Steven Carr

If his Church declared that the age of the Earth was outside the sphere of science, Bede would declare that he would not accept the empirical evidence that the Earth was old, just as he will never accept the empirical evidence that there is nothing but bread and wine after transubstantiation.

Bede

Skeptical,

What you seem to be saying is that if I experience X, I should go and ask someone else if they have experienced X too. So, if I do an experiment, it must be repeated before I can rely on it. And if I have a religious experience, I can rely on it when I have met a whole load of people who have had the same experience. So why privilege science? Ok, so in theory scientific experiments are the same whoever does them (in practice they aren't but we'll leave that can of worms unopened). But many things are not - taste, beauty, love etc. If we can accept that some things are not experienced by everyone, I don't see why we cannot have confidence in our religious experiences, especially when others make the same claims.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Toto

This opens another can of worms, perhaps beyond this forum. If religious experiences can be duplicated by stimulating the brain in a certain fashion or by certain drugs, does that make them invalid? If people in different conflicting religions have the same experience, does that indicate that differences between religions are not important, and the "intellectual" content of the religion is irrelevant (the New Age approach)? And how does that relate to transubstantiation, which has 0 evidence to support it?

Steven Carr

http://www.faith.org.uk/Publications...g/remaap03.htm
'For this latter expression leaves open the possibility that bread and wine still exist after the consecration, which is contrary to the faith of the Church that bread and wine are substantially changed into the true body and blood of Christ at the consecration, so that bread and wine as such cease to exist.'


The bread and wine no longer exist. What physical material does exist then?


The Catholic Church says the bread and wine cease to exist.

Simply put. Is this true? What matter IS present, if the bread and wine do not exist?

What should a Catholic scientist say about the relationship between Church dogma and science?

How can Bede write essays about how science does not conflict with religion, and every week, go to a ceremony where his Church tells him that the evidence of his own eyes misleads him about the nature of what he is consuming?

Science says the bread and wine do exist.

His Church states dogmatically that the bread and wine no longer exist.

Does Bede go with science or with Church dogma?

Amaleq13

You seem to have entirely missed Skeptical's point because this is not at all what he is saying. What he is actually saying is that you should seek out empirical evidence to support your experience.

Correct. This is the kind of empirical evidence he is talking about. Repeating the experiment establishes the reliability of the results.

Wrong. The number of folks repeating the same anecdotal evidence does not change it into empirical evidence. The former is notoriously unreliable but even more so when it lacks the latter.

Who says you can't have "confidence" in your religious experiences? What you cannot do is assert a subjective belief as an objective fact unless you have empirical evidence to support the claim. You can have "confidence" that a painting is beautiful but you cannot prove it in any objective fashion. No matter how many people agree that the painting is beautiful, that doesn't make an opposing view factually incorrect. Likewise, you can have "confidence" that your religious experience was genuine but you cannot prove it in any objective fashion unless you can provide empirical evidence to support it.

Amaleq13

If and when you decide to open this can, please do so in the Science & Skepticism forum. I'm sure those folks might have some questions for you. Let me know when you do so because I don't want to miss the fun.

Steven Carr

Bede is only following his Church's attitude to science

http://www.newoxfordreview.org/2002/...isscanlon.html

'Some, however, will find it difficult to accept this apparent conflict with physical science. Thus, Paul VI stated in No. 16 of Mysterium Fidei regarding this mystery of the Real Presence: "And so we must approach this mystery in particular with humility and reverence, not relying on human reasoning, which ought to hold its peace, but rather adhering firmly to divine Revelation.'

CARR
So when science conflicts with dogma, Bede's Church is firmly against reasoning.