Leon Lederman?

[ribozyme]

Did Leon Lederman break the second commandment when he called the Higgs boson the God particle?

Also if someone says biochemistry is what he/she consider to be “God” and they say that convey their devotion to their “God” by reading biochemistry textbooks and various peer-reviewed articles, would they violate the first commandment?

 

[RyanL]

Did Leon Lederman break the second commandment when he called the Higgs boson the God particle?

Also if someone says biochemistry is what he/she consider to be “God” and they say that convey their devotion to their “God” by reading biochemistry textbooks and various peer-reviewed articles, would they violate the first commandment?

Without knowing the context of the first, it’s tough to say. Probably not is my initial thought, since he’s not intending to use the Lord’s name in vain, only to describe the function of the particle – perhaps it’s an accurate description of the instrumental cause which God uses. In that case it might be appropriate to call it the God particle.

As to the second, yes, it’s a violation of the first commandment. Any time you worship of the one true God takes a back seat to anything else, it’s a violation of the first commandment.

If your biochemist, however, intended to worship the actual God by reading, devotion, etc., to biochemistry…that would be very Catholic. Laborare est orare, as we like to say.

Finally, if either of these two were invincibly ignorant regarding the existence of God (which I think is a fairly tough thing for an intelligent person to accomplish), their culpability is mitigated so that an otherwise mortal sin would not now so be.

Make sense?

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[ribozyme]

Leon Lederman is an atheistic physicist. I am asking if he is committing a sin, or only Christians can break the second commandment.

Next, the second scenario the person thinks the Christian God does not exist.

 

[RyanL]

Leon Lederman is an atheistic physicist. I am asking if he is committing a sin, or only Christians can break the second commandment.

Anyone and everyone can sin, Christian or otherwise. Your question appears to be whether or not the 10 Commandments are a discipline, applicable only to those inside the Church, or is a commandment, applicable to everyone. I would have thought the name was sufficiently clear – they’re not the 10 Suggestions.

Think of it another way – would Lederman be sinning if he murdered someone? What if he committed adultery? What if he disrespected his mother and father out of spiteful selfishness?

The answer to these question will be the same regarding your first question. Yes to one is yes to all. No to one is no to all.

Next, the second scenario the person thinks the Christian God does not exist.

I’m pretty sure I already answered this.

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[ribozyme]

Anyone and everyone can sin, Christian or otherwise. Your question appears to be whether or not the 10 Commandments are a discipline, applicable only to those inside the Church, or is a commandment, applicable to everyone. I would have thought the name was sufficiently clear – they’re not the 10 Suggestions.

Think of it another way – would Lederman be sinning if he murdered someone? What if he committed adultery? What if he disrespected his mother and father out of spiteful selfishness?

The answer to these question will be the same regarding your first question. Yes to one is yes to all. No to one is no to all.

I’m pretty sure I already answered this.

God Bless,
RyanL

No you haven’t. You have to answer this question first.

Finally, if either of these two were invincibly ignorant regarding the existence of God (which I think is a fairly tough thing for an intelligent person to accomplish), their culpability is mitigated so that an otherwise mortal sin would not now so be.

I already know that in Christian theology, atheists can sin against God by breaking the other eight commandments. I was wondering if an atheist would be granted an exception for the first two, and you have answered the question in a satisfactory fashion.

Is Lederman and the biochemist " invincibly ignorant regarding the existence of God? "

What is they are empiricists can find no evidence for the existence of God using empiricism? How can they be culpable?

 

[Corki]

Diminished culpability doesn’t change the sinfulness of an act. It just means that the severity of the sin is not as great as it is for one who acts with full knowledge. A sin is still a sin but what may be a mortal sin to a fully Catechised Catholic might be a venial sin to a non-Christian.