In order to understand these 17th-century events, it is worthwhile to take a step back and understand the state of cosmology at that time. The Church and much of Europe, since at least the 13th century, had adopted an Aristotelian cosmology. The works of Aristotle had been reintroduced into Europe, in Latin, and were eventually integrated into Church teaching.
Aristotle’s view of the cosmos was the source of the geocentric (earth-centered) view of the universe. The earth was immobile. The center of the earth is where all matter was drawn, to where things naturally moved. The sun, moon, planets, and stars all revolved around the earth on celestial spheres. The moon and beyond was a realm of eternal, changeless perfection, while the domain of matter was subject to change and decay. Aristotle’s view of the cosmos was integrated into Christian theology finding concord with such passages that indicate the earth is stationary (Psalm 75:3; 93:1; 96:10; 119:90; 1Chronicles 16:30) and that the sun moves (Joshua 10). In the second century, Ptolemy developed a model of the geocentric cosmos that would explain the observed motions of planets. The combination of an explanatory model for astronomical observations and the imprimatur of the Church made the geocentric view the only rational and acceptable view of the universe for over 300 years.
Finally, let us consider what lessons can be drawn from the Galileo affair. When studying history, one must always be careful not to fall into the trap of anachronism, judging events in the past through the lens of the knowledge and sensibilities of the present. When considering the heliocentric debate in context, the evidence available, and the consensus of the time, it was reasonable to support the Aristotle's geocentric view. Another form of temporal snobbery we should avoid is condemning the Church for how it exercised its authority. The following observation can be stated about that period:
“The early seventeenth century was a time of growing absolutism in Europe, in both religious and political terms. The freedom to express dangerous ideas was as unlikely to be defended in Protestant Geneva as in Catholic Rome. The idea that a stable society could be built on general principles of
free speech was defended by nobody at the time, and police and judicial constraints were therefore inevitable realities.” The church in the 17th century was an absolutist institution defending its complete power over the interpretation of scripture in faith, morals,
and the physical universe. Who would expect it not to? Do we see the church today defending its rights over nuclear science? Or relativity? Or the physical measurement of the speed of light?
The modern scientific world was coming into being in the 17th century and human beings, being what they are, have a very hard time in accepting change (as shown here with many minds still in the 17th century).
Topic: SSPX Priest Publicly Smashes Fr. Paul Robinson's (SSPX) Book (Read 23088 times)