(December 19, 2015 at 1:26 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: The Church only claims infallibility on official matters of faith and morals... example being the divinity of Jesus, the immaculate conception, life after death, etc.

Anyone, including The Church, can claim infallibility on anything though... it doesn't make it so.

Without evidence it's just "I'm sure I'm right about this!". And anyone can do that... and to be honest if anyone feels the need to do that I think that that just gives me an extra reason to doubt and be suspicious. Who needs to do that unless they haven't got actual facts and evidence and they're just trying to convince themselves and/or others of something that they want to believe and hope to believe but perhaps don't deep down believe it's really as real as they claim it is?

I think this is more about belief in belief itself and belief that professing belief is a good thing, and good for the world... than it's about actually believing in the existence of anything that corresponds to actual reality... and I don't mean corresponding to "reality" in practical, pragmatic terms to help one live one's life... but I mean corresponding to reality in terms of anything that actually corresponds to actual objective existence.

(December 19, 2015 at 1:26 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 19, 2015 at 1:18 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Oh you mean it was bullshit when it started but NOW they've got it right?

That was BS, yes. But like I said. Everything that is not a doctrinal teaching on faith and morals is subject to change as times change and as we learn more about the world around us. The Church only claims infallibility on official matters of faith and morals... example being the divinity of Jesus, the immaculate conception, life after death, etc.

Getting back to the topic at hand though.... The Church and mainstream Christianity in general are not at all in conflict with ET life. The first time I heard about there being any conflict was in this *atheist* forum lol. Emphasis on atheist. That should tell you something. 

(Oh, and I am speaking in the present, fyi.) 

Do those Holy Blinders you're wearing come in different shades?

(December 19, 2015 at 12:40 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 19, 2015 at 12:32 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model

I would hardly call 1822 "very recent history." 

More recently than that, slavery was legal in the United States. Yet no one busts that out to somehow try to suggest that America, as it stands today, endorses slavery.

Relatively speaking, I think 194 years out of 2016 is quite recent, to say the least.

As for other evils which the bible endorses and aren't endorsed in modern society, what does that really say about the validity of bible-based doctrines anyway?

(pssssst, your math is off)

^Well, it was until you edited lol.

(December 19, 2015 at 2:28 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (pssssst, your math is off)

Never was what I'm best at - fixed!

Still recent, btw.

(December 19, 2015 at 2:30 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote:

(December 19, 2015 at 2:28 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (pssssst, your math is off)

Never was what I'm best at - fixed!

Still recent, btw.

Everyone,

Read for yourself:

1. The proposition that the sun is in the center of the world and immovable from its place is absurd, philosophically false, and formally heretical; because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scriptures.
   
2. The proposition that the earth is not the center of the world, nor immovable, but that it moves, and also with a diurnal action, is also absurd, philosophically false, and, theologically considered, at least erroneous in faith.
   
   

http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1630galileo.asp

(December 19, 2015 at 2:36 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(December 19, 2015 at 2:30 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: Never was what I'm best at - fixed!

Still recent, btw.

Everyone,

Read for yourself:

1. The proposition that the sun is in the center of the world and immovable from its place is absurd, philosophically false, and formally heretical; because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scriptures.
   
2. The proposition that the earth is not the center of the world, nor immovable, but that it moves, and also with a diurnal action, is also absurd, philosophically false, and, theologically considered, at least erroneous in faith.
   
   

http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1630galileo.asp

Well, it is false that the sun doesn't move.

(December 19, 2015 at 2:41 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote:

(December 19, 2015 at 2:36 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Everyone,

Read for yourself:

1. The proposition that the sun is in the center of the world and immovable from its place is absurd, philosophically false, and formally heretical; because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scriptures.
   
2. The proposition that the earth is not the center of the world, nor immovable, but that it moves, and also with a diurnal action, is also absurd, philosophically false, and, theologically considered, at least erroneous in faith.
   
   

http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1630galileo.asp

Well, it is false that the sun doesn't move.

Of course, Galileo was wrong!  As was Tycho Brahe.

ET and Christ.

Evolution has already dismantled the entire enterprise: no Adam and Eve, no fall, no original sin, no need for a redeemer. This is why the RCC, despite its reasonable acceptance of modern science, must still maintain the assertion of a literal Adam and Eve. That's enough, but ET would make it more absurd.

Non-humans on this planet are exempt, will intelligent extra terrestrials also be exempt? The only other option would be to convince the flock that the the fall of non-existent people somehow imbued ET with original sin requiring redemption. If we were ever able to communicate I'm sure they will shit themselves laughing that people take this seriously.