Sacraments for Aliens

[AZ42]

much as the peoples of the Americas and Polynesia.

I don’t follow?

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Lets say that there is a alien race on another planet. They have the same intelligence as humans do and we come in physical contact with them. One human falls in love with one of them and as a baby that is half human and alien.

That would be truly remarkable if aliens had the same DNA and could have a child with a human.

 

[tafan2]

I find it interesting how much modern society is obsessed with extraterrestrial life. It seems we are afraid not if discovering aliens, but of discovering there is no one else out there. It seems to me, there is no one else out there. We have absolutely no evidence of there being other intelligent life. The one scientific argument is based on the vastness of the universe. And while I get that the universe is really, really big, that argument doesn’t seem very convincing to me.

From a theological standpoint , the book of genisis certainly indicates that mankind is the summit of God’s material creation. Jesus Christ is God and man. And while, I will accept the possibility that we are not “alone” from a theological view (I find CS Lewis’s Space Trilogy an interesting perspective), it just doesn’t seem to fit. I think modern science is so caught up in finding life out there because they are afraid I am right. If we are alone in this vast universe, the “why” is not what they want to contemplate.

 

[BornInMarch]

I find it interesting how much modern society is obsessed with extraterrestrial life. It seems we are afraid not if discovering aliens, but of discovering there is no one else out there. It seems to me, there is no one else out there. We have absolutely no evidence of there being other intelligent life. The one scientific argument is based on the vastness of the universe. And while I get that the universe is really, really big, that argument doesn’t seem very convincing to me.

I agree with you on this; I think we’re alone, and I hope we are too (that way we don’t have to share the galaxy or become the target of hostile foes).

Having said that, it’s still useful to have thought experiments about this.

 

[tafan2]

I think CS Lewis had the best thought experiment about it in the first two books if his Space Trilogy. Those books have the added benefit of illustrating The Fall and it’s consequencees.

 

[porthos11]

Do you know what a thought experiment is?

You won’t believe how many posters here are utterly incapable of grasping hypotheticals and thought experiments. They resort to cop-outs and dismissals rather than addressing the hypotheticals (“there are no aliens, so your question is irrelevant.”)

To your hypothetical, no, aliens would not be eligible to receive the sacraments because of the Nature assumed at the Incarnation. What was not assumed was not redeemed. The Christian economy of salvation is for human beings alone. If such intelligent aliens were to visit us or even live among us (e.g. “Alien Nation”), they would not be able to validly partake of any of our sacraments. If there is any need for an economy of salvation for them, that would be between them and God. They may not be fallen. Or they may be, and God did not decide to establish an economy of redemption for them. Or maybe he did, in a manner similar to ours, or completely different. He may have laid out a completely different moral code for them.

Our moral code would not apply to them in any manner whatsoever. None of our teachings on sex, marriage, divorce, and even those against stealing and murder would bind them morally, i.e. we would not be able to accuse them of sin. The only thing that would prevent them from doing so is our civil law: hands off us or we’ll punish you according to our laws. They would still be subject to the public order. Any moral code would be theirs alone.

What was not assumed by Christ was not redeemed, in our economy of salvation.

 

[Wesrock]

Our moral code would not apply to them in any manner whatsoever. None of our teachings on sex, marriage, divorce, and even those against stealing and murder would bind them morally, i.e. we would not be able to accuse them of sin. The only thing that would prevent them from doing so is our civil law: hands off us or we’ll punish you according to our laws. They would still be subject to the public order. Any moral code would be theirs alone.

There would be commonalities of goods due to them being rational beings (probably animals). It seems a stretch, at least from a natural law perspective, to say that there is no overlap in moral code.

 

[BornInMarch]

Interestingly enough, according to this National Catholic Register article, Pope Francis himself implied that he would baptize aliens if they asked.

Pope Francis said, during a morning Mass in May 2014, “If an expedition of Martians arrives and some of them come to us and if one of them says: ‘Me, I want to be baptized!’ what would happen?” He said that even if these hypothetical beings were “green men, with a long nose and big ears, like children draw … who are we to close doors?”

Thoughts?

And think long and hard before you say “Pope Francis is wrong”; if you do I’ll expect an explanation.

 

[porthos11]

porthos11:

Our moral code would not apply to them in any manner whatsoever. None of our teachings on sex, marriage, divorce, and even those against stealing and murder would bind them morally, i.e. we would not be able to accuse them of sin. The only thing that would prevent them from doing so is our civil law: hands off us or we’ll punish you according to our laws. They would still be subject to the public order. Any moral code would be theirs alone.

There would be commonalities of goods due to them being rational beings (probably animals). It seems a stretch, at least from a natural law perspective, to say that there is no overlap in moral code.

Overlap is probably not unexpected, but it would be their moral code. Even “natural law” is based solely on what God has written in our hearts as human beings. There is no reason to assume that the same natural law is written on aliens’ consciences. For us, murder is reprehensible. For Klingons, it is not necessarily so. Even if there is overlap, it is still our moral code, and their moral code. If I were to relocate to Qo’noS and backhand the Chancellor of the Klingon High Council, and he murders me as a result, I would not be able to blame him based on my own human natural law; he’s following his own natural law. Likewise, if a Klingon relocated to Earth and murders someone on the streets of New York because a human criticized his smell, even though he follows his own moral code, it’s our planet, our rules.

The problem with a lot on these forums is to anthropomorphize non-human creatures, including God and hypothetical aliens. It shows our natural human arrogance that somehow our standards will and apply to all creatures, even non-human rational ones. Our moral code is part of the economy of our salvation, not that of other rational creatures. Non-human rational creatures would have their own relationship with God, and that economy can have a completely alien moral code, at least to us.

 

[twf]

You bring up Klingons. There was an episode of TNG that revealed that all of the varied humanoid species of the galaxy, including Klingons, share some DNA as an ancient proto-humanoid race spread its DNA throughout the galaxy billions of years ago. In such a scenario, would shared DNA with alien species “muddy the waters”, so to speak, in regards to the “assumed nature” aspect of the economy of salvation?

 

[porthos11]

Interestingly enough, according to this National Catholic Register article, Pope Francis himself implied that he would baptize aliens if they asked.

Pope Francis said, during a morning Mass in May 2014, “If an expedition of Martians arrives and some of them come to us and if one of them says: ‘Me, I want to be baptized!’ what would happen?” He said that even if these hypothetical beings were “green men, with a long nose and big ears, like children draw … who are we to close doors?”

Francis is wrong, and it has been explained well why he is.

What was not assumed was not redeemed. Christ became man, and not Martian.

“Who are we to close doors” has a simple answer: we are human beings, and they are not. It is impossible to baptize non-human creatures. To be eligible for baptism, the being must be, first of all, human, a descendant of Adam.

Superman/Kal-El cannot be baptized. Sarek cannot be baptized. Worf cannot be baptized. But Spock can, Alexander can, K’heleyr can. As for Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader, well, the question is moot since we all know Star Wars is heresy.

 

[BornInMarch]

The problem with a lot on these forums is to anthropomorphize non-human creatures, including God and hypothetical aliens. It shows our natural human arrogance that somehow our standards will and apply to all creatures, even non-human rational ones. Our moral code is part of the economy of our salvation, not that of other rational creatures. Non-human rational creatures would have their own relationship with God, and that economy can have a completely alien moral code, at least to us.

Actually, God makes it clear he is not a moral relativist.

In Exodus 21:28-29, animals are held to our moral code.

“If a bull gores a man or woman to death, the bull is to be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible. If, however, the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not kept it penned up and it kills a man or woman, the bull is to be stoned and its owner also is to be put to death.”

Notably, a bull isn’t even sapient. It acts on instinct rather than deliberate decision-making.

 

[porthos11]

You bring up Klingons. There was an episode of TNG that revealed that all of the varied humanoid species of the galaxy, including Klingons, share some DNA as an ancient proto-humanoid race spread its DNA throughout the galaxy billions of years ago. In such a scenario, would shared DNA with alien species “muddy the waters”, so to speak, in regards to the “assumed nature” aspect of the economy of salvation?

Yeah, let’s not bring that part into the hypothetical. That just muddies things as you say. I just used the Klingons as an example, and we don’t have to assume the whole Star Trek canon for the OP’s hypothetical.

 

[porthos11]

porthos11:

The problem with a lot on these forums is to anthropomorphize non-human creatures, including God and hypothetical aliens. It shows our natural human arrogance that somehow our standards will and apply to all creatures, even non-human rational ones. Our moral code is part of the economy of our salvation, not that of other rational creatures. Non-human rational creatures would have their own relationship with God, and that economy can have a completely alien moral code, at least to us.

Actually, God makes it clear he is not a moral relativist.

In Exodus 21:28-29, animals are held to our moral code.

“If a bull gores a man or woman to death, the bull is to be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible. If, however, the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not kept it penned up and it kills a man or woman, the bull is to be stoned and its owner also is to be put to death.”

It doesn’t matter. Exodus is part of the human economy of salvation, and a bull is not a rational creature. And in any case, it is not a judgment on the bull’s guilt, as a bull has no moral code. It’s an ancient form of animal control. And capital punishment to boot. Your hypothetical was clear: rational aliens. A bull does not meet that condition any more than a rabid dog does.

It is quite possible that such rational aliens would have a moral code identical to ours in content, but it does not mean we have a shared moral code. That is their moral code, part of their own economy. They would be subject to our laws and political systems for as long as they were on our planet, and we can still criminally prosecute and punish them, but we could not pass any moral judgment on them (that is to say, that they have sinned).

 

[BornInMarch]

Francis is wrong, and it has been explained well why he is.

What was not assumed was not redeemed. Christ became man, and not Martian.

“Who are we to close doors” has a simple answer: we are human beings, and they are not. It is impossible to baptize non-human creatures. To be eligible for baptism, the being must be, first of all, human, a descendant of Adam.

So if the Pope says “aliens are held to human moral codes and can join the Catholic Church”, and the infallibility of this is accepted by the majority of the church’s clergy and laity, what would you do?

Superman/Kal-El cannot be baptized. Sarek cannot be baptized. Worf cannot be baptized. But Spock can, Alexander can, K’heleyr can. As for Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader, well, the question is moot since we all know Star Wars is heresy.

I’m not opening that can of worms.

 

[porthos11]

porthos11:

Francis is wrong, and it has been explained well why he is.

What was not assumed was not redeemed. Christ became man, and not Martian.

“Who are we to close doors” has a simple answer: we are human beings, and they are not. It is impossible to baptize non-human creatures. To be eligible for baptism, the being must be, first of all, human, a descendant of Adam.

So if the Pope says “aliens are held to human moral codes and can join the Catholic Church”, and the infallibility of this is accepted by the majority of the church’s clergy and laity, what would you do?

What would I do? Assent of course, as we ought to do. And it has nothing to do with whether it’s accepted by one or a million clergy and laity. An infallible definition is always manifestly clear.

But know that won’t happen because it is wrong. Any attempt to define it will be stopped by the Holy Spirit.

What is right is what the Church has accepted as truth: what was not assumed was not redeemed.

 

[Roguish]

There are trillions of planets. But 99.99% are uninhabitable.

They’re uninhabitable by life as we know it. There is no way to estimate how many planets are inhabitable or uninhabitable for life in general. It might well be that they are nearly all inhabitable.

 

[porthos11]

FloridaCatholic:

There are trillions of planets. But 99.99% are uninhabitable.

They’re uninhabitable by life as we know it. There is no way to estimate how many planets are inhabitable or uninhabitable for life in general. It might well be that they are nearly all inhabitable.

That was just another example of someone not comprehending what is meant by “hypothetical.” The hypothetical defined that rational/intelligent alien life exists and made themselves known to humanity.

Those here who say “that’s moot because we JUST KNOW we’re alone in the universe” just don’t get it. The hypothetical defined a hypothetical “truth”, and so within the hypothesis, it’s fair game.

Some people just don’t get that.

 

[BornInMarch]

what was not assumed was not redeemed.

I’m curious about that though. Where do you draw the line with “what is assumed”? Because Jesus an Israeli Jew; does that mean he only died to save Jews? After all, he didn’t assume the flesh of a gentile.

 

[mVitus]

As for Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader, well, the question is moot since we all know Star Wars is heresy.

I’ve heard that the Star Wars lore for humans involves some Earthlings getting sucked in a wormhole sending them back in time to the Star Wars galaxy. So Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker could get baptized.

Where do you draw the line with “what is assumed”?

At human nature. He opened the door to Jew and Gentilw (seen clearly via Scripture), not Jew, Gentile, and Martian.