References and Further Reading 1.
The link to the original is found here. Until Galileo forced the issue into the realm of theology, the Church had been a willing ombudsman for the new astronomy. It had, for example, encouraged the work of both Copernicus and sheltered Kepler against the persecutions of Calvinists.
Despite the fact that there was no clear proof for heliocentrism at the time, Galileo was intent on ramming Copernicus down the throat of Christendom. Eventually Cardinal Robert Bellarmine challenged Galileo to prove his theory or stop pestering the Church.
In spite of the warning, Galileo persisted in promoting the theory as fact. Nevertheless, his crusade would not have ended in the offices of the Inquisition had he possessed a modicum of discretion, not to say charity.
Galileo used exaggerated caricature, insult, and ridicule to make those still holding to the Ptolemaic system look ridiculous. It was a conflict that ought never to have occurred, because faith and science, properly understood, can never be at odds.
In fact, as Stanley Jaki and others have argued, it was the metaphysical framework of medieval Catholicism which made modern science possible in the first place. Even many intelligent Catholics would prefer that the whole sorry affair be swept under a rug.
Inhe expressed the wish that the Pontifical Academy of Sciences conduct an in-depth study of the celebrated case. A commission of scholars was convened, and they presented their report to the Pope on October 31, Contrary to reports in The New York Times and other conduits of misinformation about the Church, the Holy See was not on this occasion finally throwing in the towel and admitting that the earth revolves around the sun.
That particular debate, so far as the Church was concerned, had been closed since at least when Benedict XIV bid the Holy Office grant an imprimatur to the first edition of the Complete Works of Galileo.
What John Paul II wanted was a better understanding of the whole affair by both scientists and theologians. It has been said that while politicians think in terms of weeks and statesmen in years, the Pope thinks in centuries.
The Holy Father was trying to heal the tragic split between faith and science which occurred in the 17th century and from which Western culture has not recovered.
Following the guidelines of the Second Vatican Council, he wished to make clear that science has a legitimate freedom in its own sphere and that this freedom was unduly violated by Church authorities in the case of Galileo. A close look at the facts puts to rout almost every aspect of the reigning Galileo legend.
It had encouraged the work of Copernicus and sheltered Kepler against the persecutions of Calvinists. Problems only arose when the debate went beyond the mere question of celestial mechanics.
But here we need some historical background. Actually, the notion is at least as old as the ancient Greeks. But the geocentric theory, endorsed by Aristotle and given mathematical plausibility by Ptolemy, was the prevailing model until Copernicus."Galileo, Science and the Church" tells the story of how heliocentric astronomy came to be condemned by the Catholic Church in the early 17th century -- a development that led to the censure of Galileo, the foremost astronomer of the era.
The Galileo affair (Italian: il processo a Galileo Galilei) was a sequence of events, beginning around , culminating with the trial and condemnation of Galileo Galilei by the Roman Catholic Inquisition in for his support of heliocentrism..
In , Galileo published his Sidereus Nuncius (Starry Messenger), describing the surprising observations that he had made with the new telescope. Mar 10, · Along with his translations, Digges added commentary and new ideas, making it clear that the Copernican model was more than philosophy, it was a physically real model of the solar system.
Even so, the Catholic Church today acknowledges that Galileo’s condemnation was wrong. The Vatican has even issued two stamps of Galileo as an expression of regret for his mistreatment.
Infallibility. If you’ve memorized at least one verse of scripture, it is likely you have memorized John It is assumed by many that the public at large knows this verse well enough that you can simply post the reference on a sign at an athletic event and the world will know exactly what it signifies.
Faith and Reason. Traditionally, faith and reason have each been considered to be sources of justification for religious belief. Because both can purportedly serve this same epistemic function, it has been a matter of much interest to philosophers and theologians how the two are related and thus how the rational agent should treat claims derived from either source.