Intellectual life also subject to evolution

I READ Con Hayes’s letter (‘No intellectual Houdini act can reconcile faith and evolution’, November 26) many times and have failed to grasp the substantive point he was trying to make.

The letter fails to distinguish between Christian and pre-Christian, New and Old Testament, creation and evolution. He does point out that Darwin was aware the theory of evolution would “upset a lot of people, especially Christians.” Surprise, surprise, 150 years ago!

Mr Hayes should not be surprised that over time the depth and scope of the ever-changing intellectual environment is subject to evolution, side by side with the physical.

He seeks to reconcile the Genesis story with the findings of modern science. Not possible. Attempting to do so would be like reconciling a gamma ray burst with the pre-Big Bang scenario — at the moment an impenetrable barrier; doubly so with Genesis because of the allegorical nature of the story.

I was fascinated to read one day that, genetically speaking, I am more closely related to the chimpanzee than the chimpanzee is to the orangutan. While my deflated ego was recovering from this revelation, I realised my faith in the Creator remained undiminished. There was no clash.

I believe the evolution debate involves three categories:

1.The scientifically-inclined who question and reason.

2.The Ussher-like adherents whose restricted beliefs discourage questioning and reasoning, and

3.The majority who couldn’t care less about evolution.

Of the three I would respect most the first category — among whom, I must admit, I would include Mr Hayes. As I feel this debate has put my evolution ‘on hold’, as far as I’m concerned this correspondence is now concluded.

Sean Fitzgerald

3 Shournagh Drive

St Ann’s Hill

Blarney

Co Cork