God cannot become an object of 'human experimentation,' Pope teaches

[_Abyssinia]

Pope Benedict said on June 30 that although science has led to incredible advances in the modern age, it falls short in completely revealing the personhood of God.

Although empirical reason “has led to great achievements, and no one would seriously wish to deny that it is just and necessary as a way to understand nature and the laws of nature,” the Pope said,“there is a limit to such a use of reason.”

“God is not an object of human experimentation. He is Subject and shows Himself only in the relationship between one person and another.”

catholicnewsagency.com/news/god-cannot-become-an-object-of-human-experimentation-pope-teaches/

Full speech: zenit.org/article-32987?l=english

 

[Hokomai]

Pope Benedict said on June 30 that although science has led to incredible advances in the modern age, it falls short in completely revealing the personhood of God.

Although empirical reason “has led to great achievements, and no one would seriously wish to deny that it is just and necessary as a way to understand nature and the laws of nature,” the Pope said,“there is a limit to such a use of reason.”

“God is not an object of human experimentation. He is Subject and shows Himself only in the relationship between one person and another.”

catholicnewsagency.com/news/god-cannot-become-an-object-of-human-experimentation-pope-teaches/

Full speech: zenit.org/article-32987?l=english

I’m one of those keenly interested in science and its application to religious thought; I am just an amateur but I have read a view books and many blogs, and given it a great deal of thought over 45 years. I have absolutely no idea what the Pope is saying in this quote. The last sentence, especially, appears to be completely without meaning. Am I missing something?

 

[Dale_M]

I’m going out on a limb here, but for the sake of discussion, I’ll toss in my sense of what the Pope said.

I don’t think Pope Benedict’s speech had much to do with science. He stated that the topic was theology and the proper way to approach theology (which utilizes reason, but is dependent on revelation.)

Perhaps, however, the awarding of the prize can offer the occasion to dedicate ourselves for a moment to the fundamental question of what “theology” really is.

Theology is the science of faith, tradition tells us. But here the question immediately arises: Is this really possible? Is this not, in itself, a contradiction? Is not science, perhaps, the contrary of faith? Does faith not cease to be faith when it becomes science? And does not science cease to be science when it is ordered or even subordinated to faith?

When there is not this use of reason, then the great questions of humanity fall outside the ambit of reason and are left to irrationality. Because of this authentic theology is so important. Right faith orients reason to its openness to the divine, so that, guided by love for the truth, it can know God more closely. The initiative for this path is with God who has put in man’s heart the search for his Face. Hence, part of theology, on one hand, is humility that lets itself be “touched” by God, and on the other hand, discipline that is linked to the order of reason, which preserves love from blindness and which helps to develop its strength for seeing.

zenit.org/article-32987?l=english

When Pope Benedict says that God is Subject, and not an object of human experimentation, he seems to be pointing to the limits of reason within theology.

[N]o (one) would dare to seriously deny that this approach is right and necessary in the realm of knowledge of nature and of its laws. However such a use of reason has a limit: God is not an object of human experimentation. He is Subject and manifests himself only in the person to person relationship, which is part of the essence of person.

In essence, Pope Benedict seems to be saying that theology, although a science with rational analysis vital to its process, shouldn’t lose sight that it is dependent on revelation (unlike the natural sciences.)

 

[phoooiee]

I’m one of those keenly interested in science and its application to religious thought; I am just an amateur but I have read a view books and many blogs, and given it a great deal of thought over 45 years. I have absolutely no idea what the Pope is saying in this quote. The last sentence, especially, appears to be completely without meaning. Am I missing something?

It means that in the same way that love manifests itself between people (and this is beyond the capacity of science to describe) so God does the same.

 

[Anthony_V]

It means that in the same way that love manifests itself between people (and this is beyond the capacity of science to describe) so God does the same.

Or that because his love is such a subjective activity, he protects certain aspects of it to not be revealed by science.

 

[Hokomai]

Thanks everyone. i can see how the different ideas might be behind what is written, but it is not clear from the words used. I have often found this sort of fuzziness in Vatican writing, but this seems an extreme case. Why doesn’t the Vatican just say what it means?

 

[phoooiee]

Thanks everyone. i can see how the different ideas might be behind what is written, but it is not clear from the words used. I have often found this sort of fuzziness in Vatican writing, but this seems an extreme case. Why doesn’t the Vatican just say what it means?

Often, I have found that the ideas coming out of these Church documents are so transcendent that there is no way to express them in a cut and dry way. To me, it seems like the language is dancing around an elusive central concept that it can only hint at, since it goes beyond words. I find it to be very beautiful and inspiring.

 

[music2]

Thanks everyone. i can see how the different ideas might be behind what is written, but it is not clear from the words used. I have often found this sort of fuzziness in Vatican writing, but this seems an extreme case. Why doesn’t the Vatican just say what it means?

Im not sure i really understand what the Pope is saying here because i don’t understand in what context is he speaking about.
Is he saying that he doesnt agree with medical science studying people’s religious experiences-For eg:when they hook up monks to EEG or put them in FMRI machine and see what changes go on in their brain as they are doing devotions?

OR

Is he referring purely that science shouldn’t be used to try to find God-Eg:when scientists claim they’ve found God particles etc?

 

[ringil]

Let’s keep God out of science. This is the mistake of the pseudo-scientists advocating ID and IDevolution around here.