Evolution & Catholicism Are Incompatible

In your last statement you referred to my reference which was included in Wikipedia concerning the Catholic Church's position on evolution was "not true". As evidence of this you stated "Wikipedia even admits that the threshold for inclusion is "not truth."(1) Your footnote referenced a Wikipedia article on verifiability. (http://en.wikipedia.org...). Not only could I NOT find anything close to your statement there, I did find this statement: "All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable." (Ibid) The article goes on to explain the care which they take to be certain that the articles are true.You then stated "The Catechism has no authority where it contradicts official Church teaching." This statement is untrue as the Catechism is in fact the PRIMARY source of official Catholic teaching. About the Catechism Pope Paul II declared in "APOSTOLIC LETTER LAETAMUR MAGNOPERE": "The Church now has at her disposal this new, authoritative exposition of the one and perennial apostolic faith, and it will serve as a “valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesiastical communion” and as a “sure norm for teaching the faith,” as well as a “sure and authentic reference text” for preparing local catechisms (cf. Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, no. 4). Catechesis will find in this genuine, systematic presentation of the faith and of Catholic doctrine a totally reliable way to present, with renewed fervor, each and every part of the Christian message to the people of our time." Pope John Paul II also stated in "APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION FIDEI DEPOSITUM":"The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved June 25th last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesiastical communion."You likewise err by stating that the U.S. Conference of Bishops is subject to the greater authority of Vatican I. It was not the U.S. Conference of Bishops which wrote the Catechism... they merely translated it from Latin. The Catechism was written by a Commission of Cardinals and Bishops convened by Pope John Paul II under the auspices of Vatican II Again I cite "APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION FIDEI DEPOSITUM": "In 1986, I entrusted a commission of twelve Cardinals and Bishops, chaired by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, with the task of preparing a draft of the catechism requested by the Synod Fathers. An editorial committee of seven diocesan Bishops, experts in theology and catechesis, assisted the commission in its work." Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, of course, was later Pope Benedict XVI.Your example of a supposed scientific theory which disagreed with the Resurrection certainly would conflict with Catholic dogma. However no such theory exists nor is it likely. You then go one to say:"If you think none of Church dogma contradicts any scientific theory, you are either sorely misinformed on the vast number of scientific theories out there, or ont he (sic) dogma of the Church.". I imagine you meant "don't know" towards the end of that sentence. But it is a rather presumptuous statement that has been asserted without proof. What "theories" or "dogmas" are you referring to? You likewise dismiss my citing of the Nicene Creed by stating that "Not all dogmas are in the Nicene Creed." yet you do not cite one which is appropriate. In as far as your comment stating my inability to prove my statement concerning whether or not an individual is obliged to reject or accept evolution let me mention the specific text from the source which I already cited as proof, the Papal Encyclical "Humani Genris" by Pope Pius XII: "For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter -- for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God." (#36) This clearly states that it is the SOUL which is the specific creation of God, not necessarily the physical body which could have developed along an evolutionary process with the guidance of God.I must admit that I am confused by your next statement which was in response to my comment that it seemed you were changing the topic to whether or not Scripture should be interpreted literally. You said: Finally in your summary you stated that I only cited supporting quotes from the Catechism and said that it was an "inferior" source. However, I have completely proven the the Catechism is considered the definitive source for the understanding of Catholic teachings. Nor was the Catechism my only source. In this discussion I have cited all of these sources:"Apostolic Constitution Fidei Despositum" by Pope John Paul II"Apostolic Letter Laetamur Magnopere" by Pope John Paul II"The Catechism of the Catholic Church" item numbers 107, 108, 110, 159, and 337"The Catholic Church and Evolution" Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org...)"Humanai Genris" by Pope Pius XII"The New American Bible", Matthew 18 and Psalm 90"The Nicene Creed""Summa Theologica, Treatise on Sacred Doctrine" by Thomas Aquinas"U.S. Conference of Bishops, Frequently Asked Questions" Questions 1 and 5 (www.usccb.org)"Wikipedia:Verifiability" Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org...)