When I was an atheist, I believed there was no evidence for God, but that science  was truth. Then science showed me there was no evidence for atheism – Dr Sy Garte, PhD in Biochemistry

Questions featuring the relation between the most recent scientific evidence and the existence of God are ones that are hotly debated in our society (and rightly so). The positions taken are many – some say that God and science do not go hand in hand – even that science has, in some sense, done away with the “proofs” for the existence of God. Is this so?

Today we will make recourse to a highly respected Biochemist – someone who was, for most of their life, a staunch atheist. His name Sy Garte. What is so striking about Dr Garte is the fact that it was science per se – his own research – which compelled him to discover God’s existence. The question is: what exactly was it that helped him understand that a divine reality (i.e. and ultimately that the Christian God) actually exists?

Garte’s primary work is his award-winning book titled, The Works of His Hands: A Scientist’s Journey from Atheism to Faith (Kregel Publications, 2019). Here, Garte competently explores physics, philosophy of science, quantum entanglement, mathematics, evolution, consciousness, and the fight for morality and justice, all in a fast-moving personal story that’s rather humorous at points and heart-wrenching in others. He begins the book by affirming the importance of questioning. Raised in a militant anti-religious (communist) family, he narrates how “my parents’ atheism was indeed a deeply felt religious belief, and that it was successfully transmitted to and accepted by me at a very young age”. His faith, in other words, was in atheism. In this respect, Garte confesses that “like all faiths, the faith I was born into raised questions. And like all faiths, mine had ready answers for most of these questions”. The questions raised were: “why are we here? what is our purpose?”. But in light of his Marxist (communist) context, the answer to these questions were clear to him: “to work for the betterment of all humanity, to strive for fairness and justice in the world for all, to defeat the evil forces of superstition, oppression, and hatred”. All “good answers”, he concludes.

In this respect, however, while acknowledging the plausibility of such answers, Garte realised that there was a problem with the Marxist framework: “but even early in my life, I sensed a problem with them”. Thus, in a quasi-Lewisian fashion, Garte asked, “if there is no concept of fairness in nature (no objective standard), and if humans are nothing more than natural beings, why should they be fair?”:

where did the subversive concepts of fairness and justice come from? What was their source if it wasn’t from the natural world?

According to an atheistic framework, capitalists are simply acting out the pseudo-Darwinist prerogative of the survival of the fittest. At first, Garte approached these questions by adopting a purely Darwinist approach: “the answer I came up with was that humans had somehow evolved to a higher level in the midst of a cruel and uncaring world, that humans had evolved a sense of purpose and a potential for further growth and development”. He continues here, writing, “I felt that through an evolutionary quirk (what Richard Dawkins later referred to as a “spandrel”), humans had become a unique species of animal that could feel, think, and create”. In this vein, Garte understood that we humans had “evolved from the natural world, but [he] also came to see that we were something more”. We could create beauty, we could change our lives, we could love. All of these unique capacities, he writes, “were vague and uncertain ideas, pretty well lost in the maelstrom of anti-religious views that dominated my mind”.

Until it all changed. And because?

It would not do justice to explore the rigorous scientific evidence that Garte outlines in the book in such a limited space. What I suggest, rather, is for anyone who is sincerely curious to explore the book, authentically. What can be said for certain is that the book manages to show that, the common idea that to be a Christian one must park one’s mind at the doors of the church before entering, is a myth. Garte’s journey is testament of one who searched lengthily for the truth and who let the truth itself guide him – through the means of his own rigorous discipline. He is a brilliant example of a Christian following Jesus’s command to love God with our minds (Matt. 22:37).

Check out Sy Garte’s website in which one can provide feedback about the book, post a review, or ask questions.

Dr. Garte’s book “The Works of His Hands“.

See More – Top-popes-quotes-about-science

– Famous-catholic-astronomers/

The post Dr Seymore Garte: A Scientist’s Journey From Atheism to Faith appeared first on Universe of Faith.

As a young boy, Anthony used to put a pillow on the roof and look at the Milky Way with his naked eye. One day he didn’t see it anymore. A new airport was built a few kilometres away from his home and there was too much light pollution for him to be able to see the galaxy. Since his childhood days, Anthony’s interest in astronomy kept growing. Today, he mostly enjoys looking at the planets, observing their different colours and their positions. He is also fascinated by the moon with its craters and its shadows.

What is the universe made up of?

The “universe” refers to everything that there is in space – our Earth, all the other planets, the stars and all that exists in outer space. “The universe consists of three main components, most of which are still unknown to us. We can see and know about only 5% of the universe; the planets, the moon, the sun, and the galaxies which are made of stars. 25% of the universe is dark matter. Dark matter cannot be seen directly because it does not emit light. We know that dark matter exists because of the gravitational effects it has on visible objects. There is the hypothesis that dark matter is made up of weakly interactive massive particles (WIMP), which still need to be identified. The rest is dark energy, which makes up 70% of the universe. Dark energy helps the universe to expand. It is not seen directly or indirectly.”

It was a Catholic priest, the Belgian scientist Fr Georges Lemaître, who came up with the Big Bang theory. “An explosion of great heat created new atoms. This happened 13.8 billion years ago. The first stars were formed 200 million years from the Big Bang”, explains Anthony

What is astronomy?

“The word ‘astronomy’ which is derived from the Greek language, is the study of those elements which are in the universe, outside the Earth’s atmosphere. It includes the planets, the stars, the moon, comets, galaxies, dark energy and dark matter. Practically astronomy is the study of all that one can see from the Earth. Astronomy is the science which studies what these objects are made of and how they evolve. It is the frontal lobe of science and one of the oldest sciences. Astronomy is the place where you interpret and confirm mathematical and scientific ideas”, says Anthony.

Anthony explains that there are two main sections in the study of astronomy. “First, there is astrometry. This involves the measuring of positions and movements of spatial objects. This section of astronomy also studies how much, and what type of light these objects emit. The type of light measured – white or yellow – also indicates the temperature of that particular object. Astrometry is about applied maths. The second section is astrophysics. Astrophysics investigates the physical and chemical substances of these objects. It investigates what makes up the stars.”

Different astronomers specialise in different areas of study. Some astronomers observe the planets. Others observe the stars, the moon, the sun, the galaxies, the cosmos, and the beginning of the universe. Some astronomers work on the theoretical aspects of astronomy. They use specialised computers to create models to develop theories on how certain systems which exist today, will eventually develop in the future. Meanwhile, other astronomers are interested in astrophotography. They take photos of spatial objects and new objects which they see.

The difference between astronomy and astrology

Anthony explains that one should not confuse astronomy with astrology. “Humans have always observed the stars. They tried to organise, classify and understand their significance in their life. Ancient civilisations divinised these stars. They organised them in constellations – patterns of stars – which can be observed throughout the year. There is nothing scientific in the descriptions we see in certain magazines about the positions of various constellations like Pisces, Aries, Libra. Astrology is not science.

What is the purpose of astronomy?

In the past, astronomy helped people find their way by observing the position of the stars. “Man has used the stars for navigation for many years. For example, the North Star guides sailors when navigating at sea”, explains Anthony. Astronomy also helped farmers understand time before calendars were created. In the past, the farmers observed the sky to understand the seasons for planting.

Today, astronomy helps us learn more about Earth by understanding what is happening outside our world. “For example, the planet Venus has a temperature of 468 degrees Celsius because of its greenhouse gases. There is nothing romantic on Venus! These high temperatures can even melt lead. Thus, as we scientifically investigate Venus, we learn about the effects of global warming on Earth.” says Anthony.

Astronomy also helps us to find out the age of the Earth and try to understand the mysteries of the universe. “Man has always been asking certain questions: How long will Earth last? Where did the universe come from? If the universe had a beginning, what was there before it? What is outside the universe? Where are we from? What is the future of the Earth and the universe? Where will we end up? Where are we going? What is our destiny?”

Discoveries made in astronomy applied in daily life

Anthony illustrates the purpose and the fruit of astronomy in our daily life.  Astronomy was vital in creating the MRI scanner, PET scans, and the GPS which gives the exact position through satellites. Other daily uses from applying what was discovered in astronomy include the microwave oven, which was developed during experiments performed at the ISS (International Space Station), solar photovoltaic panels, X-rays for baggage checks and gas chromatography to scan for bombs and drugs in airports. Artificial limbs are another invention which was originally created for space exploration. This technological innovation was originally designed for space vehicles. Another example is the scratch-resistant lenses that were originally developed for NASA’s scratch resistant astronaut helmets. Moreover, the Goddard Space Flight Centre created systems to monitor astronaut’s vital systems, which were then adapted in an insulin pump that regulates blood sugar levels and release of insulin.  

Do countries work together in the field of astronomy?

Astronomy is a science that unites and brings scientists and countries together. Anthony explains that many nations are proud of these technological achievements. “There is a lot of competition between different countries to use the technology developed in the field of astronomy. Countries spend considerable amounts of money in this field, even where there is great poverty. Moreover, this passion for scientific research has brought many countries together. Countries work together in this field even if they do not agree on other matters. Such an example is found in France where an extensive research project involving different countries, is trying to produce energy similar to that of the sun. Europe, America and China are all involved in this project.”

Astronomy and the Catholic Church

The Church has had an interest in astronomy for a long time. During the Medieval period, in the European Universities run by the Church, mathematics and astronomy were always part of the curriculum. In 1891 Pope Leo 13^th created the Vatican Observatory as a sign of the Catholic Church’s interest in this science. Today, the Vatican Observatory headquarters of the Catholic Church is located at the papal summer residence in Castel Gandolfo, outside Rome. There is also an associated research centre at the University of Arizona, in the United States.

The Jesuits have always and are still running both locations. At the time of Pope Leo 13^th, the Church wanted to tell scientists, ‘Do not be afraid of religion’. Today it is the other way round. Nowadays we need to tell believers: ‘Do not be afraid of science’. It is unhealthy to create a taboo around science. Science does not lead us away from our faith. On the contrary, science can help us discover many things which ultimately God has created,” says Anthony.

Anthony does not see any conflict between science and faith. “It is very clear in my mind; astronomy and faith are two sides of the same coin. When I see something in the universe which fascinates me, I see more so God’s greatness in his creation. Pope John 23^rd said that astronomy is like a small bridge between the world of science and the Church. Over the years, the Church has had many famous astronomers who were priests.”

Galileo and the Catholic Church

I asked Anthony on his view on the episode of Galileo Galilei and the Catholic Church. He said, “The episode of Galileo Galilei has to be read in its historical context. One also has to consider the people involved in the episode at the time. Yes, the Church took the wrong approach with Galileo. That is why, in 1992,  Pope John Paul 2^nd issued an apology with a formal statement through the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. The Church wants to walk in the truth. By recognising the mistakes of that time, she is also recognising the truth and wanting to move forward. This is an important step. How many people and institutions are ready to admit their wrongdoings because they want to walk in truth and move forward? The Catholic Church did”, replies Anthony.

The connection between faith and astronomy

Anthony remarks that when he looks at the skies in the evening he becomes more aware of the beauty and the mystery of the skies. He says that this observation is also part of his faith: “I build my personal faith on that of the apostles. The apostles saw Jesus. They lived with him, they saw him die on the Cross and rise from death after three days. I am amazed at the idea of God’s decision to become matter;  to become one of us. Moreover, he died and rose again. Jesus’ incarnation into a man of flesh and blood, is a concrete way of how we can see God. When I look at the skies, it makes me want to say how great God is and how small I am. It helps me realise God’s greatness.”

Anthony describes the following as an example. In May 2019, laser detectors in Italy and the USA absorbed light that made astronomers realise that there was an explosion between two black holes which created a shock wave. This happened 7 million years ago, however, it was only last year that we detected its shock wave. Other examples include the following facts. The Earth was formed around 4.5 billion years ago. Additionally, there are approximately 200 million galaxies in the universe and 100 billion different solar systems. Moreover, our galaxy the Milky Way, has a diameter of around 180,000 light years (one light year is equivalent to 9.5 trillion km).

God’s Greatness in the universe and our smallness

“When I consider these limitless dimensions of time and all the great distances, I become more aware of my human smallness”, says Anthony. “I then ask myself… How great and how old is God’s love when compared to the oldest star? How great and wide is God’s love compared to the width of the universe? We might be unfamiliar with these concepts because we relate to our own height and weight. We know a world of dimensions. However, when I see these realities in the universe they become a sign of God’s veiled presence; God, who is without dimensions. I’m not surprised that St Ignatius used to feel great consolation when looking at the sky!”

Anthony also comments on the order which we find on Earth. This is in great contrast with what we find outside our solar system. “Earth is a very particular place and so is its position in the solar system. One of its particularities is that only on Earth do we find tectonic plates which cause earthquakes. These plates create energy and give life. Furthermore, if the Earth were closer to the Sun it would be too hot, like Venus. Conversely, if it was a bit farther it would be too cold, like Mars.”

“In our solar system there is a sense of order and harmony, like the seasons. Once you go outside our solar system, you only find chaos. So far, Earth is the only place where there is life as we know it. A lot of research is being carried out to find whether there are other planets that can sustain life. I cannot ignore the possibility that there is life elsewhere in the universe. Who am I to put God in a box?”

Read more:
– Famous Catholic Astronomers
– Top Popes’ Quotes About Science

The post Astronomy and Faith appeared first on Universe of Faith.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a broad concept which is becoming harder to define. As AI researcher Nick Bostrom explains, the more AI is being incorporated into our daily lives, such as in the algorithms which reshuffle our social media walls and in the technology of general home appliances, the less we recognise that software as being AI. Instead, we see it as ‘mere technology’.

Part I – Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence definition

The Maltese AI Taskforce defines Artificial Intelligence as follows:

“Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to systems designed by humans that, given a complex goal, act in the physical or digital world by perceiving their environment, interpreting the collected structured or unstructured data, reasoning on the knowledge derived from this data and deciding the best action(s) to take to achieve the given goal. AI systems can also be designed to learn to adapt their behaviour by analysing how the environment is affected by their previous actions.”

“As a scientific discipline, AI includes several approaches and techniques, such as machine learning, machine reasoning, and robotics, as well as the integration of all other techniques into cyber-physical systems.”

I decided to use this definition since it is so elaborate; it somehow defines AI sufficiently. Of interest are the highlighted key phrases. The phrase, ‘designed by humans’, clearly states that it is a technology created by us humans. As Noreen Herzfeld theorises, it is made ‘in our image’. This statement will be useful in our discussion further on. Another key phrase refers to the fact that AIs are often built to achieve a goal. An exception to this is the Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) which is built goal-less. The third highlighted phrase refers to the use of AI in analysing effects on the environment. The strength of AI is mostly appreciated in their use when processing data to make decisions regarding the environment.

Two main categories of artificial intelligence:  NI and AGI

AI is normally broken down into two main categories, Narrow Intelligence (NI), and General Intelligence (AGI).

NIs are AI programmed to perform a single, albeit complicated, task such as analysing text, processing vocal input or even creating art and literature. Great advancements are happening in the NI field. Some examples are its use in self-driving cars and natural language processing. NIs ubiquitous use is also found in search and recommendation engines and in some data engines such as IBMs Watson.

In contrast,  AGI is still a nascent field. It is sometimes referred to as strong AI; a superintelligent, or human-level AI. It can understand and reason its environment just as a human being would. Concisely, an AGI is built to replace the human in a decision-making environment.  AGI researcher, Nick Bostrom, has defined superintelligence as “any intellect that greatly exceeds the cognitive performance of humans in virtually all domains of interest”. In Bostrom’s definition AGI needs a capacity to learn and to deal effectively with uncertainty and probabilistic information.

Myths about artificial intelligence

Only luddites worry about AI. This cannot be further from the truth. Many top AI researchers and technophobes, including Elon Musk, the late Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, Sam Altman and Nick Bostrom have expressed their concern regarding its use. Musk’s response to an MIT audience – “we are raising the demon”- summarises this existential fear.

AI turns evil: While AI’s goals can be misaligned with ours, this doesn’t necessarily mean that AI can ever turn evil. This is especially the case with the way that AI is portrayed in sci-fi movies. Hence, as technologists we ought to make sure that the data on which the AI is built, and the algorithmic intelligence, are both aligned to an ecological view of humanity.

AI can’t control humans. Again, this statement is false. Intelligence enables control. One need not go far to understand that political propaganda on social media, itself an AI-based algorithm, can and did sway many an election. Moreover, data is the new gold. Thus, it is also the new power of economy. As we all know, power provides the means to influence which data is used and deemed relevant. It can determine which problems become priorities, and for whom the tools, products, and services are geared. Hence, AI is an enabler or disabler of power.

Part II –  Robots and AI

Defining Robots

Let’s start by looking at some definitions of robots.

According to Asimov’s Laws of Robotics every robot should obey these 3 laws:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. It must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

I join the likes of Eliezer Yudkowsky’s camp of believers that such laws are unsafe at best.

On the other hand, the AI4People’s ethics group have outlined 4 principles for the use of AI in robots:

i) beneficence aligned (do only good),
ii) non-maleficence (do no harm),
iii) autonomy (human agent remains responsible for individual decisions)
iv) justice

I believe that these are much safer to use when interpreting AI-research.

Robot Sophia

With regards to robots such as Hanson Robotics’ Sophia, I believe that this is nothing more than a marketing stunt.  Before discussing the AI behind this project, let us discuss the team behind Sophia. Given his artistic background, David Hanson fully understands the importance of having a humanoid robot that has an appearance which is both non-threatening and welcoming.

Hanson’s spokesman, Ben Goertzel, is a full-stack AI researcher and a strong believer of Singularity. He supports the idea of a hypothetical point in time at which technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable (not necessarily bad) changes to humankind: an ‘intelligence explosion’ that qualitatively far surpasses all human intelligence. According to technologist Antoine Tardif, Goertzel’s mission is to use Sophia to raise funds for his SingularityNET project which attempts to democratise access to AI technology. Thus, Sophia is useful to keep the interest of investors in the project.

Sophia is often wheeled in during presentations. However, the robot seems to lack awareness of its surroundings, while finding it hard to focus its attention on any one object. It seems that Sophia (I refuse to use ‘her’) is using computer vision, chat-bot technology comprised of voice recognition technology and perhaps some form of Natural Language Processing. In comparison, the last two technologies are also used in Amazon’s Alexa and Apple’s Siri. Both of these are actually way more technologically advanced than Sophia despite her ‘cute’ human face.

Nonetheless, given the Law of Accelerating Returns , the AI community is still hypothesising the technological-emergence of a solid AGI framework, such as OpenCog or DeepMind, which can be easily hosted by a humanoid such as Sophia.

Do you think a humanoid robot can eventually become more powerful than a human being?

Humanoid robots are just a marketing gimmick. They give a sense of intelligence. I am much more concerned with AIs shaping us, rather than the AIs shaped after us.

In a paper co-authored with spiritual theologian Fr Charlo Camilleri and philosopher Tero Massa, we argue, in line with Paul Heelas, that rather than rationality, spirituality is essential in the definition of what it means to be human. This quote summarises what we attempt to say: “Innate drives linked essentially to being human, such as the discovery of the self, seeking to gain knowledge, progressing in life, searching for one’s identity and the definition of one’s self, are translated and replicated into the building of the new version of the human. One can postulate that innate within humankind, there is a desire for self-reproduction which surpasses the biological need and ventures into the realm of the spiritual.”

Thus, when speaking about AGIs becoming human or human-like, we believe that we need to start our discussion from what makes us spiritual. We outline the following categories:

1. Self-knowledge, stimulations and intellectual aspiration
2. Spirituality as 3 ‘to’s: to be (noun), to do (verb), to encounter (relational)
3. Built in imago humani 
4. The ability to imagine
5. The capacity of feeling  emotions
6. Consciousness, personhood and ensoulment
7. The ability to re-invent the self

Technologically speaking, AGIs are far from achieving such attributes. This does not mean that God is limited from irrupting in silicon as God irrupted in biology. In our thought-provoking paper, we conclude with philosopher Johan Seiber’s suggestion that as theologians, reflecting on the digital, we need to “find ways to think about digitalisation not as a threat to humanity but as an opportunity to explore avenues that we may not have even known about.”

Part III – Ethics in AI

Artificial intelligence ethics

The main question one needs to ask when discussing AI ethics is: “For what purposes do you want to use it?” Are you going to use it to do good or to harm?

Let us look at some examples. Imagine taking a photo of a lump in the skin, and uploading it to a trained AI system to verify whether this is skin cancer or not. One can mention Facebook’s tool which is used to identify potential suicidal cases amongst its users.  One can also speak of AIs which are used to allocate resources after natural disasters.

On the other hand, AI can be programmed to kill, such as in the use of autonomous weapons. One can also mention the deep fakes which are a particular source of concern in 2020’s US presidential campaign. Another example when AI can be misused is that one can programme with good intentions but use biased data. In these situations, the AI’s goals will be misaligned from those of humankind.

As these examples illustrate, the concern about advanced AI isn’t malevolence but competence. A super-intelligent AI will be extremely good at accomplishing its goals. However, if those goals aren’t aligned with ours as humankind, we have a problem.

Data as the New Gold

When speaking about ethics, a major issue lies in the collection and use of Big Data. Recognising that two points of data are connected, is not enough. The system must ask why one-point affects another. Moreover, data is deeply personal. We would not want others to access the digital ‘model’ — our Facebook or Google account — that defines us. Therefore, it must be fortified. As Joanna Bryson muses, legal frameworks with a heavy focus on AI ethics must protect this data from being bargained as an asset. Companies need to carry out a risk-assessment, reinforce their servers and take every precaution to ensure their cyber-security is defended. Furthermore, questions surrounding who owns the user’s data are necessary in the groundwork of protecting the user. So is the psychology behind how you are using it.

Related to data is algorithmic transparency and the ‘black box’ problem. AI needs to be built capable of explaining its steps. As McKinsey Global Institute discovered in their research, some companies made a trade-off opting for a slightly less performant AI because they favoured explainability. Otherwise they could end up with situations similar to that of Sarah Wysocki .

Ms Wysocki, a fifth-grade teacher, who despite being praised by students, parents and administrators alike, was fired because the algorithm decided that her performance was sub-par. Other biases emerging from data include considerable job losses suffered by African-American men due to such processing of data. Another instance is of dark-skinned patients being falsely ‘imaged’ to be healthier, with the subsequent risk of further aggravating their health issues. Against the rise of a ‘digital technocracy’, which masks itself as post-racial and merit-driven but is essentially likely to judge a person’s value based on racial identity, gender, class and social worth, Pope Francis’ call to ecological conversion sounds even stronger.

Seven Principles for discussing AI ethics

The High-Level Ethics group of the European Commission speaks of 7 principles when discussing AI ethics. I would like to outline the principles as a conclusion to this article:

1. Human agency and Oversight: AIs should support individuals in making better and more informed choices in accordance with their goals. One can achieve oversight by ensuring overseeing of the work by a human person, either ‘in’ every decision cycle, ‘on-loop’ intervenes during the design cycle and monitors or ‘in command’ overseeing overall activity;
2. Technical robustness and safety: AIs need to be resilient against both overt and more subtle attacks to manipulate data or algorithms themselves;
3. Privacy and data governance: The user remains the owner and controller of the data;
4. Transparency and Explainability: It is important to log and document the decisions of the system while the AI is able to explain such decisions. Moreover, the AI needs to be capable of communicating such decisions;
5. Diversity, Non-Discrimination and Fairness: All stakeholders need to be consulted and represented;
6. Societal and Environmental well-being: The use of AI systems should be given careful consideration particularly in situations relating to the democratic process, including opinion-formation, political decision-making or electoral contexts;
7. Accountability: On this principle, I tend to agree with Tom Strange who says that humans must remain accountable for every AI decision. According to Bryson, the human has the onus on what code is written, as well as when, why and by whom, and on which software and data libraries are used. Thus, it is the responsibility of the organisations to monitor AIs.

Living in a shared home

In conclusion, while reading these principles, I cannot help but hear once again Pope Francis’ recommendations on ecological conversion. He suggests that we move away from a technocratic paradigm which seeks unlimited progress at all costs, and start looking at our world as a shared home. We need to convert our way of thinking, policies, lifestyle and spirituality  so as to thread carefully into the future, while being neither luddites nor blind technophobes. Is my decision other-focused?

The post What Is Artificial Intelligence? – Myths, Robots, Ethics appeared first on Universe of Faith.

This is not an exhaustive list but presents some of the most famous Catholic astronomers

Fr Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543)

Fr Nicolaus Copernicus was a Polish Catholic priest who practiced medicine and then went into astronomy developing heliocentrism, meaning that the Sun is in the middle and that all planets, including Earth orbit in circles around it. He is believed to have entered the priesthood later in life. His contributions to astronomy revolutionised the field and the world. Read more

Fr Matteo Ricci SJ (1552-1610)

Italian Fr Matteo Ricci was a Jesuit missionary to China who brought his mathematical and astronomical knowledge to China and adapted to Chinese culture. Read more

Fr Giulio Alenio SJ (1582–1649)

Italian born Fr Giulio Alenio was a Jesuit theologian, astronomer and mathematician. He was sent to the Far East as a missionary and adopted a Chinese name and customs. He wrote 25 books, including a cosmography and a Life of Jesus in Chinese. Read more

Fr Giovanni Battista Zupi SJ (c. 1590–1650)

Italian born Fr Giovanni Battista Zupi was a Jesuit astronomer, mathematician and the first person to discover that the planet Mercury had orbital phases. The lunar crater Zupus is named after him. Read more

Fr Giovanni Battista Riccioli SJ (1598–1671)

Fr Giovanni Battista Riccioli was a Jesuit astronomer who authored the book Almagestum novum, an influential encyclopedia of astronomy. He was the first person to measure the rate of acceleration of a freely falling body. He created a selenograph with Father Grimaldi who now adorns the entrance at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C. Read more

Fr Giuseppe Asclepi SJ (1706–1776)

Fr Giuseppe Ascelpi was a Jesuit astronomer and physician who served as director of the Collegio Romano observatory. The lunar crater Asclepi is named after him. Read more

Fr Roger Boscovich SJ (1711-1787)

Fr Robert Boscovich from Croatia was a genius who studied many fields: atomic theory, optics, math, physics, architecture, and astronomy. Before being ordained a priest in the Society of Jesus, he published eight scientific dissertations in the field of astronomy and used geometry to calculate a planet’s orbit. A crater on the moon is named after him. As a whole, he was an incredibly learned man who stayed true to the Catholic faith and let it inform his scholastic endeavors. Read more

Fr Georges Lemaître (1894–1966)

Belgian priest Fr Georges Lemaître was a contemporary scientist of, and based his work on Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity. Lemaître first proposed what has since been named – at first pejoratively, but since compellingly – the “Big Bang Theory.” He claimed that all the matter in the universe had once been packed together in a solid ball, a “Primeval Atom”, and had expanded outwards from there. Read more

Fr George Coyne SJ (1933-2020)

Fr George Coyne was an American Jesuit astronomer and promoter of science-theology dialogue. He led the Vatican Observatory as its director for 28 years. Research was an important part of Coyne’s astronomical legacy. His work included the study of the lunar surface that helped guide NASA as it planned the Ranger missions and the Apollo crewed missions to the moon. He also conducted research on Mercury’s surface, interacting binary star systems that give off sudden bursts of intense energy, and Seyfert galaxies, a group of spiral galaxies with small and unusually bright star-like centers. Read more

The post Famous Catholic Astronomers appeared first on Universe of Faith.

1. The Church in favour of science

“The Church and her Pastors are not opposed to true and solid science, whether human or divine, but that they embrace it, encourage it, and promote it with the fullest possible dedication.”
Pope Leo 13th, Vatican Observatory, 1891

2. Science is a gift

“Art along with science is the highest gift God has given [man]”.
Pope Benedict 16th (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger), Interview with Peter Seewald – The Salt of the Earth (book), 1997

3. Science and religion need each other

“Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes.”
Pope John Paul 2nd, Letter to Director of the Vatican Observatory, 1988

4. The Church does not forbid the doctrine of evolution

“The teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.”
Pope Pius 12th, Humani Generis, 1950, 36

5. The Big Bang Theory is not in conflict with the notion of Creation

“The Big Bang theory, which is proposed today as the origin of the world, does not contradict the intervention of a divine creator but depends on it. Evolution in nature does not conflict with the notion of Creation, because evolution presupposes the creation of beings who evolve.”
Pope Francis, I Believe: The Promise of the Creed (book), 2016

6. There is no discrepancy between faith and reason

“Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.”
 Catechism of the Catholic Church 159

 Read more:
– Famous Catholic Astronomers 

The post Top Popes’ Quotes About Science appeared first on Universe of Faith.