Galileo Religion

There will always be a battle between religion and science, it is a truth universally acknowledged. Galileo attempted to make the two compatible by suggesting that the truth can only be sought out if the notion under consideration can be accurately tested and if the opposing view can be founded as false. Galileo’s goes into depth about the truth of scripture and the sciences, intertwined with the reason of man, in his letter to Christina of Lorraine, Grand Duchess of

Galileo felt that the common opinions of others should not satisfy another’s curiosity and others should not be made to believe the opinions of others. The church as well as others that interpreted or preached from the Bible distorted the information and Galileo thought that those who did this should not be allowed to speak or preach about it.

Also as a scientist, he did not stop with just imagining what was in the universe and how it worked, but he continued to try to discover and answer his own questions. The fact that Galileo was curious should not have been a surprise, considering that a scientist would not be a good scientist, or a scientist at all, if they did not question things. Continuously, he does not say that the Bible is wrong. He is saying that the way that the church interpreted the Bible was wrong, “passages taken from places in the Bible, which they failed to understand properly.” (document A). In this sentence that Galileo writes in a letter to the Duchess of Tuscany, Christina. He is writing to a higher authority in the church, trying to explain that he is not accusing the Bible, or the ideas in the Bible as being wrong. He seems to be using logical reasoning, science. Galileo was told to keep quiet about his ideas in 1615. Unlike Bruno, who had forcefully tried to prove that he was right and that the church and/or the Bible was wrong, Galileo seems to actually keep quiet until 1632, a good 17 years. In 1632, he published his book, Dialogue

His more relaxed viewpoint on the interpretations of the Bible and scripture allowed him to accept the Copernican theory. He even justified his stance through principals. The first principle was called biblical limitation. “I should judge that the authority of the Bible was designed to persuade men of these articles and propositions which, by science, or by any other means than through the very mouth of the Holy Spirit.” This principle overall explained that the bible could only be understood and interpreted correctly by the Holy Mother Mary. This gave a justification against claims from previous scholars such as St. Aquinas and St. Augustine. These two scholars took ideas for the overall argument from interpretations of the Bible made from either themselves or those before them. Therefore, Galileo believed that the interpretations were false. This allowed for science to not come in conflict with Catholicism as no one truly understood it. Another principle was the priority of physical demonstration. This principle stressed more on the empirical evidence before scriptural evidence. For this principle, Galileo focused primarily on nature and this allowed him to protect the concept of the Copernican theory from the bible. Since he used empirical evidence on nature, it allowed him to determine that the sun was at the center of the universe. Thus, observation, a major part of scientific

He says that he is going against everything that has been astronomy. He (Martin Luther) then contradicts himself by saying that in scripture it says that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, not the Earth. This shows how religious people were against the change during the Scientific Revolution, but had somewhat believed some of it because of the bible. In document four John Calvin talks about how Copernicus shouldn't be laughed at. Just because some higher figures reject it doesn't make it wrong.

During the Scientific Revolution, in the 17th century, several philosophers began to doubt scientific knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. One of those philosophers, Galileo, discovered a new innovation that could have changed the viewpoint on the Church’s Scripture accuracy. Galileo discovered that the sun stayed still as the Earth revolved around it, which was the opposite of what the Church taught. During this time, it was very dangerous for Galileo to oppose the Church. This was because doubts about the Church would lead to a loss of its power and the people’s trust, which was unwanted.

It is evident that the Catholic Church realized their inaccuracy of their theory of the function of the solar system. After several centuries, the church accepted the truth in the theory of Galilei’s heliocentrism theory. The Timeline further explains that in, “1939: Pope Pius XII called Galileo a hero of research”(Doc A: Line 14). Galileo was no longer known as heresy of the Catholic religion but rather a hero that drew the line between reality and belief.

There were many who cited portions of scripture such as Joshua 10:13, which states “So the Sun stood still in the midst of heaven” (Joshua 10:13), and Isaiah 40:22, which states “he that stretcheth out the heavens as nothing, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.” (Isaiah 40:22), as pieces of holy evidence to refute and definitely disprove the heliocentric theory as truth. However, Galileo could not easily be written off as a rambling, heretical madman either, seeing as his theories were first proposed by Nicolaus Copernicus, who was “not only a Catholic, but a priest and a canon.” (Galileo, Letter to Christina, 2) Even if Galileo was not a respected member of the Church, Copernicus was, and if his theories had originally been proposed by a Catholic canon, then it was harder to dismiss his ideas as heretical. Additionally, Galileo himself frequently offered to present others with evidence of the truth of his theories, stating “to the leading philosophers of the faculty here…I have offered a thousand times of my own accord to show my studies…” (Galileo, Letter to Kepler).

(At the trial of Galileo in 1615, Cardinal Bellarmine declared, "To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin"). Eventually, most people began to believe scientific theories about the nature of the universe, rather than religious dogmas. A deistic philosophy emerged and became influential, differing from Christianity in viewing God as a great clock maker who was above any petty worship that humans could give him. The deistic view was a harmonious consolidation of religious and scientific beliefs into one (usually deterministic) philosophy.

The committee was clinging to tradition and the knowledge that had been passed down to them for the last 1500 years. The church took the scripture too literal, and it clouded their judgment. Galileo came to the committee (church) with two propositions, the first being “The sun is in the center of the world and is altogether immovable in respect to local motion” the second was, “The earth is not the center of the world nor it is immovable, but it moves as a whole and also with a daily motion.” Within a couple days the committee came to a conclusion that the propositions were foolish (Copernicanism, page 152). Galileo could not demonstrate the theory, so the church did not take his claim seriously. The church felt threatened by the claim, and feared that it would weaken the power they had. This corrupted the committees’ view of the book, which caused the unfair treatment Galileo received. The treatment Galileo received justified his actions for publishing the book without the churches consent. It was wrong to disregard Galileo’s theories, because of past beliefs. The church should have been more open minded of the idea and turned to science to disprove it rather than

In the history of the Catholic Church, no episode is so contested by so many viewpoints as the condemnation of Galileo. The Galileo case, for many, proves the Church abhors science, refuses to abandon outdated teachings, and is clearly not infallible. For staunch Catholics the episode is often a source of embarrassment and frustration. Either way it is undeniable that Galileo’s life sparked a definite change in scientific thought all across Europe and symbolised the struggle between science and the Catholic Church.

Towards the conclusion of Galileo's letter he offers an argument of truths. The argument basically states this: if the truth of the Bible conflicts with the truth of fact, and two truths cannot contradict, then one or the other is wrong. Since the truth of fact cannot be wrong, except for ignorance, then the scientific interpretations found in the Bible may therefore be in err. Galileo's doesn't exactly feel that the Bible is wrong, he is just providing one more argument towards the difference in science and the Bible. The errors themselves, he states, are most likely due to the inability to "affirm that all

Even though Galileos beliefs were held in practicing Catholicsim, his writings were showing evidence for “Copernican heliocentrism.” The Catholic Church, however, disapproved of heliocentricity, feeling that it was contrary to the statements in the Bible: if God created human beings as His supreme creation, He would place man at the center of His cosmos. (At that time the more literal Biblical interpretation was prevalent with the church fathers, especially among the Dominican Order, facilitators of the Inquisition)2 However, real power layed with the Church, and Galileo's arguments were most fiercely fought on the religious level. Cardinal Robert Bellarmine insisted that Galileo furnish more adequate proof of his new theories before he would be allowed to teach them as true or even as probably true.

Galileo’s Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems uses powerful logic and simply described concepts to overcome the Aristotelian bias of the populous and argue in favor of Copernicus’ heliocentric view of the universe. Copernicus theorized that the earth, along with the other planets in the sky, is in motion around the sun. The Aristotelian’s geocentric worldview, that the earth is the motionless center of the universe, was deeply ingrained into the minds of the people and the teachings of the church. Galileo’s argument had to be not only incisive and logical to have any sway, but it also had to avoid offending or denying the ancient principles of thought proposed by Aristotle. He walked this delicate line between educating the public and

for people to accept. But when the actual facts are looked at it is very easy