Do you believe in life on other planets?

[Amator Veritatis]

As a matter of clarification, I should point out that the Bible is, in fact, inerrant in all matters, be they doctrinal, moral, historical, scientific or any other matter. This fact is taught by Pope Leo XIII in his famous Encyclical Letter [i]Providentissimus Deus[/i]. Below is an excerpt from this grand work with relevant citation.

But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the sacred writer has erred. For the system of those who, in order to rid themselves of these difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that divine inspiration regards the things of faith and morals, and nothing beyond, because (as they wrongly think) in a question of the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should consider not so much what God has said as the reason and purpose which He had in mind in saying it -- this system cannot be tolerated. For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican. These are the words of the last: "The Books of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire, with all their parts, as enumerated in the decree of the same Council (Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are to be received as sacred and canonical. And the Church holds them as sacred and canonical, not because, having been composed by human industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority; nor only because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author."[57] Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot therefore say that it was these inspired instruments who, perchance, have fallen into error, and not the primary author. For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write -- He was so present to them -- that the things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Otherwise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture. Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers. "Therefore," says St. Augustine, "since they wrote the things which He showed and uttered to them, it cannot be pretended that He is not the writer; for His members executed what their Head dictated."[58] And St. Gregory the Great thus pronounces: "Most superfluous it is to inquire who wrote these things -- we loyally believe the Holy Ghost to be the Author of the book. He wrote it Who dictated it for writing; He wrote it Who inspired its execution."[59] Cf., [i]Providentissimus Deus[/i], Article XX.

N.B., [57] Sess. iii., c. ii., de Rev. ; [58] De consensu Evangel. 1. 1, c. 35. ; [59] Praef in Job, n. 2.


While every sentence of the above excerpt is relevant to the discussion, below are listed those declarations which undeniably illustrate that Holy Writ is free not merely from errors regarding faith and morals but from all error whatsoever.

"For the system of those who, in order to rid themselves of these difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that divine inspiration regards the things of faith and morals, and nothing beyond, because (as they wrongly think) in a question of the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should consider not so much what God has said as the reason and purpose which He had in mind in saying it -- this system cannot be tolerated."

This system is precisely what has been advocated by some who have already posted on this thread. It is forbidden by the Church and contrary to the Faith.

"For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican."

These statements merely serve to expound upon the previous statements. There can be no doubt whatsoever that the Church teaches that every matter of Holy Writ is completely inerrant and that, were this not the case, the Holy Scriptures could not be authored by the Holy Ghost, which dogma, too, is an Article of the Faith.


In addition, Pope St. Pius X in his Motu Proprio [i]Praestantia Scripturae[/i] affirms and commends the prior Encyclical of Leo XIII, [i]Providentissimus Deus[/i], and makes additional provisions regarding the consciences of Catholics concerning Sacred Scripture. First, as St. Pius X notes, Leo XIII founded a Pontifical Biblical Commission composed of wise and holy Cardinals to issue declarations regarding matters Scriptural. Below are St. Pius X's words regarding this commission, from his Motu Proprio [i]Praestantia Scripturae[/i].

Wherefore we find it necessary to declare and to expressly prescribe, and by this our act we do declare and decree that all are bound in conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Commission relating to doctrine, which have been given in the past and which shall be given in the future, in the same way as to the decrees of the Roman congregations approved by the Pontiff; nor can all those escape the note of disobedience or temerity, and consequently of grave sin, who in speech or writing contradict such decisions, and this besides the scandal they give and the other reasons for which they may be responsible before God for other temerities and errors which generally go with such contradictions.


St. Pius X, therefore, made binding on all Catholics the obligation to accept the decisions of the Biblical Commission relating to doctrine. Of note is the fact that this same commission stated in no ambiguous terms the necessity of accepting the entire book of Genesis as historically and literally accurate. Of course, this much had already been taught by Leo XIII in [i]Providentissimus Deus[/i], but it is especially relevant because such a decision is binding on the conscience of Catholics.


Of course, read in light of these other documents, St. Pius X's condemnation previously cited from [i]Lamentabili Sane[/i], clearly applies to every aspect of the Bible, not merely those concerned with faith and morals.


Noteworthy, as well is Pope Benedict XV's same affirmation of the total inerrancy of Holy Scripture in his Encyclical Letter [i]Spiritus Paraclitus[/i]. One need only purchase an updated copy of [i]Enchiridion Symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum[/i], often simply referred to as "Denzinger", after the priest who compiled the original in 1854. The most popular updated edition in English is entitled [i]The Sources of Catholic Dogma[/i] and printed by Loreto Publications from the 1954 edition. In any event, one who were to examine the entries for Popes Leo XIII and St. Pius X would find a wealth of decrees condemning various false interpretations of the Sacred Scriptures, be they failing to interpret Genesis literally or failing to subscribe to the entire Pentateuch the authorship of Moses or failing in some other regard. If more references be necessary, I am able to provide them.

Edited April 1, 2006 by Amator Veritatis

[Paladin D]

The Bible is indeed 100% inerrant, however, that doesn't mean all of Sacred Scripture is to be taken as a [b]literal, historical account[/b]. Thus, that is why it is not a sin for a Catholic to believe in Evolution, as long as certain boundaries are established (example: God was behind it all).

[Peccator]

[quote name='Paladin D' date='Apr 1 2006, 08:25 PM']The Bible is indeed 100% inerrant, however, that doesn't mean all of Sacred Scripture is to be taken as a [b]literal, historical account[/b].  Thus, that is why it is not a sin for a Catholic to believe in Evolution, as long as certain boundaries are established (example: God was behind it all).
[right][snapback]931750[/snapback][/right]
[/quote](insert after highlighted passage) ...or as an Scientific account.

Edited April 1, 2006 by Peccator

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Peccator' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:29 PM'](insert after highlighted passage) ...or as an Scientific account.
[right][snapback]931757[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Exactly.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote]    Pius IX in Syllabus of Errors, condemned the following notion: “The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions...”

    Pope Leo XIII, in Providentissimus Deus, “It is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred.”

    Pope Pius X, in Lamentabili Sani, condemned the notion: “Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error.”

    Pope Benedict XV, in Spiritus Paraclitus: “...the divine inspiration extends to all parts of Scripture without distinction, and that no error could occur in the inspired text.”

    Pope Pius XII, in Divino Afflante Spiritu, repeats Leo XIII decree: “It is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred.”

    [b]In Humani Generis, Pius XII condemns the notion: “...immunity from error extends only to those parts of the Bible that treat of God or of moral and religious matters.”[/b]

    Pontifical Biblical Commission, in 1964, states: “...that the Gospels were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who preserved their authors from every error.”

    Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in 1998, states in Professio Fidei: “...the absence of error in the inspired sacred texts...”

    Leo XIII: “For the sacred Scripture is not like other books. Dictated by the Holy Spirit, it contains things of the deepest importance, which, in many instances, are most difficult and obscure” (Prov. Deus, I, B, 2, b). He also says: “For all the books in their entirety...with all their parts, have been written under the dictation of the Holy Spirit” (DS 3292).

    Vatican Council 1 says: “Further, this supernatural revelation....is contained in the written books...from the apostles themselves by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, and have been transmitted as it were from hand to hand” (DS 3006).

    The Catholic Catechism: “Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit” (Para 81). “God inspired the human authors of the sacred books...it was a true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more” (Para 106).

    Leo XIII: “It is futile to argue that the Holy Spirit took human beings as his instruments in writing, implying that some error could slip in...For by his supernatural power he so stimulated and moved them to write, and so assisted them while they were writing, that they properly conceived in their mind, wished to write down faithfully, and expressed aptly with infallible truth all those things, and only those things, which He himself ordered; otherwise He could not Himself be the author of the whole of Sacred Scripture” (DS 3293).[/quote]

[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.