Science, faith and proof of existence (1)

John B. Pace (The First Source, January 16) should research his sources and quote properly before putting any black on white. Stephen Hawking, in his book The Grand Design, writes: “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.” Prof. Hawking also says that John Paul II told a conference he was at that “it’s OK to study the universe and where it began. But we should not enquire into the beginning itself because that was the moment of creation and the work of God” further saying that he (Hawking) hoped that the Pope was not aware of his recent paper since he did not want to go through what Galileo went through.

It is wrong, and even dangerous, to assume that the Church does not fear science (and all kinds of scientists) when this greatest of mankind’s tools has been the axe, hatchet and shaver of so much of what it attributed to the god entity, taking away the magic and mysticism and replacing them instead with simple logical explanations. The only reason the Church cosies up to scientists is because it believes in keeping enemies closer. Street saints also have a habit of picking up bit quotes by eminent scientists when these mention “God” for any reason.

Mr Pace also promotes Intelligent Design when he tells us of an intelligent force. He asks how could otherwise matter organise itself to result in such “wonderful variety”. Would Mr Pace care to expound on this matter?

He continues by asking how life could have come about creating individuals, “each with a purpose” – God’s plan – which, as I was taught by those good souls at the MUSEUM, man is free to abandon at the cost of facing hardship, disease, extremely hot, spicy food and heartburn. How does, for example, Toulouse-Lautrec fit in “the purpose”? He was disabled, lived a debauched, sinful life and had a talent for art. Ah yes! God works in mysterious ways.

Mr Pace also mentions “historical human errors and excess” crimes against humanity committed by popes and high Church officials. Need I remind him that, for example, the Holy Inquisition (nowadays known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith) was responsible for the torture and death of millions? Need he be informed that most witch convictions were based on evidence gathered as described by the Church-sanctioned, highly scientific, Malleus Maleficarum (which was approved by the Infallible Pope himself)? What does that fall under? Human error or excess?