Dumbest Debate in Years
The vigilant secularists over at Spoid attack the Catholic Truth Society's alleged plan to proselytize space aliens:
The naivete of the Vatican is almost charming.
Assuming the "UFO problem" resolves with the verification of the extraterrestrial hypothesis -- which is a huge assumption -- what makes the Vatican so sure these beings are friendly? Regular humans have routinely attacked missionaries throughout ancient and modern history. What might a tired alien explorer do to some native preaching about baptism and Jesus? What if the alien can blow up people's brains with his thoughts?
Those few serious scientists who've studied the phenomena (such as astronomer and Silicon Valley legend Dr. Jacques Vallee) have generally concluded that whatever the UFOs and "aliens" are, they intentionally present themselves in astounding, confounding and ultimately absurd ways that likely have little resemblance to their physical reality (if there is a physical reality to the phenomena). Mathematicians who propose the concept of parallel universes supports the interdimensional visitation theory.
In other words, the "visitors" are probably the same things earlier generations considered to be demons, gods, succubi, incubi, ghosts, leprechauns, etc.
In other, other words, that "alien" you're trying to convert to Christianity may be a vengeful demon, a disinterested and possibly artificially controlled entity unable to even see you clearly, some malevolent specter amused by sexually abusing humans, the same apparition earlier religious nuts called "Satan," or the spirit of Jesus himself.
Link.
Bonus coverage: Thomas Aquinas on whether E.T. could exist. Excerpt from conclusion:
Aquinas does not favor the idea that other human-type beings exist because he thinks that the human soul represents the very lowest type of intelligence, whereas the human body represents the very highest material body. However, he does remain open to the possibility.
From a theological standpoint, Aquinas explains that there is no reason for concern here because it is not the task of Scripture to classify the beings in the universe. Since Aquinas does not think that there in fact are other human-type beings, he has little reason to investigate any apparent conflicts between their existence and scriptural statements. His examination of whether many Incarnations are possible is useful for theological discussions of ET existence.
Aquinas explicitly denies that it is probable that other human-type bodies exist, for the reason noted above. There are two other probable arguments that can be drawn from Aquinas, one against and one in favor of the existence of other human-like creatures. On the one hand, the human species would reflect God's goodness in a special way by being unique, while on the other hand, it is befitting to God's goodness that he create more of better creatures. Aquinas leans in the direction of the former view, but realizes that the latter could in fact be the case. And by doing so, he gives us an example of the circumspection that this matter demands.
