If you go to Midnight Mass, you might hear the proclamation of “The Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ from the Roman Martyrology”. It goes as follows:
When ages beyond number had run their course from the creation of the world, when God in the beginning created heaven and earth, and formed man in his own likeness; when century upon century had passed since the Almighty set his bow in the clouds after the Great Flood, as a sign of covenant and peace; in the twenty-first century since Abraham, our father in faith, came out of Ur of the Chaldees; in the thirteenth century since the People of Israel were led by Moses in the Exodus from Egypt; around the thousandth year since David was anointed King; in the sixty-fifth week of the prophecy of Daniel; in the one hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad; in the year seven hundred and fifty-two since the foundation of the City of Rome; in the forty-second year of the reign of Caesar Octavian Augustus, the whole world being at peace, JESUS CHRIST, eternal God and Son of the eternal Father, desiring to consecrate the world by his most loving presence, was conceived by the Holy Spirit, and when nine months had passed since his conception, was born of the Virgin Mary in Bethlehem of Judah, and was made man: The Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh.
This proclamation is actually a striking example of the Catholic Church reinterpreting Scripture to accommodate the findings of modern science. Here is the Proclamation as it was over a century ago:
In the year from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created heaven and earth, five thousand, one hundred and ninety-nine; from the flood, two thousand, nine hundred and fifty-seven; from the birth of Abraham, two thousand and fifteen; from Moses and the coming of the Israelites out of Egypt, one thousand, five hundred and ten; from the anointing of King David, one thousand and thirty-two; in the sixty-fifth week, according to the prophecy of Daniel; in the one hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad; in the year seven hundred and fifty-two, from the founding of the city of Rome; in the forty-second year of the empire of Octavian Augustus, when the whole world was at peace, in the sixth age of the world, Jesus Christ, eternal God, and Son of the eternal Father, desirous to sanctify the world by His most merciful coming, having been conceived of the Holy Ghost, and nine months having elapsed since His conception, is born in Bethlehem of Juda, having become man of the Virgin Mary. The Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.
In the older version of the Proclamation, the universe is about 7200 years old — 5199 years from Creation to the Nativity, plus 2024 from the Nativity to today. This age comes from interpreting the Bible. I do not know the details of the chronology. In the famous Ussher Chronology, there are 4000 years between Creation and the Nativity, making the universe just over 6000 years old. In the Jewish Chronology, it is 5785 years old (the year 5785 having started this past fall).
In the newer version of the Proclamation, how old is the universe? “Ages beyond number.” Why? Well, various branches of science have shown that the Earth is very old and of course the universe is older. However, we would not want to pin things down too much here. After all, I have on my bookshelves a 1980s introductory college astronomy textbook (William J. Kaufmann III’s Universe, published by W. H. Freeman & Co., New York, 1985) that puts the age of the universe at “15-20 billion years”. I have Antonie Pannekoek’s 1961 A History of Astronomy (Interscience Pubs., New York) that puts it at “two thousand million years”; that is, 2 billion. I have a 1957 physical science textbook, Principles of Physical Science, by Francis T. Bonner and Melba Phillips (Addison-Wesley, Reading Mass.). It says, “five and one-half billion years” (the age calculation is a “highly speculative one”, it adds). If you do a web search on “age of the universe” today, you will see a value of just under 14 billion years.
You would not want to have the Proclamation blowing in the breeze of changing age calculations:
When 5.5 billion years had run their course from the creation of the world….
Whoops! No.
When 2 billion years had run their course from the creation of the world….
Whoops! No.
When 15-20 billion years had run their course from the creation of the world….
Whoops! No.
When just under 14 billion years had run their course from the creation of the world….
What are the chances that, in fifty years, our age number will be a bit different still?
The caution seen in the Christmas Proclamation played a role in debate within the Church over evolution in the late nineteenth century. For example, Fr. Salvatore Brandi, a Jesuit writing in the Jesuit publication La Civiltà Cattolica (which still exists, and features regular articles about the Vatican Observatory — click here for those in Italian — click here for English) noted:
The first impediment to accepting evolution for educated Catholics comes not from the fear of contradicting the Bible, but from the scientific insufficiency of that system, that is, the absolute lack of evidence that confirms it.
The evidence for evolution was weaker then than now (heck, astronomers then were still assuming the universe was eternal, with no beginning, and did not evolve at all). A scientific idea must be solid before it can be used in interpreting Scripture, Brandi said. “It is certainly required”, he wrote, “that the words of eternal Truth not be interpreted and warped on the basis of gratuitous hypotheses, to make [those words] say today in obedience to one theory, what will be said tomorrow in obedience to another”.
In other words, Brandi was not saying that science could not influence scriptural interpretation. Almost since its beginning, the Church has accommodated science — since when Ptolemy (~150 A.D.) said that stars had to be larger than the moon, contrary to the “two great lights” of Genesis 1 (St. Augustine treated the “two great lights” question). But the science had to be solidly demonstrated. If a theory had weaknesses scientifically, why bother to consider it theologically? After all, the interpretation of Scripture could not be allowed to simply flutter in the changing winds of passing scientific ideas, following one fallible scientific idea today, another tomorrow.
Leaving room for the fallibility of our knowledge seems like a wise move (click here for more on the Roman Martyrology and why the Church apparently has never been particularly concerned about the chronological details involved). That is something cool to keep in mind if you hear “When ages beyond number had run their course from the creation of the world” at Midnight Mass — a bit of recognition at that great Christmas celebration both of science, and of its fallibility.
