Caupernican Debaucle - What was it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pjs2ejs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pjs2ejs

Guest
My protestant friend is bringing up this event when he says, the Catholic church said that the world was not round, etc. because “the Bible says so”. This was his first criticism of the Church. I had no rebuttal regardless.
 
at the time, the majority of people believed that the earth was
flat, and the center of the universe… that wasn’t something that
the Church decided, that was what the majority of the “scientists”
of the time believed…

🙂
 
From newadvent.org

Opposition was first raised against the Copernican system by Protestant theologians for Biblical reasons and strange to say it has continued, at least sporadically, to our own days. A list of many of their Pamphlets is enumerated by Beckmann. On the Catholic side opposition only commenced seventy-three years later, when it was occasioned by Galileo. On 5 March, 1616, the work of Copernicus was forbidden by the Congregation of the Index “until corrected”, and in 1620 these corrections were indicated. Nine sentences, by which the heliocentric system was represented as certain, had to be either omitted or changed. This done, the reading of the book was allowed. In 1758 the book of Copernicus disappeared from the revised Index of Benedict XIV.
 
From This Rock:

A young Lutheran scholar, Rheticus, left his chair of mathematics at Wittenberg (where, in 1517, Martin Luther had posted his 95 theses on a church door) to work with Copernicus in Poland and to prepare the scientist’s manuscripts for publication–an early example of ecumenical cooperation. A summary of Copernicus’s findings was released, and it met with tremendous hostility from Protestant theologians; there was no such general hostility from Catholics. Rheticus was barred from returning to his post at Wittenberg. …

Controversialists who claim the Galileo Case “proves” the Catholic Church opposed scientific advances seem reluctant to note that Copernicus’s work on the heliocentric theory would not have been completed had not Churchmen urged him on.
 
The “history” your friend has given you is completely garbled.
  • The World being round was never anything which the Church pronounced on - the Church was open-minded on this issue. (That was how Columbus got funded, remember?) Many medieval churchmen supported the notion of a round earth.
  • The issue Copernicus was concerned with was whether the earth went round the sun or the sun round the earth. It was nothing to do with the earth being flat!
  • Copernicus, like many early scientists, (Bacon, Mendel) was actually a Catholic Priest. Most history books never reveal this for some reason. His work was not condemned at the time.
  • The man condemned (to house arrest - nothing more) was Galileo, some 80 years later. He was condemned for writing a book publicising Copernicus theories. Galileo’s book was provocative in that it openly derided the Church for believing the literal bible accounts which say that the sun moves in the sky! It was for this open contradiction of scripture and the mocking manner of the writing, that Galileo was brought to trial.
  • Actually the modern concept of Einsteinian **relativity ** has re-opened the debate of whether the sun goes round the earth or vice versa!
 
40.png
Axion:
The “history” your friend has given you is completely garbled.
  • The World being round was never anything which the Church pronounced on - the Church was open-minded on this issue. (That was how Columbus got funded, remember?) Many medieval churchmen supported the notion of a round earth.
  • The issue Copernicus was concerned with was whether the earth went round the sun or the sun round the earth. It was nothing to do with the earth being flat!
  • Copernicus, like many early scientists, (Bacon, Mendel) was actually a Catholic Priest. Most history books never reveal this for some reason. His work was not condemned at the time.
  • The man condemned (to house arrest - nothing more) was Galileo, some 80 years later. He was condemned for writing a book publicising Copernicus theories. Galileo’s book was provocative in that it openly derided the Church for believing the literal bible accounts which say that the sun moves in the sky! It was for this open contradiction of scripture and the mocking manner of the writing, that Galileo was brought to trial.
  • Actually the modern concept of Einsteinian **relativity **has re-opened the debate of whether the sun goes round the earth or vice versa!
Click to expand...
What got Galelio in trouble was that his book consisted of a debate between 3 people-one was know as “simplitico” who was very dense. Unfortuantley Gallelio had “Simplitico” arguing using the same arguments the Pope had put forth. Gelllios enemies convinced the Pope that gallelio was mociking hime in the book and the rest is Histrory
 
40.png
estesbob:
What got Galelio in trouble was that his book consisted of a debate between 3 people-one was know as “simplitico” who was very dense. Unfortuantley Gallelio had “Simplitico” arguing using the same arguments the Pope had put forth. Gelllios enemies convinced the Pope that gallelio was mociking hime in the book and the rest is Histrory
Click to expand...
His book certainly did not help, but what got him in trouble was holding a position which contradicted Scripture. In 1616 the theological qualifers (referrring to Carpenicus’ works) came up with the following statement:

"The eleven theologian-qualifiers of the Holy Office meet to consider the theological qualifications proper to be attached to the following propositions:

( i ) The sun is the centre of the universe (“mundi”) and absolutely immobile in local motion.

( ii ) The earth is not the centre of the universe (“mundi”); it is not immobile but turns on itself with a diurnal movement.

All unanimously censure the first proposition as “foolish, absurd in philosophy {i.e. scientifically untenable) and formally heretical on the grounds of expressly contradicting the statements of Holy Scripture in many places according to the proper meaning of the words, the common exposition and the understanding of the Holy Fathers and learned theologians”; the second proposition they unanimously censured as likewise “absurd in philosophy” and theologically “at least erroneous in faith”.

Galileo was warned not to teach this position by St. Bellarmine per a request of Paul V. Galileo eventually ignored the spirit of the warning (including publishing the book). Urban the VIII in his 1633 Inquisition condemned Galileo as vehemently suspect of heresy.

See Part III of Geocentricity 101, linked above (forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1002924&postcount=8).

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
40.png
Erich:
From This Rock:

…
Controversialists who claim the Galileo Case “proves” the Catholic Church opposed scientific advances seem reluctant to note that Copernicus’s work on the heliocentric theory would not have been completed had not Churchmen urged him on.
Click to expand...
It is true that protestants joined the Church in condemning geocentrism, and it is true that some Catholics who helped spread the problem. But this is not a good thing is it?

I mean, if scientists had at some point in the last 350 years proven that:
  1. The earth rotated (in a manner distinguishable from rotation of the universe)
or 2. Proven the earth translates

then maybe you could imply that. But this has not occured to date.

See Geocentrism 101, linked above for a realistic summary of the matter(forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1002924&postcount=8)

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
40.png
Maranatha:
From newadvent.org

Opposition was first raised against the Copernican system by Protestant theologians for Biblical reasons and strange to say it has continued, at least sporadically, to our own days. A list of many of their Pamphlets is enumerated by Beckmann. On the Catholic side opposition only commenced seventy-three years later, when it was occasioned by Galileo. On 5 March, 1616, the work of Copernicus was forbidden by the Congregation of the Index “until corrected”, and in 1620 these corrections were indicated. Nine sentences, by which the heliocentric system was represented as certain, had to be either omitted or changed. This done, the reading of the book was allowed. In 1758 the book of Copernicus disappeared from the revised Index of Benedict XIV.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that Benedict allowed the publication of Corpenicus’ works AFTER the editors had corrected it (this occured in 1620). Therefor there is no significance to this in terms of a reversal of previous decrees.

See Geocentrism 101, above.
(forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1002924&postcount=8)

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
40.png
johnshelby:
at the time, the majority of people believed that the earth was
flat, and the center of the universe… that wasn’t something that
the Church decided, that was what the majority of the “scientists”
of the time believed…

🙂
Click to expand...
As I pointed out, the Church NEVER held flat-earth theory.One father did, but the vast majority held a spherical earth (as did the scientists of the time). Flat earth is really more of a 19th centuiry protestant creation.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
40.png
Pjs2ejs:
My protestant friend is bringing up this event when he says, the Catholic church said that the world was not round, etc. because “the Bible says so”. This was his first criticism of the Church. I had no rebuttal regardless.
Click to expand...
I hope you read the Geoecntrism 101 series. This is a reasonable summary of the status of geocentrism, and I hope a useful apologetics tool.

(forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1002924&postcount=8)

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
another point about …flat earth… Magellan circumnavigated the globe around 1520. Also Columbas thought he had reached the Indies as he had set out to do so.

st julie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top