Spirituality
04 Aug 05
08 Aug 05
1 edit
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesLet's leave the matter of provocation aside then. You believe that Galileo was the model scientist and citizen, minding his own business, publishing scientific papers when the Big Bad Church pounced down on him because his papers hurt their fragile theology and their even more fragile egos. I believe that Galileo was an egotistical loudmouth who decided it was his mission in life to force his theories down the throats of Christendom (and let everyone know he was as brilliant at Scriptural exegesis as he was at physics while he was at it) even though he couldn't actually prove they were valid.
I don't believe that he set out to provoke them, and used science as a tool to accomplish that task.
His provoking them was an unavoidable byproduct of conducting and publicizing his scientific endeavors, given the clerics' fra ...[text shortened]... e Church's "Simon Didn't Say" stance on cosmology has changed.
Actually, we're not discussing whether Catholic views have changed over time; but whether the Catholic Church has undergone substantial change over time. To answer that question, you need to ask "What is the Catholic Church really about?"
(This is a nice cue for a witticism, but if you're after an honest debate, I'll request you desist.)
The Catholic Church is not about cosmology or astronomy. It's really about theology and morality. What is God like? Who was Jesus and why did He live and die the way He did? What do our lives mean? How should we live them? Sappy stuff - but nothing to do with whether the Sun goes round the Earth or the Earth goes round the Sun or the two revolve around a common centre of mass. The Church affirms itself in its teaching function (what we call the Magisterium) on matters of faith, morals and salvation.
So, for one thing, the Church does not have (and never had) an "official" view one way or another regarding cosmological theories. Yes, its quasi-official view (the view of the Tribunal) has changed. But that is not an essential body of the Church. Nor is its views on cosmology an essential aspect of the teaching function of the Church.
For another thing, even if it were (and I'm not saying it is), the Church has never authoritatively taught on the matter. Which is why I asked the question - what do you think the Church's views on the matter were for the 1000 years or so before they rediscovered Aristotle's works?
Yes, it's the "Simon says" defence - but it's enough.
There - anything further we say on the matter will just be repetition. Is there a theological matter on which you can demonstrate a change in viewpoint by the Church?
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by lucifershammerIf one party is publishing papers and another party is imprisoning people, which one is using force to affect the beliefs of Christendom?
I believe that Galileo was an egotistical loudmouth who decided it was his mission in life to force his theories down the throats of Christendom .
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by lucifershammerWhat is the Catholic position on the salvation of the Jews?
Let's leave the matter of provocation aside then. You believe that Galileo was the model scientist and citizen, minding his own business, publishing scientific papers when the Big Bad Church pounced down on him because his papers hurt their fragile theology and their even more fragile egos. I believe that Galileo was an egotistical loudmouth who deci ...[text shortened]... re a theological matter on which you can demonstrate a change in viewpoint by the Church?
08 Aug 05
1 edit
Originally posted by kirksey957"Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God. In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh. On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues."
What is the Catholic position on the salvation of the Jews?
- Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium. Vatican II.
08 Aug 05
2 edits
Originally posted by lucifershammerSo, the Catholic Church adopts the stand that God is racist, that there is a race of people most dear to him, who get special treatment by virture of their race?
On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God
What about Jews who convert to the faith rather than be born into it. The quote doesn't seem to speak to their salvation.
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesIn Galileo's case - both.
If one party is publishing papers and another party is imprisoning people, which one is using force to affect the beliefs of Christendom?
Galileo did not simply publish papers within the scientific community (as modern scientists do). He published pamphlets and letters which were circulated all around Europe. Nor did he stick to describing his observations and theories. His letters (post-1611) dealt with theological matters such as Biblical hermeneutics as well. When pointed out that his theory of perfect circular orbits was empirically untenable, he ignored that as well - and continued circulating letters and pamphlets talking of his theory as fact. When pointed out the key objection against heliocentrism - the lack of (empirical evidence of) stellar paradoxes - he ignored that as well. The Church had to accept Copernicanism as irrefutable truth. When challenged to finally prove his theory (he wasn't just put on trial - he was asked to scientifically demonstrate that his theory was true) - his response was the easily-refuted theory of tides.
Galileo wasn't forced to come to Rome for his original 1616 judgment - he had originally charged up himself to force Pope Paul VI to declare Copernicanism true. It is only after the Pope referred the matter to the Holy Office that his original injunction came about.
08 Aug 05
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerIt's telling that you find publishing and distributing papers, letters and pamphlets - even if it was to every home in Europe on a weekly basis, say, Sunday - to be an act of force.
In Galileo's case - both.
Galileo did not simply publish papers within the scientific community (as modern scientists do). He published pamphlets and letters which were circulated all around Europe. Nor did he stick to describing ...[text shortened]... theory was true) - his response was the easily-refuted theory of
It's curious that the Church doesn't hold itself to the same standard of proof to which it holds its detractors. The Church obviously couldn't prove the Copernican model either, since it wasn't even correct.
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles"A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God."
So, the Catholic Church adopts the stand that God is racist, that there is a race of people most dear to him, who get special treatment by virture of their race?
What about Jews who convert to the faith rather than be born into it. The quote doesn't seem to speak to their salvation.
- Romans 2:28-29
Racism - the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races
- http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=racism
Are the Jews "superior"? No.
"What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin."
- Rom 3:9
Are they "special"? Yes.
"What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God."
- Rom 3:1-2
Do they get special treatment by virtue of their race? No.
"All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)"
- Rom 2:12-15
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by lucifershammerSo, did Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium have any meaning at all, or was it completely vacuous? Could you restate it in your own words to make its substance clear? It sure sounds to me like it says that Jews, by virtue of having ancestors who were God's chosen people, are given preferential consideration because God had a covenant with those ancestors.
Do they get special treatment by virtue of their race? No.
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThe term "act of force" suggests physical, or military, force. I never used that term.
It's telling that you find publishing and distributing papers, letters and pamphlets - even if it was to every home in Europe on a weekly basis, say, Sunday - to be an act of force.
It's curious that the Church doesn't hold itself to the same standard of proof to which it holds its detractors. The Church obviously couldn't prove the Copernican model either, since it wasn't even correct.
As you well know, force need not be physical. It can be political as well. Distributing papers, letters and pamphlets is a way of exercising political force. By doing so, Galileo stopped being merely a scientist - he became a politician as well.
In the latter paragraph, did you mean heliocentric/Aristotelian-Ptolemaic model? Actually, given the tools available at the time, the Church (Christian scientists, actually) could demonstrate that the heliocentric model (with Brahe's modification) was better than Galileo's. It explains all the known facts better, is more consonant with daily experience and predicts the absence of stellar paradoxes (something the Copernican model predicts, and Galileo could not demonstrate). Nevertheless, scientists and theologians within the Church were willing to consider Galileo's model as a valid theory until further evidence could be gathered (read Cardinal Bellarmine's comments).
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesPreferential consideration ... in terms of what?
So, did Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium have any meaning at all, or was it completely vacuous? Could you restate it in your own words to make its substance clear? It sure sounds to me like it says that Jews, by virtue of having ancestors who were God's chosen people, are given preferential consideration because God had a covenant with those ancestors.
If it is a question of Revelation and Incarnation - then, yes, the Jews did receive preferential consideration.
If it is a question of Salvation - then, no. Jews do not have a "free pass" to Heaven because they are Jews.
The citation from LG essentially says that the path of salvation is open to the Jews - that they are not excluded from salvation because they are not Christian.
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by lucifershammerAnd this is official, Simon Says, Catholic doctrine? That salvation is open even to those who willfully deny Christ?
The citation from LG essentially says that the path of salvation is open to the Jews - that they are not excluded from salvation because they are not Christian.
08 Aug 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I refuse to accept this. I have never used the word force to connote something other than physical coercion.
But I have (and did). And I was the first to use the word.
There is no such thing as forcing somebody to believe something, which you suggested Galileo did.
Do you assert that "political force" (as I described in a previous post) is an invalid concept? Do you deny that compulsion need not be of a nature that implies personal, physical harm?
08 Aug 05
1 edit
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesNot if it is wilfully and knowingly. I am using the word "knowing" in the sense of "reasonable belief" rather than "absolute certainty".
And this is official, Simon Says, Catholic doctrine? That salvation is open even to those who willfully deny Christ?
EDIT: The Jews are not excluded from salvation merely because they are not baptised, Bible-thumping, "I've been saved" Christians. Nor are they eligible for salvation merely because they are the "People of God", the "chosen people".