I just read Dan Brown's Angels and Demons . I have to admit in spite of it's evident controversy, I thoroughly enjoyed DVC as an entertaining read, and it was recommended to me to read this one as well.
Something kinda profound struck me, though. A discussion of the problems with the science/religion paradox.
The set-up: one of the world's most brilliant female scientists, Vittoria Vetta, is arguing (it's a long story) with a man who is functioning as the interim Pope, a.k.a the Camerlengo.
[From Wikipedia: "Chief among the present responsibilities of the Camerlengo is the formal determination of the death of the reigning Pope. Until a successor Pope can be elected, the Camerlengo serves as acting head of State of the Vatican City - although this power of government is extremely limited, being merely enough to allow Church institutions to continue to operate and perform some basic functions without making any definitive decisions or appointments that are normally reserved to or are powers delegated by the pope."].
Vittoria and her father were working with antimatter, and in the process, believed they found scientific proof that God exists. The Camerlengo had interfered in a big way with this research, including the murder of Vittoria's father.
Now I realize that the scenario is not only fictional but extremely far-fetched. Yet the conversation is quite interesting.
There is truth in some of both their points. But in the end I think the church is so anti-science for precisely the reason Vittoria states:
The church is afraid that God will show himself outside the walls of the church, and as a result they fear that people will stop needing the church.
I wonder, might that be a good thing? It would mean that we had grappled with what is commonly held as TRUTH, and we had inadvertently found God in the complexities of life rather than in the predictability of an institution.
God is in ALL things.
Something kinda profound struck me, though. A discussion of the problems with the science/religion paradox.
The set-up: one of the world's most brilliant female scientists, Vittoria Vetta, is arguing (it's a long story) with a man who is functioning as the interim Pope, a.k.a the Camerlengo.
[From Wikipedia: "Chief among the present responsibilities of the Camerlengo is the formal determination of the death of the reigning Pope. Until a successor Pope can be elected, the Camerlengo serves as acting head of State of the Vatican City - although this power of government is extremely limited, being merely enough to allow Church institutions to continue to operate and perform some basic functions without making any definitive decisions or appointments that are normally reserved to or are powers delegated by the pope."].
Vittoria and her father were working with antimatter, and in the process, believed they found scientific proof that God exists. The Camerlengo had interfered in a big way with this research, including the murder of Vittoria's father.
Now I realize that the scenario is not only fictional but extremely far-fetched. Yet the conversation is quite interesting.
Camerlengo: "For centuries the church has stood by while science picked away at religion bit by bit. Debunking miracles. Training the mind to overcome the heart. Condemning religion as the opiate of the masses. They denounce God as a hallucination - a delusional crutch for those too weak to accept that life is meaningless. "I could not stand by while science presumed to harness the power of God himself! Proof, you say? Yes, proof of science's ignorance! What is wrong with the admission that something exists beyond our understanding? The day science substantiates God in a lab is the day people stop needing faith!"I wonder, should science try to prove God's existence? Would that be a bad or a good thing? What would happen to our faith if such a thing really happened?
Vittoria: "You mean the day they stop needing the church. Doubt is your last shred of control. It is doubt that brings souls to you. Our need to know that life has meaning. Man's insecurity and need for an enlightened soul assuring him that everything is a part of a master plan. But the church is not the only enlightened soul on the planet! We all seek God in different ways. What are you afraid of? That God will show himself somewhere other than inside these walls? That people will find him in their own lives and leave your antiquated rituals behind? Religions evolve! The mind finds answers, the heart grapples with new truths. My father was on your quest! A parallel path! Why couldn't you see that? God is not some omnipotent authority looking down from above, threatening to throw us into a pit of fire if we disobey. God is the energy that flows through the synapses of of our nervous system and the chambers of our hearts! God is in all things!"
There is truth in some of both their points. But in the end I think the church is so anti-science for precisely the reason Vittoria states:
The church is afraid that God will show himself outside the walls of the church, and as a result they fear that people will stop needing the church.
I wonder, might that be a good thing? It would mean that we had grappled with what is commonly held as TRUTH, and we had inadvertently found God in the complexities of life rather than in the predictability of an institution.
God is in ALL things.
0 comments:
Post a Comment