Scholarly article on Galileo?

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

TheFollyOfGod

Guest
Hello,

I was wondering if any of you knew of a good article on the Galileo episode that is both clear and scholarly? The tracts here on Catholic.com are good at providing a general overview, but due to their nature as tracts they do make the effort to back up their claims with original sources (for example, “the Anti-Catholic Trump Card” makes the passing claim that Nicholas Copernicus was a priest and simply leaves it at that). While I am generally disposed to receive what the tracts on Catholic.com have to offer (as I have always found the site to be reliable), this might not be so with other friends who are not Catholic and who already have a certain slant against the Church due to all the myths that are out there. In short, I’d like to have something for them to read that does not require them to simply take the author’s word for it (see, for example, this very well written and researched document which approaches the controversial carbon dating that was conducted on the Shroud of Turin in a way that anybody can verify the information for themselves).

Also, while I am at it… what proof is there that Nicholas Copernicus was a priest? Even New Advent refrains from making this assertion as well the “Galileo Controversy” tract. Can one even make the claim that he was a religious? If I understand it correctly, the fact that he was a canon means that he had administrative responsibilities, but I am not sure if this equates to being a religious or having taken vows.

Thanks in advance for the help! 🙂
 
PS: I wasn’t sure were to create this post, but as the Galileo controversy is generally used to argue that the Church is anti-science / anti-reason, I thought this would be the best bet. Feel free though to move elsewhere.
 
TheFollyOfGod said:
Hello,

I was wondering if any of you knew of a good article on the Galileo episode that is both clear and scholarly? The tracts here on Catholic.com are good at providing a general overview, but due to their nature as tracts they do make the effort to back up their claims with original sources (for example, “the Anti-Catholic Trump Card” makes the passing claim that Nicholas Copernicus was a priest and simply leaves it at that). While I am generally disposed to receive what the tracts on Catholic.com have to offer (as I have always found the site to be reliable), this might not be so with other friends who are not Catholic and who already have a certain slant against the Church due to all the myths that are out there. In short, I’d like to have something for them to read that does not require them to simply take the author’s word for it (see, for example, this very well written and researched document which approaches the controversial carbon dating that was conducted on the Shroud of Turin in a way that anybody can verify the information for themselves).

Also, while I am at it… what proof is there that Nicholas Copernicus was a priest? Even New Advent refrains from making this assertion as well the “Galileo Controversy” tract. Can one even make the claim that he was a religious? If I understand it correctly, the fact that he was a canon means that he had administrative responsibilities, but I am not sure if this equates to being a religious or having taken vows.

Thanks in advance for the help! 🙂
Click to expand...
Your question is kind of open ended, try this: newadvent.org/cathen/06342b.htm

You can also google Fr. William A. Wallace who is a scholar in the history of philosophy and who has written a lot about Galileo.

On Copernicus, there is no documentation that he was ever a priest, though many believe that it was possible: newadvent.org/cathen/04352b.htm

Linus2nd
 
Thank you, Linus, for the quick reply. Catholic Encyclopedia fits the bill in that it clearly states its sources at the bottom. If I could find something that is more recent though, I think it might fly better with those I have in mind to share the article with.

I’ve heard good things on Wallace. Maybe its time I buy one of his books. The fact that I am listening to the Braveheart soundtrack might be confirmation I should go ahead and place the order. 😛

Thanks also for the article on Copernicus.
 
TheFollyOfGod said:
Thank you, Linus, for the quick reply. Catholic Encyclopedia fits the bill in that it clearly states its sources at the bottom. If I could find something that is more recent though, I think it might fly better with those I have in mind to share the article with.

I’ve heard good things on Wallace. Maybe its time I buy one of his books. The fact that I am listening to the Braveheart soundtrack might be confirmation I should go ahead and place the order. 😛

Thanks also for the article on Copernicus.
Click to expand...
I think it would be better if you read Wallace at a good library first, since his works are expensive and may not be exactly what you want and he is very deep. He does have an on line course you can look into first but I don’t think he says anything about Galileo in it as it is a basic course in the philosophy of nature.

home.comcast.net/~icuweb/c02000.htm

P.S. He is 92 years old and still going!

Linus2nd
 
You might want to check out Galileo’s Jesuit teacher Ricci and also Bishop Nicole Oresme who was more than a couple of hundred years before Copernicus,
 
Ooh, now that we are at it, do you guys know of a list of clerics who came up with significant scientific discoveries like Bishop Nicole Oresme? Or even commonly known scientists who were religious or clerics (i.e., Big Bang Theory Jesuit priest)? I think this could hep the bias of those who have branded the hierarchy as being woefully anti science.

Thanks!
 
TheFollyOfGod said:
Ooh, now that we are at it, do you guys know of a list of clerics who came up with significant scientific discoveries like Bishop Nicole Oresme? Or even commonly known scientists who were religious or clerics (i.e., Big Bang Theory Jesuit priest)? I think this could hep the bias of those who have branded the hierarchy as being woefully anti science.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
Try the first few links after selecting the following link.

whatswrongwithatheism.wordpress.com/scholarly-articles/http://whatswrongwithatheism.wordpress.com/scholarly-articles/
 
Thanks again for the help. Do you know of any good sources which show that Ricci was a Jesuit? I am having a hard time coming up with one.
 
Ostilio Ricci may not have been a Jesuit. He was a mathematician at the Tuscan court.

Perhaps I was confusing him with the Jesuit priest Matteo Ricci of the same time who was one of the leaders of the papal delegation to the Chinese court which spread the knowledge of Western science in the east.
 
I did see Matteo Ricci come up in my research. Didn’t know he was the one who spread western scientific knowledge. Good to know!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top