Copernius, Galileo wrong. Church right. Any apologies?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Linusthe2nd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Copernicus, Galileo were right to some extent, but didn’t have enough evidence to overturn the science of the day. The Church relied on the testimony of Lord Bacon who was correct in that the evidence to support the Copernican system was not sufficient to be scientifically supportable. The Church was not suppressing science, but relied on it to judge Galileo’s indiscretion to publicize the hypothesis as complete truth to the masses that were poorly educated, thus causing confusion. Galileo was also being supported by an Italian political party which made his motives further suspect. It was these actions that put him in house arrest so that he could continue his work, but be kept from causing political and cultural unrest. The works of Copernicus was forbidden for 4 years from Galileo’s trial in 1616 to 1620. Copernicus is the hero of the story. He was the originator of the hypothesis and only published it in Latin for the scientific community.

Yet, they were both wrong the sun is not the center of the universe, but only the center of the solar system. Therefore, if the church agreed with the system it would have been just as wrong. None of this was declared infallible and even the judges of Galileo left remarks that Church teaching might have to be changed if this system was later found correct.
 
oldcelt said:
You are in good company.
Click to expand...
Like I understand the history behind them it seems that the Church did nothing wrong. Either it’s an ignorance of history that people need to apologize for.

Cause the Earth still goes around the sun and is not the center of the universe and solar system. The Earth is the center of life cause we have not yet discovered life elsewhere yet.
 
adawgj said:
Like I understand the history behind them it seems that the Church did nothing wrong. Either it’s an ignorance of history that people need to apologize for.

Cause the Earth still goes around the sun and is not the center of the universe and solar system. The Earth is the center of life cause we have not yet discovered life elsewhere yet.
Click to expand...
The bolded statement is a very broad statement. For the rest, when studying a historic event it is best to find the most impartial sources.

These cases are among the greatest testimonies for the separation of Church and State.
 
The University of Notre Dame
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
Answering nature’s most fundamental question

You know their names—Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and Hawking. They, and
scientists like them, explained gravity. They discovered radio waves, x-rays,
radioactivity, electromagnetism, superconductivity, and the structure of the
atom. And they invented radar, transistors, computers, lasers, MRI’s, electron
microscopes, nuclear power, and the Internet. They are physicists. And at the
College of Science, you will learn to think like them; you will know some of what
they knew.
physics.nd.edu/assets/82396/undergraduate_physics_at_notre_dame.pdf

😃

Well, I’ve posted quite a bit through this topic and wish everyone the best life has to offer!

🙂
 
LogisticsBranch said:
The University of Notre Dame
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
Answering nature’s most fundamental question

You know their names—Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and Hawking. They, and
scientists like them, explained gravity. They discovered radio waves, x-rays,
radioactivity, electromagnetism, superconductivity, and the structure of the
atom. And they invented radar, transistors, computers, lasers, MRI’s, electron
microscopes, nuclear power, and the Internet. They are physicists. And at the
College of Science, you will learn to think like them; you will know some of what
they knew.
physics.nd.edu/assets/82396/undergraduate_physics_at_notre_dame.pdf
Click to expand...
Nicely done. I think that’s game, set and match to Sean Connery’s wife. 😃
 
inocente said:
Nicely done. I think that’s game, set and match to Sean Connery’s wife. 😃
Click to expand...
Gee, that naughty word nature again :D. " The University of Notre Dame
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
Answering nature’s most fundamental question "

However, I think the philosophy department might take issue with the final phrase :D.

Even Benedict XVII has used the forbidden word several times here:

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/october/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20081031_academy-sciences_en.html

😛

Linus2nd
 
LogisticsBranch
The University of Notre Dame
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
Answering nature’s most fundamental questions
You know their names—Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and Hawking. They, and
scientists like them, explained gravity. They discovered radio waves, x-rays,
radioactivity, electromagnetism, superconductivity, and the structure of the
atom. And they invented radar, transistors, computers, lasers, MRI’s, electron
microscopes, nuclear power, and the Internet. They are physicists. And at the
College of Science, you will learn to think like them; you will know some of what
they knew.
physics.nd.edu/assets/82396/undergraduate_physics_at_notre_dame.pdf
Click to expand...
😃
Click to expand...
Well, I’ve posted quite a bit through this topic and wish everyone the best life has to offer!
Click to expand...
🙂
Click to expand...
Sorry, I accidently forgot the “s” that is now noted in red.😃 But other forks here would have known that if they had opened the link. God isn’t used in science courses at Notra Dame. Obviously, their isn’t any priests that have a problem with that nor any Pope.

I’ll end this topic by stating that I’m a little over 60 years old and did not attend a Catholic elemenary (K-6 grades, junior high school (7-8 grades), or high school (9-12), or a Catholic University. I went to public schools and went to a non-Catholic University. I leaned about Galileo and Charles Darwin when I was in 6th grade. Religon was most definately not part of any of those schools or the University I attended. 😃 The same goes for my husband. There definately was and still is a separtion between Church and state.🙂

Science has remained separate in Catholic Universities from what I understand by friends of mine who attended them.
 
LogisticsBranch said:
Sorry, I accidently forgot the “s” that is now noted in red.😃 But other forks here would have known that if they had opened the link. God isn’t used in science courses at Notra Dame. Obviously, their isn’t any priests that have a problem with that nor any Pope.

I’ll end this topic by stating that I’m a little over 60 years old and did not attend a Catholic elemenary (K-6 grades, junior high school (7-8 grades), or high school (9-12), or a Catholic University. I went to public schools and went to a non-Catholic University. I leaned about Galileo and Charles Darwin when I was in 6th grade. Religon was most definately not part of any of those schools or the University I attended. 😃 The same goes for my husband. There definately was and still is a separtion between Church and state.🙂

Science has remained separate in Catholic Universities from what I understand by friends of mine who attended them.
Click to expand...
The only time there is a big deal about science is when a specific scientific dictum intersects a fundamental doctrine of the Catholic Church. In that case – Divine Revelation trumps.
 
grannymh said:
The only time there is a big deal about science is when a specific scientific dictum intersects a fundamental doctrine of the Catholic Church. In that case – Divine Revelation trumps.
Click to expand...
Science don’t work that way. Science doesn’t really care about divine revelation. Infact, most of the people I know that went to K-12 Catholic schools during my period of time left the Catholic Church. I attend mass when I can since I travel quite a bit and sometimes there is no Church around. I do believe in a triune God. My love for God is what matters most to me. Science has nothing to say about heaven and a truine God.

I’m done with this topic.😃
 
LogisticsBranch said:
Science don’t work that way. Science doesn’t really care about divine revelation. Infact, most of the people I know that went to K-12 Catholic schools during my period of time left the Catholic Church. I attend mass when I can since I travel quite a bit and sometimes there is no Church around. I do believe in a triune God. My love for God is what matters most to me. Science has nothing to say about heaven and a truine God.

I’m done with this topic.😃
Click to expand...
May I respectfully respond to the sentence “Science doesn’t really care about divine revelation.”

Natural science takes place in the proper material/physical world. However, humans are peerless among all species in that our nature is an unique wonderful unification of both the material/physical world of our universe and the spiritual world of our Creator God. The goal of humankind is joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision – Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matthew 5:8; 1 Corinthians 13:12)

We are the only creatures who are deliberately called to share in the life of God, here on planet earth and beyond in heaven. It makes sense to listen to Divine Revelation as taught by the Catholic Church.

Natural science is a gift from God. It should not be used as opposition to Divine Revelation regarding humans.
 
grannymh said:
May I respectfully respond to the sentence “Science doesn’t really care about divine revelation.”

Natural science takes place in the proper material/physical world. However, humans are peerless among all species in that our nature is an unique wonderful unification of both the material/physical world of our universe and the spiritual world of our Creator God. The goal of humankind is joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision – Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matthew 5:8; 1 Corinthians 13:12)

We are the only creatures who are deliberately called to share in the life of God, here on planet earth and beyond in heaven. It makes sense to listen to Divine Revelation as taught by the Catholic Church.

Natural science is a gift from God. It should not be used as opposition to Divine Revelation regarding humans.
Click to expand...
From a scientific point of view we are homo sapiens and homo sapiens existed long before the Church came into existence. Religion isn’t science! I’m not a creationist nor am I a proponent of the Intelligent Design movement. Are you a creationist?
inocente said:
Nicely done. I think that’s game, set and match to Sean Connery’s wife. 😃
Click to expand...
Yeah, my husband could be his look alike.😃 Every once in a while on my travels there will be a person who calls me by a name that isn’t mine. Apparently I have a look alike too. Take care:thumbsup:
 
Linusthe2nd said:
It is beginning to look like Copernius and Galileo were wrong and the Church was righgt. It now appears that the earth may indeed be the center of the universe. So the question is, will the world apologize for the abuse that has been heaped upon it for the last 500 years? Will the professors in our universities across the land stop upbrating the Church? At the very least they should admit that actually determining the center of the universe is far from being as easy as Copernicus and Galileo thought.

medium.com/@john_qpublic/planck-satellite-confirms-wmap-findings-universe-is-not-copernican-26f88f17a732

Linus2nd
Click to expand...
the Church is run by humans and sometimes is wrong. The Church is not infallible in terms of things that fall outside of the areas of faith and morals. The Church can be fallible in terms of things of science. There is nothing in the scriptures that tells us the earth is the center of the universe.

As far as the science goes there is no such things as the center of the universe. There is no point of origin that the universe came from. When the big bang happened everything that would ever exist in the universe was in the singularity so in theory there is no center of the universe. I don’t completely understand it myself but that is what most scientists say. I trust they are correct.

but it really doesn’t matter for faith and morals, we don’t have to be the center of the universe to be God’s chosen people. Don’t try to argue that copernius and Galileo wrong to try to make the Church look infallible in matters she doesn’t need to be infallible in.
 
grannymh said:
May I respectfully respond to the sentence “Science doesn’t really care about divine revelation.”

Natural science takes place in the proper material/physical world. However, humans are peerless among all species in that our nature is an unique wonderful unification of both the material/physical world of our universe and the spiritual world of our Creator God. The goal of humankind is joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision – Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matthew 5:8; 1 Corinthians 13:12)

We are the only creatures who are deliberately called to share in the life of God, here on planet earth and beyond in heaven. It makes sense to listen to Divine Revelation as taught by the Catholic Church.

Natural science is a gift from God. It should not be used as opposition to Divine Revelation regarding humans.
Click to expand...
Science and theology are two different areas of science. There is no way that science could ever disprove divine revelation.

JPII said it best in his letter to the Vatican Observatory.
To be more specific, both religion and science must preserve their autonomy and their distinctiveness. Religion is not founded on science nor is science an extension of religion. Each should possess its own principles, its pattern of procedures, its diversities of interpretation and its own conclusions. Christianity possesses the source of its justification within itself and does not expect science to constitute its primary apologetic. Science must bear witness to its own worth. While each can and should support the other as distinct dimensions of a common human culture, neither ought to assume that it forms a necessary premise for the other. The unprecedented opportunity we have today is for a common interactive relationship in which each discipline retains its integrity and yet is radically open to the discoveries and insights of the other.
Click to expand...
Questions of this kind can be suggested in abundance. Pursuing them further would require the sort of intense dialogue with contemporary science that has, on the whole, been lacking among those engaged in theological research and teaching. It would entail that some theologians, at least, should be sufficiently wellversed in the sciences to make authentic and creative use of the resources that the best-established theories may offer them. Such an expertise would prevent them from making uncritical and overhasty use for apologetic purposes of such recent theories as that of the “Big Bang” in cosmology. Yet it would equally keep them from discounting altogether the potential relevance of such theories to the deepening of understanding in traditional areas of theological inquiry.
Click to expand...
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/1988/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_19880601_padre-coyne_en.html
 
LogisticsBranch said:
From a scientific point of view we are homo sapiens and homo sapiens existed long before the Church came into existence. Religion isn’t science! I’m not a creationist nor am I a proponent of the Intelligent Design movement. Are you a creationist?
Click to expand...
I am not a “creationist” and I am not a proponent of Intelligent Design theory. Nonetheless, I have found some *personal *good in the general Intelligent Design movement.

From a scientific view, Homo sapiens is solely a material, physical decomposing living organism. This scientific view is acceptable in the medical arena. When this view spills over into the spiritual arena, then I am a Catholic who understands, accepts, and believes that all humankind descended from two, real, sole, fully-complete human founders.
 
grannymh said:
I am not a “creationist” and I am not a proponent of Intelligent Design theory. Nonetheless, I have found some *personal *good in the general Intelligent Design movement.

From a scientific view, Homo sapiens is solely a material, physical decomposing living organism. This scientific view is acceptable in the medical arena. When this view spills over into the spiritual arena, then I am a Catholic who understands, accepts, and believes that all humankind descended from two, real, sole, fully-complete human founders.
Click to expand...
If you understand that science doesn’t have anything to say about religion and theology than there is nothing wrong with this view. The problem doesn’t lie in the science rather in a reductionist philosophy that puts science on a pedestal treating it like has the final say on everything. This is a recent development starting with Descartes and the like who started to reduce philosophy to pretty much pointless, just some arguing for academic sake instead of representing what reality may be like.

again I suggest reading JPII letter to the vatican observatory I linked a a couple posts ago. It is short but a little difficult to understand at times but if you read through it a few times you got it.
 
grannymh said:
I am not a “creationist” and I am not a proponent of Intelligent Design theory. Nonetheless, I have found some *personal *good in the general Intelligent Design movement.
Click to expand...
Clarification:

The personal good I found is in chapters one and five by Dr. Ann Gauger in the book Science & Human Origins, ISBN-13: 978-1-936599-04-2 (paperback) Chapter five addresses the technical aspects of specific genetic conclusions. Dr. Gauger’s review of science literature is excellent.
 
grannymh said:
We are the only creatures who are deliberately called to share in the life of God, here on planet earth and beyond in heaven. It makes sense to listen to Divine Revelation as taught by the Catholic Church.

Natural science is a gift from God. It should not be used as opposition to Divine Revelation regarding humans.
Click to expand...
I think the main issue may be more about business as usual rather than deliberate opposition.

Wherever revelation appears to make a prediction about the natural world, and the prediction is brought into question by evidence, the issue is that nature can’t lie, and this leads to schism. Some will say that revelation must be reinterpreted on that point, others that it is plain wrong, others that the evidence must be reinterpreted, and so on. Everyone goes off into huddles.

Examples include all the various views on cosmology (geocentrism etc.) and human origins (creationism etc.). A more important example, because it affects real people now, is interpreting the empirical evidence on homosexuality - there have been a huge number of threads in the Social Justice forum with all manner of divisions.

This is not to discuss those issues here, just to say that every so often science has and will act as a fragmentation grenade on one religion or another by simply going about its business.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top