Has the Church ever been wrong?

[Abu]

catholicgirl201
Didn’t the Church believe that the Earth was once flat?

The smears against Christ and His Church are legion.

“Popular lore, movies, and children’s stories hold that in 1492 Christopher Columbus proved the world is round and in the process defeated years of dogged opposition from the Roman Catholic Church, which insisted that the earth is flat. These tales are rooted in books like A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, an influential reference by Andrew Dickson White, founder and first president of Cornell University. White claimed that even after Columbus’ return “the Church by its highest authority solemnly stumbled and persisted in going astray.

“The trouble is, almost every word of White’s account of the Columbus story is a lie. All educated persons of Columbus’ day, very much including the Roman Catholic prelates, knew the earth was round. The Venerable Bede (c. 673-735) taught that the world was round, as did Bishop Virgilius of Salzburg (c. 720-784), Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179), and Thomas Aquinas (c. 1224-74). All four ended up saints. Sphere was the title of the most popular medieval textbook on astronomy, written by the English scholastic John of Sacrobosco (c. 1200-1256). It informed that not only the earth but all heavenly bodies are spherical.

“So, why does the fable of the Catholic Church’s ignorance and opposition to the truth persist? Because the claim of an inevitable and bitter warfare between religion and science has, for more than three centuries, been the primary polemical device used in the atheist attack on faith.
“The truth is, there is no inherent conflict between religion and science. Indeed, the fundamental reality is that Christian theology was essential for the rise of science—a fact little appreciated outside the ranks of academic specialists.”
See catholicleague.org/rer.php?topic=Miscellaneous&id=120 (by Rodney Stark, from Catalyst 9/2004)

 

[Soulewolf]

Has the Church ever been wrong?

Yes. Especially in the cases of science vs religion. The church back in the day adhered to the Ptolemaic model of the universe (earth at the center). When this was challenged by Galileo who supported the Copernican model (earth revolving around the sun) , the church declared heresy and was forced into house arrest for the rest of his life. So yes. this little bit of dogma was proven incorrect.

 

[fhansen]

Yes. Especially in the cases of science vs religion. The church back in the day adhered to the Ptolemaic model of the universe (earth at the center). When this was challenged by Galileo who supported the Copernican model (earth revolving around the sun) , the church declared heresy and was forced into house arrest for the rest of his life. So yes. this little bit of dogma was proven incorrect.

Yes, I think this contributed to the Church growing- growing up actually-in understanding her role-and scientific declarations were simply never part of that purpose.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Of course you are aware that not only “The Church” but that most scientists of the time subscribed to a heliocentric theory and had done so since Aristotle had, it was thought, disproven a geocentric theory? You are aware of that, are you not?

Of course you are aware that Galileo was **wrong **in his theory regarding the non-motion of the sun, and the Church was actually correct regarding the fact that the sun moves where Galileo said it did not. You are aware of THAT, are you not?

The implication that the Church was some backward ‘anti-science’ behemoth is based on your faulty knowledge of the Church and the context of the times. It was not.

 

[MarianD]

The Church’s infallibility only extends to its coverage on doctrinal issues and dogmas. It doesn’t extend to its official position on scientific issues, on politics, or on other worldly things etc.

The Holy Spirit only prevents His Church from being in error only in regards to issues of the Faith.

 

[Abu]

Thank you, Tantum Ergo. It is quite remarkable how some people make their own trouble and confuse themselves

Soulewolfe
the church declared heresy and was forced into house arrest for the rest of his life. So yes. this little bit of dogma was proven incorrect.

False, again.
.
Post #48: Galileo was, in the 1633 Decree of the Inquisition, censured as “vehemently suspected of heresy.” No papal declaration of heresy was made.

Post #36: See Catholic Answers: catholic.com/library/Galileo_Controversy.asp
“The Church has never claimed ordinary tribunals, such as the one that judged Galileo, to be infallible. Church tribunals have disciplinary and juridical authority only; neither they nor their decisions are infallible.”

There was not even a “little bit of dogma” much less doctrine in the Decree.

Galileo was wrong in his interpretation of the Bible. He was wrong in his physics. From Ockham through Copernicus, the development of the heliocentric model of the solar system was the product of the universities – that most Catholic innovation. From the start, the medieval Christian university was a place created and run by scholars devoted entirely to knowledge. Buridan, Oresme, Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Bacon, Newton, all developed empirical science from Catholic theology. The system of Copernicus was never denounced.

Galileo got in trouble for presenting heliocentrism as more than just a hypothesis, as absolute truth. Nicolaus Copernicus had no problems at all, and even dedicated his De Revolutionibus to the Holy Father.
The only statement was a theological opinion issued by the theologians of the Holy Office. Theological opinion does not represent the Magisterium (official teaching) of the Church – Copernicanism had never been declared heretical by either the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium of the Church.

Post #61: “The truth is, there is no inherent conflict between religion and science. Indeed, the fundamental reality is that Christian theology was essential for the rise of science—a fact little appreciated outside the ranks of academic specialists.”
See catholicleague.org/rer.php?topic=Miscellaneous&id=120 (by Rodney Stark , from Catalyst 9/2004)

 

[edwest2]

Yes, I think this contributed to the Church growing- growing up actually-in understanding her role-and scientific declarations were simply never part of that purpose.

“growing up”? Compared to what?

“The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago.”

God bless,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

The Church’s infallibility only extends to its coverage on doctrinal issues and dogmas. It doesn’t extend to its official position on scientific issues, on politics, or on other worldly things etc.

The Holy Spirit only prevents His Church from being in error only in regards to issues of the Faith.

That is not entirely accurate:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/own/documents/rc_pa_acdscien_doc_10121999_history_en.html

God bless,
Ed

 

[Soulewolf]

The Church’s infallibility only extends to its coverage on doctrinal issues and dogmas. It doesn’t extend to its official position on scientific issues, on politics, or on other worldly things etc.

The Holy Spirit only prevents His Church from being in error only in regards to issues of the Faith.

I believe the churches stance on a Ptolemaic model was a deceleration of dogma.

 

[Soulewolf]

“growing up”? Compared to what?

“The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago.”

God bless,
Ed

This is impossible. Nothing existed before the universe. Especially time. In fact the idea of time breaks down mathematically right after the big bang.

If eternity is measured by time, then the universe has existed throughout all of time. the idea of a length of time that there was nothing is absurd. From my own point of view based in relativity, every point in time is objectively distinct from every other point in time and thus exists objectively for eternity. That is, Now and the big bang are objectively happening simultaneously and will continue to do so for eternity simply because there is no objective “time”.

 

[Abu]

MarianD
The Holy Spirit only prevents His Church from being in error only in regards to issues of the Faith.

That should be when defining doctrine on faith and morals, or declaring a dogma.
You might refer to post #49 which addressed a previous statement which you had made.

 

[fhansen]

Of course you are aware that not only “The Church” but that most scientists of the time subscribed to a heliocentric theory and had done so since Aristotle had, it was thought, disproven a geocentric theory? You are aware of that, are you not?

Of course you are aware that Galileo was **wrong **in his theory regarding the non-motion of the sun, and the Church was actually correct regarding the fact that the sun moves where Galileo said it did not. You are aware of THAT, are you not?

The implication that the Church was some backward ‘anti-science’ behemoth is based on your faulty knowledge of the Church and the context of the times. It was not.

Don’t know if that’s meant for me but, yes, I’m aware of those things and others, including the fact that the Church is in the main responsible for bringing us to the place in science we are today by her support of education and involvement of her people in scientific discoveries at least from the Dark Ages on. But that in no way implies that her specific role should extend beyond teaching on faith and morals and should include science too except where they may coincide or overlap, as with her teachings on polygenism vs monogenism.

 

[fhansen]

“growing up”? Compared to what?

Compared to Jesus-and His teachings-the standard for us all.

**821 Certain things are required in order to respond adequately to this call:

• a permanent renewal of the Church in greater fidelity to her vocation; such renewal is the driving-force of the movement toward unity;…

827 “Christ, ‘holy, innocent, and undefiled,’ knew nothing of sin, but came only to expiate the sins of the people. The Church, however, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal.”…**

 

[grannymh]

I believe the churches stance on a Ptolemaic model was a deceleration of dogma.

I sincerely doubt that an actual theological dogma on any specific scientific theory has ever been duly defined and declared as an universal truth based on the Catholic Deposit of Faith.

However, since Catholicism has always been interested in the created world, there would be hundreds of documents regarding speculations, theories, and so on, regarding natural science. As one will note, these conclusions are usually made by commissions or individuals, including high ranking clergy. Thus, they do not have the status of a dogma.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Compared to Jesus-and His teachings-the standard for us all.

**821 Certain things are required in order to respond adequately to this call:

• a permanent renewal of the Church in greater fidelity to her vocation; such renewal is the driving-force of the movement toward unity;…

827 “Christ, ‘holy, innocent, and undefiled,’ knew nothing of sin, but came only to expiate the sins of the people. The Church, however, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal.”…**

But the Church is the body of Christ!! How can you compare Jesus to Jesus?

What are the numbers 821 and 827 for? Is this part of a citation for the CCC? It would be nice if you used a complete citation. Thank you.

 

[LittleSoldier]

The smears against Christ and His Church are legion.

“Popular lore, movies, and children’s stories hold that in 1492 Christopher Columbus proved the world is round and in the process defeated years of dogged opposition from the Roman Catholic Church, which insisted that the earth is flat. These tales are rooted in books like A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, an influential reference by Andrew Dickson White, founder and first president of Cornell University. White claimed that even after Columbus’ return “the Church by its highest authority solemnly stumbled and persisted in going astray.

“The trouble is, almost every word of White’s account of the Columbus story is a lie. All educated persons of Columbus’ day, very much including the Roman Catholic prelates, knew the earth was round. The Venerable Bede (c. 673-735) taught that the world was round, as did Bishop Virgilius of Salzburg (c. 720-784), Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179), and Thomas Aquinas (c. 1224-74). All four ended up saints. Sphere was the title of the most popular medieval textbook on astronomy, written by the English scholastic John of Sacrobosco (c. 1200-1256). It informed that not only the earth but all heavenly bodies are spherical.

“So, why does the fable of the Catholic Church’s ignorance and opposition to the truth persist? Because the claim of an inevitable and bitter warfare between religion and science has, for more than three centuries, been the primary polemical device used in the atheist attack on faith.
“The truth is, there is no inherent conflict between religion and science. Indeed, the fundamental reality is that Christian theology was essential for the rise of science—a fact little appreciated outside the ranks of academic specialists.”
See catholicleague.org/rer.php?topic=Miscellaneous&id=120 (by Rodney Stark, from Catalyst 9/2004)

HOOAH!!!

 

[fhansen]

But the Church is the body of Christ!! How can you compare Jesus to Jesus?

What are the numbers 821 and 827 for? Is this part of a citation for the CCC? It would be nice if you used a complete citation. Thank you.

Sorry, I thought people would recognize those as Catechism quotes. The Church is an ideal in Gods mind, perfect and yet still being perfected as her people are perfected. When she speaks on matters of faith and morals she speaks infallibly for Christ. This doesn’t mean that everything her members do, including her leaders, is perfect, when, for example they may speak out of turn on issues having no impact on or connection to faith and morals. It’s good to review the Catechism’s teachings on the Church, beginning at paragraph 751.

**769 "The Church . . . will receive its perfection only in the glory of heaven,"179 at the time of Christ’s glorious return. Until that day, "the Church progresses on her pilgrimage amidst this world’s persecutions and God’s consolations."180 Here below she knows that she is in exile far from the Lord, and longs for the full coming of the Kingdom, when she will "be united in glory with her king."181 The Church, and through her the world, will not be perfected in glory without great trials. Only then will "all the just from the time of Adam, ‘from Abel, the just one, to the last of the elect,’ . . . be gathered together in the universal Church in the Father’s presence."182

796 The unity of Christ and the Church, head and members of one Body, also implies the distinction of the two within a personal relationship. This aspect is often expressed by the image of bridegroom and bride. The theme of Christ as Bridegroom of the Church was prepared for by the prophets and announced by John the Baptist.234 The Lord referred to himself as the "bridegroom."235 The Apostle speaks of the whole Church and of each of the faithful, members of his Body, as a bride “betrothed” to Christ the Lord so as to become but one spirit with him.236 The Church is the spotless bride of the spotless Lamb.237 "Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her."238 He has joined her with himself in an everlasting covenant and never stops caring for her as for his own body:239

This is the whole Christ, head and body, one formed from many . . . whether the head or members speak, it is Christ who speaks. He speaks in his role as the head (ex persona capitis) and in his role as body (ex persona corporis). What does this mean? "The two will become one flesh. This is a great mystery, and I am applying it to Christ and the Church."240 And the Lord himself says in the Gospel: "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."241 They are, in fact, two different persons, yet they are one in the conjugal union, . . . as head, he calls himself the bridegroom, as body, he calls himself "bride."242

**

 

[LittleSoldier]

No offence taken Tantum ergo. The documents I quote from are the minutes of the Holy Office that recorded word for word the happening during the Galileo case. That good enough for you. Dr Carroll can be contradicted by these same minutes as I have shown.

So you just plagiarized the quotes from those documents, against forum rules?

 

[LittleSoldier]

Sorry, I thought people would recognize those as Catechism quotes. The Church is an ideal in Gods mind, perfect and yet still being perfected as her people are perfected. When she speaks on matters of faith and morals she speaks infallibly for Christ. This doesn’t mean that everything her members do, including her leaders, is perfect, when, for example they may speak out of turn on issues having no impact on or connection to faith and morals. It’s good to review the Catechism’s teachings on the Church, beginning at paragraph 751.

**769 "The Church . . . will receive its perfection only in the glory of heaven,"179 at the time of Christ’s glorious return. Until that day, "the Church progresses on her pilgrimage amidst this world’s persecutions and God’s consolations."180 Here below she knows that she is in exile far from the Lord, and longs for the full coming of the Kingdom, when she will "be united in glory with her king."181 The Church, and through her the world, will not be perfected in glory without great trials. Only then will "all the just from the time of Adam, ‘from Abel, the just one, to the last of the elect,’ . . . be gathered together in the universal Church in the Father’s presence."182

796 The unity of Christ and the Church, head and members of one Body, also implies the distinction of the two within a personal relationship. This aspect is often expressed by the image of bridegroom and bride. The theme of Christ as Bridegroom of the Church was prepared for by the prophets and announced by John the Baptist.234 The Lord referred to himself as the "bridegroom."235 The Apostle speaks of the whole Church and of each of the faithful, members of his Body, as a bride “betrothed” to Christ the Lord so as to become but one spirit with him.236 The Church is the spotless bride of the spotless Lamb.237 "Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her."238 He has joined her with himself in an everlasting covenant and never stops caring for her as for his own body:239

This is the whole Christ, head and body, one formed from many . . . whether the head or members speak, it is Christ who speaks. He speaks in his role as the head (ex persona capitis) and in his role as body (ex persona corporis). What does this mean? "The two will become one flesh. This is a great mystery, and I am applying it to Christ and the Church."240 And the Lord himself says in the Gospel: "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."241 They are, in fact, two different persons, yet they are one in the conjugal union, . . . as head, he calls himself the bridegroom, as body, he calls himself "bride."242

**

But you didn’t answer my question. How can you compare Jesus to Jesus? I really don’t understand what you are trying to say here. I’m sorry but I am really confused now.

Oh, never mind. I’m having some problems in comprehension right now (brain damage ). I’ll read it again in the morning and I’ll probably understand it better then. I apologize to everyone. Stupid brain!

 

[GaryTaylor]

You know something interesting about this topic. I watched the History Channel do a coverage on the Exodus. Amazing show. They prove everthing written in Exodus though archaelology, geography, and natural disasters [provided by God of course]. The only thing missing? Is the Ark of the Covenant. Only problem with all of this? The Bible would have been off 100-years. Wish is very very possible when talking Exodus and OT.

But from watching this documentary, I believe dates could be slightly off. But the facts are strikingly accurate. So accurate I was shocked.

I always thought the NT was spot on the money. But with the OT I wasn’t sure about it. Now after seeing Exodus? I have no doubt Genesis is also very accurate.

Check it out its called…Exodus Decoded