To analyse in the first place, in perfect autonomy from any other consideration, is the role of sciences. At this first level one must study carefully all data available in palaeontology, biosystematics, molecular biology, which provide ever growing evidence for the evolution of species.

In a second phase we should focus on the study of the various scientific theories that aim to explain such an event. Historically, the first theory was Lamarck’s transformism; while several elements of his theory have been surpassed, we cannot dismiss the fundamental role of this great predecessor. In 1859 the theory of natural selection by Charles Darwin was expressed for the first time in The Origin of Species. Darwin’s theory is the cornerstone of the current synthetic theory of evolution, or “neo-darwinism,” with the additions of Mendel’s Laws in genetics and the mutations theory by Hugo de Vries.  This important knowledge base must be studied scientifically, integrating the numerous recent developments in various fields of research. This discussion must follow a rational course with the aim of defining with the greatest accuracy those elements that are explained by this theory and those elements that the theory still fails to explain, making a serene confrontation with other attempts, if any, to explain the mechanisms of evolution.  Keeping a purely scientific perspective, the study of the origin of man will follow, using the facts that are known as a starting point.

At this point, it is essential to consider the neo-darwinian theory as it is, a scientific theory that evolves continually, trying to integrate an increasing number of elements. Like any other scientific theory, it must be put under scrutiny and must be discussed. For this reason, it must not be considered either as a definite truth, which would transform it into ideology – the very opposite of science – or, on the opposite end of the spectrum, as contradictory to a religious truth, for example. It is allowed nonetheless to discuss the question of possible methodological presuppositions, such as mechanicism or radical reductionism, which might have contaminated such a theory in a philosophical rather than in a scientific manner.

For this reason, the second aspect to consider carefully, clearly departing from the realm of positive sciences, is philosophical reflection; this will be addressed both at an epistemological level – to understand which is the epistemological statute of neo-darwinism, for example – and at the philosophy of nature level, utilizing a critical approach, so as to consider properly the numerous philosophical implications in the evolution of species in general, and in synthetic theory in particular.

Only an appropriate philosophical reflection can articulate, without confusing, sciences on the one hand, and faith and theology on the other hand. Philosophical reflection on evolution must logically take place before theological consideration of the various theories that attempt to explain it. Within the field of Christian theology, the most logical point of departure is a suitable exegesis of the Biblical texts that address Creation, starting from the first two chapters of the Book of Genesis. The distinction of literary genres remains one of the greatest lessons to be drawn from Galileo.

In this manner, we avoid any direct argument between creation and evolution, as well as the controversies raised for example by “Intelligent Design,” as if it were an alternative scientific theory to neo-darwinism. A Christian can believe in the providential design of God in Creation, without transforming it into a “scientific theory” that competes with another one: these are definitely different levels of interpretation. However, this requires that no scientific theory is placed as the ultimate explanation of reality, which would reduce it to being pseudo-metaphysics, or a pseudo-religion – in any case, the opposite of science.