus of helium. The energy thus liberated comes to 
compensate the loss involved in the radiation of the sun 
itself. Also in modern physical laboratories, through 
bombardment with particles endowed with tremendous 
energy or with neutrons, successful efforts are being made 
to effect transformations of nuclei, as can be seen in the 
example of the atom of uranium. In this connection 
mention must also be made of the effects of cosmic radia-
tion, which can break down even the heaviest atoms, thus 
not infrequently liberating entire swarms of sub-atomic 
particles. 

We have desired to cite only some few examples, but 

38 



such as could establish beyond all possible doubt the 
explicit mutability of the inorganic world, large and 
small: the countless transformations of the forms of en-
ergy, especially in the chemical decompositions and com-
binations talking place in the macrocosm and, in no 
smaller degree, the mutability of chemical atoms, even 
down to the sub-atomic particles of their nuclei. 

Therefore, the scientist of today, directing his gaze 
more deeply into the heart of nature than his predecessor 
of a hundred years ago, knows well that inorganic matter 
is, so to speak, in its innermost being, countersigned with 
the stamp of mutability, and that, consequently, its exist-
ence and its subsistence demand a reality entirely differ-
ent and one which is by its very nature invariable. 

Just as in a picture done in chiaroscuro, the figures 
stand out on a background of darkness, and only in this 
way achieve the full effect of form and life, so also the 
image of the eternally immutable Being emerges clear 
and resplendent from the torrent which snatches up and 
carries off with itself all the material things of the macro-
cosm and the microcosm in an intrinsic mutability which 
knows no pause. The scientist who stops on the bank of 
this immense torrent finds rest in that cry of truth with 
which God defined Himself: "I am who am" (Exod., 
3, 14), the God to whom the Apostle gives praise as to 
"the Father of lights, with whom there is no change or 
shadow of alteration" (James, 1, 17). 

B . T H E DIRECTION OF TRANSFORMATIONS 

a) in the macrocosm: the law of entropy 

Modern science has not only widened and deepened 
our knowledge of reality and the vastness of the muta-
bility of the cosmos; it likewise provides us with valuable 
indications on the direction taken by the processes of 
nature. As late as a hundred years ago, especially after 

39 



the discovery of the law of the conservation of energy, it 
was thought that natural processes were reversible. Con-
sequently, in conformity with the principles of the strict 
causality, or rather the determination, of nature, an ever-
recurring renovation and rejuvenation of the cosmos was 
regarded as possible. Through the law of entropy, how-
ever, discovered by Rudolph Clausius, it was recognized 
that the spontaneous processes of nature are always ac-
companied by a diminution of free and utilizable energy. 
In a closed material system, this conclusion must lead 
eventually to the cessation of processes on a macroscopic 
scale. This unavoidable fate, from which only hypotheses 
—sometimes unduly gratuitous, such as that of continued 
supplementary creation—have endeavored to save the uni-
verse, but which instead stands out clearly from positive 
scientific experience, postulates eloquently the existence 
of a Necessary Being. 

b) in the microcosm,: 

In the microcosm, this law, which is basically statistical, 
is not applicable. Besides, at the time it was formulated, 
practically nothing was known regarding the structure 
and the behavior of the atom. However, recent atomic 
research, as well as the unexpected progress of astro-
physics, have made it possible to achieve surprising dis-
coveries in this field. Here we can only allude briefly to 
the results of these discoveries, but they can be summed 
up by saying that both atomic and intro-atomic develop-
ment are clearly marked with a sense of direction. 

To illustrate this fact, it will be sufficient to cite the 
example, already mentioned of the behavior of solar 
energy. The electronic structure of the chemical atoms 
in the sun's photosphere releases at every moment into the 
surrounding space a gigantic quantity of radiant energy 
which does not return. This loss is compensated from 
within the sun through the formation of helium from 

40 



hydrogen. The energy thus released comes from the mass 
of the hydrogen nuclei which, in the course of this process 
and in a small degree (7 per cent), is converted into 
equivalent energy. Therefore, the process of compensa-
tion takes place at the expense of the energy which, origin-
ally, in the hydrogen nuclei, exists as a mass. Thus, in the 
course of billions of years, through a progress which is 
slow yet irreversible, this energy is transformed into radi-
ations. A similar process is found in all radioactive pro-
cesses, whether they be natural or artificial. 

Thus here also, in the microcosm strictly and properly 
so-called, we find a law indicating the direction of evolu-
tion, a law which is analogous to the law of entropy for 
the macrocosm. The direction of spontaneous evolution 
is determined through the diminution of utilizable energy 
in the structure and the nucleus of the atom and, up to 
the present time, science knows of no processes capable of 
compensating or annulling this exploitation through the 
spontaneous formation of nuclei having high energy value. 

C . T H E UNIVERSE AND ITS DEVELOPMENTS 

If the scientist turns his attention from the present 
state of the universe to the future, even the very remote 
future, he finds himself constrained to recognize, both 
in the macrocosm and in the microcosm, that the world is 
growing old. In the course of billions of years, even the 
apparently inexhaustible quantities of atomic nuclei lost 
utilizable energy and, so to speak, matter becomes like an 
extinct and scoriform volcano. And the thought comes 
spontaneously that if this present cosmos, today so pul-
sating with rhythm and life, is, as we have seen, insuffi-
cient to explain itself, with still less reason will any such 
explanation be forthcoming from the cosmos over which, 
in its own way, the shadow of death will have passed. 

Let us now turn our attention to the past. The farther 

41 



back we go, the more matter presents itself as always 
more enriched with free energy, and as a theater of vast 
cosmic disturbances. Thus everything seems to indicate 
that the material universe had in finite times a mighty 
beginning, provided as it was with an indescribably vast 
abundance of energy reserves, in virtue of which, at first 
rapidly and then with increasing slowness, it evolved into 
its present state. 

This naturally brings to mind two questions: 
Is science in a position to state when this mighty be-

ginning of the cosmos took place? And, secondly, what 
was the initial or primitive state of the universe? 

The most competent experts in atomic physics, in col-
laboration with astronomers and astrophysicists, have at-
tempted to shed light on these two difficult but extremely 
interesting problems. 

D . T H E BEGINNING IN T I M E 

First of all, to quote some figures—which aim at noth-
ing else than to give an order of magnitude fixing the 
dawn of our universe, that is to say, to its beginning in 
time—science has at its disposal various means, each of 
which is more or less independent from the other, although 
all converge. We point them out briefly: 

1. Recession of the spiral nebulae or galaxies 

The examination of various spiral nebulae, especially 
as carried out by Edwin W. Hubble at the Mount Wilson 
Observatory, has led to the significant conclusion, pre-
sented with all due reservations, that these distant sys-
tems of galaxies tend to move away from one another with 
such velocity that, in the space of 1,300 million years, the 
distance between such spiral nebulae is doubled. If we 
look back into the past at the time required for this pro-
cess of the "Expanding Universe," it follows that, from 
one to ten billion years ago, the matter of the spiral nebu-

42 



lae was compressed into a relatively restricted space, at 
the time the cosmic processes had their beginning. 

2. The age of the solid crust of the earth 

To calculate the age of original radioactive substances, 
very approximate data are taken from the transformation 
of the isotope of uranium 238 into an isotope of lead 
(RaG), or of an isotope of uranium 235 into actinium D 
(AcD), and of the isotope of thorium 232 into thorium D 
(ThD). The mass of helium thereby formed can serve 
as a means of control. This leads to the conclusion that 
the average of the oldest minerals is at the most 5 billion 
years. 

3. The age of meteorites 

The preceding method adopted to detehnine the age of 
meteorites has led to practically the same figure of 5 
billion years. This conclusion assumes special importance 
from the fact that today the inter-stellar origin of meteor-
ites is generally admitted by all. 

4. The stability of the systems of double stars and 
starry masses 

The oscillations of gravitation between these systems, 
as also the attrition resulting from tides, again limit their 
stability within a period of from 5 to 10 billion years. 

Although these figures may seem astounding, never-
theless, even to the simplest of the faithful, they bring 
no new or different concept from the one they learned in 
the opening words of Genesis: "In the beginning. . . .," 
that is to say, at the beginning of things in time. The 
figures We have quoted clothe these words in a concrete 
and almost mathematical expression, while from them 
there springs forth a new source of consolation for those 
who share the esteem of the Apostle for that divinely in-
spired Scripture, which is always useful "for teaching, 
for reproving, for correcting, for instructing" (2 Tim., 
3, 16). 

43 



E . T H E STATE AND QUALITY OF ORIGINAL MATTER 

In addition to the question of the age of the cosmos, 
scholars have, with similar earnestness and liberty of 
research and verification, turned their daring genius to 
the other problem which has already been mentioned and 
which is certainly more difficult, concerning the state and 
quality of primitive matter. 

According to the theories serving as their basis, the 
relative calculations differ in no small degree from one 
another. Nevertheless, scientists agree in holding that 
not only the mass but also the density, pressure and tem-
perature of matter must have reached absolutely enormous 
proportions, as can be seen from the recent work of A. 
Unsold, director of the Observatory of Kiel (Kernphysik 
und Kosmologie, in the Zeitschrift fur Astrophysik, 24, 
B, 1948, pag. 278-305). Only under such conditions can 
we explain the formation of heavy nuclei and their rela-
tive frequency in the periodic system of the elements. 

Rightly on the other hand, does the mind in its eager-
ness for truth insist on asking how matter reached this 
state, which is so unlike anything found in our own every-
day experience, and it also wants to know what went 
before it. In vain would he seek an answer in natural 
science, which declares honestly that it finds itself face 
to face with an insoluble enigma. It is true that such a 
question would demand too much of natural science as 
such. But it is also certain that the human mind trained 
in philosophical meditation penetrates more deeply into 
this problem. 

It is undeniable that when a mind enlightened and en-
riched with modern scientific knowledge weighs this prob-
lem calmly, it feels drawn to break through the circle of 
completely independent or autochthonous matter, whether 
uncreated or self-created, and to ascend to a creating 
Spirit. With the same clear and critical look with which 

44 



it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives 
and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose 
power, set in motion by the mighty "Fiat" pronounced 
billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out 
over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture 
of generous love matter bursting with energy. In fact, it 
would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping 
step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in 
bearing witness to that primordial "Fiat lux" uttered at 
the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth 
from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the par-
ticles of chemical elements split and formed into millions 
of galaxies. 

N o ABSOLUTE PROOF FROM SCIENCE 

It is quite true that the facts established up to the 
present time are not an absolute proof of creation in time, 
as are the proofs drawn from metaphysics and Revelation 
in what concerns simple creation, or those found on 
Revelation if there be question of creation in time. The 
pertinent facts of the natural sciences, to which We have 
referred, are awaiting still further research and confirma-
tion, and the theories founded on them are in need of 
further development and proof, before they can provide 
a sure foundation for arguments which, of themselves, 
are outside the proper sphere of the natural sciences. 

This notwithstanding, it is worthy of note that modern 
scholars in the fields regard the idea of the creation of 
the universe as entirely compatible with their scientific 
conceptions and that they are even led spontaneously to 
this conclusion by their scientific research. Just a few 
decades ago, any such "hypothesis" was rejected as en-
tirely irreconcilable with the present state of science. As 
late as 1911, the celebrated physicist Svante Arhenius 
declared that "the opinion that something can come from 

45 



nothing is at variance with the present-day state of sci-
ence, according to which matter is immutable." (Die 
Vorstellung worn Weltgebaude in Wandelder Zeiten, 1911 
pag. 362). In this same vein we find the statement of 
Plate: "Matter exists. Nothing can come from nothing, 
hence matter is eternal. We cannot admit the creation of 
matter." (Ultramontane Weltanschauung und Moderne 
Lebenskunde, 1907, pag. 55). 

On the other hand, how different and much more faith-
ful a reflection of limitless visions is the language of an 
outstanding modern scientist, member of the Pontifical 
Academy of Science, when he speaks of the above-men-
tioned inquiries into the age of the world: 

These different calculations point to the conclusion that 
there was a time, some nine or ten billion years ago, prior 
to which the cosmos, if it existed, existed in a form totally 
different from anything we know, and this form consti-
tutes the very last limit of science. We refer to it perhaps 
not improperly as creation. It provides a unifying back-
ground, suggested by geological evidence, for that expla-
nation of the world according to which every organism 
existing on the earth has a beginning in time. Were this 
conclusion to be confirmed by future research, it might 
well be considered as the most outstanding discovery of 
our times, since it represents a fundamental change in the 
scientific conception of the universe, similar to the one 
brought about four centuries ago by Copernicus. (Space 
and Spirit, by Sir Edmund Whittaker, 1946, pp. 118-119). 

CONCLUSION 

What then is the importance of modern science for the 
argument for the existence of God based on the muta-
bility of the cosmos? By means of exact and detailed 
research into the macrocosm and the microcosm, it has 
considerably broadened and deepened the empirical foun-
dation on which this argument rests, and from which it 
concludes to the existence of an Ens a se, immutable by 

46 



His very nature. It has, besides, followed the course and 
the direction of cosmic developments, and, just as it was 
able to get a glimpse of the term towards which these 
developments were inexorably leading, so also has it 
pointed to their beginning in time some five billion years 
ago. Thus, with that concreteness which is characteristic 
of physical proofs, it has confirmed the contingency of 
the universe and also the well-founded deduction as to the 
epoch when the cosmos came forth from the hands of 
the Creator. 

Hence, creation took place in time. Therefore, there is 
a Creator. Therefore, God exists! Although it is neither 
explicit nor complete, this is the reply we were awaiting 
from science, and which the present human generation is 
awaiting from it. It is a reply which bursts forth from 
mature and calm consideration of only one aspect of the 
universe, namely, its mutability. But this is already enough 
to make the entire human race, which is the peak and the 
rational expression of both the macrocosm and the micro-
cosm, become conscious of its exalted Maker, realize that 
it belongs to Him in space and in time and then, falling 
on its knees before His sovereign majesty, begin to invoke 
His name: "Rerum, Deus, tenax vigor, Immotus in te 
permanens, Lucis diurnae tempora, Successibus determi-
nans."—"0 God, creation's secret force, Thyself unmoved, 
yet motion's source, Who from the morn til evening's ray, 
through every change dost guide the day." (Hymn for 
None). 

The knowledge of God as sole Creator, now shared by 
many modern scientists, is indeed the extreme limit to 
which human reason can attain. Nevertheless, as you 
are well aware, it does not constitute the last frontier of 
truth. In harmonious cooperation, because all three are 
instruments of Truth, like rays of the same sun, science, 
philosophy and, with still greater reason, Revelation, con-
template the substance of this Creator whom science has 

47 



met along its path, unveil His outlines and point out His 
features. Revelation, above all, makes His presence, so 
to speak, immediate, vitalizing and loving, like that pres-
ence of which either the simple faithful or the scientist is 
aware in his inner soul when he recites unhesitatingly the 
concise terms of the ancient Apostles' Creed: "I believe 
in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and 
earth." 

Today, after so many centuries, which were centuries 
of civilization because they were centuries of religion, 
the need is not so much to reveal God for the first time, 
as it is rather to recognize Him as a Father, reverence 
Him as a Lawgiver, and fear Him as a Judge. If they 
would be saved, the nations must adore the Son, the loving 
Redeemer of mankind, and bow to the loving inspirations 
of the Spirit, the fruitful Sanctifier of souls. 

This persuasion, taking its remote inspiration from 
science, is crowned by Faith which, being ever more 
deeply rooted in the consciousness of the people, will 
truly be able to assure basic progress for the march of 
civilization. 

This is a vision of the whole, of the present as of the 
future, of matter as of the spirit, of time as of eternity, 
which, as it illuminates the mind, will spare to the men 
of today a long tempestuous night. 

It is that Faith which at this moment inspires Us to 
raise towards Him whom we have just invoked as Vigor, 
Immotus and Pater, a fervent prayer for all His children 
entrusted to our care: "Largire lumen vespere, Quo vita 
nusquam decidat,"—"Grant us light in the evening so 
that life may never fail"—"light for the life of time, light 
for the life of eternity." (Hymn for None). 

48 



Other A M E R I C A P R E S S 
B O O K L E T L E A D E R S 

WHAT IS THE BIBLE? 

By Francis P. LeBuffe, S.J. 

WHAT IS MARRIAGE? 

By Vermeersch • Bouscaren 

ENCYCLICALS 
on 

Education, Marriage, the Liturgy 
and other subjects. 

THE SCOTT PAMPHLETS 

Religion made easy by the country's outstanding 
pamphleteer, Father Martin J. Scott, S.J. 

Write for complete list of America Press booklets 

AMERICA PRESS 

70 East 45th St. 

New York 17, New York 



Why Intelligent Catholic Readers Need 

America 
A CATHOLIC REVIEW 

OF THE WEEK 

Because each issue 

contains . . . 

Four or five editorial discussions of the week's important 
events 

Comments, or shorter editorials, assaying the news at home 
or abroad 

Longer articles on topics of current interest to Catholics and 
to Americans 

Contributions on literature—prose, poetry, authors, literary 
morals 

Interesting reviews of the newest books 

Two feature columns — on Washington News, on Catholic 
news 

A homily, or sermonette, on the Gospel for the coming Sunday 

A one-column review of the new Broadway plays; another on 
the latest films 

$ 7 . 0 0 THE YEAR CANADA: $ 8 . 0 0 FOREIGN: $ 8 . 5 0 

A M E R I C A 
7 0 EAST 4 5 T H STREET N E W YORK 1 7 , N . Y .