- Status
P
Petergee
Guest
A couple of errors in this report though not as bad as some reports of this I have seen in other media.
The implication is that Copernicus’ original burial was NOT accompanied by “full Catholic honours”. OK maybe the Primate of Poland wasn’t present, but as a Canon of the Cathedral who was famous for his learning, almost certainly the Bishop would have presided. And there had never been any suggestion that Copernicus was anything less than a devout and fervently believing Catholic Canon.
“His heliocentric theory of the solar system didn’t go down too well with the 16th century Vatican.”
The 16th century Vatican had absolutely no issue with Copernicus’ theory. Copernicus dedicated his massive book on the theory to the reigning pope who patronised him, against the Lutherans who then dominated his homeland and ridiculed his theory. (Luther called Copernicus “a madman”). Copernicus and other astronomers who followed his theory were the main driving force behind Pope Gregory’s introduction of the more astronomically correct and now universally used Gregorian Calendar in 1582 (at first rejected by protestant countries, Britain and its colonies holding out against it until 1752).
“Only later did the Catholic church round on his “heretical” ideas”
The Church has never taught that the heliocentric theory is heretical. It merely ruled in 1633 that, pending proof of the theory (which was eventually provided by Jesuit astronomers in the 18th century) it was not permissible to claim that it is the only possible astronomical theory which is compatible with the Bible and that the Bible **must **be interpreted only in a way consistent with the heliocentric theory. A canonical court found Galileo merely “vehemently suspected of heresy” for having claimed these things. NOT for teaching the heliocentric theory itself.
The implication is that Copernicus’ original burial was NOT accompanied by “full Catholic honours”. OK maybe the Primate of Poland wasn’t present, but as a Canon of the Cathedral who was famous for his learning, almost certainly the Bishop would have presided. And there had never been any suggestion that Copernicus was anything less than a devout and fervently believing Catholic Canon.
“His heliocentric theory of the solar system didn’t go down too well with the 16th century Vatican.”
The 16th century Vatican had absolutely no issue with Copernicus’ theory. Copernicus dedicated his massive book on the theory to the reigning pope who patronised him, against the Lutherans who then dominated his homeland and ridiculed his theory. (Luther called Copernicus “a madman”). Copernicus and other astronomers who followed his theory were the main driving force behind Pope Gregory’s introduction of the more astronomically correct and now universally used Gregorian Calendar in 1582 (at first rejected by protestant countries, Britain and its colonies holding out against it until 1752).
“Only later did the Catholic church round on his “heretical” ideas”
The Church has never taught that the heliocentric theory is heretical. It merely ruled in 1633 that, pending proof of the theory (which was eventually provided by Jesuit astronomers in the 18th century) it was not permissible to claim that it is the only possible astronomical theory which is compatible with the Bible and that the Bible **must **be interpreted only in a way consistent with the heliocentric theory. A canonical court found Galileo merely “vehemently suspected of heresy” for having claimed these things. NOT for teaching the heliocentric theory itself.
S
Soutane
Guest
Thank you for the succincnt explanation which i suspect will be copied and pasted many times over.Kudos.
D
Dale_M
Guest
The Register is a British technology blog/freelance journalist site… Why is it considered a Catholic source, let alone a generally reliable one?
D
didymus
Guest
The Church has long been willing to let scientists do their own thing, see these quotes from Thomas Aquinas:
In his work on heliocentrism he included his own Biblical exegesis and theology. That’s what the heresy trial was about.
Imagine that a modern scientist concluded a paper in a respectable journal with several pages about why his work shows that the Bible is bushwa and God does not exist.
Btw, see Aquinas’s second quote about the appearances of heavenly bodies being explained – that’s why heloicentrism didn’t catch on initially. The old geocentric system could and did accurately predict the movement of planets, eclipses, &c. It was not stupid stupid of medieval folk to hold onto their current system until the new theory was thoroughly proven.
Galileo’s crime, besides being a pain in the arse who alienated just about everybody including the Pope, who had once been his patron was stepping over the line from science into theology.
In his work on heliocentrism he included his own Biblical exegesis and theology. That’s what the heresy trial was about.
Imagine that a modern scientist concluded a paper in a respectable journal with several pages about why his work shows that the Bible is bushwa and God does not exist.
Btw, see Aquinas’s second quote about the appearances of heavenly bodies being explained – that’s why heloicentrism didn’t catch on initially. The old geocentric system could and did accurately predict the movement of planets, eclipses, &c. It was not stupid stupid of medieval folk to hold onto their current system until the new theory was thoroughly proven.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
In Polish: Dobrze! Lepiej późno niż wcale. Nawet Kościół katolicki może się zmienić.
Good! Better late than never. Even the Catholic Church can change.
S
Soutane
Guest
Catholic Press quotes many news sources a lot of them secular.It vets them for its readers.It is the Catholic Press that is the Catholic news source.Didn’t you realise that?
The Register is a British technology blog/freelance journalist site… Why is it considered a Catholic source, let alone a generally reliable one?
D
Dale_M
Guest
S
Soutane
Guest
I should be blushing I can’t find a direct link on the internet.I know it’s a news bot,but I’m GUESSING its from the CNA Catholic News Agency.Maybe you could ask a moderator?No, I guess not.
What is Catholic Press?
S
Suspicious_Mind
Guest
I’m sure his family will be thrilled.
S
Soutane
Guest
I’m sure they will be.Are you related to him?
P
Petergee
Guest
S
Soutane
Guest
Hans Kung?-not a scientist,but nonetheless.
S
seekerz
Guest
My question, on learning of this yesterday was: why the re-burial? Because he’s now seen as a hero? Because he was proved right? If he put forward scientific facts in the wrong way (as a post above suggests), even if those facts proved true subsequently, does that make his actions any less unacceptable today? Guess I’m confused about what has changed and why the ceremonial honors…
S
Soutane
Guest
Interesting and intriguing observation
P
Petergee
Guest
That’s probably what the reporter WANTS you to think but it’s false.
The only reason for the “re-burial” is that they dug his skeleton up to cut off a piece to check the DNA. The article implies that the Church deliberately buried him in an unmarked grave, because it was ashamed of or embarrassed by him and wanted to dishonour him or for people to forget him.
In fact there surely would have been a marked gravestone or memorial placed over his grave when he was originally buried. Then contually over the next 400 years, the armies of Prussia, Sweden, and later the Nazis and the Marxists dominated, raped and pillaged this part of Northern Poland. They all hated Catholicism in general and Polish Catholic artworks, statues, monuments etc in particular, not to mention the achievements of Polish Catholic scientists. They destroyed countless artworks and did their very best to wipe out Polish culture completely.
He didn’t, but Galileo later created an atmosphere where many interpreted them in the wrong way.
Because his remains have finally been positively identified and Poland is now peaceful and free, so this can be done.
S
steveoberm
Guest
I read the article but question the genetic sample from a 'hair" found in a book? That could have been the hair from the same person buried in the grave …other that Copernicus. Reason for according everyone the full honors when they die… hard to do it over I think after so many years.
“By 2004, so iconic had Copernicus become that at the behest of local bishop Jacek Jezierski, scientists set out to identify his remains. DNA from the disinterred skull and bones of a 70-year-old man - the age at which Copernicus died - were matched with a high probability to a genetic sample from a hair found in one of the astronomer’s books”
“By 2004, so iconic had Copernicus become that at the behest of local bishop Jacek Jezierski, scientists set out to identify his remains. DNA from the disinterred skull and bones of a 70-year-old man - the age at which Copernicus died - were matched with a high probability to a genetic sample from a hair found in one of the astronomer’s books”
- Status