Would You Baptize An Extraterrestrial?…And Other Questions From The Astronomers’ In-Box At The Vatican Observatory, by Guy Consolmagno, SJ and Paul Mueller, SJ

[Note: This book was provided free of charge by Blogging For Books/Image in exchange for an honest review.]

Although as official employees of the Vatican City’s astronomy observatory the authors have no office of authority outside of the Roman Catholic Church except by the quality of their logic and rhetoric, it is fortunate for would-be readers that this book is an enjoyable, nuanced, and deeply humane read. Among the most notable strengths of this book, which allows it to present a more nuanced approach to faith and science than is normally the case, is the fact that the book is constructed in the form of a dialogue between two people with different backgrounds and slightly different perspectives but ultimately the same worldview. Yet those slight differences, and the personal experiences shared by the two, allow for a book that succeeds largely on an emotional level rather than on a purely logical level. This was probably intentional–the authors are skilled writers, and certainly immensely competent scientists, well recognized as astronomers, and their work is certainly very thoughtful, but it appears designed much more for people of faith (particularly Catholics, as there is much here to offend Protestants, including one of the authors blaming them for Galileo’s trial, and much to offend those the authors consider either religious or scientific fundamentalists).

The book is organized around six questions that the authors regularly receive in their office as Jesuit (one a lay brother, one a priest) employees of the Vatican Observatory. The questions are as follows: Biblical Genesis or Scientific Big Bang? What happened to poor Pluto? What really happened to Galileo? What was the Star of Bethlehem? What’s going to happen when the world ends? Would you baptize an extraterrestrial?” Quite a few of these questions are an area of personal interest, and some of them I have my own opinions and judgments on. The answers of the authors are, for the most part profound and somewhat lengthy–the answers to the questions take up 300 pages of very urbane and often witty text. At times, as in the essays on Pluto (not surprisingly, my favorite planet as a child [1]) and Galileo, the discussion involves politics, boundary issues, in a way that illuminates the messy and often dubious way in which decisions are made in a political fashion by any sort of council. At other times, as in the essays on the end of the world and the relationship between faith and science, the reply is often very carefully written, but sometimes a dodge. For example, the authors present no eschatological view and express a dislike of Revelation because it does not come off as witty and humorous, and instead involves a lot of quotes of Douglas Adam and Bujold [2] and other fantasy writers. Likewise, the essay on creation versus the big bang ended up largely being an essay on art criticism rather than on science, even if it made some valid points about the difficulty in conceptualizing contemporary art and science and in the difference from a pixel or whole picture approach of life and the universe.

Among the most frequent word pictures of the authors is the comparison of science to the famous cartoon coyote and faith to the roadrunner in their approach to the physical world. This is a descriptive and revealing word picture, but it is also a decidedly nontechnical one. At other times, the stories are deeply moving. In talking about the end of the world, one of the authors discusses an experience he had where he was asked to babysit for some friends of his who had some young sons, and one of them had trouble sleeping, and so he offered to sleep on the floor beside the bed, which led for the boy to sleep soundly in the belief that he was now safe. The author describes his weeping because of complicated but deeply felt emotions, including a feeling of longing and loss about his vow of celibacy meaning that he would never get to be a father himself, as well as a feeling of anger at those Catholic priests who had taken advantage of such vulnerable and trusting children for their own selfish purposes. Likewise, in discussing Galileo’s conviction on suspicion of heresy, the authors point out the broader cause of consistent problems with Roman Catholicism, namely its relationship with the European political order, as well as Galileo’s taste for fierce and biting wit that was at least the partial cause of his own demise. Among the most touching areas is the discussion of the baptism of extraterrestrials and its implications in terms of our own humanity in how we treat outsiders and strangers. In general, whatever one’s thoughts about the Roman Catholic Church as an institution, this book demonstrates that the authors are decent people with a great deal of insight about faith and science, art and literature, and even if they and their institution are certainly not infallible, they are also richly humane and thought-provoking. That set of qualities makes this a worthy book for any Christian reader, whether Catholic or not, who has an interest in the intersection of science, faith, and culture.

[1] https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/the-valley-of-the-shadow-of-books/

[2] https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/tag/vorkosigan-saga/