Fish Eaters: The Whys and Hows of Traditional Catholicism

``Where the Bishop is, there let the multitude of believers be;
even as where Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church'' Ignatius of Antioch, 1st c. A.D

The Book of Nature


Imagine being one of the early humans raised without memory of Eden and without exposure to the revelations given to men like Abraham and Moses. Then imagine how you would have experienced the natural world!  Death, birth, thunder, lightning, solar eclipses, the power of the seas -- these things must have inspired wonder, confusion, and, most importantly, awe. Early man attributed such phenomena to preternatural powers he thought he saw in them, sometimes seeing the phenomena themselves as gods and worshiping such things as the stars and fire as deities in their own right. His in-built religious impulse caused him to imagine gods -- many, many gods. Gods of thunder, of rain, of harvest -- an almost endless variety of gods populated the ancient world, and the stories told about them shaped cultures and, later, civilizations. The ancient Mesopotamians had their pantheons of gods, as did the Greeks and Romans that followed.

Then, around 600 years before Lord Christ was born, certain Greeks began speculating about the nature of nature in itself, as itself, as opposed to considering the natural world solely in terms of the random doings of their capricious gods. While still honoring those false gods, their questions changed in kind, going from the likes of "which gods move things?" to "of what are things made?" and "are there patterns to the way things change?"

Thales is the first individual known to history to have begun systematizing such thought, thereby becoming the father of natural philosophy. Of him, St. Augustine wrote, in "City of God," Book VIII:

Thales was distinguished as an investigator into the nature of things; and, in order that he might have successors in his school, he committed his dissertations to writing. That, however, which especially rendered him eminent was his ability, by means of astronomical calculations, even to predict eclipses of the sun and moon. He thought, however, that water was the first principle of things, and that of it all the elements of the world, the world itself, and all things which are generated in it, ultimately consist.

St. Augustine goes on to describe the successor of Thales, a man called Anaximander, who "did not hold that all things spring from one principle, as Thales did, who held that principle to be water, but thought that each thing springs from its own proper principle. These principles of things he believed to be infinite in number, and thought that they generated innumerable worlds, and all the things which arise in them."

Then came Anaximenes, who thought all was made of "infinite air." He was followed by a line of thinkers who continued to theorize on the nature of things and which of the elements was primary: Anaxagoras, who, St. Augustine says, taught Diogenes, who taught Archelaus. Of their ideas, St. Basil wrote in his "On the Hexaemeron":

The philosophers of Greece have made much ado to explain nature, and not one of their systems has remained firm and unshaken, each being overturned by its successor. It is vain to refute them; they are sufficient in themselves to destroy one another.

Theirs was the problem of infinite regress, one that Fr. Joam Fenicio, S.J. wrote of many centuries later, after his encounter with a Hindu Brahmin in 1583 1:

[S]ome say that the earth rests upon the horn of a bull, while others (whose opinion is looked upon as a more probable one) say on the back of the cobra Ananta; and when I asked him: "Well, upon what does that cobra Ananta support itself?" he answered me: "On the back of a tortoise." "And, pray, upon what does that tortoise rest?"  He answered: "On top of eight elephants." "Well, and those eight elephants?" But then he smiled and told me not to ask any more, as he did not know how to answer.

The Greeks, though, found a way out of the so-called "turtles all the way down" problem of infinite regress: one of Archelaus's students was Socrates, who taught Plato, who taught Aristotle. These last three not only collectively formalized deductive reasoning, developed the Socratic method, and began to hypothesize about Forms, substance, essence, potential, etc., they, most importantly, finally discerned that there must be a transcendent First Cause, a Prime Mover that supercedes the natural world and brought it into being. They went beyond the physical to the metaphysical, and in all this, prepared the world for a deeper understanding of nature and of a concept the Greek philosophers honored: logos -- i.e., reason and divine order. St. Augustine says of the Platonic philosophers that they "recognized the true God as the Author of all things, the Source of the light of truth, and the bountiful bestower of all blessedness."

And in the meanwhile, as the great thinkers of Greece came to recognize the logical necessity of the Uncaused Cause, the Sibyls prophesied of the coming of His Son, Jesus Christ.

Then, in the year 1, God took on flesh and was born in Bethlehem. After the Babe became a man, suffered, was crucified, died, and conquered the tomb, St. John wrote of Him in his Gospel:

In the beginning was the Word [Logos], and the Word [Logos] was with God, and the Word [Logos] was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him: and without Him was made nothing that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men... And the Word [Logos] was made flesh, and dwelt among us...

In the beginning -- when time itself began -- was the Divine Mind, and this Mind brought an orderly creation into being, ex nihilo. The notion that all that exists in the natural world reflects this truth is an approach that is momentous and unique to Christianity among the world's religions. Hinduism sees the world as illusion; Islam sees God as irrational and capricious; orthodox post-Temple Judaism is so self-focused that the natural world in itself is ignored; Buddhism sees our perception of reality as the false result of the belief that we are separate from other things. And on it goes. And none of these belief systems is conducive to science.

But the s
atisfaction of man's religious impulse and rational nature come together in the true Faith, and that Faith recognizes two "books" by which Truth can be known. The first is Sacred Scripture, a book -- rather, a collection of books -- that reveals truths that can only be known by divine revelation and which are accepted by faith on the authority of the Church; the second is the natural world, a "book" that reveals truths that can be known through the senses and reason. And never can there be any conflict between these two books if read correctly.

Sacred Scripture is full of verses that teach that there is, in essence, a second "book" for us to read. One of the most explicit of these is Wisdom 13:1-5:

But all men are vain, in whom there is not the knowledge of God: and who by these good things that are seen, could not understand Him that is, neither by attending to the works have acknowledged Who was the Workman: But have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon, to be the gods that rule the world. With whose beauty, if they, being delighted, took them to be gods: let them know how much the Lord of them is more beautiful than they: for the First Author of beauty made all those things. Or if they admired their power and their effects, let them understand by them, that He that made them, is mightier than they: For by the greatness of the beauty, and of the creature, the Creator of them may be seen, so as to be known thereby.

The writings of the Church Fathers and other early Christians are replete with this concept. Socrates Scholasticus, in Book IV of his Ecclesiastical History, recounts that St. Anthony of the Desert responded with these words to a philosopher who asked him how he can live without books:

My book, O philosopher, is the nature of things that are made, and it is present whenever I wish to read the words of God.

The theme is continued by St. Augustine, in a sermon on Matthew 11 (Sermon 68):

[Some], in order to find God, will read a book. Well, as a matter of fact there is a certain great big book, the book of created nature. Look carefully at it top and bottom, observe it, read it. God did not make letters of ink for you to recognize Him in; He set before your eyes all these things He has made. Why look for a louder voice? Heaven and earth cries out to you, "God made me." You can read what Moses wrote; in order to write it, what did Moses read, a man living in time? Observe heaven and earth in a religious spirit.

Origen, in the first Book of De Principiis, explains why this approach to God is appropriate to man:

Our eyes frequently cannot look upon the nature of the light itself — that is, upon the substance of the sun; but when we behold his splendour or his rays pouring in, perhaps, through windows or some small openings to admit the light, we can reflect how great is the supply and source of the light of the body. So, in like manner, the works of Divine Providence and the plan of this whole world are a sort of rays, as it were, of the nature of God, in comparison with His real substance and being. As, therefore, our understanding is unable of itself to behold God Himself as He is, it knows the Father of the world from the beauty of His works and the comeliness of His creatures.

Consider what this means with regard to the Beauty of God! The loveliness of nature is known to anyone with eyes, and it's so often truly -- quite literally -- breathtaking. But to move one's eyes from the gorgeousness of the sea's waves crashing on the shore; or from a Moon in a sky adorned by Taurus, Orion, and the Pleiades; or from a lush forest, thick with life -- to move the eyes from any of these to the Face of God Himself would be like looking away from a gentle ray of light streaming through your kitchen window, and then at the blazing Sun itself. What beauty is in store for the righteous! St. Robert Bellarmine captures this truth well in his "Mind's Ascent to God":

In this world then which comprehends the universality of things, there are many things which are altogether wonderful, but what doth more especially call for our admiration is their greatness, multitude, variety, efficaciousness, and beauty. All which being attentively weighed and considered (God enlightning the eyes of our understanding) will help us to a sight of a Greatness, Multitude, Variety, Power, and Beauty of such immensity that our souls will be ravished into transport and ecstasy in admiration of them, and when we shall sink to ourselves again, we shall look upon all things, but God, as mean and inconsiderable.

St. Augustine, in his Confessions, writes about how God's creation inspires virtue as well as knowledge. In particular for him, it is the Book of Nature's chapter on the heavens that brings him to his knees in humility:

Let us look, O Lord, upon the heavens, the work of Your fingers; clear from our eyes that mist with which You have covered them. There is that testimony of Yours which gives wisdom unto the little ones. Perfect, O my God, Your praise out of the mouth of babes and sucklings. Nor have we known any other books so destructive to pride, so destructive to the enemy and the defender, who resists Your reconciliation in defense of his own sins. I know not, O Lord, I know not other such pure words which so persuade me to confession, and make my neck submissive to Your yoke, and invite me to serve You for nought. Let me understand these things, good Father. Grant this to me, placed under them; because You have established these things for those placed under them.

From the Book of Nature we can gain insight to the beauty and nature of God, and be inspired to goodness. So pay attention to His works, and praise Him through your gratitude for them. As St. Bonaventure tells us in his The Mind's Road to God:

He, therefore, who is not illumined by such great splendor of created things is blind; he who is not awakened by such great clamor is deaf; he who does not praise God because of all these effects is dumb; he who does not note the First Principle from such great signs is foolish. Open your eyes therefore, prick up your spiritual ears, open your lips, and apply your heart, that you may see your God in all creatures, may hear Him, praise Him, love and adore Him, magnify and honor Him, lest the whole world rise against you.

I encourage Catholics to go out into nature and to be mindful of it, to observe it, and to glorify God for it -- i.e., to be grateful to the One Who made it. And I more than encourage Catholics with children or grandchildren to take those kids with them when they do. Because most children are being raised in urban settings and with an inordinate amount of attention-grabbing digital technology, the lessons from the Book of Nature are being ignored. Gone, too, are the health benefits -- physical, intellectual, and psychological -- from spending time in nature. This is a tragedy. Take the children in your life to a place that is beautiful and quiet, and read to them the gorgeous words of the 43rd chapter of Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) or the hymn of Daniel 3:52-90, prayed by Sidrach, Misach, and Abdenago in the fiery furnace.

The more you know about something, the more you can appreciate it,2 so learn about what you see when you go outside. Get field guides to the flora, rocks and minerals, birds, reptiles, insects, and other animals of your area. Learn about the lives of the living creatures, which of the flora are edible, how to track the animals, etc. Teach your children: to notice and know the names of the Winds, at least the cardinal ones (buy or make a weather vane!); to tell time from the position of the Sun; to be able to orient themselves in space according to the Sun and stars3; to observe and understand the Moon's phases and the way the stars move.4 Maybe select a window through which you have a good view of the Sun, and have your kids mark on the glass where the Sun is at various times of a day so they can see how it moves and arcs across the sky. Trace with them the routes the creeks and rivers near you take on their way to the ocean.5 Plant a garden with them (especially a Mary Garden), or, if you don't have land, grow plants in pots, from seeds -- especially edible plants. Talk to them about the food you eat, the farmers who grow it, the men who drive trucks and trains to deliver it to stores, where meat comes from and how the animals are raised, etc., so they'll have a deep sense of where food really comes from and how much labor and sacrifice are involved in it all. Teach them about the modern elements and the classical elements (Earth, Water, Fire, Air). Even better, perhaps before outright teaching them certain things -- for ex., about the Moon's phases -- you can have them look and record their own observations, as if they're early natural philosophers determining for themselves the patterns they see over time.6 Make up games and challenges to keep them really observing.7 Celebrate the Church's four Embertides and Rogation Days.

Just help your children and granchildren receive and retain the gift of wonder and the ability to marvel at the complexity, beauty, and order of the created world. Above all, help them acquire the virtue of gratitude to God for all He's given to us.

The Great Breach

The natural philosophy of the ancient Greeks and medievals, derived from their observations of the Book of Nature, morphed into modern science thanks to the efforts of men like the Franciscan friars Roger Bacon, John Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham, the Dominican St. Albert the Great, and many other clerics, religious, and seculars. The scientific method -- observation, the formulation of a question about what is observed, asserting a hypothesis about it, making a falsifiable prediction, testing to possibly find support for the hypothesis, logical analysis of the test's results -- each step of which being fraught with assumptions,8 was formalized over the centuries and came to be the standard tool for manipulating and understanding the physical workings of the world of nature.

But increasingly, beginning at the time of the so-called "Enlightenment," many have come to see that tool as not one among many, but as the only tool worth valuing -- our only real means of knowing anything. A great rupture came to be seen between the Book of Nature -- open to the world of science -- and the Book of Scripture -- the world of religion and philosophy. Theology, once considered the "Queen of the Sciences," was dethroned, as were metaphyics later; in their place stands the thinking of Descartes, popularized by Isaac Newton. Spirit has been stripped away, and all that's left, in the minds of some, are mechanistic sub-atomic particles forming atoms forming elements forming molecules and, sometimes, forming cells which specialize to form organisms.

This attitude, called "scientism," is unable to reckon with the most important of all questions. While relying on science as the only means of knowledge, too many are oblivious to the fact that science, by its very nature, cannot answer questions about the meaning or morality of anything. What is Beauty to someone who thinks this way? What is Love? Why do we exist at all? What is our purpose? Where are we going? How should we behave? How, why, and for what purpose can we, allegedly nothing but masses of atoms ourselves, be conscious of and know anything? (To see how silly the scientism mindset can get, read the satirical study, in pdf format, "Parachute Use to Prevent Death and Major Trauma When Jumping from Aircraft: Randomized Controlled Trial").

But something funny happened in the early 20th century: experiments gave results that weren't in compliance with classical Newtonian physics. Newtonian physics measures the world of objects larger than atoms -- their motion and interaction -- and has given us formulae to use to calculate such things as the speed at which a mass falls to earth, or the momentum of an object of a given mass moving at a given speed. But if we dig down deeply, past the level of the atom, this sort of physics gives way to a strange world of quantum physics. There, matter is replaced by probabilities -- potential that only comes into existence at the act of measurement. In other words, there is no "there" there at the sub-atomic level -- until it interacts with consciousness. The world we perceive is made of -- nothing. At least nothing that we can submit to science. It doesn't come into being "from below" -- i.e., ultimately from smaller and smaller subatomic particles forming atoms forming molecules; it comes into being from above. The Spirit that Descartes stripped away from the world has been put back in by the discoveries of quantum physics, and we find ourselves back at Plato, Aristotle, and St. Thomas Aquinas.

That the world, at the quantum level, is quite literally made of potential is interpreted by some to mean that the everyday world of our senses doesn't exist. To them, the world is nothing but a dream
, as the nursery rhyme says,

Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream,
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, life is but a dream.

They come up with ideas like "multiverses" or the notion that we live in a computer similation to escape the conclusion that Consciousness -- the Mind of God -- wills the universe into being (they do this, too, to escape "problems" such as the fine-tuning of the universe that must be for life to exist). Some abuse quantum physics to come up with New Age, "we create our own reality" nonsense (all those starving Africans and the folks being tortured in political camps will be glad to hear about that, I'm sure), and to claim that the moral and immoral are whatever we want them to be "because science!" 9

But that illusory, amoral world with no real foundation is madness. We experience the world of the senses -- the world of trees and cheese and doorknobs -- every day. We see an apple. We smell it. We taste it. We feel its texture. We hear the crunch when we bite into it. The apple exists (and regarding anyone who says it doesn't "really" exist: throw it at his head with great force and ask "Does it exist now?"). But if we break the apple down into its very smallest components, we eventually come to nothing but potential that requires Mind to bring it into being. I'll let Rick De Lano explain. Listen to this interview with him about the work of physicist and philosopher Wolfgang Smith:

Mp3: Rick De Lano on Coast to Coast AM: Quantum Physics and the Death of Scientism
(Length: 1:13:09)

The point of all this: The great rupture between the Book of Nature and the Book of Scripture that's been posited since the "Englightenment" isn't real. Catholics have nothing -- not one thing -- to fear from sound science, and don't let any of the multitude of science abusers out there tell you otherwise.

Another point to be made is this: when scientists go from making scientific observations to advising on political or ethical matters, a line has been crossed. When they go from "is" to "ought," that "ought" is a reflection of what they value, and values -- determinations as to what is good and what should be -- are always religious in nature. As an example, if, say, scientists were to determine that the population of some butterfly is decreasing, and they posit that this decrease is caused by X, the moment they propose a solution that should be put in place by political policy, they are relying on a value judgment -- a judgment that calls on their personal sense of the good. Imagine they propose banning X, and that banning X would put Y number of people out of work. What they are asserting is that increasing the population of that butterfly is better -- is a greater good -- than keeping Y number of people employed. And that assertion is a value judgment, not a scienfitic conclusion. Find the religious statement inherent in policy recommendations, evaluate them, and call out scientists for making them without admitting they are making religious statements, and without clearly stating what those religious statements are. Don't let them assert that their recommendations are "the science" and not reliant on value judgments.10

I leave you with a quote about Louis Pasteur, from a book of Catholic apologetics written in 1914:

It is only a few years since Pasteur, a devout Catholic, closed his illustrious career; and it was Pasteur that gave the memorable answer to a pupil of his who had asked him how it was possible for one who had studied and reflected so much to remain a believer in Christianity: "It is precisely because I have studied and reflected that I have to-day the faith of a Breton; and had I studied and reflected more, I should have the faith of a Breton's wife." 11

See also these pages:
And see, too, these books from this site's Catholic Libary (pdf format):


1 A Treatise on Hindu Cosmography from the Seventeenth Century, Jarl Charpentier, Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London Vol. 3, No. 2 (1924), pp. 317-342. Online:

2 I'll share a personal anecdote about this: I'd always been squeamish about spiders. They gave me the heebie-jeebies. But then one year, I noticed a spider outside my window, and I started to really look at it. She'd come at the same time every night, almost to the minute, and build her web just on the other side of the glass. I started to become rather fascinated, to the point I'd actually anticipate her arrival. Then one day, she was gone, and I was really surprised at how sad I was. I did some research and learned she was an orb-weaver. I read all about them, watched videos about them, etc., and developed a real respect for the creatures. The next Summer, I found one on my porch, and watched again. I'd leave the porch light on just so it'd help attract bugs to her web, which I'd watch her build at night and take down in the morning. I even named her. When she went away to lay her eggs and die, it was almost like losing a pet. The next year, I had three spiders on my porch (perhaps last year's spider's children), living out their little spider lives, and all three got names. I saw them build, hunt, re-build, and even mate. Over time, the animals that used to freak me out became not only objects of fascination for me, but friends of sorts. My fear of them was gone, and my appreciation for their place in nature grew enormously. (I still don't want to touch one, mind you, or worse, have one touch me, but they're welcome on my porch anytime. Most welcome.)

3 To find North during the daytime when the Sun is out, drive a straight stick into smooth, even ground so it's as upright as possible. Follow the shadow of the stick out to the very end of the shadow, and place a marker -- e.g., a very small rock, a small twig stuck in the ground -- at the exact point the shadow ends. This point will mark West. Wait a while until the shadow moves. When it does, mark the very tip of the new shadow in the same way you did before. This point will mark East. Draw a straight line in the dirt to connect the two markers you made. That line marks out the East-West axis. From there, you can find the other two directions: with East at your right side, stand with your toes against the line that marks the East-West axis. Directly in front of you is North; behind you is South. The only trick to this is remembering that the first shadow marker will mark West; to remember this, remember "The West is the best," and, so, comes first. Of course, you can use any already existing slim shadow of an upright object to orient yourself in this way, but to have a Boy Scout-like method is nice.

See this site's section on the Zodiac.

5 Using Google Maps can help you trace rivers in this way. It really is interesting how the smallest of rivers almost always find their way to the sea. For ex., the route of the creek I grew up near in Indianapolis, Indiana has this path: Fall Creek flows into the White River, the White flows into the Wabash River, the Wabash flows into the Ohio River, the Ohio River flows into the Mississippi River, and the Mississippi flows into the sea at the Gulf of Mexico.

6 For teaching your children about the phases of the Moon, one idea is to provide them with sheets on which are placed 31 circles per month (some of which won't be used, of course). Over the course of three months (maybe during Summer vacation), have them go outside each night, observe, and color in the Moon with a pencil according to the phase it's in. I provide a pdf of three months' worth of "Moon circles" for you to use: moonphases.pdf.

7 Some ideas:
  • While out walking outdoors, challenge those with you to find various shapes in nature -- for ex., things that look like faces, or the shapes of letters (take pictures of your findings and see if you can collect the entire alphabet).

  • While outdoors, periodically stop, have everyone close his eyes and describe what he hears and smells and otherwise senses.

  • Before a hike, get paint swatches from the hardware store and cut them so you have pieces of paper with one color on them. Jumble them up in a hat and have everyone blindly select 5 swatches. While out, challenge them to find things in nature that match the colors on their swatches. Photograph what they find.

  • Listen to the birds' songs. What words do they seem to be saying? What human songs do their songs most sound like?

  • While on a hike, challenge everyone to find one of each of the following: annelid; arthropod; reptile; amphibian; bird; non-human mammal; fungus.
  • Have a list of birds found in your area, and check them off as you spot them.

  • Turn your outing into a challenge as to who can take the most beautiful or interesting photograph.

  • Collectively or individually write haiku about what you see as you go along (haiku consists of three lines, the first with 5 syllables, the second with 7, and the last with 5)

  • "Make things interesting" by having pools on when a member of the family will spot the year's first daffodil, rainbow, flock of Northward-headed geese in Spring; the first hummingbird, firefly, June bug, praying mantis, orb weaver, etc., of Summer; the first yellow-orange colored tree, flock of geese heading South, etc., in Autumn; the first snowfall, icicle, animal tracks in snow, etc. in Winter. Winner of a given pool gets to choose the night's dessert or what have you. You could, beforehand, have everyone guess the date the event will happen, and award a prize to the person who gets that right, and then award a prize to the person who is the first to spot the event happening. Some tables for you to hang on your refrigerator to play this game with your family: Seasons Pool (pdf).

  • Have your kids draw maps of the land they walk and explore, including their own yard/garden if they're blessed to have such. Have them label areas with names they make up. Teach them how to orient maps so they know the four cardinal directions, have them point out where the Sun rises and sets, etc.

  • Research what your area looked like 100 years ago, 1000 years ago, 1 million years ago, etc., and teach your kids how the land has changed over time.

  • Do what the town of Rangeley, Maine did and build little "gnome homes" (or the equivalent, such as "fairy houses," etc.) on trails throughout a forest to interest kids in exploring. Set up enchanting little dioramas to motivate children to explore an outdoor area.

  • Hide things in the forest that kids can find using GPS or, better, treasure maps.

  • Arrange forest scavenger hunts.

  • Put up bird feeders, bird houses, bird baths, bat houses, etc. in your yard. Invite wildlife by planting flowers that attract butterflies and bees, trees to attract squirrels, a little garden for the critters in addition to the one for your family, etc.

  • Get some backyard chickens (during WWII, the American government recommended 2 chickens for every family member).
8 These steps are imperfect, and a scientific obvservation or experiment needs to also be replicable. These days, some think the scientific method includes peer review, which, in reality, serves as much as political gatekeeper, and "Mean Girls" method of blackballing the "uncool kids," as it does a guardian of good science. Read Richard Smith's "Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals" (pdf) -- and know that papers with research that's been replicated are cited 153 times less often on average than papers that haven't been replicated, likely because they're more "interesting" or suit the views of the academics citing them (see the pdfs Nonreplicable Publications Are Cited More than Replicable Ones and Why Most Published Research Findings are False). For a more general look at scientism and the problems with each step of the scientific method, see Paul Feyerabend's  "How to Defend Society Against Science" (pdf). And listen to Dr. William Brigg's lecture given at Hillsdale College in 2023 (mp3).

9 Revel in this bit of insanity -- "What quantum physics taught me about queer identity" -- from the BBC (source:

My name is Amrou Al-Kadhi or Glamrou. And I have an identity that you might categorise as intersectional. I'm British-Iraqi, gay, non-binary and also identify as Muslim. And reading about quantum physics has really helped me understand my queer identity.

Quantum physics is a beautiful, strange and glorious sect of physics that looks at the subatomic particles that govern our world. So, inside the neutrons, electrons and the protons you're looking at the quarks, leptons, bosons and the Higgs. Whereas classical Newtonian physics is obsessed with the universal formula that govern our reality, it's so fixed on resolute answers. Quantum physics reveals that there is no fixed reality and it's full of beautiful contradictions. We can now observe that the same sub-atomic particle can be in many places at the same time. So if we fire an electron through a wall with two holes, for instance, we should be able to see that it goes through one or the other. But, on a quantum level when you observe what's going on, we see that the same particle is actually going through both holes at the same time. Multiple versions of the same event are happening all at the same time.

What's so remarkable about quantum physics is the fact that what's happening on a subatomic level contradicts what we're actually seeing happening in reality. It shows us that reality is itself a construct, and what's going on internally on a subatomic level belies what we're actually observing.

Quantum physics to Newtonian physics is, to me, what queer theory is to heteronormativity, i.e. looking for normative constructs of society male, female, of gender, of race categorising everything in a neat, rigid way. I am very comforted by this as a queer person with no real fixed identity. It gives me immense hope that there's this model of the world. This real physical, philosophical model which shows us that reality is just a set of contradictions with no real fixed foundation. It is in this model of space-time as a series of entanglements that I'm able to piece together all of the fragmented sects of my identity being able to identify as British and Iraqi, as queer and Muslim, as someone of many genders and potentially no genders at all.

10 Whenever you hear "scientists say" or "the science says," replace those phrases with "some scientists say." When those phrases are followed by "should," "recommend," suggest," "ought,"  and other such words, look for the non-scientific values judgment.

11 From "The Catholic's ready answer; a popular vindication of Christian beliefs and practices against the attacks of modern criticism," by Michael Peter Hall, available in this site's Catholic Library.

Back to Being Catholic