- #1
- 473
- 4
Writing in the Vatican newspaper, the astronomer, Father Gabriel Funes, said intelligent beings created by God could exist in outer space.
Father Funes, director of the Vatican Observatory near Rome, is a respected scientist who collaborates with universities around the world.
That's roughly how I would put it, though I'd be a little more pointed and say that due to the decreasing popularity of religion, they want to remain ahead of the curve, if possible, to avoid embarassment and further loss of revenue. That's the main thrust of their interest in science - making sure they don't get bitten in the rear-end. It took them more than 300 years to accept Galileo and a lot of scientifically minded people will never let them live that one down. I don't have much near-term hope for their position on abortion/contraception, though.Believe it or not, the Catholic Church has a great interest in science. My guess would be that in the interest of science, and in an effort to officially keep up with what we know, they are taking a public position that the notion of alien life is not contrary to Church doctrine.
From wiki (I'm sure most of you know that already, just posting for records, plus it's so funny I never get enough of it)And even in the case of Galileo, it wasn't so much that the Church didn't know he was right. They were more worried about the effect that it would have - interestingly, not unlike the Brookings Report wrt ETs.
On February 15, 1990, in a speech delivered at the Sapienza University of Rome, Cardinal Ratzinger cited some current views on the Galileo affair as forming what he called "a symptomatic case that permits us to see how deep the self-doubt of the modern age, of science and technology goes today." Some of the views he cited were those of the philosopher Paul Feyerabend, whom he quoted as saying “The Church at the time of Galileo kept much more closely to reason than did Galileo himself, and she took into consideration the ethical and social consequences of Galileo's teaching too. Her verdict against Galileo was rational and just and the revision of this verdict can be justified only on the grounds of what is politically opportune.” The Cardinal did not clearly indicate whether he agreed or disagreed with Feyerabend's assertions. He did, however, say "It would be foolish to construct an impulsive apologetic on the basis of such views".
On 31 October 1992, Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, and officially conceded that the Earth was not stationary, as the result of a study conducted by the Pontifical Council for Culture.
If you've ever been involved in university teaching committees - that's quite a fast response to changing knowledge!On 31 October 1992, Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, and officially conceded that the Earth was not stationary,
That's roughly how I would put it, though I'd be a little more pointed and say that due to the decreasing popularity of religion, they want to remain ahead of the curve, if possible, to avoid embarassment and further loss of revenue. That's the main thrust of their interest in science - making sure they don't get bitten in the rear-end. It took them more than 300 years to accept Galileo and a lot of scientifically minded people will never let them live that one down. I don't have much near-term hope for their position on abortion/contraception, though.
And even in the case of Galileo, it wasn't so much that the Church didn't know he was right. They were more worried about the effect that it would have - interestingly, not unlike the Brookings Report wrt ETs.
To strengthen its scientific credentials, the Vatican is organising a conference next year to mark the 200th anniversary of the birth of the author of the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin.
Could you clarify what scientific fact, exactly, they are accepting? I don't see any mention of any scientific facts in the article in the OP.Funny, what I see as accepting scientific fact ...
Well one of their guys did invent it - Georges Lemaître was a catholic priest.In the early '50s Pope Pius XII embraced the Big Bang theory
Actually, George was one of the people who cautioned the pope not to get too committed to the BB because it lacked observational support.
In the early '50s Pope Pius XII embraced the Big Bang theory because it established a scientifically acceptable framework for a creation event, and in his mind, for a creator.
Not a very helpfull attitude for a priest.
GoergeM> "Hey, boss - don't put too much faith in this, there is no real evidence yet."
Pope> "Can I remind you what business we are in ?"
;-)
Oh man... PRICELESS :rofl:
I'm not sure. The younger ones kissed me and the older ones whacked me with their heavy maple pointers...I'm going to hell - I know it!
What would the nuns at school think.
I'm not sure. The younger ones kissed me and the older ones whacked me with their heavy maple pointers...
No, at different times.Whoa... all at the same time?? :rofl:
Vatican says aliens could exist
What I find so ironic about that, is that the Big Bang theory of the universe bears absolutely no resemblance to the creation story laid out in Genesis
To accept the Big Bang, you're pretty much forced to acknowledge that the universe must be several billions of years old.
You have to accept the fact that the planets, and ultimately life, were not independent and potentially divine aspects of the universe, but instead that our origins are purely cosmic in nature.
Again, this is nothing like what is described in Genesis.
In the beginning — specifically on October 23, 4004 B.C., at noon — out of quantum foam fluctuation God created the Big Bang. The bang was followed by cosmological inflation. God saw that the Big Bang was very big, too big for creatures that could worship him, so He created the earth. And darkness was upon the face of the deep, so He commanded hydrogen atoms (which He created out of Quarks and other subatomic goodies) to fuse and become helium atoms and in the process release energy in the form of light. And the light maker he called the sun, and the process He called fusion. And He saw the light was good because now He could see what he was doing. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Actually, George was one of the people who cautioned the pope not to get too committed to the BB because it lacked observational support.
What I find so ironic about that, is that the Big Bang theory of the universe bears absolutely no resemblance to the creation story laid out in Genesis
To accept the Big Bang, you're pretty much forced to acknowledge that the universe must be several billions of years old.
You have to accept the fact that the planets, and ultimately life, were not independent and potentially divine aspects of the universe, but instead that our origins are purely cosmic in nature.
Again, this is nothing like what is described in Genesis.
It is very clear that Catholic church has acknowledged the many faults and failings contained within their teachings, but they have not admitted it. Instead, they "endorse" the latest science, and twist whatever they have to in order to make it compatible with a God.
Perhaps they day will come when they admit the virgin birth is a load of crap, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that one.
Nah its going to happen soon. They'll say they artificially inseminated Mary with God's sea men.