Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Creationism dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Vatican's astronomer
The Scotsman ^ | May 5, 2006 | IAN JOHNSTON

Posted on 05/05/2006 8:21:56 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor

BELIEVING that God created the universe in six days is a form of superstitious paganism, the Vatican astronomer Guy Consolmagno claimed yesterday.

Brother Consolmagno, who works in a Vatican observatory in Arizona and as curator of the Vatican meteorite collection in Italy, said a "destructive myth" had developed in modern society that religion and science were competing ideologies.

He described creationism, whose supporters want it taught in schools alongside evolution, as a "kind of paganism" because it harked back to the days of "nature gods" who were responsible for natural events.

Brother Consolmagno argued that the Christian God was a supernatural one, a belief that had led the clergy in the past to become involved in science to seek natural reasons for phenomena such as thunder and lightning, which had been previously attributed to vengeful gods. "Knowledge is dangerous, but so is ignorance. That's why science and religion need to talk to each other," he said.

"Religion needs science to keep it away from superstition and keep it close to reality, to protect it from creationism, which at the end of the day is a kind of paganism - it's turning God into a nature god. And science needs religion in order to have a conscience, to know that, just because something is possible, it may not be a good thing to do."

Brother Consolmagno, who was due to give a speech at the Glasgow Science Centre last night, entitled "Why the Pope has an Astronomer", said the idea of papal infallibility had been a "PR disaster". What it actually meant was that, on matters of faith, followers should accept "somebody has got to be the boss, the final authority".

"It's not like he has a magic power, that God whispers the truth in his ear," he said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: apostacy; apostate; astronomy; catholic; catholicshurch; christian; christianity; creation; creationism; crevolist; genesis; intelligentdesign; paganism; pope; romancatholic; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-216 next last
To: cripplecreek
"The fact that there is a Vatican astronomer does remind us where much western science began."
Papal astrologer position dates from 15th century, may be even earlier.
21 posted on 05/05/2006 8:53:37 AM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Knowledge is dangerous, but so is ignorance.

There's a tagline in there somewhere!


Speaking of knowlege, is this that famous tree...?


22 posted on 05/05/2006 8:55:32 AM PDT by Coyoteman (Creationists know Jack Chick about evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic

Interesting, the old brother has a point. Bible worship is paganism.


23 posted on 05/05/2006 8:58:44 AM PDT by furball4paws (Awful Offal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

When the church was all powerfull it did a lot of damage to good science. I'm not thrilled with the mixing of the two. There was a time when openly saying that the earth and planets revolved around the sun was seen as blaspheme and could be deadly.


24 posted on 05/05/2006 8:59:49 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Never a minigun handy when you need one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
You just ruined my day!

I prayed to God that he would make me a wealthy man and he said, "In a couple of days your request will be granted."

25 posted on 05/05/2006 9:02:17 AM PDT by right way right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
But, I suppose some folks believe it is, as written, a detailed account of how things happened. That's their privilege, as it is the privilege of other Christians and Jews to see it as allegorical.

Anyone who claims to have a full understanding of the Bible is fooling with you. That's impossible, as those hundreds or thousands of denominations of Christianity affirm.

In other words, you think God intended that all people should just get whatever they want out of the Bible? God didn't have a specific message in mind that he wanted all people to receive?

I believe that God does want us to know the truth. Jesus said, "Sanctify them by the truth, your word is truth." If truth is something that is based on anyone's interpretation, then it is no truth at all. And I reject the idea that an omnipotent God is unable to make something clear enough that it can be understood. I cannot agree with your statement that it is impossible.

The reason there are so many demoninations is not due to the impossibility of understanding. It is due to man's own sinfulness and lack of perfect ability to understand, and his unwillingness to accept what God clearly says.

But once again, I fall back on what I said before: We must take Scripture at its clearest meaning, taking into consideration the context of verse, chapter, book, and entirety of Scripture. In this case, the context makes it fairly clear that we're talking about a normal day, not any great length of time.

26 posted on 05/05/2006 9:03:07 AM PDT by Porkandbeeny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Porkandbeeny
In the case of the Genesis account, when you combine it with the context of "and there was evening and morning," which is typical Hebrew literature denoting a specific period of time, the clearest meaning of the words is a normal, regular day, not an indefinite period of time.

The "morning and evening" day is defined by the rotation of the earth. Does Genesis declare that the earth has always rotated at its current rate? Nope.

The length of the "days" of the creation is doctrinally irrelevant. It's hard for an idea to be a heresy when it simply doesn't matter one way or the other.

The definition of faith is not denying the truth once it is known, but believing the truth before it is known.

27 posted on 05/05/2006 9:07:03 AM PDT by TChris ("Wake up, America. This is serious." - Ben Stein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

There was more fun, when a pope [say, Julius II] would not stir without consulting his astrologers, even in the matters of military urgency. [That's where Nancy Reagan got her ideas about arranging WH schedule]. Sometimes it was in minor matters so it could be winked at, and sometimes in major decisions. That's the proper genesis, function and the job title of Guy Consolmagno's position.


28 posted on 05/05/2006 9:07:26 AM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Issues such as this are indicative of the necessity in forming scriptural interpretation in the context of the Holy Scriptures and Apostolic Tradition. When Christians began reading the words contained in the scriptures outside of the Apostolic Traditions taught in the Catholic Church, they began generating thousands of interpretations that resulted in absolute confusion.

Brother Consolmagno had one idea correct at least, when it comes to understanding the Bible, there needs to be one boss. Otherwise, there are no limits to the variety of interpretations that can be created. And, as the number of interpretations increases, the amount of confusion increases.

As a Convert to Catholicism, I remember my days growing up in a country Protestant Church. One time a preacher got up in front of the congregation and stated that a person who has an artificial heart could not go to Heaven because God dwells in the heart. And, if a person had their heart removed, then God no longer dwelt within them.

This is insanity. But, without some guidelines (as provided by Sacred Tradition), why not have this guy out spewing all kinds of insanity.

This article is a clear example of how Creationism has become a tool for fundamentalists to try to create their own version of Sacred Tradition. They often equate evolution with evil. But, the Church has never said this.
29 posted on 05/05/2006 9:08:20 AM PDT by lnbchip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
A "destructive myth" had developed in modern society that religion and science were competing ideologies.

He's right, and it is insanely destructive. Thomas Aquinas said the truth cannot contradict itself, and that no really proven truth can contradict other truth. A Christian has nothing to fear from science - as long as it IS science, and not assertion posing as science.

The evolutionary process really appears to be true* But ever since Darwin's day, unfortunately, it has been used like a crowbar to "prove" - or rather to assert - wildly unscientific claims that Mankind is simply another beast, ot that we have no free will, or There Is No God. This in turn sets off our sola scriptural FReepers who honourably - but mistakenly - feel that they must defend one literal exegesis of Genesis to the death.

*Certainly for all flora and fauna except man. There is an interesting lack of speciation in the fossil record of hominids up to and including "Lucy" which seems to indicate that something unique has happened in Man's case. But the fossil record is as yet too sparse to make supportable conclusions. I am confident that disinterested research will lead us into all Truth.

30 posted on 05/05/2006 9:08:40 AM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Pot calling kettle black.

The church should clean up its act, or the evangelicals will continue to gain on them.

Lies and name calling are the last acts of losers.
31 posted on 05/05/2006 9:08:42 AM PDT by after dark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor

Too much "canon' fodder" already.


32 posted on 05/05/2006 9:09:16 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Porkandbeeny

"The reason there are so many demoninations is not due to the impossibility of understanding. It is due to man's own sinfulness and lack of perfect ability to understand, and his unwillingness to accept what God clearly says. "




Which is why each denomination believes that IT understands the Bible as it is supposed to be understood. It's a comedy, really, when you consider on what small points of difference separate some denominations from others, and what wide differences separate others.

When the Biblical account is literally unbelievable, that is a clue to you that the account is allegorical. The creation story is one such instance. Noah's flood is another, since no such flood could physically occur. Others, like the parting of the Red Sea, and Jonah and the great fish, serve to make the point even more clearly.

You have a particular set of Christian beliefs. Other Christians have other sets of beliefs. All are Christians. All have some basic core beliefs regarding Jesus. Those are the beliefs that make one a Christian or not, not fine points of discussion.

It's perfectly OK if you believe that Genesis 1 and 2 are absolutely literally true. If you insist that others believe that, then you are wrong to do so.


33 posted on 05/05/2006 9:09:46 AM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: lnbchip

"Issues such as this are indicative of the necessity in forming scriptural interpretation in the context of the Holy Scriptures and Apostolic Tradition. When Christians began reading the words contained in the scriptures outside of the Apostolic Traditions taught in the Catholic Church, they began generating thousands of interpretations that resulted in absolute confusion."




Well, what you say makes sense, and certainly Martin Luther and the Reformation was the beginning of the denominalization of Christianity.

However, if one can recite the Apostle's or Nicene Creed and mean it, it's pretty certain that person can call himself a Christian, whatever his denomination.

The rest is open for discussion. Your example of the pastor and the "heart" questions, though, does show just how silly some of the doctrinal beliefs of some denominations really are.

Christianity is not based on whether you are a preterist or a dispensationalist, or whether you consider the Genesis 1 and 2 accounts to be literal or allegorical. It is only based upon the acceptance of the core beliefs of Christianity. Those two creeds are pretty clear tests, in my secular opinion.


34 posted on 05/05/2006 9:14:36 AM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TChris
The definition of faith is not denying the truth once it is known, but believing the truth before it is known.

"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." (Hebrews 11:1)

I find your definition of faith far more confusing than the clear meaning of Scripture. Furthermore, your argument about the rotation of the earth is ridiculous. It only makes sense if you assume that creation took longer than six normal days, but you're supporting the idea that creation took longer than six normal days by citing the possibility that the earth rotated slower. It's a circular argument. (If A, then B, therefore A)

35 posted on 05/05/2006 9:15:48 AM PDT by Porkandbeeny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
If you insist that others believe that, then you are wrong to do so.

I don't insist that others believe anything. I do say that if you choose to ignore the clear meaning of any one piece of Scripture, then you must do the same to the rest of Scripture, and then who is to say that man is really sinful? Did Jesus really actually live? Maybe Jesus didn't actually rise from the dead? The foundation of Christian faith crumbles and belief is just a pretty way to harness the young and bring some comfort to the old.

I believe that if we are not willing to take God at his word then we might as well not believe at all. I, however, choose to believe what God clearly says, and not seek an alternative interpretation that doesn't actually fit the text.

36 posted on 05/05/2006 9:21:55 AM PDT by Porkandbeeny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor

Labelling a follower of your own belief "pagan," merely because that person insists on a literal interpretation of scripture is deceit. And who is the father of lies, according to the very same scripture that this man purports to follow?


37 posted on 05/05/2006 9:24:59 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Porkandbeeny

"I don't insist that others believe anything. I do say that if you choose to ignore the clear meaning of any one piece of Scripture, then you must do the same to the rest of Scripture, and then who is to say that man is really sinful? Did Jesus really actually live? Maybe Jesus didn't actually rise from the dead? The foundation of Christian faith crumbles and belief is just a pretty way to harness the young and bring some comfort to the old. "




Well, you might want to glance at my tagline. I'm not really addressing the truth or fiction of Christianity. I'm just talking about Christianity and the Bible, from a perspective outside of the religion. I am not a Christian at all.

I've studied all sorts of religions, though, and am commenting on Christianity and the Bible as they are seen by Christians. You must admit that there's sure a lot of variation among Christians about the details of their beliefs. It's an interesting thing to study.


38 posted on 05/05/2006 9:25:43 AM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor

I've been saying for a couple of weeks that ID is a form of animism. I noticed this when a freeper made an explicit reference to being able to see intelligence in cellular mechanisms.

I think a couple of our ID posters who like to quote Shapiro are pushing a form of animism.


39 posted on 05/05/2006 9:28:46 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Porkandbeeny
"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." (Hebrews 11:1)

I find your definition of faith far more confusing than the clear meaning of Scripture.

OK, but is it faith if your are hoping for something that is untrue? I would argue that it is not true faith. If it is, then Christianity has no claim to faith any more than a Buddhist or Muslim, since they all believe in things they do not see. The difference is truth. Of all the differing beliefs, they cannot all be true. There must be only one truth, one faith. The rest are false and powerless.

Furthermore, your argument about the rotation of the earth is ridiculous. It only makes sense if you assume that creation took longer than six normal days, but you're supporting the idea that creation took longer than six normal days by citing the possibility that the earth rotated slower. It's a circular argument. (If A, then B, therefore A)

No, not a circular argument, but a possibility, yes. We are presented with widely known, common, overwhelming evidence that the creation of the earth took longer than six of our current days. There are a number of ways that the Genesis account can be seen to harmonize with those plain facts. I have only presented one possibility, not proclaimed it to be the certain truth.

I simply don't get some people's denial-based faith. It's almost as if some believe that their religion isn't supposed to make sense or harmonize with plain truth. I believe all truth, be it religious, scientific, economic, political, etc., is self-consistent and harmonious. Where they do not appear to harmonize or agree, one part or another is simply not true.

40 posted on 05/05/2006 9:29:22 AM PDT by TChris ("Wake up, America. This is serious." - Ben Stein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-216 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson