Part three
The Facts of the matter An alternate view to the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic one that the universe was geocentric and geostatic came in 1543 with the publication of De revolutionibus orbium coelestium by Nicolas Copernicus, a canon 0f the cathedral of Krakow. Only astronomers of the day mostly clerics like Copernicus appreciated and understood its potential to overturn 2000 years of astronomical theory. THE 1 ST PHASE of the Affair 1613 to 1616 The affair innocently started in 1613 when the mother of Galileo’s patron the Grand Duchess Christina asked Fr. Benedetto Castelli, an astronomer and university colleague of Galileo, if the story in the old testament of Joshua stopping the rotation of the sun to lengthen the day conflicted with Copernican theory. He deferred to Galileo who then wrote her a letter pointing out that St. Augustine’s Doctrine of Accommodation applies and requires that biblically expressed ideas or those of any time are subject to the limitations of the knowledge then available and open to amendment as new knowledge is gained 2. In 1614 a Benedictine Friar Tommaso Caccini preached a sermon in Santa Marie Novella severely criticizing Copernicus Astronomers, Mathematicians and Galileo. Another friar Nicolo Lorini then wrote a letter to the Inquisition claiming that he had written evidence of heretical beliefs expressed by Galileo in a letter to Castelli. Both friars were in search of promotions and totally unschooled in science. Their “examples” were not in the letter and the accusations of heresy dismissed. But the Index suspended circulation of Copernicus’ book to stave off personal interpretations of scripture advocated by reformers. The leading and most brilliant scholar of his day Roberto Cardinal Bellarmino, later Saint, was asked to meet with Galileo who agreed 3. Bellarmino respected Galileo greatly and willingly wrote for him a letter stately that he was not being reprimanded or censured. He acknowledged the reasons obtained by observation behind Galileo’s views of heliocentrism (very true) and earthy axial rotation as evidenced by the tides (untrue). His view was that even though a theory “saves the phenomena” by allowing results consistent with what we see it may not be completely accurate. Was this not true for Ptolomy’s geocentric view used for over a 1000 years? He knew Galileo believed his view were more consistent with reality but asked him not to offer them as true until supported by more evidence. A unsigned document in Bellarmino’s files produced at his trial in 1633 indicated that Galileo agreed. This ended the 1 st phase of the Affair.
0 Comments
We would like to invite all students to join us after Thursday Night Mass this week, October 6th, for a science experiment night. Come to do classic science experiments such as making your own ice cream, elephant tooth paste, and the egg drop.
Part 2
Often overlooked today are the mutually productive enlightening discussions going on between them for a millennium and a half since Augustine. The fundamental question between them has been that of causation. Is it natural, supernatural or both?? Supernaturalism and Naturalism are both based on notions of primary and secondary causation. God is everywhere the primary cause but is he the immediate cause of all effects. Naïve supernaturalism says yes but has never been given much weight. Nor has Occasionalism which holds that the link between cause and effect is an artifact of our perception Traditional Christianity says both but holds a position more on the side of naturalism. God is omnipotent but made things to operate within a Communis Cursus Naturae, a common natural causation that guarantees the validity of investigation in an (almost always) constant world. The crucial test lies in events that occur outside of or by the suspension of the natural order. We call them miracles when they show a disproportion between cause and effect inexplicable by every resource that the study of the Communis Cursus Naturae can muster. The idea originating in the reformation that the age of miracles is over unintentionally supported more extreme views on naturalism. The most extreme is Philosophical Naturalism that says nothing exists beyond the material thus denying anything supernatural. It forms the basis of current Atheism. Less strident is Methodological Naturalism holds that divine explanations are not to be used for things not understood but makes no claims for or against the existence of God. The Age of Science beginning in the 17 th century was ushered in by men of Faith. They espoused Natural Theology the belief that the order in the natural world can be used as a source of information about God and his attributes. Men like Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Leibnitz, Boyle and Galileo. But a Faith that over the next 4 centuries would be eroded by Deism and then Scientism. The Galileo Affair brought forth Realism; the view that scientific explanations only are literally true descriptions of the way things really are. Ever since the Affair is the most-often cited incident in the history of science-religion interactions most often to show the obstructive nature of the religious position. |
Archives
October 2022
Categories |