The Invisible Things

Articles in Apologetics

Valid and Invalid Conclusions from the Galileo Controversy

with 2 comments

In 1614, Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei wrote a letter to the Grand Duchess Christina in which he defended his position regarding the authority of the Church in matters of scientific inquiry. On the basis of that letter, and the subsequently published work, “Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems,” Galileo was censured and punished by the Papal authority of Pope Urban III as a heretic for his teaching of heliocentrism, despite initially having the support of the former Cardinal Barberini.

The church’s denial and suppression of scientific observations, which were ultimately proven to be true, on the basis of theological doctrine has become one of the most frequently invoked polemics against the Christian faith in modern history. Many skeptics cast Galileo as a fellow skeptic and renegade agnostic fighting against the potentially fascist control of the Church. While there are shades of truth in such a picture, I would argue that it is irresponsible to distort the struggle of Galileo for the purposes of debunking Christianity. While an obvious response to such a move would be to recall the warning of Augustine, that one must not judge a philosophy by its abuse, I think there is more to this to be discussed. Needless to say, to conclude that because the Church was in error in the Galileo affair therefore Christianity is false is unwarranted.

Actually, Galileo was a devout and committed Christian, believing that God had created a world with certain laws which made scientific study possible. To Galileo, scientific inquiry was a means through which to better understand his creator and to bring glory to Him. His study, however, did reveal some tensions between what the Church had taught regarding the created world and his own documented observations. In his letter to the Grand Duchess, Galileo explained,

The reason produced for condemning the opinion that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still is that in many places in the Bible one may read that the Sun moves and the Earth stands still…It is very pious to say and prudent to affirm that the Holy Bible can never speak untruth- whenever its true meaning is understood…It is necessary for the Bible, in order to be accommodated to the understanding of every man, to speak many things which appear to differ from the absolute truth so far as the bare meaning of the words is concerned. (All of the statements of Galileo quoted in this article are found in his letter to the Grand Duchess Christina, of 1614.)

It seems that Galileo calibrated his scientific study by affirming what should be the authority, both for the scientist and for any discerner of truth. Despite the seeming tensions between the accepted teaching of the Church and his observations, Galileo was certain that an explanation which favored both the authority of the scriptures and the truth of his observations could be found. By taking his observations of God’s creation and understanding them in light of His Word, it became apparent that much of the Biblical descriptive language, especially as it pertains to the created world, is phenomenological in nature. In other words, much of the Biblical description of the created world is in language which reflects how certain phenomena appears from the point of view of mankind. Galileo defended this conclusion on the basis of the theological position of Augustine, which indicated various genres of literature within the scriptures as indicative of the different means by which interpretation is established.

Galileo continued, “Since the Holy Ghost did not intend to teach us whether heaven moves or stands still, whether its shape is spherical or like a discus or extended in a plane, nor whether the Earth is located at its center or off to one side, then so much the less was it intended to settle for us any other conclusion of the same kind.”

This makes a crucial point regarding the truth and teaching of Scripture. Galileo says, and I think quite correctly so, that while the scriptures cannot speak falsely and should be regarded as quite correct in all propositions they make, they may not carry a particular doctrinal mandate in regard to the Earth’s position and behavior in the universe. So, while the Bible does in fact make many statements about the Earth being immoveable or having four corners, the emphasis is on the point of view of mankind and is often poetic rather than scientific. Thus, to create a doctrine from a literal interpretation of descriptive phenomenological language would be tenuous at best and irresponsible and heretical at worst!

Galileo advocates for the freedom of scientific inquiry, proceeding from reverence and honor of God, His Word, and His creation, rather than the censuring of such a practice out of fear.

To prohibit the whole science would be but to censure a hundred passages of Holy Scripture which teach us that the glory and greatness of Almighty God are marvelously discerned in all His works and divinely read in the open book of Heaven.”

In other words, the Bible itself seems to affirm that the Heavens, too, are a truth-telling source of testimony to the glory of God. Thus, our observations of it must be combined with the scriptures to provided the most accurate and comprehensive description of our Creator available to us. Perhaps, then, the argument should be that neither science nor the Church, which is merely the corporate name of God’s people, should have final epistemological authority, but that the two should participate in concert, guided by the truth of the Word, in the effort to discern the truth of God and His creation.

Sadly, Galileo was never vindicated in his lifetime. Cardinal Barberini, who had initially encouraged him to produce the “Dialogue,” was later displeased by how Galileo’s work unfavorably characterized the church and too strongly advocated for heliocentrism. When Barberini became Pope Urban III, he called Galileo before the Inquisition to answer for charges of heresy, for which he was ultimately condemned and placed under house arrest for the remainder of his life. It wasn’t until 1758 that the Vatican formally accepted the heliocentric scheme of the solar system and affirmed its agreement with scripture. Much later, in 1992, Pope John Paul II wrote of his regret over how the Church handled the dispute, indicating that Galileo’s desire for the cooperation of science and scripture was indeed correct.

Advertisements

Written by Christopher Butler

April 17, 2006 at 3:11 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. WordPress Video Tutorials-39 Step by Step Videos http://www.filesonic.com/file/199042372

    Odilia Axon

    March 12, 2011 at 12:04 am

  2. Great post. One of the enduring legends about Galileo is that he was imprisoned and tried by the Catholic Church and that he was in fear of his life. Another myth is that he proved his theories at the time. Nothing can be further from the truth. He agreed to write about his theories without claiming that he was correct, but he got carried away and he offended the Pope, who was also being pulled both ways due to internal threats and the wars at the time. A cursory glance at his work by the committee meant to be reading his work was misunderstood and they claimed that he actually said that the sun went around the earth as a fact. He actually wrote a dialogue to debate both sides, but the whole thing was put as him claiming his theory as fact and that was something that he never did. The committee and then the inquisition became angry and he was called to give account of his views. Pressure was put on those examining his work to get him to confess as the political situation was delicate and so the inquisition demanded that he adjure his book and he had no choice but to do so. But his life was never in danger and very few of the trial jury had actually read his work and the Pope may not have even seen it. It was just easier to have him accept that he was wrong and retire on a pension and under house arrest. The house that he was given was very large, with a large garden and he had a pension and could still study and do research. He could not teach his theories or discus or write on them. Galileo got many visitors and even travelled to visit his daughter in her nunnery and wrote to her often. He lived a very comfortable life and his life was not in danger.

    The sad thing was that Galileo was correct, but he could not prove his theory and it was not possible to prove until 1983. It was in 1992 that he was formally pardoned and declared that he was correct as stated, but it was only at this time 300 years later that the actual proof existed. Had the proof existed at the time I feel that Galileo would have been accepted and would not have upset anyone. The Pope at the time was his friend and the political situation seems to have overtaken the issue of the sun and the earth; so he was unfortunate to have made his discovery at the wrong time and in the wrong place. The Church had its own scientists, it was not anti science as some ignorant people claim today.

    Bandit Queen

    November 16, 2011 at 5:12 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: