Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Baptizing Aliens And The Insufficiency Of Scripture

Patrick Chan recently pointed me to this article, which gives us another example of the insufficiency of scripture. We need an infallible guide to give us answers about this sort of thing. Maybe the Catholic Church hasn't ruled infallibly on the subject yet, but it's good to know that it could give us the answer someday if it ever wanted to.

I also appreciated the astronomer's faithfulness to Christian tradition. If Polycarp or Augustine were alive today, I'm sure he'd also be an evolutionist who publicly dismisses and derides Christians like those in the intelligent design movement. He'd refer to them as "creationist fundamentalists" who have "pseudoscientific" views and have "hijacked" the issue. I'm sure that the bishop of Rome's scientists in that day (like the one who overlooks his "meteorite collection" today) had the same sort of mindset.

10 comments:

  1. So this guy would be happy if "intelligent" life were to be found in space, and that "intelligence" is basic attribute of the soul, but intelligent design is a problem?

    (Palm-to-Face).....

    ReplyDelete
  2. Some time ago there were some articles out about some Roman Catholic ethicist talking about the need to baptize chimpanzees. More of the same.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, of which Stephen Hawking is a member, keeps the senior cardinals and the pope up-to-date with the latest scientific developments. Responding to Hawking's recent comments that the laws of physics removed the need for God, Consolmagno said: "Steven Hawking is a brilliant physicist and when it comes to theology I can say he's a brilliant physicist."

    I thought that was even funnier than the idea of baptizing an alien.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "The pope's astronomer said the Vatican was keen on science and admitted that the church had got it "spectacularly wrong" over its treatment of the 17th century astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo confirmed that the Earth went around the sun – and not the other way around – and was charged with heresy in 1633. He spent the rest of his life under house arrest in Tuscany. Only in 1992 did Pope John Paul admit that the church's treatment of Galileo had been a mistake."

    Wait a minute.

    I thought the Magisterium was infallible. If the Magisterium back in the day declared that Galileo was a heretic for being a heliocentrist, then for Pope JPII to declare that the Church was wrong for doing that...

    then isn't that a prima facie admission that the Magisterium is NOT infallible?

    An admission made by the Pope, no less!

    What's the weasel explanation that woulb be given by Catholics to explain away this dilemma of theirs?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Truth Unites ... : I thought the Magisterium was infallible. If the Magisterium back in the day declared that Galileo was a heretic for being a heliocentrist, then for Pope JPII to declare that the Church was wrong for doing that...

    then isn't that a prima facie admission that the Magisterium is NOT infallible?


    As you are aware, the gang from Rome has always thought highly of itself.

    It was at this point that they recalibrated their theory of infallibility from what it had been ("faith, morals, and science") to what it is currently, "faith and morals."

    Sometimes circumstances just force them to scale back their grand claims. This was one of them. I believe the historical studies of the early papacy will be another.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "It was at this point that they recalibrated their theory of infallibility from what it had been ("faith, morals, and science") to what it is currently, "faith and morals."

    Hi John,

    Do you have supporting links or documentation showing the Magisterium's recalibration from what it was then to what it is now?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Do you have supporting links or documentation showing the Magisterium's recalibration from what it was then to what it is now?

    Not on the Gallileo affair. But it's clear they were adamant about their own opinion, which was later completely recanted.

    But there are several instances in more modern areas. The first is the papacy. Consider the statement of Vatican I. Speaking of Peter's "of true and proper jurisdiction that he directly and immediately received from our lord Jesus Christ himself," they went on to speak about the "permanence of the primacy of Peter in the Roman pontiffs:

    … for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church … whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole church …

    This doesn't leave much room for doubt that the earliest "popes" -- no doubt they had Clement in view -- had literal command over the whole church.

    http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.htm#Chapter%201%20On%20the%20institution%20of%20the%20apostolic%20primacy%20in%20blessed%20Peter

    Then consider this:

    In the history of the Church, there is a continuity of doctrinal development on the primacy … The Second Vatican Council, in turn, reaffirmed and completed the teaching of Vatican I, addressing primarily the theme of its purpose, with particular attention to the mystery of the Church as Corpus Ecclesiarum. This consideration allowed for a clearer exposition of how the primatial office of the Bishop of Rome and the office of the other Bishops are not in opposition but in fundamental and essential harmony.

    Therefore, "when the Catholic Church affirms that the office of the Bishop of Rome corresponds to the will of Christ, she does not separate this office from the mission entrusted to the whole body of Bishops, who are also 'vicars and ambassadors of Christ' (Lumen gentium, n. 27). The Bishop of Rome is a member of the 'College', and the Bishops are his brothers in the ministry". It should also be said, reciprocally, that episcopal collegiality does not stand in opposition to the personal exercise of the primacy nor should it relativize it.


    http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFPRIMA.HTM 

    This is an official document, written and issued by Ratzinger.


    "No salvation outside of the church" has similarly been re-worked.

    I was noticing too, this morning, the "precepts of the church," which were requirements for such things as fasting and attendance at mass and reception of the sacraments of communion and confession have been significantly relaxed too, although these were some of the "works" that were an integral part of the "sacramental treadmill" codified by Trent.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "No salvation outside of the church" has similarly been re-worked.

    I was noticing too, this morning, the "precepts of the church," which were requirements for such things as fasting and attendance at mass and reception of the sacraments of communion and confession have been significantly relaxed too, although these were some of the "works" that were an integral part of the "sacramental treadmill" codified by Trent."


    The Infallible Interpreter possesses a "Living Tradition" which is fixed.

    If you know what I mean.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Infallible Interpreter possesses a "Living Tradition" which is fixed.

    If you know what I mean.


    Steve Hays has used the metaphor of a chess player getting to re-arrange the position before moving; that way they always get to change the position on the board to suit their needs of the moment.

    DTK has called this "death by a thousand qualifications."

    ReplyDelete