DOCSLIB.ORG

Revisiting Galileo, Astronomy, and the Authority of the Bible

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revisiting Galileo, Astronomy, and the Authority of the Bible JETS 53/1 (March 2010) 103–116 “MEN OF GALILEE, WHY STAND GAZING UP INTO HEAVEN”: REVISITING GALILEO, ASTRONOMY, AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE h. j. lee* Four hundred years after Galileo Galilei’s (1564–1642) first observation through a telescope, the 62nd General Assembly of the United Nations and the International Astronomical Union dedicated 2009 as the International Year of Astronomy. The year’s commemoration brought together over 140 countries in an effort to promote worldwide recognition of the discovery of the telescope and the ongoing work in the field of astronomy. This interna- tional collaboration aspired to initiate a process that can potentially be as revolutionary as the discovery of the telescope itself. While the year’s main objectives may have been scientific and pediological, it is equally important to reexamine the relationship between Galileo’s work and Christianity because the Church has not always celebrated his achieve- ments like the General Assembly. In 1633, the Roman Catholic Church found Galileo holding views that contradicted Scripture and banned the scientist from conducting any work in astronomy. It was not until Pope John Paul II’s 1979 commemorative speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that the papacy addressed grievances against Galileo. The actions of the pope spurred various efforts to vindicate Galileo and to rectify the condemnation of his work. Despite subsequent scholarship since 1979, at least one aspect of Galileo has unfortunately been inadequately addressed. In the years following the invention of the telescope, Galileo found himself needing to defend his Copernican cosmology. His defense came in the form of the essay Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina (1615; published in 1636). In this piece, Galileo challenged the exegetical practice of his accusers and upheld his own views as biblical. Specifically, his opponents lacked the principle of accommoda- tion, which was the key to the harmonization of astronomy and the Bible in the view of the astronomer’s view. Relying heavily on Augustine (354–430), Galileo attempted to establish a hermeneutic that brought together Scripture and his own scientific discoveries. This study asks on the four hundredth anniversary of Galileo’s invention of the telescope whether his understand- ing of accommodation compromised scriptural inerrancy. * Hoon Lee is a Ph.D. student at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 2065 Half Day Road, Deerfield, IL 60015. 104 journal of the evangelical theological society i. recounting the events of the galileo affair The events surrounding the Galileo affair help to set up a clear picture of Galileo’s understanding of accommodation. It must be noted that Galileo was not unique among Catholics in adhering to the Copernican position. His most prominent allies were the Dominican Tommaso Campanella (1568–1639) and the Carmelite Paolo Antonio Foscarini (1562–1616). In 1611, Campenella recounted the “prophecies” of John Chrysostom (347–407), Theodore of Tarsus (602–690), Origen (185–254), and Augustine who understood the language of Scripture to exceed a literal hermeneutic. Despite Campanella’s efforts, it would seem he did little to stem the actions of the Catholic Church, especially since his work was not received until March 1616 when the Copernican po- sition had just been forbidden.1 Foscarini’s efforts made a greater impact especially in his interactions with Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621). When responding to biblical texts such as Ps 92:1 and 103:5, where the geocentric theory is apparently sup- ported, Foscarini replied similarly as Campanella. Again, appealing to the Church fathers and the language of Scripture, he states that the passage should be interpreted “in respect to us, in relation only to us, and according to the appearances.”2 In A Letter to Fr. Sebastiano, Foscarini defended the notion that a helio- centric universe can be harmonized with Scripture’s description of the world. He writes, “it is said according to the vulgar opinion and the common way of speaking; the Holy Spirit frequently and deliberately adopts the vulgar and common way of speaking.”3 For Foscarini, Scripture’s language as accom- modated to mankind cannot be understood literally. He goes on to explain himself when he states, “words are to be interpreted ‘according to the vulgar meaning and the common mode of speaking,’ which is the same as saying, ‘according to appearances and in relation to us or in respect to us.’ ”4 Foscarini is clearly referring to the way Scripture references the appearance of the earth in relation to the sun and the rest of the universe. When we understand that Scripture was written in accommodated language, then we are free from a literal reading that finds itself in contradiction to science. While not dealing directly with Galileo, the work of Didacus à Stunica deserves mention. In describing the Spanish theologian’s Commentary on Job (1584), Irving Kelter writes, 1 For a thorough discussion of Campanella’s Apologia pro Galileo, consult Bernardino M. Bonansea, “Campanella’s Defense of Galileo,” in Reinterpreting Galileo (ed. William A. Wallace; Washington, DC: Catholic University of America, 1986) 205–39. 2 Paolo Antonio Foscarini, “A Letter to Fr. Sebastiano Fantone, General of the Order, Con- cerning the Opinion of the Pythagoreans and Copernicus About the Mobility of the Earth and the Stability of the Sun and the New Pythagorean System of the World,” in Galileo, Bellarmine, and the Bible (trans. Richard J. Blackwell; Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 1991) 229. It should be noted that Protestant Bibles follow the Hebrew numbering making the references Ps 93:1 and 104:5 respectively. 3 Ibid. 226–27. 4 Ibid. 227. galileo, astronomy, and the authority of the bible 105 It is the only printed work of Catholic biblical exegesis between Copernicus’s On the Revolutions (1543) and Foscarini’s Letter (1615) that attempts to recon- cile scriptural passages with the new system of the universe. in fact, the only pro-Copernican Catholic biblical commentary as such known from the early modern period.5 Stunica identifies Copernicus’s use of the Pythagorean theory which he har- monized with the description of the universe found in Scripture. When one interprets Scripture accurately, there is no need to construct an either/or scenario between science and Scripture. Especially when one understands the importance of accommodation, realizing that Scripture is “speaking in the language of the people and not in the language of physical truth,” there is no dilemma between the Bible and science.6 Despite all that Stunica writes in this work he later rejected the Copernican position though not on exegetical but on purely scientific grounds. As for Galileo, it was not until The Starry Messenger (1610) that he first expressed his support of the Copernican position. It did not take long for disconcertment to grow among the local clergy. Though unrest began as early as 1611, it was Niccolò Lorini’s comment concerning the contradiction between Scripture and motion of the earth that bothered Galileo to the extent of writing to Lorini and demanding an explanation. Lorini replied saying that the statement was made merely as a passing comment without any thought behind it. As we will see shortly, this was not entirely the case. What has become the infamous luncheon between Benedetto Castelli (1578–1643) and the Grand Duchess Christina (1565–1637) eventually moti- vated two important essays. At the meeting the Grand Duchess Christina inquired about Josh 10:12–13 and the implications of Scripture stating that the sun stood still in conjunction with Galileo’s beliefs that the earth was in motion. While Castelli reassured Galileo that he was able to appease the Grand Duchess and her concerns, Galileo was not so easily convinced. On December 21, 1613, Galileo advanced his defense in a letter to his former student. Without the permission of Galileo, Castelli esteemed the warrant of the essay and distributed copies. One of these copies came into the possession of Lorini, who in turn brought it before the monastery of San Marco. Encour- aged by his order, on February 7, 1615 Lorini sent the essay to the Cardinal Inquisitor Paolo Emilio Sfondrati of the Congregation of the Index of Pro- hibited Books in Rome. Unknown to Lorini, Galileo grew unsatisfied with the initial essay and wrote an extended response to the Grand Duchess, which developed his understanding of accommodation through Augustine. In the meantime, opposition against Galileo continued to grow. In 1614, the Dominican Tommaso Caccini condemned Galileo in a sermon on Acts 1:11 in which he played on the words, “men of Galilee, why stand gazing up into heaven,” to denigrate the heliocentric theory of Galileo. 5 Irving A. Kelter, “The Refusal to Accommodate: Jesuit exegetes and the Copernican System,” in The Church and Galileo (ed. Ernan McMullin; Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 2005) 39. 6 Ibid. 39–40. 106 journal of the evangelical theological society The tide began to shift more rapidly in 1616 when the Congregation of the Index officially banned Copernicus’s On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres (1543).7 After four days of deliberation the committee found the work’s statements asserting a heliocentric universe in direct opposition to Scripture. While not condemning any of Galileo’s works, the authorities felt the need to recall him for a proper discussion on the implications of this ban. Cardinal Bellarmine8 and Cardinal Michelangelo Segizzi met with Galileo on February 26, 1616. Bellarmine was the main spokesman and conducted the meeting in which Galileo was warned against promoting the heliocentric theory. Despite Bellarmine’s efforts, Segizzi interjected with a more forceful admonition, demanding that Galileo in no way hold or teach the Copernican position. Seemingly inconsequential, this injunction caused a certain level of debate since Bellarmine refused to sign Segizzi’s account of the meeting for archival purposes.9 Rather, Bellarmine presented his own opinion of the meeting in the plenary session of the Holy Office.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Galileo in Rome Galileo in Rome
    Galileo in Rome Galileo in Rome The Rise and Fall of a Troublesome Genius William R. Shea and Mariano Artigas Oxford New York Auckland Bangkok Buenos Aires Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kolkata Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi São Paulo Shanghai Taipei Tokyo Toronto Copyright © 2003 by Oxford University Press, Inc. First published by Oxford University Press, Inc., 2003 198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 www.oup.com Issued as an Oxford University Press paperback, 2004 ISBN 0-19-517758-4 (pbk) Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press. The Library of Congress has catalogued the cloth edition as follows: Artigas, Mariano. Galileo in Rome : the rise and fall of a troublesome genius / Mariano Artigas and William R. Shea. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-19-516598-5 1. Galilei, Galileo, 1564-1642—Journeys—Italy—Rome. 2. Religion and science—History—16th century. 3. Astronomers—Italy—Biography. I. Shea, William R. II. Title. QB36.G2 A69 2003 520'.92—dc21 2003004247 Book design by planettheo.com 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper CONTENTS ACKNO W L E D G E M E N T S vii I N TRO D U C TIO N ix CHA P TER O N E Job Hunting and the Path
    [Show full text]
  • Behind the Scenes at Galileo's Trial
    Blackwell-000.FM 7/3/06 12:24 PM Page iii BEHIND THE SCENES AT GALILEO’S TRIAL Including the First English Translation of Melchior Inchofer’s Tractatus syllepticus RICHARD J. BLACKWELL University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana © 2006 University of Notre Dame Press Blackwell-000.FM 7/3/06 12:24 PM Page iv Copyright © 2006 University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 All Rights Reserved www.undpress.nd.edu Manufactured in the United States of America Behind the Scenes at Galileo’s Trial was designed by Jane Oslislo; composed in 10/13.3 Fairfield Light by Four Star Books; printed on 50# Nature’s Natural (50% pcr) by Thomson-Shore, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Blackwell, Richard J., 1929– Behind the scenes at Galileo’s trial : including the first English translation of Melchior Inchofer’s Tractatus syllepticus / Richard J. Blackwell. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and indexes. isbn-13: 978-0-268-02201-3 (acid-free paper) isbn-10: 0-268-02201-1 (acid-free paper) 1. Galilei, Galileo, 1564–1642—Trials, litigation, etc. 2. Religion and science— History—17th century. 3. Inchofer, Melchior, 1585?–1648. Tractatus syllepticus. 4. Catholic Church—Doctrines—History—17th century. 5. Inquisition—Italy. I. Inchofer, Melchior, 1585?–1648. Tractatus syllepticus. English. II. Title. qb36.g2b573 2006 520.92—dc22 2006016783 ∞The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources. © 2006 University of Notre Dame Press Blackwell-01 5/18/06 10:01 PM Page 1 chapter one The Legal Case at Galileo’s Trial Impasse and Perfidy galileo’s trial before the roman inquisition is one of the most frequently mentioned topics in the history of science.
    [Show full text]
  • Galilæana Viii
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Institutional Research Information System University of Turin BIBLIOTECA DI GALILÆANA VIII COPERNICUS BANNED The Entangled Matter of the anti-Copernican Decree of 1616 edited by Natacha Fabbri and Federica Favino LEO S. OLSCHKI EDITORE MMXVIII Tutti i diritti riservati Casa Editrice Leo S. Olschki Viuzzo del Pozzetto, 8 50126 Firenze www.olschki.it ISBN 978 88 222 6584 5 CONTENTS Introduction . Pag . VII Roberto Bondì, Dangerous Ideas: Telesio, Campanella and Galileo . » 1 Natacha Fabbri, Threats to the Christian Cosmos. The Reckless As- sault on the Heavens and the Debate over Hell . » 29 Franco Motta, Nature, Faith and the Judge of Faith. Some Consid- erations on the Historical-Political Context of Copernicus’ Con- demnation . » 57 Luigi Guerrini, The Archbishop and Astronomy. Alessandro Marzi- medici and the 1604 Supernova . » 101 Federica Favino, Alchemical Implication of 1616 Affaire. On the Par- ish Priest Attavanti, the Knight Ridolfi and the Cardinal Orsini . » 127 Giovanni Pizzorusso, Francesco Ingoli: Knowledge and Curial Ser- vice in 17th-century Rome . » 157 Édouard Mehl, Kepler’s second Copernican Campaign. The Search for an Annual Stellar Parallax after the Roman Decree (1616) . » 191 Rienk Vermij, Copernicanism and the Bible in the Dutch Republic around 1616: a non-debate . » 211 Steven Vanden Broecke, An Astrologer in the World-Systems Debate. Jean-Baptiste Morin on Astrology and Copernicanism (1631-1634) . » 223 Index of Names . » 243 — V — Franco Motta NATURE, FAITH AND THE JUDGE OF FAITH Some Considerations on the Historical-Political Context of Copernicus’ Condemnation 1. The denunciation of Galileo and the first examination of Coperni- canism by the Inquisition The dossier against Galileo that reached the desk of the Prefect of the Index, Cardinal Sfondrati, in February 1615 contains several interest- ing charges.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TRIAL of GALILEO-REVISITED Dr
    THE TRIAL OF GALILEO-REVISITED Dr. George DeRise Professor Emeritus, Mathematics Thomas Nelson Community College FALL 2018 Mon 1:30 PM- 3:30 PM, 6 sessions 10/22/2018 - 12/3/2018 (Class skip date 11/19) Sadler Center, Commonwealth Auditorium Christopher Wren Association BOOKS: THE TRIAL OF GALILEO, 1612-1633: Thomas F. Mayer. (Required) THE CASE FOR GALILEO- A CLOSED QUESTION? Fantoli, Annibale. GALILEO; THE RISE AND FALL OF A TROUBLESOME GENIUS. Shea, William; Artigas, Mariano. BASIC ONLINE SOURCES: Just Google: “Galileo” and “Galileo Affair” (WIKI) “Galileo Project” and “Trial of Galileo-Famous Trials” YOUTUBE MOVIES: Just Google: “GALILEO'S BATTLE FOR THE HEAVENS – NOVA – YOUTUBE” “GREAT BOOKS, GALILEO’S DIALOGUE – YOUTUBE” HANDOUTS: GLOSSARY CAST OF CHARACTERS BLUE DOCUMENTS GALILEO GALILEI: b. 1564 in Pisa, Italy Astronomer, Physicist, Mathematician Professor of Mathematics, Universities of Pisa and Padua. In 1610 he observed the heavens with the newly invented telescope- mountains and craters of the moon, moons of Jupiter, many stars never seen before; later the phases of Venus; sunspots. These observations supported his belief that the Copernican (Heliocentric) system was correct, i.e. that the Sun was the center of the Universe; the planets including earth revolved around it. This was in direct contrast to the Ptolemaic-Aristotelian (Geocentric) System which was 1500 years old at the time. Galileo’s Copernican view was also in conflict with the Christian interpretation of Holy Scripture. Because of the Counter Reformation Catholic theologians took a literal interpretation of the Bible. Galileo was investigated by the Inquisition in 1615 and warned not to defend the Copernican view.
    [Show full text]
  • Galileo Was Wrong the Church Was Right
    Galileo Was Wrong The Church Was Right The Evidence from Church History Volume III Chapters 14 - 17 Seventh Edition Robert A. Sungenis, Ph.D. Published by Catholic Apologetics International Publishing, Inc., 2013 Mailing address: P. O. Box 278 State Line, Pennsylvania, 17263 1-800-531-6393 Copyright © 2013 by Robert A. Sungenis, Sr. and assigns All rights reserved. No part of the contents of this book Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right: The Evidence from Church History, Volume III is permitted to be reproduced or copied by any means whatsoever without written consent from the copyright holder, except for short quotations to be used in various print or electronic mediums. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sungenis, Robert, A, Sr. Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right by Robert A. Sungenis Bibliographical reference 1. Geocentrism. 2. Cosmology 3. Church History. 4. Galileo 5. St. Robert Bellermine Cover design by Robert Sungenis Seventh edition Previous five editions, in two volumes, were titled Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right, published between 2005 and 2010. Sixth edition, in three volumes, was published in January 2013. ISBN-10: 1939856035 ISBN-13: 978-1-939856-03-6 Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 ii Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture passages are taken from either the Revised Standard Version or the Douay-Rheims Bible. Some passages have been translated by Robert Sungenis directly from the Hebrew or Greek. A CDROM is included with this book so that the reader can view the electronic animations and graphics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Silence of the Wolves, Or, Why It Took the Holy Inquisition Seventy-Three Years to Ban Copemicanism1
    Erschienen in: The Making of Copernicus : Early Modern Transformations of the Scientist and his Science / Wolfgang Neuber ... (Hrsg.). - 1. Auflage. - Leiden : Brill, 2015. - (Intersections ; 36). - S. 42-63. - ISBN 978-90-04-28110-3 The Silence of the Wolves, Or, Why It Took the Holy Inquisition Seventy-Three Years to Ban Copemicanism1 Gereon Wolters Abstract I give two main answers to the question why Copernicus's De revolutionibus (1543) had so long been officially ignored in 'Rome'. The first is that cosmological issues were of only peripheral. importance in such times of life-and-death contestations with Protestant reformers. The second is that it took- in a very contingent way- the per­ sonality of Cardinal Bellarmine, driven by an anti-reformationist emphasis on author­ ity, to unite with a 'synergy effect' two separate dogmatic strands: (1) the old teaching of the superiority of theology over all other forms of knowledge, made binding in the Papal Bull Apostolici Regiminis (1513), and, (2) the Decree of the Council of Trent on the Holy Scripture (1546), which stated that only the Church, and not the single believer (as Luther had claimed), had the authority to bindingly interpret the Scripture in matters of faith and morals. The synergy between the two strands had the surprising epistemic result of any biblical passage becoming a 'matter of faith.' 1 The Roman Wolves Howl (1616) Our story ends on 5 March 1616 with a Decree of the Holy Congregation of the Index:2 This Holy Congregation has also learned about the spreading and accep­ tance by many of the false Pythagorean doctrine, [3 ] altogether contrary to 1 Thanks to Giora Hon (Haifa) for greatly improving the paper.
    [Show full text]
  • The Galileo Affair, Part 1: Introduction
    The Galileo Affair, Part 1: Introduction By Paul Newall (2005) The trial and resulting abjuration of Galileo before the Holy Congregation of the Catholic Church, which occurred at the convent of Minerva on the 22nd of June, 1633, has been studied by scholars and laymen alike for several hundred years. Not surprisingly, the sheer number of personalities involved, together with the many aspects playing a part in political, religious, philosophical and scientific affairs over the course of Galileo's life, have given rise to a great many interpretations of what happened and—perhaps more importantly—why. Introduction What happened to Galileo has been examined at length as an historical event that can shed light on a few specific questions: What is the relationship between science and religion? How did modern science develop and why? What is the relationship between science and society? Although it has also been viewed as a human tragedy (Brecht, 1966), the first of these has tended to be paramount. Some perspectives seemed well-supported by a cursory glance and the trial has since come to be known as a paradigmatic example of the inherent conflict between science and religion. The Myths According to one such interpretation, Galileo knew the Earth to go round the Sun (as Copernicus had written) rather than the converse (as implied in several Biblical passages). The Church would not allow science to disprove the revealed truth of Scripture, however, and hence threw Galileo to the Inquisition where he was forced under threat of torture to disclaim this opinion and never speak of it again.
    [Show full text]
  • Sidereus Nuncius: Mountains and Craters on the Moon Galileo’S Manuscript Drawings of the Moon As Seen with a Telescope: ! ! Cf
    This Friday: Houghton Library Visit, 10-11am ! meet in lobby of Houghton Library at 10am pls travel light (we’ll put our things in a locker) bring a quarter if you can (they have them too) Lecture 10: ! the reception of Copernicus 1543 to 1616 ! -few paid any attention to heliocentrism (“hypothesis” as “model”) ! -a rival theory with the best of both systems (Tycho Brahe and his better data) ! -only a few Copernicans: Kepler, Bruno ! -source of conflict: Tridentine Church + Galileo Copernicus’s De Rev (1543) ! a reworking of Ptolemy’s Almagest that inverts the places of earth and sun ! very technical in Latin ! astronomy the oldest science but not highly ranked in university hierarchy Hierarchy of the disciplines in the medieval and Renaissance university Theology Law Medicine Arts faculty: study philosophy preparatory studies: 7 liberal arts arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy (quadrivium) grammar, rhetoric, dialectic (trivium) Motions of the earth in the Copernican system ! 1. diurnal rotation (day and night) ! 2. annual orbit of the earth around the sun (seasonal variations) ! + 3. a “trepidation” which accounts for precession of equinoxes (which caused a long slow drift of the equinox from its date) [don’t need to know this] Problems posed by heliocentrism: ! requires a new physics ! requires a near infinite universe + moon looks silly ! requires a new interpretation of some verses in the Bible ! ! ! Erasmus Reinhold,! Prutenic Tables (1551)! using Copernicus’! model and parameters! ! =instrumentalist use! of heliocentrism Tychonic system: ! geo-helio- centrism= ! best of both?? Tycho Brahe (1546-1601), Danish nobleman, received “big science” funding from King of DK, then from Rudolph II in Prague.
    [Show full text]
  • How They Make Me Suffer
    How they make me suffer... A short biography of Galileo Galilei Sara Bonechi How they make me suffer… A short biography of Galileo Galilei Sara Bonechi Translated by Anna Teicher Florence, 2008 This publication forms part of the Web Application Scientific Itineraries in Tuscany produced by the Institute and Museum of the History of Science, Florence, and promoted by the Ministry of Cultural Affairs - Department of Libraries and Cultural Institutes, by the Central Institute for the Unified Catalogue of Italian Libraries and for Bibliographic Data (ICCU) and by the Region of Tuscany – Department of Cultural Affairs. The Application may be consulted at the address: http://brunelleschi.imss.fi.it/itineraries/ This text is available in PDF format at the site of the Application. How they make me suffer, those who go in search of the highest good, but have so far failed to find it, because, my brain tells me, it is not in the place where they are seeking. (Galileo, Against wearing the Gown) INDEX Birth and early life and education (1564-1580) 11 In 1564 Galileo was born in Pisa, where his schooling began. In 1574 he began to study in Florence with the Vallombrosan monks, but was taken away by his father before he had completed his course of study. University studies (1580-1589) 15 In 1580 Galileo enrolled in the Faculty of Medicine and Philosophy at the Studio of Pisa (the University), but, strongly attracted to the study of geometry and disappointed with the academic milieu, he failed to complete the course. He began a deeper study of Archimedes’ work, which offered him a methodological basis opposed to the dominant Aristotelian philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Download a Pdf File of This Issue for Free
    Issue 76: The Christian Face of the Scientific Revolution The Christian Face of the Scientific Revolution: Did You Know? Interesting and unusual facts about Christians in the scientific revolution. editors Astronomer by Night, Canon by Day When Nicolaus Copernicus wasn't redrawing the celestial map, he held down a day job as a Catholic canon (ecclesiastical administrator). As the Reformation grew rapidly and extended its influence in Poland, Copernicus and his respected friend Tiedemann Giese, later bishop of Varmia, remained open to some of the new ideas. Copernicus did not leave a written record of his views, but he authorized Giese to quote him in a book supportive of a mediating position he hoped would avoid disruption in the church. He also consorted openly with at least two Lutherans—his first and only disciple, Georg Joachim Rheticus, and the well- known Lutheran clergyman, Andreas Osiander (also recognized for competence in mathematics and astronomy). This might have sunk the career of most Catholic functionaries, but friends in high places kept Copernicus's job for him. When, decades later, Galileo was attacked for promoting Copernicus's heliocentric cosmology, he defended himself by reminding his opponents that the Polish astronomer had been "not only a Catholic, but a priest and a canon." Galileo got two out of three right—although Copernicus did serve his church faithfully for 40 years, like many other canons of his day he never pursued ordination. "Bodying Up" to Modern Science We often associate the birth of modern science with Galileo Galilei, who sought to prove Copernicus's cosmology empirically with his telescopes.
    [Show full text]
  • Galileo Galilei: a Conflict of Faiths
    Galileo Galilei: A Conflict of Faiths Ali Jones Senior Division Historical Paper Words: 2,499 The path from antiquity to the present was shaped by the shockwaves from a myriad of conflicts. Yet one contention stands out among the rest for both the length of the debate and the intensity of the parties involved: the clash between science and religion. Early scientific philosophers were devout, and early hypotheses coexisted with Holy Scripture. As scientific technique and technology matured, however, theories were developed that did not require the constant control of a Creator. Renowned astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson spoke to this relationship by stating that the authors of these texts “invoke divinity only when they reach the boundaries of their understanding”.1 This trend in scientific discovery brought the conflict between science and religion to its height in the sixteenth century; at this time, the Aristotelian model of the universe - which claims that the static Earth sits at the center of all planetary orbits - was accepted by scientific philosophers and the Catholic Church.2 In the early 1500s, however, Nicolaus Copernicus furthered a theory that had sat on the scientific sidelines since the third century: the idea of a heliocentric, or sun-centered, universe.3 Despite the fact that this theory was grounded in scientific fact, its theological complications were extensive. Progress toward discovering the universe’s true nature might have lapsed along with the banning of Copernicus’s revolutionary yet unorthodox work, De Revolutionibus, had the mantle not been seized by an ​ ​ obstinate Florentine scholar who had no difficulty reconciling his own religious and scientific views.
    [Show full text]
  • GALILEO BETWEEN HISTORY and MYTH: NEW OBSERVATIONS on the LIFE and WORKS of GALILEO GALILEI © Rosangela Libertini, Phd in Philo
    Rosangela Libertini GALILEO BETWEEN HISTORY AND MYTH: NEW OBSERVATIONS ON THE LIFE AND WORKS OF GALILEO GALILEI Accents and Paradoxes of Modern Philology, Issue 2-2017 (2), pp. 19–31 GALILEO BETWEEN HISTORY AND MYTH: NEW OBSERVATIONS ON THE LIFE AND WORKS OF GALILEO GALILEI © Rosangela Libertini, PhD in Philology, Scientific Researcher, Catholic University of Ružomberok, Hrabovska Cesta, 1, Ružomberok, Slovakia, [email protected] Translated into English by Julia Skoreva Summary The present paper is the result of a joint work between Charles University of Praha, the Catholic University of Ružomberok and the University of Nitra to make known a very famous but unknown personality, Galileo Galilei. The main task of this group of researchers was the Slovak translation of Galileo’s last work: Dialogue around two new sciences related to mechanics and movement of bodies. The first part of the paper concerns the life of the scientist, with particular regard to the famous process to Galileo Galilei in 1633. The article then examines the Galilean mythos, that image that in the century was created around the Florentine scientist for several reasons and which does not correspond to reality. For example, the famous statement assigned to Galileo “And yet it moves!”, which is not recorded in any document, not even in the papers of his process. Finally, this paper recalls some of the steps taken by the Catholic Church that led to an instance of annulment of the process. Key words: Galileo, the Catholic Church and scientific research, telescope, Ptolemaic solar system, Maria Celeste Galilei. Introduction This article is a summary of a five-year work that is still underway.
    [Show full text]