When Life Isn't Ideal: "Amoris Laetitia"

Something I found on page 59 of "Amoris Laetitia"¹ is an example of why I love being Catholic — common sense, drawing on the Church's experience and wisdom, developed by dealing with people for two millennia.

Some folks have been having conniptions over the encyclical: some because the Pope won't redefine marriage to suit their preferences; others, I suspect, for his failure to heap abuse on couples in " 'irregular' situations."

Instead of denouncing them as loathsome sinners who should be cast into the outer darkness, Pope Francis actually talks about "...offering them assistance so they can reach the fullness of God's plan for them...." ("Amoris Laetitia," page 227)

"The Validity of Certain Unions"

That's 'way ahead of where I'm at in the encyclical, though. I'm still reading through the third chapter, where I found this 'shocking' statement:

"...Canon Law also recognizes the validity of certain unions celebrated without the presence of an ordained minister.⁷¹ ..."
("Amoris Laetitia," page 59, Pope Francis)

I put a longer excerpt,² and links to Canon Law cited in footnotes 71 and 72,³ at the end of this post.

Like I said, I love being Catholic: partly because the Church has been dealing with people for two millennia — and learning how to deal with less-than-ideal situations.

Mass and Mixed Marriages

(From John Martin, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)

Marriage is a sacrament "...by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life...." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1601-1617, 1621-1651)

Marriage between two Roman Catholics "...normally takes place during Holy Mass...." (Catechism, 1621)

So any couple who say they're married, but aren't both Catholics, or didn't have a 'proper' wedding during Mass, aren't really married, and will burn in eternal hellfire?

I certainly won't say that, partly because I've read Luke 6:37-38, and that's another topic. (March 9, 2016; March 15, 2015)

Also because that's not what the Church says.

My wife and I were married during Mass, but I wasn't a Catholic at the time. Not on paper, anyway: although my wife once quipped that 'in my heart I have always been Catholic.'

In countries like America, where Catholics are a minority, "a mixed marriage (marriage between a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic)" is hardly uncommon. (Catechism, 1633)

We had to get "the express permission of ecclesiastical authority," but not "an express dispensation," since I was already a baptized Christian. (Catechism, 1633-1637; Code of Canon Law Book IV Part I Title VII Chapter VI, 1124; Book IV Part I Title VII Chapter III, )

I'd done the research before an interview with our parish priest. I'd been expecting a detailed examination of my beliefs, and was hoping there wouldn't be too many 'technical' questions.

The interview was a massive anticlimax. The priest asked me what I thought marriage was: and stopped me before I'd really hit my stride — asking if I thought marriage was a lifelong and exclusive bond. I didn't reply "well, DUH!," but that's how I felt.

I knew that some folks stumbled into and out of physical relationships with little or no mutual commitment: but I didn't understand why they'd bother calling it "marriage." Like my wife said, 'in my heart, I have always been Catholic.'

Banns and Disasters

Ideally, a nice young Catholic couple have their banns read, or use "other opportune means to accomplish the investigations necessary," as Canon Law 1067 puts it; have perfect weather for their wedding Mass, and live happily ever after.

Ideally.

We do not live in an ideal world. Weather was reasonably pleasant when my wife and I got married, but lightning with near-simultaneous thunder and a torrential downpour was in progress at a relative's wedding I attended.

Couples have faced worse, including imminent death.

Disasters, accidents, and terminal illness, happen. Couples in such situations might be reasonably certain one or both of them wouldn't survive long enough for a 'proper' marriage ceremony.

The good news is that they might still get married, if only for a short time:

"If a person competent to assist according to the norm of law cannot be present or approached without grave inconvenience, those who intend to enter into a true marriage can contract it validly and licitly before witnesses only...."
(Code of Canon Law Book IV Part I Title VII Chapter V, 1116)

The conditions where this is okay are rather limited: impending death; or a reasonable chance that the couple can't find a priest for the next month. The latter isn't likely for couples living in urban areas.

For the 250 or so folks who keep McMurdo Station running during Antarctic winters, finding a priest before an icebreaker clears a channel might be challenging.

Having clergy present is still a good idea, though:

"...In either case, if some other priest or deacon who can be present is available, he must be called and be present at the celebration of the marriage together with the witnesses, without prejudice to the validity of the marriage before witnesses only."
(Code of Canon Law Book IV Part I Title VII Chapter V, 1116)

I don't see that as being "lax." It's recognizing that a marriage is done by the two people getting married, and God:

"The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized."
(Code of Canon Law Book IV Part I Title VII, 1055)

That's pretty much what Pope Francis says:²

"...the couple who marry are the ministers of the sacrament...."
("Amoris Laetitia," page 59)

It's also an example of the common sense I mentioned earlier: my opinion.

There may be awkward situations that the Church hasn't had to deal with yet. But after two millennia, my guess is that there aren't many.

After the Wedding

Getting married is just a first step. Couples tend to become couples with children, which is a good thing: and a lot of work, which is yet another topic. (Catechism, 2201-2223)

No pressure, but here's a link to the Vatican Press online copy of "Amoris Laetitia:"

• "Amoris Laetitia"
  Pope Francis, Vatican Press (March 18, 2016)(released April 8, 2016)

More of my take on life, love, and families:

• " 'Amoris Laetitia' — or — Don't Panic"
  (April 10, 2016)
  Particularly
  • Tradition and 'Being Traditional'
• "Sex, Satan, and Me: Getting a Grip"
  (July 12, 2015)
  Particularly
  • Not Living in the Past
  • Respect, Dignity, and Drunk Driving
• "Holy Family, Not '50s Family"
  (December 28, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Not All Vocations are "Vocations"
  • No Pressure, Really
  • Looking Ahead
• "Fear of the Lord: Ancient, Timeless Wisdom"
  (November 16, 2014)
• "Yeats, Cthulhu, and Synod 14"
  (October 19, 2014)
  Particularly
  • "...Things Fall Apart; the Centre Cannot Hold..."
  • "Tensions and Temptations"
  • Change Happens

---

¹ I haven't finished reading "Amoris Laetitia," the Pope's encyclical about love in the family, yet. That's because I'm studying it "patiently and carefully:"

"...The greatest benefit, for families themselves and for those engaged in the family apostolate, will come if each part is read patiently and carefully, or if attention is paid to the parts dealing with their specific needs...."
("Amoris Laetitia," page 6, Pope Francis)

² From "Amoris Laetitia:"

"...Canon Law also recognizes the validity of certain unions celebrated without the presence of an ordained minister.⁷¹ The natural order has been so imbued with the redemptive grace of Jesus that 'a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament'.⁷² The Church can require that the wedding be celebrated publicly, with the presence of witnesses and other conditions that have varied over the course of time, but this does not detract from the fact that the couple who marry are the ministers of the sacrament. Nor does it affect the centrality of the consent given by the man and the woman, which of itself establishes the sacramental bond...."
("Amoris Laetitia," page 59, Pope Francis (March 18, 2016)(released April 8, 2016))

³ Code of Canon Law, referenced in "Amoris Laetitia," page 59, footnotes 71 and 72:

• Footnote 71
  Code of Canon Law Book IV Part I Title VII Chapter V, 1116; Book IV Part I Title VII Chapter X Art. 2, 1161-1165
• Footnote 72
  Code of Canon Law Book IV Part I Title VII, 1055

Sound, Fury, and "Laudato Si' "

The Pope's 'environmental encyclical' was published today. I figure I'll read "Laudato Si' " before opining about what it says. The official English translation (w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html) runs to well over 31,000 words, so that will take some time.

What I've seen of the encyclical at a very quick glance is hardly surprising.

Pope Francis says that greed is a bad idea, and we shouldn't do it.

He also says that we live on Earth, and that taking care of the place makes sense.

So far, I don't have a problem with what I've seen.

I gather that some folks who saw, or heard about, an unofficial translation of a leaked rough draft of the document went ballistic: conservatives because it was liberal; liberals because it was conservative; the usual stuff. I gave my position back in 2008:

• "Conservative? Liberal? Democrat? Republican? No, I'm Catholic"
  (November 3, 2008)

Dominion and Responsibility

I don't know how many of the Victorian upper crust actually said they were 'lords of creation,' who could do what they liked with the rest of humanity, and the planet.

That, to me, does not make sense. Not even from the viewpoint of enlightened self-interest. As a Christian and a Catholic, I certainly can't embrace an 'it's all mine' attitude.

I think we have "dominion" over this world, like Genesis 1:26 says. But, like I said, I'm a Catholic. I see humanity's "dominion" as the sort of authority held by a steward or shop foreman.

That authority comes with responsibilities. Big responsibilities. Making reasoned use of the world's resources is part of our job. So is making sure that future generations have what they'll need. (Catechism, 339, 952, 2402-2405, 2456)

This world is God's gift to humanity — for all of us, including folks who haven't been born yet. Private property, personal ownership of part of the world, is okay: provided the owner acquired and uses it ethically. (Catechism, 2402-2405)

And that's all I have time for today.

More about:

• "Climate Change, Deccan Traps: Still Learning"
  (May 8, 2015)
  Particularly
  • Aristotle, Galileo, and All That
  • Pursuing Truth
  • A Half-Billion Years of Climate Change
• "Climate Change, Science, and the Vatican"
  (May 1, 2015)
  Particularly
  • Individuals and the Common Good
  • The 'Vatican Science Academy:' Climate Change Matters
  • Stewardship and the United Nations
• "Setting Earth's Thermostat"
  (February 20, 2015)
  Particularly
  • "Learning Wisdom: Not Fear
• "Moderation and a Pythagorean Dribble Glass"
  (January 25, 2015)
  Particularly
  • Love, Money, and Not Going Crazy
• "Environmentalism: Using the Brains God Gave Us"
  (June 15, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Delicate and Fragile as Cockroaches and Thistles
  • God's Property, Our Responsibility
  • Not Lords, Not Victims: Stewards

Addition, Subtraction, and Lent

Lent starts Ash Wednesday, a few days from now. It's a big deal:

"...By the solemn forty days of Lent the Church unites herself each year to the mystery of Jesus in the desert."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 540)

That doesn't mean that I should go to the nearest desert.

I live in central Minnesota, where the nearest dunes are in the Sand Dunes State Forest. Like many of the state forests, 'Dunes' has an assortment of lakes, ponds, and wet ground. Minnesota is not a particularly dry state: even in drought years.

South Dakota Badlands and Lent

(From Wereldburger758, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Badlands National Park, South Dakota, United States)

The nearest place that's desert-like is the South Dakota badlands: only 500 miles west and a bit south. There's paved road all the way, so I could make the trip: in a bit under eight hours, weather and vehicle permitting.

Happily, I don't need to take "in the desert" quite that literally.

Lent is when I should re-live the great events of salvation, and practice "penance, voluntary self-denial such as fasting and almsgiving, and fraternal sharing." (Catechism, 1095, 1438)

Penance? Self-denial? Fasting?? No wonder some folks think Christianity is all about being miserable. I'll grant that adopting an 'oh woe, all ye faithful' attitude is popular in some circles, and I've been over that before:

• "Hope, Joy, and 'More Despondent Than Thou?' "
  (January 8, 2012)

Lent: It's an Inside Job

(Me, Ash Wednesday 2011)

The 40 days of Lent is preparation for the Church's big day: Easter.

Sackcloth, ashes, fasting: they can be important, but they're what shows on the outside. The important work is inside me: a "conversion of the heart" that brings me closer to my Lord. (Catechism, 1430)

I've never seen sackcloth used as a penance, by the way. Sackcloth is the sort of cloth generally used for sacks: which is pretty obvious, from the name. We call hessian "burlap" where I live, I grew up calling burlap bags "gunny sacks:" and that's another topic.

You can use the stuff to make rugs, too. It would be distinctly uncomfortable for clothing: particularly undergarments. Which is the idea, of course.

We've been celebrating Lent for about two millennia now, and although the core of our practices hasn't changed, the cultures we work in aren't what they were in the first century.

For example, although the number of days for fasting within Lent has stayed right around 40, the total has varied from today's 46 days by up to three weeks. I suppose someone's upset that we're doing it the "wrong" way: but I think God's more interested in that "conversion of the heart," than in whose schedule we use.

Fasting and Common Sense

Fasting is important, and required for Catholics age 18 to 59: with some exceptions.

"Q. Are there exemptions other than for age from the requirement to fast on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday?

"A. Those that are excused from fast and abstinence outside the age limits include the physically or mentally ill including individuals suffering from chronic illnesses such as diabetes. Also excluded are pregnant or nursing women. In all cases, common sense should prevail, and ill persons should not further jeopardize their health by fasting."
("Questions and Answers about Lent and Lenten Practices," USCCB)

I'm in my 60s, and diabetic, so fasting isn't an option for me. I like to eat, so that might seem like good news. But since fasting is out, I need to find something to take its place.

Something Extra for Lent

"What are you giving up for Lent" is a common question: and the start of some jokes, like "I'm giving up skydiving for Lent."

Subtracting something from daily routines for Lent is an option, but I try to add something instead. Some years it's been praying a chaplet for the duration. I haven't made up my mind what this year's project will be.

I'd better decide soon, though: Whatever I do, it starts Wednesday.

More, from the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops):

• "Fast & Abstinence"
• "Questions and Answers about Lent and Lenten Practices"

Related posts:

• Work in progress
  
  • "Still Learning to Pray"
    (February 17, 2013)
  • "Giving Up Skydiving for Lent"
    (February 13, 2013)
  • "First Sunday in Lent; God is Reclaiming His Broken Creation"
    (February 26, 2012)
  • "Ash Wednesday, 2012: Another Lent, Another Chaplet"
    (February 22, 2012)
  • "Third Sunday of Lent 2011"
    (March 27, 2011)
• The big picture
  • "Time, Decisions, and a Sense of Scale"
    (September 28, 2013)
  • "Fasting, Penance: and Infinite Depths of Joy"
    (June 3, 2012)
    Particularly
    • Joy: Short-Term and Long-Term
    • God, Rain, and Me
    • Jesus, Joy, and Standing Orders
  • "Diversity in Unity: Two Millennia and Counting"
    (April 18, 2012)
  • "Hope, Joy, and Working for a Better World"
    (September 13, 2011)
    Particularly
    • The Golgotha Incident
    • The Future Looks Pretty Good - - -
    • - - - And We Have Work to Do
  • "We Won: Quite a While Ago"
    (January 13, 2011)

Background:

• "Message of Pope Francis for Lent 2014"
  He became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich
  Pope Francis (December 26, 2013)

Human Folly and Body Counts

Ragnarok didn't happen last Saturday. I'm pretty sure that the "Jorvik Viking Centre experts" were having a little fun while promoting their organization:

• "Viking apocalypse: End of the world predicted to happen on Saturday (but don't cancel your weekend plans yet)"
  Heather Saul, The Independent (UK) (February 19, 2014)

I quipped that Ragnarok, the day after, was a massive anticlimax on Google Plus. (February 23, 2014)

End-Times Bible Prophecy, the Zombie Apocalypse, and Godzilla

Selling 'End Times Biblical prophecy' books and Last Judgment fire insurance is a cultural tradition here in America. I've occasionally had fun with the less-serious sides of the perennial doomsday prediction in another blog:

• "Mayan Apocalypse Transition: Book a Galactic Cruise; or Take the Cosmic Bike Tour"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (February 3, 2012)
• "Planet X, NASA, and the Lizard People From Outer Space"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (January 2, 2012)
  Particularly
  • Nibiru, NASA, and the Lizard People
• "Zombie Apocalypse: CDC's Tongue-in-Cheek Disaster Preparedness Advice Post"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (May 19, 2011)
• "The Neutrinos are Coming! 2012 and Hollywood Science"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (November 16, 2009)

I've toyed with the idea of writing my own doomsday prediction: maybe involving mutant squirrels, conspiring with corrupt pet store owners to enslave humanity in their nougat mines; or a revolt of the Roombas.

Two aspects of this plan have so far thwarted my ambition. First, someone might take me seriously, and a really don't need that kind of trouble. Second, the robot revolt has been done: including an insightful analysis by XKCD:


(From XKCD, used w/o permission.)

Tales about giant fire-breathing lizards and mutant ants can be fun. Real doomsday predictions: not so much.

The Coming Apocalypse: 634 BC — 2013 AD

After the current apocalyptic prediction fizzles, some folks who believed the 'End Times prophecy' recover: and some don't. Broken lives of believers are a tragedy. So, I think, is the effect that this recurring silliness has on folks who don't believe, and that's another topic.

Prophecies of doom, and their anticlimactic aftermath, is nothing new: and not limited to Christians. Wikipedia has a list of anticipated apocalypses: from 634 BC, when Rome didn't fall; to 2013 August 23, 2013, when Grigori Rasputin said fire would consume all life on land.

At least two 'prophecies' were accurate: in a very narrow, tragic, sense.

Guyana, a Gated Community, and Death

Jim Jones predicted that after a nuclear apocalypse on July 15, 1967, survivors would found a new Eden: socialist, of course.

Mr. Jones called his little group The People's Temple of the Disciples of Christ, but I don't think the People's Temple can reasonably be called a Christian church. Mr. Jones apparently called Christianity a "fly-away religion" that oppressed women and enslaved "people of color." Back in the '60s that notion may have seemed novel, and that's another topic.

1967 brought "Captain_Scarlet_and_the_Mysterons" and "All You Need is Love, but no apocalypse: nuclear or otherwise.

The mass murder-suicide in Guyana started November 17, 1978, when Congressman Leo Ryan; news media workers Don Harris, Bob Brown, Greg Robinson; and escaping Temple follower Patricia Parks were killed at an airstrip. On the evening of November 18, 1978, Jim Jones and his followers drank poisoned Flavor Aid. The final body count was 918: 642 adults and 276 children.

Marshall Applewhite and 38 of his Heaven's Gate followers spent their last days in a San Diego-area gated community. On March 24, 25, and 26, 1997, they methodically killed themselves.

By now, I suppose someone has blamed Christianity, Congress, flavored beverages, gated communities, vodka, or Star Trek for these deaths. I'm inclined to see them as somewhat extreme examples of human folly.

Standby Alert: Two Millennia and Counting

I'm a Catholic, so I take the Last Judgment seriously. That is emphatically not the same as quivering in fear every time something odd happens, or the latest 'prophecy' gets trotted out. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1038-1041)

This creation's closing ceremony could start any time, but my guess is that it's not imminent. We've been on standby alert for about two millennia, and that's another topic. (Matthew 25:13)

When the Second Person of the Trinity was here, my Lord said:

"²¹ But of that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, ²² but the Father alone.' ..."
(Matthew 24:36)

Pretty much the same thing is in Mark 13:32. I'm willing to leave the decision to God, and concentrate on my part of the job outlined in Matthew 28:19-20. Not everyone feels that way.

I could try slicing and dicing Bible verses and history trivia to get a nifty new Apocalypse prediction — but I really do not need that kind of trouble. My particular judgment is coming within the next few decades, and that's another topic. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1021-1022, 1051)

Related posts:

• "Apocalypse Whenever"
  (June 14, 2011)
• "Last Judgment: Attendance Mandatory"
  (May 21, 2011)
• "Oh, Rapture! Here Come the End Times - Again"
  (May 20, 2011)
• "God Knows, I Don't: And That's Okay"
  (November 14, 2010)
• "Death, Judgment, Heaven, Hell, and Warm Fuzzies"
  (August 8, 2010)

Smallpox, Science, and Silliness

We've lived with, and died from, smallpox for a dozen millennia. Egypt's Ramses V, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, and millions whose names are not remembered, suffered from the disease.

Smallpox wasn't an entirely fatal disease. About two of every three who caught the worst sort didn't die: but were scarred for life.

One of the few advantages to surviving smallpox was that it didn't strike the same person twice. Somewhere along the line, folks also noticed that the disease wasn't as severe for those who caught it from a contaminated break in the skin.

That practical observation led to variolation, deliberately infecting someone so that their bout with smallpox was more survivable, which reduced the smallpox death toll. It was an early step on the road to contemporary medicine.

I don't recall anyone objecting when the United Nations declared that smallpox was extinct on May 8, 1980. But in the "good old days" when folks like Edward Jenner were developing inoculations against smallpox, it was a different story.

Beware the Tiny Cows!

(From James Gillray, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
"The Cow-Pock—or—the Wonderful Effects of the New Inoculation!"
(James Gillray's warning against the perils of preventing smallpox. (1802))

Concern over new medical technology is nothing new.

For example, in 1802 James Gillray warned the British public against a controversial medical technology: inoculation. Meanwhile, the London Fever Hospital opened, "to the great horror of the neighbours." It was the first voluntary fever hospital, and that's another topic.

James Gillray may have realized that using cowpox inoculations to prevent smallpox wouldn't really make little tiny cows burst from the nose, face, and assorted other embarrassing spots.

Then again, maybe he did. Let's take a closer look at Mr. Gillray's illustration.


(From James Gillray, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Detail of James Gillray's "The Cow-Pock—or—the Wonderful Effects of the New Inoculation!")

Mr. Gillray's illustration includes a picture on the wall that looks a bit like Nicolas Poussin's The Adoration of the Golden Calf.

The golden calf incident happened after Moses had presented the Decalog, which included a rule about carving idols, and a list of more detailed rules. (Exodus 20:4)

When Moses delivered the Decalog and rules, "the people ... answered with one voice:"

"When Moses came to the people and related all the words and ordinances of the LORD, they all answered with one voice, 'We will do everything that the LORD has told us.' "
(Exodus 24:3)

Not long after, some of them apparently changed their minds. (Exodus 32:1-35)

I know about statues and crucifixes, by the way; believe that idolatry is a bad idea; and that's yet another topic. Topics. (May 17, 2013; July 15, 2012)

Fear and Weirdness, 1722

(From Henry Baker, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Henry Baker's 1756 drawing of microscopes owned by Antonie van Leeuwenhoek.)

Anton van Leeuwenhoek saw microorganisms in his microscope in the 1670s, but it wasn't until early 1800s that Agostino Bassi linked Leuwenhoek's 'worms' with disease. We'd discovered that variolation, a now-obsolete method of inoculation, often prevented disease: but hadn't a clue why or how.

Scientists worked the bugs out of the germ theory of disease later in the 19th century.

Until then, with no solid theoretical foundation, and anything but consistent application of treatments, rational skepticism about inoculation made sense. Experimental medicine is — experimental: although I think it can be a good idea, and that common sense and ethics apply. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2292-2295)


(From Peter Pelham, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Cotton Mather, American Puritan clergyman and vaccination supporter.)

While folks like Leeuwenhoek were laying the foundations of today's medical science, some preachers were saying that God makes sinners sick: or uses the threat of deadly disease to bludgeon us into righteousness.

Weaving a tale of noble scientists struggling against ignorant preachers and their superstitious stooges might make a ripping tale. Real life isn't that simple.

In 1721, Puritan minister Cotton Mather urged doctors to try inoculating against smallpox. Dr. Zabdiel Boylston was the only one who didn't refuse. A protester threw a bomb through Mather's window, but more folks got inoculated anyway.

In 1722, English minister Edmund Massey taught that inoculation was sinful because God frightened folks into virtue. I'm not making this up:

"...The fear of disease is a happy restraint to men. If men were more healthy, 'tis a great chance they would be less righteous. Let the Atheist and the Scoffer inoculate. Their hope is in and for only this life. Let us bless God for the Afflictions He sends upon us, and grant us patience under them...."
("Against the Dangerous and Sinful Practice of Inoculation," Edmund Massey (1722))

Preachers, Priests, and the Pope, 1814

(From Britannica Kids, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Louis Pasteur, Catholic and scientist.)

Edward Jenner's vaccination experiments triggered strong reactions, sensible and otherwise:

"Smallpox is a visitation from God; but the cowpox is produced by presumptuous man; the former was what Heaven ordained, the latter is, perhaps, a daring violation our of holy religion."
(A physician's reaction to Dr. Edward Jenner's experiments in developing a vaccine for smallpox, (1796) via Psychological Sciences, Vanderbilt University)

---

"...In contrast, many village priests in Italy, Germany, Switzerland, and England not only urged parishioners to seek the preventative treatment, they became wholesale vaccinators themselves. Pastors in Bohemia charged parents with responsibility 'before God for neglecting the vaccination of their children.' In 1814, the Pope himself endorsed vaccination as 'a precious discovery which ought to be a new motive for human gratitude to Omnipotence.'..."
("Deliberate extinction: Whether to Destroy the Last Smallpox Virus," pp. 19-20, David A. Koplow, Georgetown University Law Center (2004))

That would have been Pius VII, the 251st pope, who said vaccination was "a precious discovery which ought to be a new motive for human gratitude to Omnipotence."

A generation later, Louis Pasteur, a Catholic layman and scientist, helped prove that microorganisms cause at least some diseases. Developing germ theory was anything but a one-man show, though, and that's yet again another topic.

I suspect that persistent claims that he wasn't really Catholic stem partly from his belief that "mixing science and religion" was a bad idea. ("Louis Pasteur," Faith and spirituality, Wikipedia)

If by "mixing science and religion," Pasteur meant ignoring results that don't support notions we inherited from ancient Mesopotamian myth and folklore: I agree. (January 3, 2014)

Faith, Science, and Getting a Grip

It might be easier to either decide that all new ideas are the work of Satan, or that any criticism of new ideas is inspired by superstitious fear.

That wouldn't make sense, though.

Since I'm a Catholic, I don't have to pretend that ancient Mesopotamians knew more than NASA. I'm also encouraged to use my brain. (Catechism, 1778)

I'm also expected to believe what the Church says about God and humanity. Happily, the Catholic Church and the Non Sequitur's Church of Danae have very little in common.

Truth is important. (Catechism, 2464-2503)

Lying is wrong. (Catechism, 2482-2486)

So far, many folks might agree with what the Church says. The next few points may be controversial.

Human beings are animals, and people. We are made in the image and likeness of God: each of us is an "animal endowed with reason," who can control his or her own actions. (Catechism, 1700, 1730, 1951)

Sin can involve the body, but the body is basically good. (Genesis 1:27, 31; Catechism, 362-368, 2515-2516)

Except for humans, animals aren't people. They are for our use, not the other way around: but we can't 'do anything we want' with animals, because they belong to God. (Catechism, 2415-2416, 2418)

I don't expect God to shield me from illness: but whether I let illness drive me to despair, or not, is up to me. Being healthy is a good thing, and so is taking reasonable steps in staying healthy. We also recognize a charism of healing. (Catechism, 1264, 1500-1525, 2275, 2288-2296)

Medical and psychological research is a good thing, too: but like anything else we do, ethics are vital. (Catechism, 2292-2296)

Organ transplants are okay in many cases, and organ donation after death is a good idea. We're not allowed to break one person down for parts for another's benefit, though. Ethics again. (Catechism, 2296)

We should trust God, because the Almighty is in control, knows and provides for our needs, and deserves our trust. (Matthew 6:31-33; Catechism, 303-305)

The end does not justify the means. Ever. (Catechism, 1759)

After centuries of warnings about the "sinful practice of inoculation," it's small wonder that some folks see any "religious" objection to scientific research as nonsense. Dire warnings against Satanic rock music didn't help, and that's another topic.

I'll be back Friday, with my take on a human-pig hybrid, and why I do not think Tokyo will be ravaged by a giant mutant safflower.

Related posts:

• "Reason, Evidence, and Searching for Truth"
  (February 3, 2013)
• "Faith, Health, and Feeling Foggy"
  (September 8, 2013)
• "April 25, 2012 Honoring the Body, Within Reason"
  (April 25, 2012)
• "God the Almighty, Providence, and Some Guy in Minnesota"
  (February 1, 2012)
• "Prayer, Medicine and Trusting God"
  (March 4, 2010)

More:

• "Deliberate extinction: Whether to Destroy the Last Smallpox Virus"
  David A. Koplow, Georgetown University Law Center (2004)
  (From http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1126&context=facpub (February 11, 2014))

2 + 2 = 4, Therefore … : Getting a Grip about Faith and Science

The notion that the Bible is supposed to tell us everything about the world boiled over in the mid-19th century.

Most of the sound and fury against 'un-Biblical' ideas has been focused on science: particularly the "religion of the Antichrist," evolution.

Heathen Numerals and 'End Times Bible Prophecies'

(Oakland Blog, via SFGate, used w/o permission)

It could have been worse. Someone might have claimed that because two and two equals four, God cannot exist: and we'd have folks demanding that Satanic arithmetic be banned from schools.

I don't think that two plus to equals four proves that God does exist, but I don't refuse to believe in multiplication because there isn't a multiplication table in the Bible. I'm not even outraged by today's Hindu-Arabic numerals.

Maybe someone's stitched together Revelation 2:10, Luke 15:4, Isaiah 60:22: proving to his satisfaction that multiplication and a base ten numbering system are "Biblical."

Somehow, coming up with 'End Times Bible Prophecies' seems to be a male preoccupation. Maybe it has something to do with Y chromosomes and the corpus callosum, and that's another topic. Topics.

Oddly enough, I've never encountered someone who refused to use the symbols 0 through 9, despite their 'heathen' origins. Yet more topics.

Newfangled Ideas and the Papist Peril

Folks getting upset about newfangled ideas is nothing new.

About eight centuries back, some European scholars realized that we might be living in a really big universe. Others insisted that there couldn't be other worlds: because Aristotle said so. In 1277, the Church stepped in: and ever since, claiming that we must be standing on the only world has been against the rules for Catholics.

Telling God what He can't do seems silly, at best: and the same principle can be applied to searching for life in the universe. My opinion. I'll get back to that in another post.

Roughly three and a half centuries back, a Calvinist fired back at new ideas with a well-researched bit of Biblical scholarship. His chronology placed the moment of creation at nightfall before October 23, 4004 BC.

The Ussher chronology is still with us. A remarkable number of Catholics fervently support the 17th-century Calvinist's timetable. They may be unaware that Ussher also worked hard to protect Christians from 'papists:'

"The religion of the papists is superstitious and idolatrous; their faith and doctrine erroneous and heretical; their church in respect of both, apostatical; to give them therefore a toleration, or to consent that they may freely exercise their religion, and profess their faith and doctrine, is a grievous sin."
("James Ussher," Primate of All Ireland, Wikipedia)

If Ussher had been right about creation's age, accepting his timetable would make sense. Evidence that Earth is much more than six millennia old was mounting in the 18th century, so I don't agree: but I'm a papist, and Ussher warned folks about my sort. Moving on.

Science and Common Sense

(From TrollArt.com, via Google Developers, Google+, used w/o permission.)

I don't think God is a liar. Even if I did, it wouldn't matter, because I also believe that God created the universe I live in: and defined what is real and what isn't.

Since I believe that God is truth, and that truth cannot contradict truth, I must also believe that studying what God created is okay. (Catechism, 144, 159)

That's not just my opinion. Pope Paul VI wrote that honest scientific research can't get in the way of faith, since faith and the physical world both come from God:

"...Therefore if methodical investigation within every branch of learning is carried out in a genuinely scientific manner and in accord with moral norms, it never truly conflicts with faith, for earthly matters and the concerns of faith derive from the same God...."
(36., "Gaudium et Spes," Pope Paul VI (December 7, 1965); via Internet Office of the Holy See)

Thomas Aquinas said that truth cannot contradict truth, by the way.

Second Vatican Council: Real and Imagined

The second Vatican council (II Vatican Council) happened in 1965. I was in my mid-teens at the time, worshiping in the mainstream Protestant church I grew up in: and trying to make sense of a changing world.

The '60s were a distressing decade for folks who liked the status quo. The second Vatican council didn't introduce new dogmas, or forbid anything new: but it did acknowledge that the 20th century presented new challenges, and opportunities. Some American Catholics decided that the Holy See was wrong: and set up their own little churches.

"Gaudium et Spes" is one of the four Constitutions of II Vatican. I suspect that Pope Paul VI's failure to condemn science helped convince some tightly-wound American Catholics that the second Vatican council was a mistake: and that their little circle of acquaintances were the only "real" Catholics left.

As I've said before, Catholics aren't Calvinists. But some of us get our native culture and Church teachings confused. America's default Christian beliefs are, arguably, Calvinist: and it's often easier to go along with cultural norms.

Some American priests — and, sadly, bishops — decided that II Vatican Council gave them artistic license to remodel their churches and rewrite the Mass. The results were almost as accurate a reflection of the council's documents as the Three Stooges' portrayal of American jurisprudence. (January 19, 2014)

I'm not happy about some changes in American culture: but I most certainly do not want a return to the "good old days." My memory's too good for that.

"Happy days" America was nice for men who looked and acted sufficiently WASPish to get by in a booming post-war economy, and that's yet again another topic.

"The Religion of the Antichrist"

I take my faith very seriously. The Bible, Sacred Scripture, is an important part of that faith. (Catechism, 101-133)

I read and study the Bible regularly, and have read it cover-to-cover. That last took quite a long time. But I don't believe that it's a science textbook: or a computer manual. (January 14, 2011)

I also take the Antichrist seriously - to a point. The "religion of the Antichrist" that I'm concerned about is a "...pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God...." (1 John 2:18; 2 John:7; Catechism, 675)

Putting myself, or humanity, or anything else that is not God, in God's place is idolatry: and a profoundly bad idea. (Catechism, 2097, 2112-2114)

My faith doesn't depend on science: but it's not threatened by knowledge. If anything, what we're learning about the scale of this universe encourages even deeper reverence for its Creator.

Finally, here's a longer excerpt from II Vatican council's "Gaudium et Spes:"

"...Therefore if methodical investigation within every branch of learning is carried out in a genuinely scientific manner and in accord with moral norms, it never truly conflicts with faith, for earthly matters and the concerns of faith derive from the same God. Indeed whoever labors to penetrate the secrets of reality with a humble and steady mind, even though he is unaware of the fact, is nevertheless being led by the hand of God, who holds all things in existence, and gives them their identity. Consequently, we cannot but deplore certain habits of mind, which are sometimes found too among Christians, which do not sufficiently attend to the rightful independence of science and which, from the arguments and controversies they spark, lead many minds to conclude that faith and science are mutually opposed...."
(36., "Gaudium et Spes," Pope Paul VI (December 7, 1965); via Internet Office of the Holy See)

Related posts:

• "Cave Men, Sea Monsters, Dead Scorpions, and Theoretical Physics"
  (January 31, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Faith and Reason
• "Cockroaches, Spiders, and — Things"
  (January 10, 2014)
  Particularly
  • "...The Big Problem..."
  • Clash of the 'isms'
  • "This Antithesis is Absurd"
• "Personal Preference, Reality, and Dealing with Knowledge"
  (January 2, 2014)
  Particularly
  • "Evolution: The Religion of the Antichrist"
• "Truth Cannot Contradict Truth"
  (October 13, 2013)
• "When to Call Tech Support, When to Read the Bible"
  (January 14, 2011)

Going to Hell With Dante

"...There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally pleased by both errors and hail a materialist or a magician with the same delight...."
(C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, via C.S. Lewis Quotes, About.com)

I think quite a few folks still enthusiastically commit both errors: not that the same person would be likely to nurture a Faustian fascination with the demonic and insist that demons, angels, and all things spiritual are nonsense. Marlowe's Doctor Faustus nearly does so: but he's a character in an Elizabethan drama. (October 10, 2011)

The "excessive and unhealthy interest" in devils that Lewis discussed isn't, I think, limited to folks who try to make demons work for them. Colorful faith healers of earlier generations and folks who see no problem with do-it-yourself exorcisms don't enjoy a prominent place in American society today, which is just as well.

Knowing my Limits

I have the same authority to cast out demons that any other Christian has: but I'm not an exorcist. Prayers like "Saint Michael, the archangel" and sprinkling holy water are pretty close to my limit.

I'm no more qualified to go toe-to-toe with Satan, than I am ready to join a SWAT team. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1506, 1668, 1673; Code of Canon Law, 1172)

I don't think holy water, or the words of any prayer, are magic, by the way. That would be superstition: which is against the rules. Using holy water reminds me of my baptism, it's a sacramental, and that's another topic. Topics. (Catechism, 1667-1673, 2111)

Jonathan Edwards, Mark Twain, and Me

Jonathan Edwards didn't invent Hell, but his "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" sermon helped popularize it in America: sort of.

Back in 1741, when Edwards wrote "...Angry God," the Great Awakening was firing folks up with fear of hellfire.

The Great Awakening passed, but the notion that God has anger management issues didn't: along with several distorted ideas about Hell. Several generations after "...Angry God," Samuel Clemens/Mark Twain wrote:

"I don't like to commit myself about heaven and hell - you see, I have friends in both places.

"When I think of the number of disagreeable people that I know who have gone to a better world, I am sure hell won't be so bad at all."
(Mark Twain, p.377 of Evan Esar, "20,000 quips & quotes" (1968))

"I studied a minute, sort of holding my breath, and then says to myself: 'All right, then I'll go to Hell."
(Mark Twain, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1885), via Bartlett's Quotations, 16th ed.)

By the late 20th century, quite a few Americans had decided that Hell didn't exist at all. Others apparently thought it was a place for folks they didn't like, and I had become a Catholic: which is yet another topic.

More of my take on coming attractions and common sense:

• "An Eternal Life I can Live With"
  (August 27, 2011)
• "Hell, Heaven, Character, and Culture"
  (June 23, 2011)

Hell: Real; Optional; and Undesirable

Hell is quite real. It's not the climate that makes it a punishment: it is the eternal separation from God.

God didn't create anyone whose inevitable destination was Hell: but every person can decide that loving God isn't worthwhile, and walk away from eternal happiness. I think that's a daft decision, but it is an option. (Catechism, 1033-1037)

Hell isn't a counterpart of Heaven run by an 'antigod.' Satan is just a created being, an angel who misused free will and convinced some other angels to reject God. (Catechism, 328-330, 391-395, 632-635)

God won't drag anyone into Heaven, kicking and screaming. We aren't forced into Hell, either. Where we spend eternity depends on choices we make: to love and serve God, or not. (Catechism, 1021-1022, 1854-1864)

Sin and Judgment

As I said last week, sin isn't all about sex, drugs, and rock & roll. It is a failure to love God and love our neighbor.

Realizing that some action is sinful is one thing. Deciding that the person who commits the act is going to Hell is profoundly imprudent:

"^{1 2} Stop judging, that you may not be judged.

"For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you...."
(Matthew 7:1-5)

We're supposed to leave the final judgment of individuals up to God. (Catechism, 1854-1864)

We know about Saints because of what they do, and that's yet again another topic. ("New Laws for the Causes of Saints," Congregation for the Causes of Saints(1983))

In Dante's version of Hell, lust is assigned the second circle: a windy place for folks who let emotions run their lives.

There's nothing wrong with emotions, God designed us to experience them. But God also gave us reason, and expects us to use it. (Catechism, 1763-1770, 1778)

No sin is unimportant, but some merely hurt our relationship with God: while some sever it entirely. The good news is that it takes a conscious, deliberate rejection of God and God's mercy to sever our ties with the Almighty.

Deliberately ignoring God is an option, not noticing the Almighty isn't. (Catechism, 1849, 1854-1864)

Hell, Imagined

Dante Alighieri's "Divine Comedy" reflects an educated 14th century Catholic layman's view of Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory: but it's not an official Catholic document.

The "Divine Comedy" isn't a theological treatise, either. It's a poem, a work of imagination. Dante populated his (fictional) Hell with folks he knew, or knew about. I've run across several explanations for that creative choice.

Maybe he really was a vindictive little twerp who was trying to "get even" for insults, real or imagined. Maybe he had deep-seated neuroses. Or maybe Dante used the names of people his readers would recognize, because their public lives made them exemplars of some particular failing.

I think the later explanation is more plausible: particularly since Dante went to the trouble of writing two more epic-length segments of "The Divine Comedy" after "Inferno."

Dante wasn't the first to imagine what Hell might look like, but his epic poem helped shape today's imagery. Again, Dante's terraced funnel is fictional: a poet's image, not Church teaching.


(From Mediakron Dante, Gregory Kane, used w/o permission.)

I think it's also important to remember that Dante's "Divine Comedy" takes the poet and reader on a guided tour of Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise. It's an effective way of showing the "big picture," even if it's an allegory, not a gazetteer.

Here's an overview of Heaven, Hell, and everything in between: as imagined by Dante.


(From Mediakron Dante, Gregory Kane, used w/o permission.)

Those concentric spheres make it look like Dante put Earth in the middle of the universe. I think it's more accurate to say that we live near the bottom. In "The Divine Comedy," the only place downhill from here is Hell. Late Medieval and Renaissance cosmology is - you guessed it - another topic.

Finally, we get one life, one final decision, and that's it. Purgatory is a sort of ICU for folks who died in God's grace and friendship, but aren't ready for heaven. (Catechism, 1021-1022, 1030-1032)

Related posts:

• "Poetry, Sin, and Getting a Grip"
  (November 24, 2013)
• "Catholics, Credulity, and Credibility"
  (February 12, 2012)
  Particularly
  • Religion, Psychiatric Conditions, and Getting a Grip
• "Faith, Reason, and Exorcisms"
  (May 17, 2011)
• "Demons: The Other Angels"
  (February 20, 2011)
• "Oh, Hell: You Mean That Place Really Exists?"
  (November 20, 2010)
  Particularly
  • Heaven, Hell, and Free Will

Old Water, Older Fossils, and Extraterrestrial Etiquette

Bacteria-infested water can be a nuisance or a health hazard. When it's from two miles underground, it can be exciting evidence from the dawn of life on Earth. I'm fascinated by that sort of thing. Your experience may vary.

1. Craters, Lakes, and Life
2. MISS: Signs of Ancient Life
3. Interstellar Diplomacy and Ignoring Strict Guidelines
   • Opinions and Control Freaks
4. Really Old Water

---

Space Aliens

One of the news items I picked for this week shows what some "experts" say about how we should deal with extraterrestrial intelligence. Some of what they said makes sense: although it's a little hard to see how anyone can be an expert on space aliens.

Tabloid headlines of earlier decades notwithstanding, we still don't know if there's life of any sort beyond Earth: let alone intelligent life.

That hasn't stopped storytellers from weaving yarns, though.

Space aliens in the movies have been invaders; infiltrators; saviors; and, like, real groovy:

• Independence Day (1996)
• Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
• Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)
• The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)

If we meet neighbors who aren't human, but who share our mix of free will and material form, I'm pretty sure that some folks will be upset. Others may expect the space aliens to solve all our problems, and someone's likely to see if they'll buy the Brooklyn bridge.

Being Human

I don't think that we're alone, or that we're not. Right now, we don't know. What we're learning about the billions of planets in this galaxy suggests that we're probably not the only creatures with a body and soul. On the other hand, if we share this universe with other people: I suspect that they're not quite like us.

People with the insatiable desire to see what's 'over the next hill' would, it seems to me, have found us a long time ago.

If we're not alone, our neighbors probably 'aren't human' in more ways than one. IF they were, we'd probably be selling souvenirs to tourists from the stars, struggling to win our planet back, or explaining why "football" isn't the same game on all continents.

I hope we find folks who, like us, share characteristics of both living creatures and angels. It would be an opportunity to learn what parts of "human nature" come from being human: and what comes with being - people.

More about being human, from a Catholic perspective: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 362-368, 1703.

Hate: Not an Option

Even if space aliens were the most gentle, friendly, innocuous folks imaginable: I'm sure that some of the billions of human people would hate them. I've written about original sin, hate, tolerance, and being Catholic before. Bottom line, we're not allowed to hate anybody. (September 11, 2012; July 11, 2012; December 9, 2010)

Right now, the Church says that humanity is "a unity" because we're all related. (Catechism, 360)

I do not think that implies that folks who aren't human - 'aren't human:' not in the sense that we'd be allowed to mistreat them. That simply doesn't fit with what we're told about social justice, and that's another topic. (Catechism, 1928-1942)

Rules, Neighbors, Stewardship

The rules are simple:

• Love God, love your neighbor
  • Bible
    • Matthew 22:36-40
    • Mark 12:29-31
    • Luke 10:25-27
  • Catechism of the Catholic Church
    • 1822
• Everybody's our neighbor
  • Bible
    • Matthew 5:43-44
    • Luke 10:29-37
  • Catechism
    • 1825

We're also supposed to trust God: and plan ahead. (Catechism, 227, 2115)

One more thing, before I get started on big craters, old microbes, and space aliens.

Our job description includes "subduing" nature. That's not the same as strip-mining the land and poisoning Earth's oceans. We're supposed to remember that we're stewards. (Catechism, 373, 1880, 2432, 2415, 2432)

---

1. Craters, Lakes, and Life

(Don Davis/CORBIS, via Space.com, used w/o permission.)
"A new study says impacts may be deadly at first, but their craters can later provide a habitat for life."

"Alien Life May Thrive in Impact Craters"
Amanda Doyle, Astrobiology Magazine, via Space.com (November 13, 2013)

"An asteroid or comet smashing into the surface of a planet can spell doom for living creatures, but if the impact isn't large enough to completely decimate a planet's inhabitants, then the crater can ultimately provide a habitat for life. That's the finding of a new study reported at the European Planetary Science Congress in September by Iain Gilmour of the Open University in the United Kingdom.

"If an ice- or water-rich area is the victim of an impact, the combination of heat and groundwater will create what is known as a hydrothermal system. In addition, many complex organic compounds, which could be precursor molecules for life, are created at high temperatures such as those generated by a collision. This combination could create the ingredients needed for life as we know it, making impact-induced habitats a potential candidate for the birthplace of life on Earth.

"For a habitat within a crater to remain 'home sweet home,' there must be a constant supply of water and nutrients. The lifetime of the hydrothermal system is also crucial, as the heat from the impact will eventually fade away into its surroundings...."

Three near-simultaneous impacts 65,000,000 years back probably helped dinosaurs die out. (September 29, 2013)

That's "near simultaneous" from a geological perspective. Something hit what's now the Ukraine, forming Boltysh Crater, about a thousand years or so before the 'big one' near the edge of today's Yucatán Peninsula. That makes the Ukraine crater a good model for learning how fast impact craters cool off on Earth.

Looks like Boltysh Crater took between 30,000 and 40,000 years to cool off, but a similar crater in Canada, the Haughton impact crater, only took 5,000 years. The obvious difference is that Boltysh Crater filled with water almost immediately (geologically); while the one in Canada didn't become a lake until millions of years after it formed.

As Gilmour pointed out, 30,000 to 40,000 years isn't much time: not compared to how long life's been around here on Earth. For incoming meteors and comets to keep habitats going on a cold but icy world, a whole lot of impacts would have to happen: often, and near enough to let critters migrate from a cooling habitat to newer ones.

Even so, studying impact sites and how they affect life should help us learn more about how life started here: and maybe show us where to look for life on other worlds.

---

2. MISS: Signs of Ancient Life

(Nora Noffke/Carnegie Institute, via FoxNews.com, used w/o permission.)
"A rock surface displaying polygonal oscillation cracks in the 3.48 billion years old Dresser Formation, Pilbara region, Western Australia.
(Nora Noffke/Carnegie Institute)"

"Evidence of 3.5-billion-year-old bacterial ecosystems may be earliest sign of life on Earth"
FoxNews.com (November 13, 2013)

"Scientists have discovered what may be the earliest sign of life on Earth. Remains of nearly 3.5-billion-year-old bacteria has been found in north-west Australia.

"Evidence of the never-before-seen bacteria was found in sedimentary rocks in the remote Pilbara region, home to the world's oldest rock formations.

" 'There was plenty of life from the 3.4 and 3.43 billion-year-old mark - this is pushing it further back,' researcher David Wacey, from the University of Western Australia told The Telegraph.

"While there are no cells from the microbially induced sedimentary structures (MISS) to be studied under the microscope, scientists observed the marks left behind created by large clusters of microbes...."

This is a big deal in several ways: it's the earliest MISS found so far, by about 300,000,000 years; and the fossils help show what sort of conditions the bacteria lived in. What we learn about the Pilbara fossils should help guide Mars rovers, that are looking for similar structures.

More:

• "Evidence of 3.5 Billion Year Old Bacterial Ecosystems Found in Australia"
  Astrobiology.com (November 12, 2013)

---

3. Interstellar Diplomacy and Ignoring Strict Guidelines

(Columbia Pictures. via Space.com, used w/o permission.)

"Extraterrestrial Etiquette: How Should Humanity Interact with Alien Life?"
Miriam Kramer, Space.com (October 23, 2013)

"Humanity should start thinking about how to interact with alien species long before coming into contact with extraterrestrial life, experts say.

"Coming up with a strict set of guidelines that govern the way people on future interstellar space missions study and interact with aliens is imperative before anyone blasts off to a distant world, according to attendees at Starship Congress in August.

"While a 'prime directive' - the rule that prevented Star Fleet officers from interfering with the business of alien life-forms on TV's 'Star Trek' - might be a little extreme, such a rule could help govern interactions between aliens and humans...."

Project Icarus founder Kelvin Long says that if we run into other folks in the universe, it'll be a big event. That, I'll agree with. He also said it:

"...'...will need to be managed with great care and to ensure our culture and their culture remains intact and not disrupted by this new knowledge'...."
(Kelvin Long, via Space.com)

It's quite possible that Long sees a need to 'manage' contact between humanity and people who aren't human. I'm not sure what he thinks being "disrupted" means. If he sees any significant change as a disruption, there's no way that 'first contact' wouldn't disrupt the myriad cultures and subcultures we have: short of ignoring our neighbors.

More opinions from the article:

• Armen Papazian, CEO of the International Space Development Hub
  • Either we trust that this is
    • A beautiful universe, an incredible cosmos
    • An amazing landscape
  • Or we will
    • "Utilize" it
    • "Export our scarcity economics"
• Icarus Interstellar
  • President Richard Obousy
    • Settling on other planets may not be
      Necessary
    • Desirable
  • Designer James Benford
    • Humans
      • Are curious
      • "Like to explore"
      • Won't leave other people alone
    • Dealing with other cultures
      • Is complex
      • Requires research
• Tennessee Valley Interstellar Workshop's Les Johnson
  • Before interacting directly
    • Learn as much as possible
  • Learn all you can learn before risking any kind of direct interaction
  • Leave anything that's alive alone
  • Don't bring samples back
    • We might contaminated our ecosystem

Some ideas from the panel, like trying not to hurt other folks, make sense. Others sound like the currently-fashionable fears of environmental disasters and capitalistic imperialistic warmonger America, projected on the stars.

Opinions and Control Freaks

I'm dubious about opinions that reduce complex situations to simple 'either-or' options, and that's another yet topic.

Opinions about space aliens often are like a Rorschach test. They tell more about the person than what we can expect from extraterrestrial intelligence:

• "Beware Warmonger Imperialist Space Aliens!?"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (January 11, 2011)
• "The Aliens are Coming! The Aliens are Coming!"
  Drifting at the Edge of Time and Space (April 26, 2010)
• "Nuclear Weapons, Space Aliens, Conspiracy Theories, and Getting a Grip"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (September 24, 2010)

This one, I'll take with a pinch of salt:

"...'It wasn't just guns, disease and steel, it was the shock of finding out that you're not even No. 1, you're not even No. 3, Benford said. 'That is a thing to really worry about.'..."
(Icarus Interstellar designer's James Benford, via Space.com)

Learning that humanity has neighbors who are bigger, smarter, or richer than we are wouldn't "shock" me: provided that they aren't actively hostile. Being Catholic, I realize that humans are as far down the ladder of creation as it gets, for conscious creatures. If anything, it'd be nice to have some company at our end, other than critters like ravens, ragweed, and rocks. (March 28, 2012)

Finally, this refreshing expression of good sense:

"...'A vibrant interstellar civilization will be essentially ungovernable, and that observing such guidelines will be strictly left up to each and every first contact team to obey or not obey at their discretion,' Johnson said. 'When someone is several light-years from home and they've encountered something they never encountered before, they're going to be making the decisions regardless of what the guiding moral principles might have been when they left home.'..."
(Miriam Kramer, Space.com)

Control freaks won't like the idea that 'experts' back home can't regulate everything: but it works for me.

---

4. Really Old Water

(B. Sherwood Lollar et al., via LiveScience, used w/o permission.)
"A scientists takes a sample of water from a mine deep underground in Ontario, Canada. The water turned out to be 2.6 billion years old, the oldest known water on Earth."

"Oldest Water on Earth Found Deep Underground"
Charles Q. Choi, OurAmazingPlanet, LiveScience (May 15, 2013)

"A pocket of water some 2.6 billion years old - the most ancient pocket of water known by far, older even than the dawn of multicellular life - has now been discovered in a mine 2 miles below the Earth's surface.

"The finding, announced in the May 16 issue of the journal Nature, raises the tantalizing possibility that ancient life might be found deep underground not only within Earth, but in similar oases that may exist on Mars, the scientists who studied the water said.

"Geoscientist Barbara Sherwood Lollar at the University of Toronto and her colleagues have investigated deep mines across the world since the 1980s. Water can flow into fractures in rocks and become isolated deep in the crust for many years, serving as a time capsule of what their environments were like at the time they were sealed off...."

They found this water in copper and zinc mines near Timmins, Ontario. It's much saltier than seawater, with dissolved chemicals: like water around hydrothermal vents at the ocean's floor. I remember when scientists were finding so many critters living in 'uninhabitable' places that they came up with a new word: extremophile. It's possible that life started around hydrothermal vents, not tidal pools.

Either way, we've learned that life can flourish in places where we can't: and apparently can survive for a very long time in isolated pockets. Provided that it 'took root,' we might find some sort of life buried deep in Mars: or elsewhere.

Related posts:

• Life
  • "Oxygen, Ice, and Our Changing Earth"
    (August 30, 2013)
    Particularly
    • Genes: A Three-Billion-Year Legacy
  • "Tracing the Y Chromosome, Studying Fossil Proteins, Seeking Truth"
    (August 16, 2013)
    Particularly
    • Seeking Truth
    • About Life's Origins: New Evidence
  • "An Ancient Brain, Politics, and Searching for Life on Mars"
    (October 12, 2012)
    Particularly
    • Simple Critter with a Complex Brain, a Half-Billion Years Ago
  • "Taking Life a Thousand Years at a Time"
    (June 10, 2012)
    Particularly
    • Overwhelmingly Huge
    • Afterword
  • "Adam and Eve and All That"
    (May 15, 2012)
    Particularly
    • Family Photos and the Big Picture
• The universse
  
  • "Seriously Searching for Life in the Universe"
    (February 8, 2013)
    Particularly
    • Cargo Cults, Movies, and Me
  • "Studying Thousands of Worlds; Defending Life and Conscience on Ours"
    (December 28, 2012)
    Particularly
    • Neighbors?
  • "Genesis, Optimus Prime, and Victorian America"
    (April 10, 2012)
    Particularly
    • Poetry, Metaphor, and a Nation of Literalists
    • Astrobiology and the 'Vatican Science Academy'
  • "Humans: How do We Fit In? "
    (March 28, 2012)
    Particularly
    • "God Loves All His Creatures"
    • Deuteronomy Plus a Couple Dozen Centuries
  • "Science isn't a Four-Letter Word"
    (January 29, 2012)
    Particularly
    • Science, Religion, and (fictional) Christians
    • 1277 and All That
• And Everything
  • "Life in the Universe, God, and Getting a Grip"
    (October 17, 2013)
  • " 'In a State of Journeying' "
    (January 18, 2012)
  • "Gliese 581g, Alien Angst, and the Lemming"
    Apathetic Lemming of the North (October 4, 2010)
    Particularly
    • The Inevitable Upward March of Progress, Angst, and Getting a Grip
  • "Gods, Demons, and Used Spaceship Dealers"
    Drifting at the Edge of Time and Space (February 13, 2010)
  • " 'All We Want is Peace and Quiet' - Another Look at the Mind of the Alien"
    Drifting at the Edge of Time and Space (December 9, 2009)