Dogma of the Earth as center of the universe

[rosarygirl7]

My question was only whether it was an official dogma or not (because the Church cannot teach false dogma) I just heard it and was sure it was wrong and wanted to know the answer. I think it has been answered, then! It was never an official dogma.

 

[JMMK]

Correct

 

[StAnastasia]

Put that under the file where Columbus ‘proved’ that the Earth was round.

Except that Columbus didn’t prove it was spherical, and no educated person believed it was flat!

StAnastasia

 

[JMMK]

That was my point.

 

[Brendan]

There is also the fact that the Church’s science experts asked Galieo to hold off until their was proof of his theory.

Like any good science publisher, a new theory should have certain key factors.

1. That is is better than the existing theory
2. That it makes a prediction that is unaccounted for in the existing theory.

Galieo failed on both counts.

His predictions of planetary motion were less precise than the existing heliocentric model, particularly in the area of planetary retrograde. This was, of course, because Galieo’s model placed the planets in perfectly circular orbits, when, in fact, they are elliptical.

Secondly, if the Earth moved around the Sun, there should be a stellar parallax ( a difference in in the position of a star when the Earth was on one side of the Sun, vs being on the other)

Measurements showed this not to be the case ( again, because the stars are so incredibly far away, it was unmeasurable except by modern equipment)

No reputable science journal today would print something that is as far off of experimental evidence as Galieo was with his. They would send it back for more research.

So the Church requested, rightly so, that Galieo refrain from publishing. But not only did Galieo disregard that reasonable request, he published his work in an insulting fashion to the Pope.

 

[StAnastasia]

So the Church requested, rightly so, that Galieo refrain from publishing. But not only did Galieo disregard that reasonable request, he published his work in an insulting fashion to the Pope.

Why should the Church – an ecclesiastical body – have been in a position to censor science in the first place? Had Galileo published in a Protestant country at first – where the Inquisition did not operate – he would not have run afoul of the machinery of the Counter-Reformation. There is some discussion of this in a new book I found, Catholicism and Science (2008).

StAnastasia

PS – The spelling is “Galileo,” not “Galieo.”

 

[PerryJ]

Why should the Church – an ecclesiastical body – have been in a position to censor science in the first place? Had Galileo published in a Protestant country at first – where the Inquisition did not operate – he would not have run afoul of the machinery of the Counter-Reformation. There is some discussion of this in a new book I found, Catholicism and Science (2008).

StAnastasia

PS – The spelling is “Galileo,” not “Galieo.”

Both Calvin and Luther refuted all Heliocentrism. The Church accepted Copernicus theory. The Church was much more advanced than the Protestant reformers concerning science.

Why was the Church involved? Two reasons, first Galileo wanted the Bible changed to reflect his theory. Second the Catholic Church created the University system. Almost all University degrees were presented by the Church because they created the Universities. Without the Church there was no higher learning going on for centuries. If your new books doesn’t explain this you need to get a new book.

 

[StAnastasia]

Both Calvin and Luther refuted all Heliocentrism. The Church accepted Copernicus theory. The Church was much more advanced than the Protestant reformers concerning science.

Why was the Church involved? Two reasons, first Galileo wanted the Bible changed to reflect his theory. Second the Catholic Church created the University system. Almost all University degrees were presented by the Church because they created the Universities. Without the Church there was no higher learning going on for centuries. If your new books doesn’t explain this you need to get a new book.

(1) Can you show evidence that Luther and Calvin refuted Copernicanism?

(2) Can you show evidence that Galileo wanted the Bible changed?

(3) It is flat-out false that almost all university degrees were presented by the Church.

StAnastasia

 

[PerryJ]

(1) Can you show evidence that Luther and Calvin refuted Copernicanism?

(2) Can you show evidence that Galileo wanted the Bible changed?

(3) It is flat-out false that almost all university degrees were presented by the Church.

StAnastasia

What book are you reading? It is true that the Church handed out most degrees and they were signed by the Pope. They started the Univeristies to help man learn. The Church has over 20 fathers of science to their credit. The Church actively used their Churches to prove scientific theories concerning heliocentrism by mapping the path of the sun within the Churches. Galileo was proved wrong by Kepler. His theory was proved wrong in his own lifetime. You need to get a different book. It appears that it was written by a Protestant with an axe to grind.

It appears that you have never read any history concerning Luther and Calvin or you wouldn’t have made such a post. These were not pious evangelizers. They were a mess. I have published this info so many times I am sure most are bored with it. Those two were nuts.

I will bring sources to prove all of my info in the next couple of days.

 

[StAnastasia]

It appears that you have never read any history concerning Luther and Calvin or you wouldn’t have made such a post. These were not pious evangelizers. They were a mess. I have published this info so many times I am sure most are bored with it. Those two were nuts…

It appears you yourself have never read any history concerning Luther and Calvin, or you would be able to substantiate these wild claims, rather than stalling for time!

The book is Catholicism and Science, by Allen and Hess (Greenwood Press, 2008).

StAnastasia

 

[PerryJ]

It appears you yourself have never read any history concerning Luther and Calvin, or you would be able to substantiate these wild claims, rather than stalling for time!

The book is Catholicism and Science, by Allen and Hess (Greenwood Press, 2008).

StAnastasia

I have the books at home.

 

[Brendan]

Why should the Church – an ecclesiastical body – have been in a position to censor science in the first place? Had Galileo published in a Protestant country at first – where the Inquisition did not operate – he would not have run afoul of the machinery of the Counter-Reformation. There is some discussion of this in a new book I found, Catholicism and Science (2008).

The Universities were Catholic in nature and operation.

So it ‘censored’ it for exact same reason that if I wanted to publish a science work on University of Notre Dame Press, it ( a Catholic entity) would have the right, indeed the obligation, to make sure that my work met certain standards of academic rigor.

Thus Galileo ( and yes, I do know the spelling, it’s sometimes difficult to type while also being on a con call ) chose to publish a work of Natural Philosphy and the peer review process rejected it. And rightly so. It did not meet the academic standards of that time, or our current time.

 

[PerryJ]

It appears you yourself have never read any history concerning Luther and Calvin, or you would be able to substantiate these wild claims, rather than stalling for time!

The book is Catholicism and Science, by Allen and Hess (Greenwood Press, 2008).

StAnastasia

To give you a quick response here are just a couple of quikc lines I found on the web in the last two minutes. Luther and Calvin were very much against Heliocentrism.

The Scientific Revolution in National Context by Roy Porter Mikulas Teicu pg 98 - "Of Luther tishreden; which , ridiculed Heliocentrism.

Science and Tehcnology in World History Page 213 - Luther and Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe did pose objections (to Heliocentrism)

Seveteenth Cenrtury Art and Arhcitecture by Ann Harris pg 1 - Both Calvin and Luther denounced heliocentrism.

I put this one in because it show how the diversity of people that acknowledge the Protestant’s objections of heliocentrism.

Note that Copernicus was a Catholic cleric. If he did his work in Calvin’s Geneva he would have been burned at the stake for being Catholic. He probably would have also burned him at the stake for his theory. Calvin executed 58 people for not following his doctrine.

The books below I have read.

Witchcraft in the Southwest Marc Simmons – Page 8
“Those inquisitions carried out by John Calvin in 1545 resulted in 31 executions for witchcraft in the city of Geneva.”

Witch Hunting in the Southwest – Eric Midelfort Page 73
“Geneva in the years 1542 – 1545 some 40 person were found guilty of witchcraft and executed.”

History of Political Ideas Eric Voegelin, Athanasios Moulakis, David Walsh, David L. Morse – Page 276 “John Calvin committed 58 executions and 76 banishments”

This in the small population of Geneva; which, only had between 13,000 and 15,000 people.

 

[JMMK]

I might be off on this, but wasn’t Galileo under the patronage of the Church when he was doing this research?

 

[PerryJ]

(1) Can you show evidence that Luther and Calvin refuted Copernicanism?

(2) Can you show evidence that Galileo wanted the Bible changed?

(3) It is flat-out false that almost all university degrees were presented by the Church.

StAnastasia

How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization by Thomas Woods pg 47 - 48

"The university was an utterly new phenomenon in European history. Nothing like it had existed in ancient Greece or Rome. The institution that we recognize today, with its faculties, course of study, examinations, and degrees as well as the distinction between undergraduate and gradute study comes to us from the medieval world. The Church developed the university system because, according to historian Lowrie Daly, it was “the only institution in Europe that showed consistent interest in the preservation and cultivation of knowledge.”

Aside from the Church’s intellectual role in fostering the universities, the papacy played a central role in establishing and encouraging them. Naturally, the granting of a charter to a university was one indication of his papal role. Eighty one universities had been established by the time of the Reformation. Of these, thirty three possessed a papal charter, fifteen a royal charter or imperial one, twenty possessed both, and thirteen had none. I addition, it was the accepted view that a university could not award degrees without the approbation of pope, king or emperor."

Only the Churches degree was held out to the whole world. The other only applied to their kingdom.

This is a lot more information concerning the Churches positive impact on science. There is a lot more info than this as the Priest started many of todays modern sciences.

 

[StAnastasia]

This is a lot more information concerning the Churches positive impact on science. There is a lot more info than this as the Priest started many of todays modern sciences.

In other words, it is false to claim that almost all university degrees were presented by the Church. Oxford and Cambridge in Galileo’s time did not rely on papal permission to award degrees.

 

[StAnastasia]

Note that Copernicus was a Catholic cleric. If he did his work in Calvin’s Geneva he would have been burned at the stake for being Catholic. He probably would have also burned him at the stake for his theory. Calvin executed 58 people for not following his doctrine.

Mere speculation on your part. Do you have any historical evidence suggesting that Calvin would have burned Copernicus for a scientific theory?

 

[Brendan]

In other words, it is false to claim that almost all university degrees were presented by the Church. Oxford and Cambridge in Galileo’s time did not rely on papal permission to award degrees.

But the Universities that peer reviewed Galileo’s work were Papal Universities.

Not that Catholic Universities were opposed to the discussion of heliocentrism, Kepler’s own experiences in Catholic Praque proved otherwise.

But they mandated, again correctly, that Galileo cease presenting his work as a *fait acompli *when the experimental evidence showed otherwise.

 

[StAnastasia]

Not that Catholic Universities were opposed to the discussion of heliocentrism, Kepler’s own experiences in Catholic Praque proved otherwise.

Owen Gingerich has also shown that proximity to Rome was a factor in how assiduously scholars followed the dictates of the Congregation of the Index. Very few of the extant copies of Copernicus’ De Revolutionibus were fully expurgated as the Index demanded. Italy hewed to the decree closer than Spain!

 

[Brendan]

Mere speculation on your part. Do you have any historical evidence suggesting that Calvin would have burned Copernicus for a scientific theory?

Kepler was forced to leave Tübingen due to Lutheran objections to his heliocentrism, and found support and Imperial patronage at both Catholic Gratz in Catholic Praque with Catholic Tyco Brahe.

In fact, even though it was illegal for a Protestant to be a professor in Graz, the intercession of the Jesuits permitted him to remain.

It was also illegal to be a Protestant in Praque, but he was still accepted into the service of the Emperor and allowed to practice his Lutheran faith freely.

To top it all off, soon after Galileo announced his discovery of moons around Jupiter, the Archbishiop of Cologne provided Kepler with a telescope with which to continue his research.

All in all, the Catholic Church was incredibly supportive of the heliocentric Kepler, more so that his own Lutheran Church.