| The Catholic Church | Galileo Galilei |
|
You are Peter [rock], and on this rock I will build my church (Mat 16:18)
|
|
| Site Index | North Forest |
The Catholic Church
John Shepard
Nov 12, 2002
Galileo Galilei
To provide a defense of the Catholic Church's involvement in the case of Galileo Galilei. Protestants who are critical of Catholicism typically do not address the topic in a factual manner and do not consider the various issues that are involved.
Critics of Catholicism (both Protestant and non-Christian) typically use the case of Galileo Galilei to demonstrate that:
None of these assertions are true.
Read an account of the historical events in the Galileo case (by George Sim Johnston).
Regarding the persecution of Galileo by the Catholic Church (from a secular textbook and therefore not expressing a Catholic bias):
For centuries it was interpreted as exemplifying the forces of religion smothering scientific knowledge. More recent research has modified that picture. (The Western Heritage, pg. 469)
The following quote concludes that it was Galileo's attitude that got Galileo in trouble with the Catholic Church; not his scientific views. This is from an article by a non-Catholic so it does not express a Catholic bias:
It's interesting to note that during all of Galileo's conflicts with the Church, other astronomers, including the equally famous Johannes Kepler, were openly writing and teaching heliocentrism. . . So it was that Galileo's spiteful manner, his knack for turning even his best friends into enemies, repeatedly got him in trouble. (Twisting the Knife, by Wil Milan)
As an interesting bit of irony, the Protestant Reformation had a role in the conflict. This is significant because Protestants often use the Galileo case to "prove" that the Catholic Church has taught erroneous doctrine:
The condemnation of Copernicanism and of Galileo occurred at a particularly difficult moment in the history of the Catholic Church. In response to Protestant emphasis on private interpretation of scripture. . . The Catholic Church, . . . had difficulty moving beyond a literal reading of the Bible for fear of being accused by the Protestants of abandoning scripture. (The Western Heritage, pg. 469)
Protestants and Catholics alike have now resolved the issue of reconciling science with the Bible. But in Galileo's time the Catholic Church had to be careful how they resolved this issue because the Protestant Reformers were looking for any excuse to condemn them.
The Catholic Church is not opposed to science as the following recent quote from Pope John Paul II highlights:
Truth Cannot Contradict Truth: For my part, when I received those taking part in your academy's plenary assembly on October 31, 1992, I had the opportunity with regard to Galileo to draw attention to the need of a rigorous hermeneutic for the correct interpretation of the inspired word. It is necessary to determine the proper sense of Scripture, while avoiding any unwarranted interpretations that make it say what it does not intend to say. In order to delineate the field of their own study, the exegete and the theologian must keep informed about the results achieved by the natural sciences (cf. AAS 85 1/81993 3/8, pp. 764-772; address to the Pontifical Biblical Commission, April 23, 1993, announcing the document on The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church: AAS 86 1/81994 3/8, pp. 232-243). (Address of Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (October 22, 1996) )
Critics of the Catholic Church's handling of Galileo assume that Galileo's observations proved the Copernican model in which the earth orbits the sun. The following passage shows that the meaning of Galileo's observations were not so clear to those living at that time:
This lack of clarity was causing trouble for everyone. For example, what exactly had Galileo's observations proved? It was generally agreed that his observations disproved the Ptolemaic system, but in what sense had he proved the Copernican system? Heliocentrism accounted for the then available astronomical data, but so did the geocentric system of the Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe (which still pictured the earth at the center with the sun orbiting it, but now the planets were no longer presented as orbiting the earth but as orbiting the sun.) One problem, therefore, was the lack of clarity concerning theory, data and their relationship to one's larger philosophical framework. Responsibility for the trouble this caused rests more or less equally upon all the parties involved.
But there was a second source of trouble, responsibility for which rests squarely with the Church. The theologians involved in the Galileo case, failed to grasp the profound, non-literal meaning of the Scriptures when they described the physical structure of the created universe. This led them unduly to transpose a question of factual observation into the realm of faith. (John Paul on Science and Faith, by Michael Sherwin OP)
I do not agree that it is necessary to adopt a non-literal hermeneutic in order to harmonize science with the Bible. Hugh Ross has presented a model of Progressive Creationism in which the relevant biblical passages can be understood in a literal manner (more info).
Pope John Paul II has recently apologized for the Catholic Church's handling of the Galileo affair:
In 1992 the Catholic Church admitted that errors had occurred, most particularly in the biblical interpretation of Pope Urban VIII's advisors. (The Western Heritage, pg. 469)
Some are critical of this apology and think that Pope John Paul II should have admitted that Pope Urban VIII was guilty of declaring Galileo's conclusions as untrue when they were, in fact, true. But Pope Urban VIII never declared Galileo as a heretic as the following quotations demonstrate:
That there were competent theologians even then who argued against the views expressed here suggests that the qualifiers [experts of the Holy Office] could have reached a wiser conclusion. Theirs [the qualifiers] is the chief fault in the entire affair.
Second, the sentence itself bears the signatures of seven of the ten judges; the Pope, in other words, did not officially endorse the decision (there was, of course, no reason why he should, since the Court was simply exercising its normal powers).
The declaration that Galileo's propositions were heretical was never published as a teaching of the Church, and it was never intended to be such. It was intended and taken as the advice of certain theological experts who worked in the Holy Office, of value in a legal case, but hardly a norm of faith for the Church as a whole.
Even as a private document, therefore, the declaration of heresy received no formal papal approval. Third, there is no evidence that Pope Urban VIII ever endorsed any public document which included the declaration of heresy, especially the sentence at Galileo's trial.
It is clear, then, that not even the ordinary Magisterium has ever taught or promulgated the idea that the propositions of Copernican-Galilean astronomy are heretical or errors in faith. Thus it can in no way be claimed that "the Church" has taught that such views are heretical. To make such a claim would require that we locate the teaching authority of the Church in those theologians who claim expertise, a mistake which many make today, but one which the Galileo case should, at long last, serve to correct. (Galileo and the Magisterium: a Second Look, by Jeffrey A. Mirus)
The new scientific discoveries were causing a crisis in the church since they appeared to contradict the Bible. In reality they did not contradict the Bible at all. Rather, the interpretative framework in use at the time was incorrect. It took some time for the church to adapt to the new way of thinking that was required.
It is in that historical and cultural framework, far removed from our own times, that Galileo's judges, unable to dissociate faith from an age-old cosmology, believed quite wrongly that the adoption of the Copernican revolution, in fact not yet definitively proven, was such as to undermine Catholic tradition, and that it was their duty to forbid its being taught. This subjective error of judgment, so clear to us today, led them to a disciplinary measure from which Galileo had much to suffer. These mistakes must be frankly recognized, as you, Holy Father, have requested (L'Osservatore Romano, November 1, 1992). (John Paul II and Galileo)
It is unfortunate that the Catholic Church wrongly persecuted Galileo Galilei. But this incident does not in any way prove the charge of Protestants who are critical of Catholicism that the Catholic Church is not what she claims to be. As Pope John Paul II has publicly admitted, the Catholic Church made errors in this incident. But the church never made a claim against Galileo that wasn't true, nor did she proclaim something false as being true. The mistakes were limited to errors in judgment, to not making wise choices, and to not having compassion.
The Catholic Church | North Forest | Top of page
The Galileo Controversy from Catholic Answers. A general overview of the topic.
The Galileo Affair by George Sim Johnston. A general overview of the topic.
Galileo by Anne W. Carroll. An article about the effects of the scientific revolution on the church.
Galileo Galilei from the Catholic Encyclopedia. An in depth history and analysis.
The Catholic Church | North Forest | Top of page
Kagan, Donald; Ozment, Steven; Turner, Frank M. (2001). The Western Heritage (7th ed.). Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ
A textbook on Western Civilization.
The Catholic Church | North Forest | Top of page
| ||||||