Do you believe in life on other planets?

[Paladin D]

I rather would get the full quote and an interpretation from an orthodox Catholic source, not from a dissendent.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='Paladin D' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:36 PM']I rather would get the full quote and an interpretation from an orthodox Catholic source, not from a dissendent.
[right][snapback]931775[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

its From Catholic Apologetics International hardly a dissendent source.

[Amator Veritatis]

Paladin, perhaps you could simply read the relevant points made by myself, chiefly cited from [i]Providentissimus Deus[/i] of Leo XIII, which clearly teaches the position outlined by Sam.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:37 PM']its From Catholic Apologetics International hardly a dissendent source.
[right][snapback]931778[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/sites/site_view.cfm?recnum=1900"]Red Light from CatholicCulture.org[/url]

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

if you do not know that Catholic Culture is neo-catholic, than its time to get a brain buddy!

[Peccator]

[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp[/url]

[quote][b]The Catholic Position[/b]


[b]What is the Catholic position concerning belief or unbelief in evolution?[/b] The question may never be finally settled, but there are definite parameters to what is acceptable Catholic belief.

Concerning cosmological evolution, [b]the Church has infallibly defined that the universe was specially created out of nothing[/b]. [b]Vatican I solemnly defined that everyone must "confess the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing"[/b] (Canons on God the Creator of All Things, canon 5).

[b]The Church [color=red]does not have an official position[/color] on whether the stars, nebulae, and planets we see today were created at that time or whether they developed over time (for example, in the aftermath of the Big Bang that modern cosmologists discuss)[/b]. However, [b]the Church would maintain that, if the stars and planets did develop over time, this still ultimately must be attributed to God and his plan[/b], for Scripture records: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all their host [stars, nebulae, planets] by the breath of his mouth" (Ps. 33:6).

Concerning biological evolution, [b]the Church[color=red] does not have an official position[/color] on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God,[/b] and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

[b]Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul.[/b]

[b][color=red]Pope Pius XII declared[/color] that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" [/b](Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.

While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in [b]no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution.[/b] [/quote]

It looks as if the Church does leave science some speace...

Edited April 1, 2006 by Peccator

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:39 PM']Paladin, perhaps you could simply read the relevant points made by myself, chiefly cited from [i]Providentissimus Deus[/i] of Leo XIII, which clearly teaches the position outlined by Sam.
[right][snapback]931782[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I am not implying that specific parts of the Bible are in error, for I said the Bible is 100% inerrant. However, certain passages can be [b]interpreted[/b] as literal, and others as allegorial or symbolic. There was a huge column about this on Catholic Answers.

For example, it is well known that the events in the Book of Revelation are not taken to be *literal*, but allegorial and symbolic to what has happened, and what will happen.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Peccator' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:47 PM'][url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp[/url]
It looks as if the Church does leave science some speace...
[right][snapback]931795[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Bingo.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

On June 30, 1909, the Catholic Pontifical Biblical Commission agreed. It issued a decree interpreting the first chapters of Genesis as history, not myth. With the backing of Pope Pius X, the Commission declared that certain truths must be held no matter what the latest scientific theories claim to the contrary. These unarguable points are:

That God created all things at the beginning of time;
That man was specially created;
That the first woman came from the first man;
That all humans are of a single original race;
That our first parents lived in a happy state of justice, integrity, and immortality;
That God gave them a command to test their obedience;
That they disobeyed the divine command at the instigation of the devil who took on the form of a serpent;
That our first parents fell from their state of innocence;
And that they were promised a future redeemer.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:49 PM']On June 30, 1909, the Catholic Pontifical Biblical Commission agreed. It issued a decree interpreting the first chapters of Genesis as history, not myth. With the backing of Pope Pius X, the Commission declared that certain truths must be held no matter what the latest scientific theories claim to the contrary. These unarguable points are:

    That God created all things at the beginning of time;
    That man was specially created;
    That the first woman came from the first man;
    That all humans are of a single original race;
    That our first parents lived in a happy state of justice, integrity, and immortality;
    That God gave them a command to test their obedience;
    That they disobeyed the divine command at the instigation of the devil who took on the form of a serpent;
    That our first parents fell from their state of innocence;
    And that they were promised a future redeemer.
[right][snapback]931800[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[b]Athiestic evolution[/b] would contradict these, but not the view of evolution that is permitted by Catholics. So far, I see no contradiction.

[Amator Veritatis]

Sam seems to have beaten me to the punch, as it were, in posting the reference before I could. As is clear from the statements of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, God created all things at the beginning of time. He did not create things over time via the Big Bang, Evolution, [i]et al[/i]. We must remember that St. Pius X stated that Catholics have a moral obligation to accept the findings of the Commission.

[Amator Veritatis]

As I stated above, if God created all things at the beginning of time, He could not have created things over time by the use of Evolution or the Big Bang. Might I suggest, perhaps, a more careful reading of the texts presented in order to engage more properly in an intellectually honest, academic discussion. It appears that you have been very busy on the boards recently, posting on any number of topics. I have noticed the rapidity of your posts and conjecture that, perhaps, you have not had time to read everything as carefully as you might like.

Edited April 1, 2006 by Amator Veritatis

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:53 PM']Sam seems to have beaten me to the punch, as it were, in posting the reference before I could. As is clear from the statements of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, God created all things at the beginning of time. He did not create things over time via the Big Bang, Evolution, [i]et al[/i]. We must remember that St. Pius X stated that Catholics have a moral obligation to accept the findings of the Commission.
[right][snapback]931804[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Don't forget to read [b]Peccator[/b]'s post.

I believe God created all things at the beginning of time, however, I don't believe this means that everything was completely assembled. It's the difference between an engineer creating parts for a blueprint, and then assembling them overtime.

Eve wasn't created at the very beginning of time, she came along later when Adam got lonely.

[Peccator]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Apr 1 2006, 08:54 PM']As I stated above, if God created all things at the beginning of time, He could not have created things over time by the use of Evolution or the Big Bang. Might I suggest, perhaps, a more careful reading of the texts presented in order to engage more properly in an intellectually honest, academic discussion. It appears that you have been very busy on the boards recently, posting on any number of topics. I have noticed the rapidity of your posts and conjecture that, perhaps, you have not had time to read everything as carefully as you might like.
[right][snapback]931805[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]That is why I'll print the pieces and reply later when i have more time and more able to concentrate...22:00 here already.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:54 PM']As I stated above, if God created all things at the beginning of time, He could not have created things over time by the use of Evolution or the Big Bang.[right][snapback]931805[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I do not believe in evolution either but I do not understand how the evolution of different species would constitute separate creations any more than when a mother gives birth to a child.

[Desert Walker]

1. It is not heresy to believe that other planets are inhabited by sentient beings

2. The Vatican has assigned a priest/scholar/astronomer to tackle the potential theological uncertainties which would arise from the discovery of such beings

3. The Bible does not exclude the possibility that "all Mankind" are confined to this planet alone

4. The Bible does not exclude the possibility that some of the other galaxies might actually be other "projects"


There is a story about this written by a nun. It's called [i]Beyond the End[/i]. I wish I could remember her name...

The setting is this:

a comet hits the Earth. Just before it reaches the planet several people -- some young people and a bishop -- are supernaturally transported to another galaxy and planet. The planet is inhabited by a race of non-industrial humans. Apparently they also underwent a primordial, moral test. The difference, however, is that these beings were tested like the angels: as a numerous group, rather than as one man and one woman. So the planet contains two distinct populations of people: the fallen ones and those who remained faithful to God's law. The purpose God has in bringing Earthlings to this world is to inform them of the gift of Christ through Mary given to the children of Adam and Eve.

I found the concept interesting.

[ardillacid]

I do because I am a complete idiot

[Amator Veritatis]

I have a few comments. Firstly, Peccator, my previous comment that "I have noticed the rapidity of your posts and conjecture that, perhaps, you have not had time to read everything as carefully as you might like." was directed toward Paladin D. I apologise for not making this clear.


Secondly, thedude, the conclusion was that God created all things at the beginning of time. This would certainly exclude the possibility of a Big Bang insofar as God would not have created any thing at the beginning of time except a mass of dust, but such a conclusion would also exclude Evolution insofar as God would not have created all things at the beginning of time if other species were created at a later date. This much is true simply from the meaning of the phrase "all things". God could not have created "all things" at the beginning of time if some of them have come to be after that point. The meaning certainly does not mean to indicate that "all things" would refer to all living beings, for obviously not all humans or animals or plants were created at the beginning of time, much less does it refer to all things that exist, for the same obvious conclusions could be drawn regarding material objects as well.

It would be reasonable to conclude that microevolution would not be denied by this statement, for by microevolution no new species or beings are created, but those already existing merely develop. In this manner of speaking, it would be logical to say that microevolution presents a situation no different than a mother giving birth to a child. On the other hand, if macroevolution were true, separate beings would have come to be created over time rather than immediately at the beginning of time. If the argument is that Evolution does not create new beings any more than a mother giving birth to a child, the distinction that Evolution would create new species must be recognised. With that being said, the analogy does not follow or is at least not equivalent. The very purpose of stating that "God created all things at the beginning of time" is to illustrate that new things, which would presumably include new species, could not be created over time. Otherwise, the phrase would be rendered meaningless or nearly meaningless, for any development which might constitute a new creation, e.g., water changing into a one-celled organism would not necessarily constitute a new creation, but clearly this is false, for water is a different thing than a living one-celled organism just as an ape is a different thing than a man.

[Desert Walker]

I wonder who put this on the Moon?

[img]http://www.mufor.org/moon/ukert.jpg[/img]

An ancient people from this planet, or some folks from somewhere else?

[Desert Walker]

Never mind...

Just found another photo from the Clementine Orbiter. It looks like a natural formation.