Diversity of thought

  • Thread starter Thread starter thinkandmull
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thinkandmull

Guest
The new issue of the This Rock has a lead article that says that Catholics who believe in geocentrism have a “bad religion”. This seems to be an open theological and scientific discussion. Isn’t this therefore inappropriate? Some people get their hierophonies of the divine by believing non-common ideas
 
What I’d really like to know is, in this day and age, who believes in geocentrism, Catholic or not? :confused:

But to the main point, I don’t think the Catholic Church forces people not to accept bad science per se, only to accept doctrines and dogmas related to faith and morals, so I am not sure a person who (as bizarre as it sounds in this day and age, especially since what is now known as the Big Bang theory of cosmology was originally developed by a Catholic priest) is Catholic and holds to geocentrism is somehow not following a certain doctrine or dogma of the Church.

What is the context of that claim? Perhaps that would shed light on what they mean? 🤷
 
thinkandmull said:
The new issue of the This Rock has a lead article that says that Catholics who believe in geocentrism have a “bad religion”. This seems to be an open theological and scientific discussion. Isn’t this therefore inappropriate? Some people get their hierophonies of the divine by believing non-common ideas
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church does not enforce any particular view of a scientific issue. That is not her purpose. What she does do is give us proper interpretations and ethics in regards to science as it relates to theological issues. Catholics are free to take up whatever view they wish on a scientific subject so long as it that view is not contradictory to the ethical teachings and laws of the Church. The issue of Geocentrism is a wholly-scientific one, and one which the Church has no pronounced doctrine on. If a Catholic wants to ignore the scientific evidence and believe in a geocentric model then that is their prerogative, and it has no affect on their standing with the church. If, on the other hand, a Catholic wants to believe in something like the existence of multiple “first humans” apart from Adam and Eve then they would be violating Church Doctrine regarding our first parents and the nature of original sin.

The claim being made, that of “bad religion,” is the common cry of people who know nothing of the teachings of the Church. They take a single sample or small set of sample opinions to be indicative of not only the beliefs of all people of the Church, but also of the core teachings of the Church. Put simply, they have no idea what they’re talking about and are engaged in faulty reasoning. The believers in geocentrism don’t have “bad religion,” only bad knowledge or conclusions. If they, in turn, attribute their faulty views to their faith then they are also presenting an irrational argument not supported by Church doctrine. They are present an opinion as dogma and are equally as wrong as the people accusing them of having bad religion.
 
I’m far closer to a skeptic than lots of people. I’ve seen some books by scientists who believe in geocentrism. That’s enough for me to say I don’t know what to believe about it, and I don’t really care actually. The world appears to me to be geocentric, that is all I need to know.

The writer John Salza and I communicated once. He tried to say that all the Fathers of the Church believed in geocentrism. Then I asked him if Ignatius of Antioch wrote on it. He didn’t respond. Since the Church hasn’t said who all the Church Fathers are, he can’t claim anyway that this is a matter of faith. I am not sure that a unanimous consent from the Fathers is even a matter of faith, or just something the non-hierarchy must follow.

Karl Keating said that the Fathers must have been intending to write on the issue as if to make a dogma with the other Fathers. The Church didn’t specify that though. All it said is we can’t not follow the consent of all the Fathers. But we have to quality this somewhat, don’t we? Can we say only when they speak of matters of faith? What of philosophy? The science of God’s creation? The Church hasn’t clarified this.** What is certain is that not all the Fathers who wrote for geocentrism said what they this based on the Bible instead of simply common science.**

But I don’t know why “neo-conservative” Catholics flip out over more “traditional” views.
 
thinkandmull said:
The new issue of the This Rock has a lead article that says that Catholics who believe in geocentrism have a “bad religion”. This seems to be an open theological and scientific discussion. Isn’t this therefore inappropriate? Some people get their hierophonies of the divine by believing non-common ideas
Click to expand...
Quick Clarification.

Geocentrism is strictly in the material/physical realm of science. It has never been and will never be a theological issue. Geocentrism has never been and will never be a doctrine of the Catholic Church no matter how many Early Church Fathers, Saints, Popes, Scientists, and Ordinary Folk comment on it.
 
If all the Church Fathers taught it because of words from Scripture, than it binds you. The Church banned books that taught it because it IS theological. It has to do with interpretation of the Bible.

Steve Ray has an article on unanimous consent of the Fathers, and he says it doesn’t mean every single one. But who is he to qualify this teaching (or discipline) like that? How many than is enough. Anybody could say “its one to few”
 
I read an article from a famous geocentrist who has an apologetic organization. He said (paraphrase):

Paul V approved his Commission’s recommendation that heliocentrism is “formally heretical” in 1616; Urban VIII approved the conclusion that heliocentrism was “formally heretical” in 1633

I would like to know if these facts are true. He went on to say:

Benedict XIV kept Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler on the Index in 1741 and 1758 and said
that any publication of Galileo’s book would have to be hypothetical and also contain the
condemnation of Galileo and heliocentrism were given in 1633

So this is making a further claim, seeming to lend support to what he said about Urban VIII

Any help?
 
thinkandmull said:
I read an article from a famous geocentrist who has an apologetic organization. He said (paraphrase):

Paul V approved his Commission’s recommendation that heliocentrism is “formally heretical” in 1616; Urban VIII approved the conclusion that heliocentrism was “formally heretical” in 1633

I would like to know if these facts are true.
Click to expand...
They could be true or they could be false. That is no big deal because there is no Catholic doctrine on either heliocentrism or geocentrism.

By the way, the popular word heresy was a four-letter word back then.
He went on to say:

**Benedict XIV kept Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler on the Index in 1741 and 1758 and said **
**that any publication of Galileo’s book would have to be hypothetical and also contain the **
condemnation of Galileo and heliocentrism were given in 1633

So this is making a further claim, seeming to lend support to what he said about Urban VIII

Any help?
Click to expand...
Again, that is no big deal. Popes and plumbers are free to express their personal preferences.
 
Lots of traditional Catholics believe in geocentrism, and assert that Paul V and Urban VIII taught it as doctrine. I want more information on it
 
The new *This Rock Magazine *article on geocentrism doesn’t mention what a Catholic Answers tract on geocentrism admits: that the Church once taught geocentrism. Karl Keating tries to argue that Benedict XVI lifted restrictions on some books that taught heliocentrism. However, Benedict XIV kept Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler on the Index in 1741 and 1758 and said that any publication of Galileo’s book would have to be hypothetical and also contain the condemnations of Galileo and heliocentrism. So I think the Pope was just trying to encourage scientific debate to gain greater insight. Now in 1822 Pius Vii ratified a 1820 decision by the Holy Office, dropping the prohibition on books on this topic. But that’s prudential. Again, this link catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy from Catholic Answers admits that the Pope taught geocentrism as doctrine.
 
  1. The Holy Office teaches “false and altogether opposed to Holy Scripture, which teaches the motion of the earth and the immobility of the sun, and which is taught by Nicolas Copernicus in De revolutiionibus orbium caelestium…being spread by…Father Paolo Antonio Foscarini…Therefore, so that this opinion may not spread any further to the prejudice of Catholic truth, it decrees that the said…De revolutiionibus orbium caelestium…be suspended until corrected; but that the book of the Carmelite Father, Paolo Foscarini, be prohibited and condemned.”
St Bellarmine sent two letters to Galileo about this condemnation and said “the declaration made by the Holy Father” and “in the name of His Holiness, the Pope”). So this was Papal authority.

1633 – On June 22, the Holy Office under Pope Urban VIII formally condemns Galileo for heresy, declaring that the heliocentric theory is “formally heretical, because it is expressly contrary to the Holy Scripture.” “We say, pronounce, sentence and declare that you, the said Galileo…have rendered yourself in the judgment of this Holy office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely, of having believed and held the doctrine which is false and contrary to the Sacred and Divine Scriptures, that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west and that the earth moves and is not the center of the world…after it has been declared and defined as contrary to Holy Scripture…From which we are content that you be absolved, provided that…you abjure, curse, and detest before us the aforesaid errors and heresies and every other error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church.”

1664 – Pope Alexander VII wrote a bull Speculatore Domus Israel in which he said “We, having taken the advice of our Cardinals, confirm and approve with our Apostolic authority by the tenor of these presents, and command and enjoin all persons everywhere to yield to this Index a constant and complete obedience.”

Does anyone know where I can get that bull? It sounds like it is just setting up a index of forbidden books, not necessarily condemning any book.

Anyway, we have two Popes who taught geocentrism. The *This Rock article *said that John Paul II did not abrogate any of the previous decrees. So what authority do these still have?
 
That’s the thing about non-infallible teachings. Can a Pope bind people beyond his pontificate? Nobody knows. John Paul II believed in heliocentrism. Is that enough to abrogate the past? Who knows
 
thinkandmull said:
Lots of traditional Catholics believe in geocentrism, and assert that Paul V and Urban VIII taught it as doctrine. I want more information on it
Click to expand...
They could not teach geocentrism as Catholic doctrine because there were no major ecumenical Church council in session.

In addition, Catholics do not need a Catholic doctrine in order to believe in geocentrism.

What you may be seeing, are letters and documents from groups like papal commissions. These flooded CAF years back. Not one document was a duly defined and properly proclaimed Catholic doctrine formed with the wisdom of the Holy Spirit Who guides the major ecumenical Church councils.

Being gifted with personal free speech, any Pope can teach any scientific information without it being a duly defined and properly proclaimed Catholic doctrine. The way a planet moves in the sky is not in the theological realm of the Catholic Church no matter how many writers say it is. In my old neighborhood the saying was that one cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
 
thinkandmull said:
  1. The Holy Office teaches “false and altogether opposed to Holy Scripture, which teaches the motion of the earth and the immobility of the sun, and which is taught by Nicolas Copernicus in De revolutiionibus orbium caelestium…being spread by…Father Paolo Antonio Foscarini…Therefore, so that this opinion may not spread any further to the prejudice of Catholic truth, it decrees that the said…De revolutiionibus orbium caelestium…be suspended until corrected; but that the book of the Carmelite Father, Paolo Foscarini, be prohibited and condemned.”
St Bellarmine sent two letters to Galileo about this condemnation and said “the declaration made by the Holy Father” and “in the name of His Holiness, the Pope”). So this was Papal authority.

1633 – On June 22, the Holy Office under Pope Urban VIII formally condemns Galileo for heresy, declaring that the heliocentric theory is “formally heretical, because it is expressly contrary to the Holy Scripture.” “We say, pronounce, sentence and declare that you, the said Galileo…have rendered yourself in the judgment of this Holy office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely, of having believed and held the doctrine which is false and contrary to the Sacred and Divine Scriptures, that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west and that the earth moves and is not the center of the world…after it has been declared and defined as contrary to Holy Scripture…From which we are content that you be absolved, provided that…you abjure, curse, and detest before us the aforesaid errors and heresies and every other error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church.”

1664 – Pope Alexander VII wrote a bull Speculatore Domus Israel in which he said “We, having taken the advice of our Cardinals, confirm and approve with our Apostolic authority by the tenor of these presents, and command and enjoin all persons everywhere to yield to this Index a constant and complete obedience.”

Does anyone know where I can get that bull? It sounds like it is just setting up a index of forbidden books, not necessarily condemning any book.

Anyway, we have two Popes who taught geocentrism. The *This Rock article *said that John Paul II did not abrogate any of the previous decrees. So what authority do these still have?
Click to expand...
All of the above are not official duly defined Catholic doctrines from a major ecumenical Church Council declaring that Geocentrism is Divine Revelation.

Please note that the word geocentrism is not mentioned in the 1633 and 1664 quotes above. However, no need to worry. Catholics are free to believe in Geocentrism. Please refer to post 14.

One absolutely has to study the context each and every time the popular word “doctrine” is used.
 
grannymh said:
They could not teach geocentrism as Catholic doctrine because there were no major ecumenical Church council in session.One absolutely has to study the context each and every time the popular word “doctrine” is used.

In addition, Catholics do not need a Catholic doctrine in order to believe in geocentrism.

What you may be seeing, are letters and documents from groups like papal commissions. These flooded CAF years back. Not one document was a duly defined and properly proclaimed Catholic doctrine formed with the wisdom of the Holy Spirit Who guides the major ecumenical Church councils.

Being gifted with personal free speech, any Pope can teach any scientific information without it being a duly defined and properly proclaimed Catholic doctrine. The way a planet moves in the sky is not in the theological realm of the Catholic Church no matter how many writers say it is. In my old neighborhood the saying was that one cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
Click to expand...
 
thinkandmull said:
Lots of traditional Catholics believe in geocentrism, and assert that Paul V and Urban VIII taught it as doctrine. I want more information on it
Click to expand...
This is a scientific issue and nothing to do with faith and morals. There is not and never has been any doctrine on this matter.
 
thinkandmull said:
The new issue of the This Rock has a lead article that says that Catholics who believe in geocentrism have a “bad religion”. This seems to be an open theological and scientific discussion. Isn’t this therefore inappropriate? Some people get their hierophonies of the divine by believing non-common ideas
Click to expand...
But False ideas are not going to lead them to The Truth!
 
You guys didn’t pay attention to my posts. The Church use to consider this a theological issue, and it is because it matters on how to interpret the Bible. Maybe the Bible was meant to reveal that God put the earth in the middle of our galaxy. Anyway, two Popes signed Holy Office condemnations of geocentrism, so it was part of Catholic teaching. There aren’t rules on the books on what happens when the Church as a whole, with the Pope, stop believing in a fallible teaching of the Church. There is a TON of gray area here
 
grannymh said:
They could not teach geocentrism as Catholic doctrine because there were no major ecumenical Church council in session.

In addition, Catholics do not need a Catholic doctrine in order to believe in geocentrism.

What you may be seeing, are letters and documents from groups like papal commissions. These flooded CAF years back. Not one document was a duly defined and properly proclaimed Catholic doctrine formed with the wisdom of the Holy Spirit Who guides the major ecumenical Church councils.

Being gifted with personal free speech, any Pope can teach any scientific information without it being a duly defined and properly proclaimed Catholic doctrine. The way a planet moves in the sky is not in the theological realm of the Catholic Church no matter how many writers say it is. In my old neighborhood the saying was that one cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
Click to expand...
Catholics don’t believe that only Councils have authority
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top