Faith and Science

  • Thread starter Thread starter cassini
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just so you know, I’m sure there are others like me just reading (for days) your discussions. I am not Catholic but have been looking at the Catholic church and it’s teachings and quite honestly “Cassini” you seem to be somewhat of a rebel in your church- sure you’re not a "Protest"ant?! One thing I’ve liked about the Catholic church is that it seems to position itself in terms of evolution being “theist evolutionist” which is where I’m at and many Protestant (especially Evangelical ones) aren’t. So…remember, others are reading and interested in what you are saying and how the Catholic church is being represented.mlz
PS StA and Hecd2 - appreciate what you’ve shared 🙂
Thanks, MLZ. I live and work in a very ecumenical context, and have worked closely with Lutherans, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Baptists, Orthodox, Jews, Muslims, agnostics, and atheists. We all share the evolutionary outlook, coming at it from sometimes very different theological and philosophical presuppositions. Makes for wonderful interdisciplinary and inter-religious conversations!

StAnastasia
 
Can you? We didn’t talk about this but I’m interested to know what you think the reason is. (There is a strong biological hypothesis that you might know about, but I’d like to know what your view is.)

Alec
evolutionpages.com
Dear Alec,

I view things from strange angles. This time I see that the reason for studying is what makes the study viable.

As I’m threading my way through these posts, when science is mentioned it seems to point to actual matter, or evidence, or something already proven, Obviously physical matter is the most natural to observe. However, I get the impression that only physical matter can be studied at least in biology.

“willing to sacrifice” was the way the ant and bee study was worded in your post. But “willing to sacrifice” is not a physical object to be prodded and pinched. “willing” is part of the non-physical side of humans which I name spiritual. Plus “willing to sacrifice” indicates a higher good than reproduction. Now mother bears will fight to their death for their cubs but that is not the same as sacrificing for society. This study introduces a different element, something beyond the individual’s family. It made me think about what our armed forces are doing.

In other words, to me, science is expanding its skills to look into something that is technically not physical matter even though it does involve the body. The learning process of how to do this biologically is a viable objective regardless of the outcome.

To me science should be based on the following: observation, comparison, evaluation, and conclusion. Sometimes I imagine that the first three steps can lead to the conclusion that there is something beyond the realm of sensory experience, even when technology is used.

I know that I am reading a lot more into the study than most people would. But you did ask for my view. And I enjoyed trying to put it into words. It doesn’t matter if it is accepted or not. It does matter that I can imagine things happening beyond…

I will close with my true ant story.

A few years ago I had the direct experience of observing ants that inhabited a crack above my kitchen sink. I placed the ant bait, which ants take back to their nest, on the splash board.
Because of the bait size, it took two ants working together to get it up and into the crack/nest. One day, there was only one ant trying to pull the bait. He couldn’t get it up the wall, so he ate it and died.

Blessings,
grannymh
 
I will close with my true ant story.

A few years ago I had the direct experience of observing ants that inhabited a crack above my kitchen sink. I placed the ant bait, which ants take back to their nest, on the splash board.
Because of the bait size, it took two ants working together to get it up and into the crack/nest. One day, there was only one ant trying to pull the bait. He couldn’t get it up the wall, so he ate it and died.

Blessings,
grannymh
ok, i had a good laugh. :rotfl:
 
Dear buffalo,

I was looking for a declared heresy and found none. There were words like heretical, against scripture, condemned, church fathers, etc., but their context was not that of a formal council and a formal statement of heresy. Nonetheless,I am always open to correction.

Blessings,
grannymh
Pope Paul V Confirms the Verdict

The following, according to the Vatican minutes, was the order of events after the examination. On Wednesday, February 24th, the same propositions were qualified in virtue of the Pope’s order:

(1) “That the sun is in the centre of the world and altogether immovable by local movement, was unanimously declared to be “foolish, philosophically absurd, and formally heretical, inasmuch as it expressly contradicts the declarations of Holy Scripture in many passages, according to the proper meaning of the language used, and the sense in which they have been expounded and understood by the Fathers and theologians.”

(2) The second proposition, “That the earth is not the centre of the world, and moves as a whole, and also with a diurnal movement,” was unanimously declared “to deserve the same censure philosophically, and, theologically considered, to be at least erroneous in faith.”

The following day, the 25th Feb 1616 - the day on which the Pope Paul V actively presided at the Holy Office as its prefect - the censures were reported to him by Cardinal Mellinus after which he gave his two well-known orders, one to Bellarmine, and one to the Commissary of the Holy Office. The first order was that Galileo was to be summoned and told of the decision and advised to abandon his heresy. Cardinal Bellarmine was to call Galileo to the Vatican Palace where he was to be notified that he could no longer propose Copernicanism as a truth. There was also to be present the Commissary General of the Inquisition, Fr de Lauda, who would, in the event of Galileo objecting, deliver a more severe warning under threat of imprisonment.

On the 5th March 1616, the Congregation of the Index published the condemnations, under orders from Pope Paul V:

‘Since it has come to the knowledge of the above-named Holy Congregation that the false Pythagorean doctrine, altogether opposed to the divine Scripture, on the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun, —which Nicolas Copernicus in his work De Revolutionibus Orbium cœlestium, and Didacus a Stunica in his commentary on Job… therefore, lest an opinion of this kind insinuate itself further to the destruction of Catholic truth, this Congregation has decreed that the said books be suspended till they are corrected; but that the book of Father Paul Antony Foscarini the Carmelite be altogether prohibited and condemned, and all other books that teach the same thing; as the present decree respectively prohibits, condemns, and suspends all.’

Finally, as Andrew White recalls, ‘the papacy committed itself as an infallible judge and teacher to the world by prefixing to the Index the usual Papal Bull giving its monitions the most solemn papal sanction. To teach or even read the works denounced or passages condemned was to risk persecution in this world and damnation in the next.’
 
continued:
Judgement Against Galileo directed by Pope Urban VIII himself:
as written up by Fr Roberts 1870.
‘… “And to the end,” said the document, “that so pernicious a doctrine might be altogether taken away, and spread no further to the heavy detriment of Catholic truth, a decree emanated from the Sacred Congregation of the Index [in 1616], in which books that treat of doctrine of the kind were prohibited, and that doctrine was declared false, and altogether contrary to the sacred and divine Scripture.”
And observe in what emphatic and unmistakable terms Rome repudiated the notion that the decree might be interpreted as a practical direction, as a measure of caution for the time being, or as anything short of an absolute settlement of the question.
“Understanding,” the Congregation said, “that, through the publication of a work at Florence entitled Dialogo di Galileo Galilei delle due massime Sisteme del Mundo Ptolemaico e Copernicano, the false opinion of the motion of the earth and the stability of the sun was gaining ground, it had examined the book, and had found it to be a manifest infringement of the injunction laid on you, since you in the same book have defended an opinion already condemned, and declared to your face to be so, in that you have tried in the said book, by various devices, to persuade yourself that you leave the matter undetermined, and the opinion expressed as probable; the which, however, is a most grave error, since an opinion can in no manner be probable which has been declared, and defined to be, contrary to the divine Scripture.”
Thus the declaration of the Index, for which all the authority of an absolutely true decision was claimed, was identified with the condemnatory judgement made known to Galileo by a Congregation held in the Pope’s presence. This was significant enough; but mark what followed.
“And when a convenient time had been assigned you for your defence, you produced the following certificate in the handwriting of the most eminent Lord Cardinal Bellarmine [Here the Commission quotes Bellarmine’s letter]:

‘We, Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, …declare that the said Signor Galileo Galilei has not abjured, … but only the declaration made by the Holy Father, and published by the Sacred Congregation of the Index, has been intimated to him, …-that the earth moves round the sun, and that the sun is stationary in the centre of the world, and does not move from east to west- is contrary to the Holy Scriptures, and therefore cannot be defended or held.’

… procured, as you said, to protect you from the calumnies of your enemies, who had put it about that you had abjured, and had been punished by the Holy Office; in which certificate it is affirmed that you had not abjured, had not been punished, but only that the declaration made by our Lord the Pope, and promulgated by the Sacred Congregation of the Index; had been announced to you the tenor whereof is, that the doctrine of the motion of the earth, and of the fixity of the sun, is contrary to the Sacred Scriptures, and therefore can neither be defended, nor held. “But this very certificate produced in your defence has rather aggravated the charge against you; for it asserts that the above-mentioned opinion is contrary to Holy Scripture: yet you dared to treat of it, to defend it, and advance it as probable.” Here, then, the Congregation plainly made it known that the decision of the Index was Papal. But Papal in what sense? In a sense, according to what had been said above, to make it a most grave error to suppose that the opinion condemned thereby could in any manner be probable. In a sense, according to the sentence that followed, to justify its being classed with those declarations and definitions, the conclusiveness of which it would be heresy to deny. Papal in such a way that a Catholic might be compelled to yield its doctrine the assent of faith.
“Invoking, then, the most holy Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that of His most glorious Mother Mary ever Virgin, by this our definitive sentence we say, pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo, on account of these things proved against you by documentary evidence, and which have been confessed by you as aforesaid, have rendered yourself to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, that is, of having believed and held a doctrine which is false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures -to wit, that the sun is in the centre of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth moves, and is not the centre of the universe; and that an opinion can be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture. And consequently that you have incurred all the censures and penalties decreed and promulgated by the sacred canons and other constitutions, general and particular, against delinquents of this class. From which it is our pleasure that you should be absolved, provided that, with a pure heart and faith unfeigned, you in our presence first abjure, curse, and detest, the above-named errors and heresies, and every other error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church, according to the formula which we shall show you.
“And that this your grave and pernicious error, and transgression remain not altogether unpunished, and that you may be the more cautious for the future, and be an example to others to abstain from offences of this sort, we decree that the book of the Dialogues of Galileo Galilei be prohibited by public edict; and you we condemn to the prison of this Holy Office during our will and pleasure; and, as a salutary penance, we command you for three years, to recite once a week, the seven Penitential Psalms; reserving to ourselves the power of moderating, commuting; or taking away altogether, or in part, the above-mentioned penalties and penances.” ’
 
continued;

Galileo’s Abjuration
Code:
 “I, Galileo Galilei, son of the late Vincenzio Galilei of Florence, aged seventy years, appearing personally before this court, and kneeing before you, the most eminent and reverend Lord Cardinals, Inquisitors-General of the universal Christian Republic against heretical pravity, having before my eyes the most holy Gospels, and touching them with my hands, swear that I always have believed, and now believe, and with God’s help will always believe, all that the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church holds, preaches, and teaches. But because, after this Holy Office had juridically enjoined me to abandon altogether the false opinion which holds that the sun is in the centre of the world, and immovable, and that the earth is not the centre, and moves; and had forbidden me to hold, defend, or teach in any manner, the said false doctrine; and after it had been notified to me that the said doctrine is repugnant to Holy Scripture, I wrote and caused to be printed a book, wherein I treat of the same doctrine already condemned, and adduced arguments with great efficacy in favour of it, without offering any solution of them; therefore I am judged vehemently suspected of heresy, that is, of having held and believed that the sun is the centre of the world and immovable, and that the earth is not the centre, and moves. Wherefore, desiring to remove from the minds of your Eminences, and all Catholic Christians, this vehement suspicion legitimately conceived against me, with a sincere heart and faith unfeigned, I abjure, curse, and detest, the above named errors, and heresies, and generally every other error and sect contrary to the above-mentioned Holy Church; and I swear for the future, I will neither say, nor assert by word of mouth, or in writing, anything to bring upon me similar suspicion. And if I shall know any heretic, or one suspected of heresy, I will denounce him to this Holy Office, or to the Inquisitor, or Ordinary of the place in which I may be. Moreover I swear, and promise, to fulfil, and observe entirely, all the penances that have been or shall be imposed on me by this Holy Office. And if -which God forbid- I act against any of these said promises, protestations, and oaths, I subject myself to all the penalties and punishments which the sacred canons, and other constitutions, general and particular, have enacted, and promulgated against such delinquents.  So help me God, and His holy Gospels, which I touch with my hands.
 “I, Galileo Galilei above-named, have abjured, sworn, promised, and bound myself as above; in token whereof I have signed with my own hand this formula of my abjuration, and have recited it word by word.”
Thus did Rome’s supreme Pontifical Congregation, established, to use the words of Sixtus V., “tanquam firmissimum Catholicae fidei propugnaculum . . . cui ob summam rei gravitatem Romanus Pontifex praesidere solet,” known to be acting under the Pope’s orders, announce to the Catholic world that it had been ruled that the Papal declaration of 1616 was to be received, not as a fallible utterance, but as an absolute sentence and abjuration with the following message:

“To your vicars, that you and all professors of philosophy and mathematics may have knowledge of it, that they may know why we proceeded against the said Galileo, and recognise the gravity of the error in order that they may avoid it, and thus not incur the penalties which they would have to suffer in case they fell into the same.” ’

This was accomplished, and in many cases the professors of mathematics, physics, and astronomy were assembled like their students at roll call and the trial documents read to them. Theologians and scholars were then urged to use their learning to show Copernicanism to be a serious heresy. Soon Europe was flooded with these critiques. Often, however, such publications ventured into the realm of science and foolish reasoning. It seems some missed the point and considered the objective was to defend the scientific integrity of geocentricity rather than its theological certainty. Throughout Europe however, there were theologians who were relieved with the ban. Andrew White records that the Rector of the University of Douay, referring to the opinion of Galileo, wrote to the papal nuncio at Brussels; ‘The professors of our university are so opposed to this fanatical opinion that they have always held that it must be banished from the schools. In our English college at Douay this paradox has never been approved and never will be.’

‘Throughout the proceedings Galileo had been treated with great consideration and courtesy. Against all precedent he was not confined to the dungeons of the Inquisition but was allowed to stay as the Tuscan Ambassador’s guest at the villa Medici until after his first examination. Then he had to surrender formally to the Inquisition, but instead of being put into a cell, he was assigned a five-roomed flat in the Holy Office itself, overlooking St Peter’s and the Vatican gardens, with his personal valet and Niccolini’s major domo to look after his food and wine. Here he stayed from 12 April to the third examination on 10 May. Then, before his trial was concluded, he was allowed to return to the Tuscan Embassy, a procedure quite unheard of, not only in the annals of the Inquisition but of any judiciary. Contrary to legend, Galileo never spent a day of his life in a prison cell.’
 
And finally, one more rarely addressed papal declaration of the Copernican heresy that Providence provided, found and recorded by Fr Roberts in his book:

BULLARIUM ROMANUM 1664.
CDLXV.
Super observatione Indicis librorum prohibitorum noviter impressi1.
Alexander Papa VII, ad perpetuam rei memoriam.

‘Towards the end of his Pontificate, it occurred to Alexander VII that it was his duty, as guardian of the household of Israel, to compose and place before the faithful a new Index of prohibited books that should be complete up to his time, and be more conveniently arranged than former indices. Whereupon he set to work with a specially chosen number of Cardinals and in the March of 1664 there issued from the Vatican press a book entitled Index Librorum prohibitorum Alexandri VII. Pontificis Maximi jussu editus. It was prefaced by a Bull wherein the Pope describes this composition of his Index and gives reasons for putting it forth… “For this purpose,” pursues the Pontiff, “we have caused the Tridentine and Clementine Indices to be added to this general Index, and also all the relevant decrees up to the present time, that have been issued since the Index of our predecessor Clement, that nothing profitable to the faithful interested in such matters might seem omitted…. we, having taken the advice of our Cardinals, confirm, and approve with Apostolic authority by the tenor of these presents, and: command and enjoin all persons everywhere to yield this Index a constant and complete obedience.”
Turning to this Index, we find among the decrees the Pope caused to be added thereto, the following: the “Quia ad notitiam” of 1616; the “monitum” of 1620, declaring the principles advocated by Copernicus on the position and movement of the earth to be “repugnant to Scripture and to its true and catholic interpretation;” the edict signed by Bellarmine prohibiting and condemning Kepler’s Epitome Astronomiæ Copernicanæ the edict of August 10th, 1634, prohibiting and condemning the Dialogo di Galileo Galilei; and under the head “Libri,” we find: “Libri omnes docentes mobilitatem terræ, et immobilitatem solis, in decree 5 Martii, 1616.” These, therefore, were some of the things the Pope confirmed and approved with Apostolic authority by the tenor of his Bull. It is clear, therefore, that the condemnation of Copernicanism was ratified and approved by the Pope himself, not merely behind the scenes, but publicly in the face of the whole Church, by the authority of a Bull addressed to all the faithful. Nay, more - and I call particular attention to this point - the Index to which the decrees in question were attached, was confirmed and approved by the Pope, not as a thing external to the Bull, but as though actually in it, “quem præsentibus nostris pro inserto haberi volumus;” and therefore it, and all it contained, came to the Church directly from the Pope himself, speaking to her as her Head, “as guardian of the household of Israel, as the shepherd who had to take care of the Lord’s flock, to protect it from the evils that threatened it, to see that the sheep redeemed by the precious blood of the Saviour were not led astray from the path of truth.” ‘

Thus ended Galileo’s life, work, discoveries, times and trial. Once again it was Roma Locuta est, causa finita: Rome has spoken; the matter is ended. Alas, we know it did not end there. Science, we are assured, went on to vindicate Galileo and his Copernicanism, thereby exposing the Catholic Church as a very fallible human institution that treated this scientist abominably and interfered in the smooth progress of science.
The truth of it however, is slightly different, so let us move on and see exactly what happened thereafter

Is that enough grannymh?
 
Oh yes, grannymh, one final acknowledgement of the 1616 decree’s status. This is admitted by the Copernican heretics themselves in 1820 when the ban on H writings etc in the Index was removed. Oh, and just in case you do not know, removing something from the Index is not an abrogation, just an deregation, leaving the 1616 decree itself untouched. Another thing. It was/is argued by the Apologists that contrary to Scripture is not heresy. Anything contrary to Holy Scripture is heresy. This is quite plain in Galileo’s prepared abjuration.

The Status of the 1616 Decree as discussed by the Holy Office of Pope PiusVII in 1820. Taken from one of the best documented books on the matter of all time M Finocchiaro’s Retrying Galileo.

Olivieri’s last presentation is perhaps the most instructive of all, for in it he confirms the authority of the 1616 decree.

Olivieri: ‘In his “motives” the Most Rev. Anfossi puts forth “the unrevisability of pontifical decrees.” But we have already proved that this is saved: the doctrine in question at that time was infected with a devastating motion, which is certainly contrary to the Sacred Scriptures, as it was declared.’

In other words, even Olivieri agreed that the 1616 decree was papal and irreversible and had to be defended as such.
 
Oh yes, grannymh, one final acknowledgement of the 1616 decree’s status. This is admitted by the Copernican heretics themselves in 1820 when the ban on H writings etc in the Index was removed.
Interesting material, Cassini. Do try to get a hearing for this at the American Astronomical Association convention.

StAnastasia
 
Oh yes, grannymh, one final acknowledgement …

Dear cassini,

You have given me quite a bit to read. Please allow me to take the time to do it justice. Thank you.

One thing I do need to make clear to everyone reading this thread.

I am approaching the sun/earth controversy solely from the viewpoint of the Catholic Church and the way it properly handles controversies both on a human level and a divine level. (see post 473 as a start) This is because the underlying issue of our discussion is – how does the Catholic Church remain true to the teachings of Jesus Christ in practice. The operative words are “in practice.” A short answer is that the Catholic Church
has followed the method for discerning truth that was originally established in Acts and expanded in the first centuries following.

Another thing which is important is that we need to be careful about the vocabulary used in any historical document. Name calling has existed forever. Thus, when it comes to words like heretical, condemned, heresy, etc., the context needs to be examined. And sometimes even the immediate context needs to be placed in a larger context such as when, where, what was going on at the time etc.

Now it is time to do some creative guessing… Basically, I am approaching cassini’s position from a different angle. Maybe this opens up an opportunity to discuss the thread’s topic from different angles…

Note: I definitely need some help with my project…

Blessings,
grannymh
 
does the Catholic Church remain true to the teachings of Jesus Christ in practice. The operative words are “in practice.” A short answer is that the Catholic Church has followed the method for discerning truth that was originally established in Acts and expanded in the first centuries following.
grannymh, there is no controversy about this except in Cassini’s imagination. There is no more point in spending enormous amounts of time on this than there is in spending time arguing about the “triclavian controversy” – the problem of whether Jesus was crucified with three or with four nails.

The Church is not geocentric and never again will be. Let’s save our energy for issues of serious import.

StAnastasia
 
😛
grannymh, there is no controversy about this except in Cassini’s imagination. There is no more point in spending enormous amounts of time on this than there is in spending time arguing about the “triclavian controversy” – the problem of whether Jesus was crucified with three or with four nails.

The Church is not geocentric and never again will be. Let’s save our energy for issues of serious import.

StAnastasia
Dear StAnastasia,

Thanks for reminding me – I should have said that I don’t intend to get involved in the science aspects of cassini’s position.

Blessings,
grannymh
 
grannymh, there is no controversy about this except in Cassini’s imagination. There is no more point in spending enormous amounts of time on this than there is in spending time arguing about the “triclavian controversy” – the problem of whether Jesus was crucified with three or with four nails.

The Church is not geocentric and never again will be. Let’s save our energy for issues of serious import.

StAnastasia
Grannymh, I talk to you here under this ‘advice’ from a Copernican. Not too many get the grace to seek truth these days. Note the Devil is already trying to get you to ignore your Catholic instinct. It is my Catholic instinct that you will not be diverted in your search. Take your time, as much as you like. The truth will make you free.
 
Grannymh, I talk to you here under this ‘advice’ from a Copernican. Not too many get the grace to seek truth these days. Note the Devil is already trying to get you to ignore your Catholic instinct. It is my Catholic instinct that you will not be diverted in your search. Take your time, as much as you like. The truth will make you free.
Cassini, if you are referring to me as the devil, I suspect that is contrary to the forum’s rules of civil discourse. I would be very careful about this if I were you.

StAnastasia
 
(Edited)
Dear cassini,

Thank you for understanding about time…and the need for truth.

Blessings,
grannymh

**THE HOLY EUCHARIST IS ****THE LIGHT, STRENGTH, ****AND LIFE **
OF OUR SOULS.
 
Don’t worry, Cassini was doing nothing of the sort - rather expressing optimism towards your intellect AND your faith, ma’am!

Heck, as non Catholics on this board, Mirdath and I have been repeatedly denigrated, insulted, oh any form of verbal abuse you can imagine, up to and beyond being called ‘worse than child-molesters’…all for not belonging to some peoples’ notions of the ‘right’ religion (ie theirs, and their particular peculiar ideas about it at that!)

So go easy here, you are by no means being insulted…be slow to take offense and gentle in your dealings…I think Jesus would have liked that since he was an awfully nice guy, and Catholics are to live in imitatio Christi, yes?

Besides, this is the philosophy forum…wanna get all rowdy over orthodoxy, there’s LOADS of space on CAF for that. 😉

so be of good cheer and open hearted (whoops, this is Apologetics,my mistake…but i still feel my basic message is a good one 😊 )- it may be ‘the Season’ but for some of us, even such heathens as myself, it’s always the season for lovingkindness. :o
 
I like to support local owner stores, so I order all my books at my friend’s Catholic gift store. “The God Delusion” came in and I’ve just started it. Two of the “real” books by Dawkins are on order. Thanks.

Blessings,
grannymh
Interesting. * The God Delusion *by Richard Dawkins was removed from all the bookstores where I live! 😃 I’m sure you’ll be in for a real roller coaster ride. I almost threw it in the fireplace but saved it just incase someone likes to talk about it. I hope you’re ready for him attacking Mother Teresa of Calcutta, etc. What a nightmare!
 
Heck, as non Catholics on this board, Mirdath and I have been repeatedly denigrated, insulted, oh any form of verbal abuse you can imagine, up to and beyond being called ‘worse than child-molesters’…all for not belonging to some peoples’ notions of the ‘right’ religion (ie theirs, and their particular peculiar ideas about it at that!)
Nepenthe! Mirdath! Hope all is going well with you. I haven’t seen either of you post lately and thought you disappeared.

We disagree about…well…a few things. But I like both of you. Please stick around for a while 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top