Heliocentrism and the Church

catholicintl.com/products/books/gwwprint.htm

Ok, I’ve just looked this up, but having looked up Cosmology and Astronomy from the top experts in the field, I’m extremely skeptical on the idea of Geocentrism. I know it’s not a matter of morality or dogma, but it still seems strange to me that modern people would think too hard about it; since from what I’ve seen, Heliocentrism is proven in just about every way.

Any experts here?

I’m not an expert by any stretch of the imagination.

But neither are “true” in that you can pick any point in the universe and make the same claim of “centrality”.

Each just represents a different point of reference.

i.e. The center of my universe is that 5 year old daughter of mine when she smiles at her daddy. But that’s not likely to be your point of reference.

What does seem to be clear is that gravity works and that mass attracts mass, but neither the Sun nor the Earth can properly be said to be the center of the universe.

Chuck

The thing I’ve noticed about Geocentric Theory today is that it’s based on the idea that all we see is the entire Universe. The work of master physicists and men like Stephen Hawking (Regardless of his anti-religious ideas, he’s one of the most brilliant men ever to live, and I trust him on matters of Cosmology pretty well), and other Cosmologists have taken away the key idea for a Geocentric Universe, which I see as problematic for the modern theory.

Again, this is not a matter of Faith or Morals, and the Church could have certainly been wrong on this.

Actually, it is modern science that is credited with too much, I think. See this thread, it talks about the relation between our observations, the assumptions made, and the resulting interpretations. See especially the exchange between trth-skr and psteichen.

Really, modern science itself is not claiming too much. Scientists such as Hawking admit that many of the foundational issues are actually assumptions. I think it is the science propagandists who then claim that the assumptions are actually fact- often by just stating it without explanation. For instance, they may say, “every place in the universe looks like the center” rather than the more factually correct “scientists assume [for sake of modesty] that every place in the universe looks like the center”.

According to the opinions used to condemn Galileo, as well as place certain books on the index, it was “at least erroneous in faith”, so in that sense it was considered a matter of faith.

However, would you say that one could be a Heliocentric supporter and still a good Catholic?

I honestly have no doubt about the origin (In fact, to my Faith, Helio/Geocentrism is irrelevant) of it all, I just tend to side with Modern Science on this one particular issue. Regardless of which is actually correct, God is still the author and creator of it all.

This is just a matter of curiosity.

I would say, yes. You cannot be held responsible for what the world and even most Churchmen have accepted.

True, but, at least to me, the truth matters.

See Flogging a Pink Unicorn. Geocentrism is scientifically vacuous.

rossum

I do not think Sugenis brand of “Catholic Fundamentalism” is good for the Church. Fortuntely is and “American Thing”. Trying to outdone the Hovinds and Hams of the Protestants.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.