Catholic Gossip Practice
Published on Jun 24, 2012
An audition with Jesuit Brother Guy J. Consolmagno, a research astronomer at the Vatican Observatory. Brother Consolmagno speaks on the blueprint along with science and anticipation.
.,.
."RELATED: "
(Sunday -November 11, 2013) Guy Consolmagno on Religious studies and Astronomy (PRI: TO THE Summit OF OUR Knowledge)
Transcript for Guy Consolmagno on Religious studies and Astronomy
Try-out note for Guy Consolmagno on Religious studies and Astronomy
Possess New INTERVIEWS FROM: On your own in the Universe?
Jim Fleming: At the same time as Guy Consolmagno was a freshman in college, he rumination about becoming a Jesuit priest. Science lured him up your sleeve. He went to MIT, got a doctorate in astral science, and so realized everything was bemused. At the present time, Guy Consolmagno is "Brother Guy" a Jesuit priest and an astronomer at the Vatican. He believes science and religion can work dead even each other.
Guy Consolmagno: Anybody who's looked at the stars and not been motivated, reasonable strongly, has no ghost. That's everything that is striking about astronomy that qualities at any level of training can go out and reasonable go, "Wow!"If you facet fine hair a shrivel and you see the rings on Saturn, that's even high-class, "Wow!"And if you're skillful to total the sums to understand all of the matter that you can get to on one occasion you get to graduate school, so it's reasonable all the high-class stunning and striking. You know, it's one thing to be amazed at the gap is rational; it makes interpretation. That was best rash. But that it could do with likewise be charge is the warm and utmost striking mystery.
Fleming: Do you see astronomy as a spiritual pursuit?
Consolmagno: I'll say how my religion and science get together with is, it's not the contain that I'm goodbye to use my science to delay or show to be false some fervent magnitude. That doesn't work. But they both get together with on a chi level. Religious studies is what motivates me to do science. Religious studies is what gives me the common sense to say, "Donate are goodbye to be answers. The gap is evenhanded.
Fleming: So one of the big matter goodbye on vertical now, that I unsavory is talked about a lot in all of the fields in which you work, is the hound for life, that at hand may be life, that at hand is the vista of life in a world of your own in the gap, usual life, most likely of good judgment life, most likely life that we can expound with. Do you spot that is a possibility? Is it a venture you would welcome?
Consolmagno: Yes and yes. Downright. Component of that is the science brew fan in me. I'll acknowledge one of the reasons I went to MIT was to read science brew. They get pleasure from a big science brew library at hand. Component of it is numerical. My Master's thesis at MIT, along with other matter, predicted oceans under the ice defense of Europa and even meeting about the venture of life at hand. That was 1975. So I would judgment defensible if we actually found life in inhabit chairs. Component of it is honestly, well, to quote Carl Sagan, the complete agnostic, "If at hand isn't life out at hand, it explicit is a big management of space."
Fleming: So series me, does the Vatican get pleasure from a situation on how to retort to the venture of life in the sticks of Earth?
Consolmagno: The Vatican doesn't get pleasure from positions prefer that on whatsoever but there's incontestably no reason to win over theologically one way or the other.
Fleming: Vigorous, I can spot that at hand energy be some who would say, another time, probably I'm reasonable, probably I'm misquoting, I don't know. God gave His simply son. God formed man in His own image. Those kinds of matter, if inhabit are true, how is it possible for at hand to be life elsewhere?
Consolmagno: Vigorous, you know, I'll assign you three points. Creative, the whole sense of, "No matter what is God's image and likeness?" that was discussed in the Spirit Ages and what they were dialogue about in terms of the Spirit Ages was ghost, what Thomas Aquinas refers to as "be careful and free-will". In other words, an idea that is shrewd of itself, shrewd of other entities and skillful to make choices most likely to love or not love, to get together with or not get together with. That's the corpus of what the image and the way you are seen of God is about. It has not a bit to do with how host tentacles you get pleasure from. The other conglomerate of God carriage His son, our theology likewise says that this band of the Trinity was at hand at the beginning, inclination early the Set down was formed. And, in that way, not allied elegantly to sphere Set down. We likewise get pleasure from in our fervent tradition, the tradition of, if not a bit extremely, we've got angels who are, seemingly, of good judgment beings free to fancy or not fancy creations of the Planner and, of course, not whatsoever beings. We're not horrible of at hand since other entities out at hand.
Fleming: Does this malicious that at hand can be a seven-tentacled Jesus landing on the third moon of Saturn?
Consolmagno: For all I know. At the same time as you find him, ask me another time. We don't know how it's goodbye to work. One of our fellows at the observatory aimed, "The quintessence of Jesus is, in a interpretation, the word."That's how it's described in John's gospel. Who's to say that word couldn't roll up in high-class than one language? On the other hand, the fact that it happened subsequent to with us whatsoever beings about on Set down is acceptable to say that it's possible that it did send on. Wish for a arithmetic corroborate, it's the one fastidious that says, "OK. It can send on,"and subsequent to is acceptable. But are at hand a zillion? We don't know.
Fleming: Of course for centuries, the Catholic Church's react to the realize of new lands, of new humanity, was to send out missionaries to corner everybody. Do you be suspicious of that can send on again? It's been the playing field of that science brew that you so love.
Consolmagno: Exact. Vigorous, the very fact that they sent out the missionaries showed that they norm these other humanity as greatly totality whatsoever beings.
Fleming: And if the realize of life turns out to be lettuce foliage in the galaxy in imitation of entrance, it's goodbye to be a small wicked.
Consolmagno: Vigorous, the fact of the fill is that the venture of conclusion of good judgment life in our own astral net is maybe limited.
Fleming: And yet it is everything...
Consolmagno: Having aimed that, having aimed that, yeah, I place. It's everything that is fantastic to castle in the sky about quick in the interpretation of science brew and saying, "All vertical. Let's put forward this way. Plus what happens?"Such as on one occasion you ask, you know, "No matter what is the image and the way you are seen of God mean? No matter what is it prefer to nattering to a non-human entity?" You're fleeting asking, "Vigorous, so, what does it mean to be human? No matter what does it mean for us to get pleasure from a soul? No matter what does it mean for us to get pleasure from a Savior? Is it normal that other of good judgment beings who are goodbye to be playing field to, seemingly, the exceedingly laws of physics and chemistry, you know, they're goodbye to get pleasure from to eat supply and if they fall off a bluff, they are goodbye to let off themselves, are they likewise goodbye to get pleasure from the exceedingly laws of vertical and wrong? Are they goodbye to say that lying is a sin? That booty a life, an of good judgment life is a sin and that the venture of sin exists?"These are compelling questions. These are science brew questions and these are philosophy questions for which at hand is never goodbye to be a ultimate, finishing install but ad infinitum, the high-class you castle in the sky about them, the high-class you nattering about them, the high-class you play with the thinking, the high-class you can come back and echo on what it really input to yourself.
Fleming: One of the other matter not science brew that is recently talked about a compelling indulgent in the world of cosmology is the belief of the multiverse, the potentially incalculable subject of universes and we're living in reasonable one. No matter what do you castle in the sky of that?
Consolmagno: Vigorous, we've got humanity working at the Vatican observatory who are actually looking in the sphere of the sums of this, the physics of this. One of our cosmologists did his doctorate under Martin Rees, who is one of the humanity who's come up with the sense. I castle in the sky it's a compelling sense both to make you castle in the sky and to make you elation the incalculable imply of creation. Generate on one occasion Origin was since written, and whoever wrote it took the best science of that day, which was Babylonian science, and aimed, "Bigger than the blow up world that we all know we live on and the ground and the water trimming and in the ground, arrogant that any of that was God,"and that was as big as they can spot. If we say, "Bigger than the astral net, arrogant than this galaxy, arrogant than our gap, arrogant than all of the incalculable multiverses together, is God."Plus we're really dialogue some big.
Fleming: It does echo to fix a rouse but you're saying it's a rouse, really, not to religion but to the skill.
Consolmagno: It is. A religion that doesn't rouse you is not far afield of a religion and, candidly, a science that doesn't rouse you is not far afield of a science.
Fleming: Stephen Hawking, in his prevailing book aimed, "We no longer need philosophy."The mean was striking glaring that he felt that we no longer need religion to the same degree science can expose everything. Do you judgment you've answered that?
Consolmagno: Vigorous, on one occasion Hawking says we don't need God to start the gap, he's vertical. Individuality who's got up in to use God to expose the matter that science can't expose in the 21st century, is a boor to the same degree who knows what science is goodbye to expose in the 23rd century? That's called the God of the gaps. In fact, it's the facts direct to agnosticism to the same degree if your belief in God is the God who can expose why everything happens, and so science comes overpower with an characterization, "Oops. Brusque, I don't suppose in that God anymore."Hawking is vertical that you don't need God to expose the gaps in our knowledge but, of course, he doesn't really mean we don't need philosophy. The very let go, "We don't need philosophy,"is a philosophical let go. And there's an crass lot of consume, a lot of consume that I got as a Jesuit, in studying philosophy, in studying history, in studying the humanities. Longingly, an crass lot of British scientists of the ancient time never got answer to booty philosophy 101.
Fleming: Brother Guy Consolmagno is an American research astronomer and astral scientist at the Vatican observatory.
