http://catholicoutlook.com/oldtimescience.php

 

That Old-Time Science

Robert Sungenis’ Crusade Against Modern Astronomy

by Gary Hoge

...Pope Leo XIII himself tells us how we should interpret those passages of Scripture that describe the physical universe. In paragraphs 18 and 19 of Providentissimus Deus, the Pope specifically discussed the relationship between Scripture and the physical sciences, and he specifically rejected Mr. Sungenis’ implicit claim that the authors of Scripture intended to teach us about the nature of the visible universe. The Pope wrote:

We must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation. Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers – as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us – “went by what sensibly appeared,” or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to.9

The Pope also wrote, “There can never, indeed, be any real discrepancy between the theologian and the physicist, as long as each confines himself within his own lines.” When Mr. Sungenis tries to use the Bible as an astronomy textbook, he is not keeping “within his own lines” as a theologian, but has crossed over into the realm of the physicist and is using the Bible improperly. Scripture does not intend to teach us about astronomy, orbital mechanics, zoology, or the other physical sciences. Therefore, when Mr. Sungenis defends geocentrism by saying, “I also have on my side the testimony of Scripture,”10 he’s wrong. Scripture neither teaches geocentrism, nor teaches against it. Scripture simply wasn’t written to answer that kind of question. As Cardinal Baronius famously observed, the Bible was written to show us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.11

[ Another wise saying: the bible was written to teach us the Rock of all ages, not the age of the rocks ]

[ The Church does not teach geocentrism ]

...According to Dr. Mirus:

The conclusions to be drawn are perhaps obvious. First, 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. Second, as noted earlier, Pope Paul V did not endorse this theological opinion, but rather ordered in an in-house directive only that Galileo be commanded to stop holding and advancing his own opinion. This action, then, stemmed from a judgment of prudence about the promotion of ideas which could not be easily reconciled with Scripture. 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. That no pope ever promulgated any condemnation of Galileo’s ideas removes the Galileo case entirely from discussions on the historical character of the Church’s teaching authority.

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.16

...

In 1992, Pope John Paul II said:

[T]he sentence of 1633 was not irreformable, and . . . the debate which had not ceased to evolve thereafter, was closed in 1820 with the imprimatur given to the work of Canon Settele. . . . Thanks to his intuition as a brilliant physicist and by relying on different arguments, Galileo, who practically invented the experimental method, understood why only the sun could function as the center of the world, as it was then known, that is to say, as a planetary system. The error of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the earth, was to think that our understanding of the physical world’s structure was, in some way, imposed by the literal sense of Sacred Scripture. . . . In fact, the Bible does not concern itself with the details of the physical world, the understanding of which is the competence of human experience and reasoning.18

 

⁹ Pope Leo XIII. Providentissimus Deus. 18 November 1893. Paragraph 18, emphasis added. Vatican Website. Retrieved 16 June 2002 <http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html>.

 

¹¹ Cited in Carroll, William E. “Galileo and the Inquisition,” Journal of Religion and Society, Vol. 1, 1999, paragraph 20. JRS Website. Retrieved 16 June 2002 <http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/1999/1999-3.html>.

 

¹⁴ Johnston, George Sim. “The Galileo Affair.” Catholic Educator’s Resource Center Website. Retrieved 16 June 2002 <http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0005.html>.

¹⁵ Mirus, Dr. Jeffrey A. “Galileo and the Magisterium: A Second Look.” Faith and Reason. Christendom Press, Summer 1977. Petersnet Website. Retrieved 16 June 2002 <http://www.petersnet.net/research/retrieve_full.cfm?RecNum=559>.

¹⁶ Mirus, “Galileo.”

 

¹⁸ Pope John Paul II. Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, 31 October 1992, paragraphs 9 and 12. Caltech Newman Center Website. Retrieved 16 June 2002 <http://www.its.caltech.edu/~newman/sci-cp/sci-9211.html>.

More readings:  http://catholicoutlook.com/geocentrism.php

# posted by Matthew Tan Yew Hock @ 8:14 PM