LittleLes (Thread- Was the Church in Error, Part II) tried to argue that since the Church condemned Galileo for challenging the Church’s Geocentric position on Scripture, and supposedly since “modern science” has since proven Galileo wrong, that therefor the Vatican I proclamation regarding inerrancy of the the Church in interpreting Scripture was wrong, ergo, the Church is not infallible (by extension).
Catholic apologists supporting Geocentrism have warned that this is one reason to consider Geocentrism. By sweeping the issue under the rug because of some perceived embarrassment over Geocentrism, Catholic apologists are inadvertantly weakening the Church.
In the above referenced thread, I argued:
- The Bible teaches that the earth does not move (geostationism- leading to Geocentrism).
- The Fathers were all Geocentrists and interpreted the Bible Geocentrically- even arguing against the Greek heliocentrists long before Corpenicus.
- Three Popes made official condemnations against Corpenicanism, including a Papal Bull.
- he Church has never revoked these condemnations, nor claimed contrary to them in any official manner.
- These condemnations are part of the ordinary magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Science has not proven Geocentrism false. Science has a philosophy that there is no center, but it is just that philosophy. George, Ellis, a famous cosmologist whohas worked with Stephen Hawkings has this to say:
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations,…For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.” … “You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.”.
W. Wayt Gibbs, “Profile: George F. R. Ellis,” Scientific American, October 1995, Vol. 273, No.4, p. 55.
Not only that, but since modern science is tied to Einstein’s General Relativity (GR), and GR states that there is no “preferred center” (conversely any center will work), then modern science cannot really reject Geocentrism as a theoretical possibility, which mathematically, observationally, kinetically, and dynamically does work. These quotes help illustrate this:
Max Born. physicist and personal friend of Albert Einstein said in his famous book,“Einstein’s Theory of Relativity”,Dover Publications,1962, pgs 344 & 345:
"…Thus we may return to Ptolemy’s point of view of a ‘motionless earth’…One has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein’s field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space.
Thus from Einstein’s point of view, Ptolemy and Corpenicus are equally right."
Here, from Einstein, himself:
“The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, ‘the sun is at rest and the earth moves,’ or ‘the sun moves and the earth is at rest,’ would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS. – Einstein and Infeld, The Evolution of Physics, p.212 (p.248 in original 1938 ed.)”
[left][font=Arial][size=1]"…We know that the difference between a heliocentric theory and a geocentric theory is one of relative motion only, and that such a difference has no physical significance…"
Hoyle, Sir F. 1975. Astronomy and Cosmology - A Modern Course[font=Arial], (San Francisco:W. H. Freeman & Co.), p. 416.
Clearly, Geocentrism IS a possibility, therefor the possibility exists (and we should strongly consider it) that the Church was completely correct in the Galileo affair.
Scientism is a god. It fidgets in the modern pantheon because of the presence of the True God, who accepts no other gods.