Yesterday, the pope issued a encyclical which came down pretty hard on atheism.
Atheism may be “understandable†when mankind is confronted with evil and suffering, Pope Benedict XVI wrote in his second encyclical, issued on Friday. But the attempt to banish God, he wrote, “has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice,†whether through Marxist revolution or the science that produced the atomic bomb.
I imagine the original document is much more subtle and sophisticated than the summaries I’ve read. And the article also shows the Pope Benedict has opened up Christianity for self-critique. Nevertheless, his reasoning is way off. The line of thinking seems to be composed of several false dilemnas.
The choice is not simply between belief/goodness and unbelief/evil. I am atheist. As far as I can tell, I’m as moral as the next guy. This is often hard for believers to understand and accept; that atheists can have a code of beliefs that guides them just as strongly as a Bible.
The Pope has failed to distinguish between different kinds of atheists. One kind of atheism actively rejects that God exists. Another kind, more relevant to scientific understanding, merely proclaims it irrelevant to the topic. Science does not actively reject God, it just isn’t part of the field.
The Pope’s example of the atomic bomb is interesting. How is it linked to atheism? Many prominent scientists, including physicists and mathematicians are believers in God. Robert Oppenheimer (“father of the atomic bomb”) quoted Shiva when the bomb was tested, he was aware of the impact of this invention.
And where are all the other inventions that godless science has produced? Where are the mentions of eyeglasses, sanitation, hot water, increased food production, artificial limbs, quality fabrics and weaving, the internet, guitars, recording equipment, vitamins, natal care, automobiles, plastics, satellites, windmills, telecommunications, airplanes, kevlar, velcro, etc. Atomic power fuels most of Europe – the world supports billions more people in relative health and happiness than it could have without all the things that science has given us. If atheism is to be held responsible for all the bad things that science produces, it should be held responsible for the good also.