I think it is somewhat possible that SSPX-ers, a) accuse me of curiosity, and b) most specifically do so with the fourth kind of curiosity about intellectual knowledge enumerated by St. Thomas. Here is the Quaestio and Article:
II-II, Question 167. Curiosity, Article 1. Whether curiosity can be about intellective knowledge?
https://www.newadvent.org/summa/3167.htm#article1
Here is the relevant quote from the corpus:
On the other hand, the desire or study in pursuing the knowledge of truth may be right or wrong. First, when one tends by his study to the knowledge of truth as having evil accidentally annexed to it, for instance those who study to know the truth that they may take pride in their knowledge. Hence Augustine says (De Morib. Eccl. 21): "Some there are who forsaking virtue, and ignorant of what God is, and of the majesty of that nature which ever remains the same, imagine they are doing something great, if with surpassing curiosity and keenness they explore the whole mass of this body which we call the world. So great a pride is thus begotten, that one would think they dwelt in the very heavens about which they argue." On like manner, those who study to learn something in order to sin are engaged in a sinful study, according to the saying of Jeremiah 9:5, "They have taught their tongue to speak lies, they have labored to commit iniquity."
Secondly, there may be sin by reason of the appetite or study directed to the learning of truth being itself inordinate; and this in four ways. First, when a man is withdrawn by a less profitable study from a study that is an obligation incumbent on him; hence Jerome says [Epist. xxi ad Damas]: "We see priests forsaking the gospels and the prophets, reading stage-plays, and singing the love songs of pastoral idylls." Secondly, when a man studies to learn of one, by whom it is unlawful to be taught, as in the case of those who seek to know the future through the demons. This is superstitious curiosity, of which Augustine says (De Vera Relig. 4): "Maybe, the philosophers were debarred from the faith by their sinful curiosity in seeking knowledge from the demons."
Thirdly, when a man desires to know the truth about creatures, without referring his knowledge to its due end, namely, the knowledge of God. Hence Augustine says (De Vera Relig. 29) that "in studying creatures, we must not be moved by empty and perishable curiosity; but we should ever mount towards immortal and abiding things."
Fourthly, when a man studies to know the truth above the capacity of his own intelligence, since by so doing men easily fall into error: wherefore it is written (Sirach 3:22): "Seek not the things that are too high for thee, and search not into things above thy ability . . . and in many of His works be not curious," and further on (Sirach 3:26), "For . . . the suspicion of them hath deceived many, and hath detained their minds in vanity."
So, if for instance I had an intellect incapable of comprehending carbon dating and even studied the truth about carbon dating, I would be curious. I would be easily falling into error.
Now, have I?
I do not have a degree in the relevant sciences. I have not made a single carbon date. No university or even high school employs me to teach on it ... to some, this shows, I have an intellect incapable of comprehending it.
Well, no. First of all, some in those positions could be partly incapable of comprehending what they do, partially and on levels where they and their audience won't notice.
But more importantly, the people who have an intellect capable of comprehending carbon dating are very far from being exhausted by those holding such positions. Therefore, my lack of such positions does not mean a lack of the relevant intellectual capacity.
In fact, apart from cases if idiocy (though some of my enemies would like to reproach my capacities on such an issue, I don't think that's the case), men are fairly equal in their ultimate capacity of understanding carbon dating. They may not be equal in their immediate capacity, in some cases some would need to brush up on something else first, but they are equal in their ultimate capacity. Scientists are not the specially talented (though they usually aren't untalented, and some few of them actually are specially talented, but that's not a requirement). Scientists are the ones picked out to do the job after (usually) picking themselves out to do the studies. Given all other studies one can chose (I definitely didn't chose carbon dating or anything remotely natural sciences for university) and given the scarcity of such job opportunities, it is obvious that the scientists are only a very minute fraction of those having the required intellectual level. Precisely as concentration of productive property as of lately means only a fraction of those having the natural capacity to produce and sell sth actually become their own bosses in both producing and selling. Though, on this particular, the capacity to produce and the capacity to sell (persuasive salesmanship, negotiating credits or credit refusals, what one can give away for free without losing too much) are two different things. But I think most have a natural capacity if duly trained to combine both, it's just that concentration has tended to make this rarer.
So, no, not being a scientist does not mean not having the intelligence required to understand carbon 14 dating. Pretending it does is giving the scientific community (prone to accumulate error as any other purely human community) gets a free pass from criticism from those not already brainwashed into its mode of understanding things.
There is a huge difference between understanding that the amount of C14 produced in the atmosphere presumably matches the amount lost by radioactive decay, which is how C14 remains stable, and believing that this balance has always been there or that the factors producing it are not ultimately under God's control, or that they under God depend entirely on natural law and no free decisions of God (applied by Himself or by angels) could intervene other than as a miracle. The one is mathematic, and an object for understanding, the other is ideology, an object for agreeing or disagreeing.
So, if such FSSPX-ers in Paris actually do mean degrees and carreeres, if they mean the intelligence required to understand carbon dates is a privilege to those currently doing or teaching it, they show themselves curious (in this way, as in others) about the intellectual capacities of others. To put it simply, they are snobs rather than theologians. The latter observation could well be true about some other people, but who, as Modernists, would not express themselves by referring to St. Thomas Aquinas or "the sin of curiosity" ....
Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Octave of the Assumption
22.VIII.2023
Octava Assumptionis beatae Mariae Virginis. Festum Immaculati Cordis ejusdem beatae Virginis Mariae.
No comments:
Post a Comment