6 thoughts on “Catherine Pepinster, professional Catholic”
This was just a laughable, not to say desperate and embarrassing attempt at defending the indefensible.
The Webb telescope images have taken everyone’s breath away, and made us even more thrilled and awed by the vastness of the universe, the countless galaxies it contains, and the extraordinary capacity of human intelligence and ingenuity in giving us all such astounding access to it, and improving our understanding of it.
It’s a brave (not to say reckless or stupid) person, then, who still holds out for a ‘creator god’ who made everything. Why then, Ms Pepinster, did that deity leave it so long in the history of ‘his’ creation before revealing himself, and giving some inaccurate account of the origin of ‘the world’ (a flat earth covered in a dome, by the way) to a few people in a tiny region of a planet in a planetary system that is a tiny part of just one of those countless galaxies? And why, after revealing himself, does he then require all his male adherents to undergo genital mutilation, and demand that animals be slaughtered, their blood daubed around altars, and carcasses burned for his satisfaction and placation?
Exactly Liverpudlian!
It is indefensible of the BBC to allow advocates of (Un)Intelligent Design to spread their misinformation without a right of reply. Especially during a period when we have been discussing telling the truth in public life.
I also thought that the poem quote was a strange one to use for a (probable) pro-lifer? “And we see God is not until he is born and also we see there is no end to the birth of God.”
And we see that a child is not until it is born… ??
A ray of hope flickers in the sky..we can see now why that song is so irritating and why it has become yet another inaccurate and cliche ridden carol for Christmas. I agree that to make brilliant outer space photography justification for Catholic creationism and Lady Chatterley making love in space is a bit unforgivable even as a Distort for the Day,
That was pathetic. I get quite cross when people are allowed to get away with utterly specious assertions (not a single argument in sight), as Pepinster was this morning. Presumably the head of the Vatican observatory (a Jesuit, of course) actually knows at least some physics and cosmology, yet all he can say in the face of the evidence is that the IMF is somehow permitting the universe to evolve in its own way. Another term for this sort of sophistry is “lying for Jesus”. Disgraceful.
To co-opt a current rhetorical trend on Tw(a)tter:
“Ms Pepinster, tell us you concede your theology and morality is revised, updated and driven by the progress of science, without telling us you concede your theology and morality is revised, updated and driven by the progress of science”.
The ‘argument from design’ which believers wheel out at every opportunity is, I believe, an argument for a deistic IMF (which no longer bothers us because it died or went on holiday or whatever). The universe would run like a mechanism, expanding & developing over time according to preset laws – this appears to be the case.
The sort of IMF touted by the likes of Pepinster can do anything at any time i.e. it wouldn’t need to follow its supposed design. This creative, free-styling IMF is the one which has been steadily disappearing as our discoveries have amassed – but it won’t go away without a struggle (from its fans, not the IMF itself, obvs).
Platitude of the Day 
This was just a laughable, not to say desperate and embarrassing attempt at defending the indefensible.
The Webb telescope images have taken everyone’s breath away, and made us even more thrilled and awed by the vastness of the universe, the countless galaxies it contains, and the extraordinary capacity of human intelligence and ingenuity in giving us all such astounding access to it, and improving our understanding of it.
It’s a brave (not to say reckless or stupid) person, then, who still holds out for a ‘creator god’ who made everything. Why then, Ms Pepinster, did that deity leave it so long in the history of ‘his’ creation before revealing himself, and giving some inaccurate account of the origin of ‘the world’ (a flat earth covered in a dome, by the way) to a few people in a tiny region of a planet in a planetary system that is a tiny part of just one of those countless galaxies? And why, after revealing himself, does he then require all his male adherents to undergo genital mutilation, and demand that animals be slaughtered, their blood daubed around altars, and carcasses burned for his satisfaction and placation?
Bonkers, bonkers, bonkers.
LikeLike
Exactly Liverpudlian!
It is indefensible of the BBC to allow advocates of (Un)Intelligent Design to spread their misinformation without a right of reply. Especially during a period when we have been discussing telling the truth in public life.
I also thought that the poem quote was a strange one to use for a (probable) pro-lifer? “And we see God is not until he is born and also we see there is no end to the birth of God.”
And we see that a child is not until it is born… ??
LikeLike
A ray of hope flickers in the sky..we can see now why that song is so irritating and why it has become yet another inaccurate and cliche ridden carol for Christmas. I agree that to make brilliant outer space photography justification for Catholic creationism and Lady Chatterley making love in space is a bit unforgivable even as a Distort for the Day,
LikeLike
That was pathetic. I get quite cross when people are allowed to get away with utterly specious assertions (not a single argument in sight), as Pepinster was this morning. Presumably the head of the Vatican observatory (a Jesuit, of course) actually knows at least some physics and cosmology, yet all he can say in the face of the evidence is that the IMF is somehow permitting the universe to evolve in its own way. Another term for this sort of sophistry is “lying for Jesus”. Disgraceful.
LikeLike
Absolutely nail-on-the-head comments above.
To co-opt a current rhetorical trend on Tw(a)tter:
“Ms Pepinster, tell us you concede your theology and morality is revised, updated and driven by the progress of science, without telling us you concede your theology and morality is revised, updated and driven by the progress of science”.
LikeLike
The ‘argument from design’ which believers wheel out at every opportunity is, I believe, an argument for a deistic IMF (which no longer bothers us because it died or went on holiday or whatever). The universe would run like a mechanism, expanding & developing over time according to preset laws – this appears to be the case.
The sort of IMF touted by the likes of Pepinster can do anything at any time i.e. it wouldn’t need to follow its supposed design. This creative, free-styling IMF is the one which has been steadily disappearing as our discoveries have amassed – but it won’t go away without a struggle (from its fans, not the IMF itself, obvs).
LikeLike