The Galileo Myth
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 сер 2024
- Everyone's heard the story of how Galileo was wrongly condemned by the Church for proposing scientific claims that contradicted the Bible. The problem with this story is that it was mostly made up in the 1800s and the Catholic Church, while not always right, has always supported scientific study.
Article about Dr. David Bosworth: goo.gl/N85Dr0
Augustine's work on Genesis: creation.com/le...
Additional sources:
newsroom.ucla.e...
www.smithsonian...
Blog: breakingintheha...
Facebook: / caseyofm
Twitter: / caseyofm
Instagram: / caseyofm
Music by J.P. Garilli
soundcloud.com/johnnypg
I’m a Catholic and a physicist. Science and faith are complementary, not contradictory.
I disagree. And it's a prime example of cognitive dissonance. On one hand the Bible says many falsifiable claims that science has permanently debunked on the other hands catholics and Christians in general cherry pick what parts of the Bible are to be believed and followed.
This is not intellectually honest.
Lol sure John
Makes sense why most Physicists living on Taxpayers money contribute nothing 🤣😆
(including the Religious And Atheist Physicists)
@@mihaimoldo nahh dude, that is just your political opinion as a sentient being. Religion is a universal law given and required to all sentient beings capable of intelligence on this universe, that's why even on the ancient times of the barbaric evolution of the man to the indigenous and ethnic people, they were capable of to understand or gain consciousness that there is God. The idea of Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and all the religions that prospered on the history of the world is to teach peace and uniformity to all beings.
It would be hypocritical if people like you who only solely believes on Science to not give Artificial Intelligence (AI) a chance to be a sentient being of their own on the future when we know ourselves that their potential toward thinking can exceed the human capabilities. Yet, many people feared the AI because of what can do. It's not far from what nature fears about mankind itself espicially man being equip by Intelligence are "voracious" and self interested by nature.
Overall, it's easy to interpret Isomovs Law of robotics are just religion for the AI and robots.
@@naknampucha5236 it's called an argument. Learn what one is before you go on a rant.
Religion is not a universal law lol, it's a collection of stories nothing more. You make many claims for which you don't have any evidence but ok.
All major religions aren't about peace so that's demonstrably false. Many verses call to violence if you're not one of their own so that's complete bullshit.
As a biologist and devout Christian, I try to keep in mind that all scientific knowledge has not been found. As scientists, we are always lacking some of the facts. Scientists do the best they can with what they've got. Also I don't understand all divine revelation; though I study scripture, language, the Apostolic fathers, Church history, etc. So in the end, I try to have an open mind yet lean conservative when religion and science clash.
As a biologist, are you aware of the Chi Rho's connection to the Asclepius symbol?
@ you don't understand religion.
@Subcomandante Kaax :)
Wish you could spell "devout" Lankford. Typical supernaturalist.
No HocusPocus Typical loudmouth. Try being polite in order for someone to care what you say.
Amen. I get tired of people accusing Catholics as anti-science. Great video.
Me too. It's just not true.
Than why did Christianity suppress scientific progress in the west untill the Enlightenment or the Renaissance. Which is what led to the separation of church and state in the west
Aaron Chand That’s a simple myth, everyone sees the Dark Ages as ‘Dark’ when in actuality, that is quite false. Understandings in architecture, physics and metallurgy grew greatly during this time. With communication with the Islamic Golden Age - with Averroes and the School of Salamanca being major centres of pre-enlightenment Scientific thought. Finally, just look at Roger Bacon OFM, like Father Casey Cole here - he literally invented the chemical recipe for gunpowder in Europe through communication with the Mongols and... More importantly formed the Scientific Method in its earliest format. The Church did nothing to suppress this, they reconsidered interpretations to fit with empirical evidence. Many of those renaissance scientists also happened to be Cardinals and Priests - like Robert Bellamy. Of course, you had the minority in those times - the Inquisition, the Censors... However many of them were overridden by other clerics, the Pope protected Galileo until he died. If they were the majority, science would’ve never taken flight and yet it did when the Church was at it’s most powerful.
@@TheAaronChand Do you jave any freaking solid proof of that or are you just rehashing old, tired hearsays?
@TheOutLaw Carpenter There were both those who believed in witchcraft and those who rejected it in church, or better to say, christianity at large. Besides, those accusations were by no means exclusive to christianity. In some regions, there were moral panics, in other regions, none at all and even in those regions that had moral panics, it was rarely the church, and mostly civil authorities. Saying - christians did it doesn't make much sense because everyone was christian in those days.
Furthermore, the main point is not witchcraft itself but belief in conspiracy, that secret groups work against society, something that is hugely present even today and by no means exclusive to being religious, as some of conspiracy theories literally involve the church as the culprit.
Same goes for covid - some believers believe they can be saved by prayer alone, others certainly count on medicine, and there are also unbelievers who connect it to 5G, and unbelievers who use their head and reason.
Being religious in no way makes someone automaticaly against science, just as being an atheist doesn't make anyone automaticaly pro-science or rational.
For example, where I come from, the leading epidemiologist is a devout christian. I am christian as well, I cherish science but I see no reason why the hand that cure should exclude the hands that pray. Frkm my experience, it's best when those hands work together. I now that because I meet many doctors who are finding strenght in prayer. No, they are not expecting a miracle cures, but the it's the faith that gives them strenght to stand 24 hours, 7 days a week, and gives them motivation to comfort suffering. That faith includes seing the suffering as your brothers and sisters, and they don't ask what religion are they.
You can't simply distort, simplify and generalize - it's exactly that what is irrational and if you simply put all the religious people in the box of silly and superstitious lunatics, you are not doing anything different than those believers who think all atheists are immoral demons. Yes, different sides but still, the same coin.
Thanks a lot brother for clearing years long doubts.
Have been watching your videos for a month during quarantine.
I am a Pakistani protestant Christian who was groomed in pentecostals.
I always had doubts about catholics many of which have been cleared by just watching your videos.
Your videos have encouraged me to research more about catholicism.
Thanks for this great work.
❤️
Become Catholic, join the original Church. We adore Mary, and so do the Muslims. "Mariam" is how they call her.
@@MedievalMan dude he is not a muslim
@@joeljacobfelix4871 I never said he was. Notice the "they" part. He is in Pakistan that is heavily surrounded by a Muslim majority. Which is why theyre at odds with India.
@@MedievalMan Yes but they also say God has no Son which is a lie from the pit of hell!
My professor taught the entire Astronomy class that the Catholic Church burned Galileo at the stake. I didn't say anything, and I believed him at the time. I wonder how many classes he has told that Galileo was burned at the stake?
No dude, it was Giordano Bruno who was burnt at the stake by the catholic church!
Bruno was brutally murdered by the church because he dared to propose the Copernican model and an infinite universe.
I think you probably misheard your professor or you're intentionally misrepresenting your professor.
Galileo replaced Bruno's position as chair of mathematics at the university of Padua, so you probably mixed a few things there...
@@davidschultz6555 Giordano was killed for like a billion different heresies. None of them are related to Copernicus' views on heliocentrism. His ideas that got him executed were things like reincarnation and proposing a very pantheistic view of God. Also, he was handed over to the secular authorities, and then they burned him at the stake.
@@davidschultz6555 Bravo, David. A bit of truth for a change in a world blighted by fake news on all fronts.
.
@@aleccullen2696 Catholic church also killed millions of Christians for daring to read the bible in their own language and Jesus himself said only God is the Father not preists and sinful humanity!
@@davidschultz6555 wasn't he burned at the stake for being protestant and a blatant arianist? Also he was betrayed by progressive aristocrats who turned him in to the inquisition. He was also offered to avoid being sentenced as a heretic if he just made a formal retraction.
Saint Albert the Great. Saint Albert (or St. Albertus Magnus) is the patron saint of scientists and was the teacher of St. Thomas Aquinas.
Nicolas Copernicus was a canon, by the way.
After Galileo's trial, he was given a slap on the wrist. He was confined to 'house arrest' in his comfy little villa in Arcetri and told to recite the seven penitential psalms once a week. His wondrous, loving and beloved daughter, a nun, asked for and received permission to say them for him, so he didn't even have to do that, and Galileo did some of his most important work on gravity during these last ten years there in Arcetri.
And before his trial, Cardinal Roberto Bellarmino wrote to Paolo Foscarini a letter that included,
_Third, I say that if there were a true demonstration that the sun is at the center of the world and the earth in the third heaven, and that the sun does not circle the earth but the earth circles the sun, then one would have to proceed with great care in explaining the Scriptures that appear contrary; and say rather that we do not understand them than that what is demonstrated is false_
All truth is God, whose word is truth. As a result, Christians should, must, engage in science.The Church built observatories after Galileo; its research went on. Can anyone say, 'Gregor Mendel'?
Should even THAT have happened? The answer is NO.
@@daveandrews5764 _Should even THAT have happened? The answer is NO._
'Should' is a loaded word. What do you mean?
How would they have known that they 'should not'?
Consider the historical context.
In a way, of course, you are right, but the Church really knew that. Cardinal Bellermino was pro-Galileo (read my excerpt of his letter to Paolo Foscarini above), as were a number of other other Church leaders, because the Church has never, ever been anti-science. That they never did again what they did to Galileo is an admission of wrong. His light sentence was a Church admission that they were wrong. That the Church let him do some of his most important science after his trial shows that the Church was not anti-science.
So you agree with the Church.
@@mensetens6391 A few individuals does not constitute "the church" in it's entirety. Clearly, there are priests, nuns, etc., who adhere to science and keep their mouths shut, as did those who agreed with Galileo. Why? Because they did nit want to risk excommunication, charges of heresy, the Inquisition or being burned at the stake. I'm not sure what his "most important science" was after he was censured and essentially imprisoned; he was suffering from arthritis and nearly blind. Yes, he published, but his days of observation and experimentation were limited. Your final statement that I "agree with the church" is utter, complete trumpian double-speak bullshit. If you need to try and justify the evils of organized religion, stop using Jedi mind tricks, they only work on the weak-minded, as history has shown us.
@@daveandrews5764 _Your final statement that I "agree with the church" is utter, complete trumpian double-speak_
Not at all. Every time you agree with the truth you agree with the Church. Mind you, not everyrone in the Church has been right, but the Church has always sought the truth and found it, for God's Word (written and Living) is truth, and the Church lives by it and him. So if you seek the truth, you will find God and his Church. Ergo, apparently in ways that you have not bothered to see, you agree with the Church. See them or not, though, you agree.
@@mensetens6391 My dude,
THERE IS NO "god".
Many upset comments on this video.
Thank you for sharing your perspective brother, but more importantly, thank you for the way you handled this comment section.
A masterclass in sympathy.
I salute you.
Thank you very much! Peace and good to you!
I think the depiction of Galileo’s Two Chief World Systems (which was requested by the Pope) is valid- but I think you also need to look at his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina, where he explores in faith the scientific argument that the earth revolves around the sun, and even attempts to reread certain scriptural passage according to the Patristic model at the time.
Certainly, after being silenced for a couple decades, Galileo lacked tact. But you have to read him in the context of a human life and it’s clear that Galileo remained a faithful Catholic, and to portray him as something else actually further emphasizes the divide you are seeking to minimize.
You cite one reference which is not enough to prove that he wasn't tactless and abusive before being silenced. You have made the accusation that he wasn't tactless before being silenced, so without that evidence which defies what happened, it is you who may be pedalling the division narrative.
If you don't believe in God, you are going to have a very difficult time with quantum physics.
And the one thing I have found in pursuing my (pre-med) Biology degree is that Catholic social teaching is the only model that accurately reflects the realities of microbiology and human physiology.
Like seriously, TOB is completely reflective of sexual physiology. Or, actually, it's the other way around.
That's absolute b.s. apocalypticfurball. You know NOTHING OF SCIENCE, PHYSICS, OR APPARENTLY ANYTHING ELSE. If you knew anything at all you'd know that quantum mechanics is not only VERIFIABLE, but it's describable with mathematics. NOTHING of your silly supernatural mythology is either verifiable or descriptive mathematically. You, my friend, are a silly twit.
Ok, so to explain why this isn't true without being a dick about it, simply believing in God doesn't make understanding quantum physics any simpler. "Godidit" is an argument from ignorance, and has no mechanism nor explanatory power driving it. *How* did God do it, and what exactly did he do? How can a non-physical being "create" anything of any size? How can a non-physical being create quantum vacuums that allow virtual particles to pop into existence?
Using God as a catch-all explanation for everything is something called magical thinking, yet, as I discussed, it does not bring someone any closer to understanding the subject in question.
This is true *whether or not* it is true that there is a God.
Just to complicate things further, even if it could be demonstrated that a god existed, that would not automatically justify the belief that a god can create anything. It is possible for a god to exist that is unable to create anything itself and is subject to the laws of the universe just as we are.
It is also possible that a God that declares it cannot lie is lying. We cannot assume that just because a being says it is truthful, it therefore *must* be. That does not follow. So when a God says it cannot lie and it created the universe, how do you know it's telling the truth? It leads to circular reasoning and gets you no closer to understanding than before.
I guess when you have an event that hasn't been fully explained yet, instead of searching scientifically for a plausible explanation, you ask the Pope to issue an ex cathedra infallible ruling
@@nohocuspocus8840 absolutely seething
@@RustyWalker If all the physical and spiritual reality comes from a superior, eternal and infinite being, as God, then He would be the one who decides what is true and what is not. He would be the one who would had defined the laws of everything that exists. And if everything came into existence because of him, then he would be the only one who by essence exists, that is, only he would exist by himself without the need of anyone or anything, only he would own existence, while everything else would exist because he gave it existence.
This is the Judeo-Christian God, called: "I Am Who I Am" which also translates as "I Am", or "I Am The Being", "I Am The One Who Is", "I Am The One Who Exists", "I Am Existence", in greek is called "Ontos" ὄντος, ontos, 'being' or 'that which is'.
Therefore, if this God has no need of anything. Why would he lie? What would a superior and self-sufficient being gain from lying to such an infinitely small creature compared to him?
In fact, he couldn't lie, because everything that comes from him would be true. He would be the only source, the only objective criterion, he would be the truth himself, the Truth and Him would not be two different things, something would be true because it would reflect his own knowledge and nature embedded in the things he created.
Great video! As a catholic scientist and teacher myself I found it very well explained.
I'm a catholic and I love science. It goes hand in hand honestly for me. Great video! God bless you❤
The more I learn of physics, the more I am drawn to metaphysics.
Albert Einstein
you made it up
Galileo did have mathematical evidence that all planets revolved around the sun, but its so hard to explain that it is usually omitted. He studied the phases of the moon and the phases of Venus. He measured the angles of the phases and they could have only occurred if both revolved around the sun. It probably took him a whole month to figure it out. Likewise Galileo conducted experiments to show how the Earth still moves without anything falling off. While Galileo was not tortured he recanted when he was shown the instruments.
Also, Galileo's observation of Jupiter's moons orbiting around the planet contradicted the widely held belief that the earth was at the the center of everything. If Jupiter's moons orbited around Jupiter and not the earth then obviously the Ptolemaic system with its geocentric model had to be wrong. To say that Galileo had no evidence that the existing model was untrue is just plain wrong.
It's too bad Galileo wasn't around to witness David Scott performing the hammer and feather experiment on the moon during Apollo 15.
@@joevignolor4u949 Yes it was Church propagzndsy, didn't want the ordinary people to think for themselves or they might question a lot of Church teachings Then who would be out of a well paid job
@@joevignolor4u949😂😂😂😂😂
Great job!!! God bless you all!!!
What’s super cool is I found this today when my Priest talked about this in Catechism. Today is the Feast Of St. Robert Bellarmine, and he was helping the Pope, and Gallelio. In history we actually know that they slipped a document into Gallelios File and was condemned. All he was told to do was repent over errors he made from the Book of Genesis, and thanks to Pius XII, we know that the Bible is free from any error.
Your videos are awesome,
My prayers with you.
(Btw, I still have to send my other comment from the other video where we were debating about Leo XIII and freedom of speech and all! 😬)
I couldn't agree more! There are so many great examples of religion and science working together, and this is something I often have to explain to some of my friends who are Atheist or skeptical. I especially love your quote from 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21 "Do not quench the Spirit, do not despise prophesying, but test everything; hold fast what is good,"
Well done! this was very interesting and it was very well put together technically. Thank you for the effort people put in to creating these. I learned a lot!
I AGREE
Galileo myth: the poster child of "repetition legitimizes" fallacy.
The fact that the Galileo matter is the 'strongest' case that they can push forward is also telling. No wonder Dan Brown was so disappointed by the history that he had to make up a ridiculous holocaust of scientists in one of his novels. The truth wasn't scary enough.
, Galileo was not a martyr for science. And, of course, if someone tries to argue thay, one only has to bring up people like Copernicus, Kepler, Digges, Maestlin, Rothmann, and Brahe, all of whom believed in models of the cosmos that were not considered orthodox, and all of them escaped the fire, and indeed weren't even pursued by the Inquisition.
Ignaz Semmelweiss (1818-65) can however be regarded as a “martyr for science”. And it was his fellow-scientists - not the Churches - who made trouble for him:
“Despite various publications of results where hand washing reduced mortality to below 1%, *Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Semmelweis could offer no acceptable scientific explanation for his findings, and some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and mocked him for it. In 1865, Semmelweis suffered a nervous breakdown and was committed to an asylum, where he died at age 47 of pyaemia, after being beaten by the guards, only 14 days after he was committed* . Semmelweis's practice earned widespread acceptance only years after his death, when Louis Pasteur confirmed the germ theory and Joseph Lister, acting on the French microbiologist's research, practiced and operated, using hygienic methods, with great success.”
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis
Because the sciences are a human undertaking, they are no more immune to folly, obscurantism, ignorance, conformism, prejudice, dogmatism & fraud than any other field of study.
Copernicus was actually encouraged by the Church to continue his studies and dedicated his most famous work _On the Revolution of the Celestial Orbs_ to Pope Paul III. He wasn't concerned the Church would attack him for his theories, he was more concerned about the reactions from his own colleagues and also Martin Luther himself who seemed to have condemned the heliocentric theory.
Maybe someone should point out that there is no moral obligation to agree with the conclusions of “Science”. Complaints against Christianity or Christians for not doing so, are at bottom based on *moral* considerations - not on scientific considerations. Scientism is based ultimately on moral considerations - on the idea that people “ought to” agree with Scientism. But the sciences are not able to go from “this is a fact” to “therefore, people have a duty to accept that it is a fact”, without going outside the sciences, to enlist moral considerations.
Galileo was right about the earth revolves around the sun. But in the same time he did not believe the moon gravitational pull causes the tide. He was right about one thing but wrong about another thing.
As a believer in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and as a cradle Catholic, I LIKE Science, because WITHOUT Science we wouldn't be able to get our modern medicines like Antibiotics.
Christ is Risen!
Happy Easter!
Thanks for this wonderful video brother. This is what I always felt :
Bible - the story of God's relationship with humans, morality and His plan for human salvation
Science - observation of the world that God created and our ways of explaining what we perceive of it
I don't understand how these two can be at odds !!
Hi this is such a good resource for my confirmation class....thank you so much.
+A.J You're welcome! Pass it along!
don't listen to this monk
Love this!!!! Thank you for this resource. I’m an ecologist and evolutionary biologist and I love my faith!! 💕
I want to be a biologist, probably an ecologist or zoologist and I love my faith too!
Could you make more videos like this?
I would love to! I'm working on a few other video projects at the moment, but plan to return to them, definitely in the fall when I return to school and have to "expert" resources, but hopefully a few sooner!
Sounds great! Thank you!
Great video, this is the only video I could find on UA-cam that doesn't blatantly misrepresent what happened during the Galileo affair. Nice work.
I'm a pastor's kid, former born again devout protestant Christian but very much an athiest now. All that just to say I'm not a fan of religion but I know many religious people I admire. I respect your endeavour here and you might end up becoming one on my decently long list of religious people I respect.
Thank you for this channel. There's very little chance of me ever getting back into faith but still able to connect to you on this level makes this a successful outreach mission (to use a parlance I grew up surrounded by) nonetheless!
I can just say... Good, amazing. That exactly one of the reasons why I like Catholic Church before starting to believe.
Can you please explain the "Bruno Myth"
What myth? The fact the Catholic Church killed giordano for no apparent reason other than because they could.
@@hzq-yg8bj Well DeGrasse failed to mention that Bruno was burned not because he believed in planets but because of something else.
@@tylerchua929 he got killed because he disproved of the RCC doctrination
@@hzq-yg8bj Who cares, in the end Bruno was just a history note during the Reformation crisis for the Church. Maybe if he had been born a few centuries earlier his astronomical views would have just been seen as another step in scholastics. But for his reincarnation views? The church was going to call out delusions when it sees them
@@hzq-yg8bj quiet average internet atheist.
Lamarck's view on evolution was entirely wrong, he was not the first to propose a theory like that either
I read the bible attend mass and enjoy learning biology and physics. Not a single minute in my life that I have conflict understanding what I believe in faith and discover in science.!
All that and yet you haven't understood yet that if God was a good person there wouldn't be any suffering on Earth?
such a great video!!! Explained so well. People who don't understand that catholicism & science are not in conflict drive me bananas sometimes
My science teacher in school (non religious school) was a Christian, he used to say science is the how and God is the why
"Galileo's findings were unscientific", could you explain in what way they weren't scientific?
This is interesting, I never knew this. My whole life was a lie
Hah, hah, hah. Pretty cynical right?
_Congratulations for your Baby Monk Impersonation._ 🎉
Hello again Brother Casey. It's great to see more of your videos and I really look forward to each new one. You most likely do not recall my previous comment on another of your videos where I explained I was not catholic but was aiming to convert. I am happy to tell you that I've attended my first ever Mass and have spoken to the Dominican brother at St Cuthbert's RC church in Durham where I live about becoming a catholic. Just wanted to let you know that your videos have been a big help and influence in getting me started on this path, so thank you from my heart.
This video is fantastic. It's something I have thought about a lot, trying to reason faith, the Old Testament and scientific discovery. I see no reason for science and faith in God to be at odds. Science and Religion are both ways in which human beings try to work out what life, nature, the world, the universe and...everything is all about. We often see the anti-religious folk citing Old Testament verses as proof that the Bible is wrong and science is right. What should be remembered is that science often disproves it's own previous theories and yet that does not prove that science itself is wrong in its entirety. Personally, I have come to believe that the Old Testament in parts ( I confess I have not read it all...yet) presents an explanation of the world and of God and of mankind's place in the world in terms that were understood at the time each of the books were written. That is not to say they are purposefully untrue, rather it is saying that based on what was known at the time of writing, each book reflects what human beings understood to be the truth. Jesus Himself used parables to teach the Word of God - stories that were easy for people to understand - in order for people to relate to God in terms that they were familiar with. The parables spoke of sowing seeds, fathers and sons, fishing, bread-making, all things to which people of that time could relate as they were a part of everyday life. Perhaps in a similar way parts of the Old Testament are like the parables - the Truth presented in a way that people of that time could understand. As human kind has 'progressed' over the past few thousand years we have learned more about the world around us and so can now understand things in a different way than our ancestors could. In this way science and religion have helped us to understand more of the actual details of life, the world and everything. I would guess, if I can be so bold, that Jesus might have used different language and perhaps different methods in His teaching of the Word of God if He was first coming to earth in the present time rather than 2000 years ago. He would bring the same message, the same teaching, but would tailor the way He would teach us so that it reflected current times. I believe that God wants us to learn by scientific exploration and investigation. I believe that as we learn more through science we learn more about God. The Big Bang has come to be accepted as the most likely way for the Universe to have come into existence. This does not exclude God from creation. Science struggles with what caused the Big Bang, what caused the entirety of everything to suddenly spring into existence from practically nothingness and then continue to expand and grow outwards, filling the void with the building blocks of life and substance. Sounds very much like God creating the heavens and the earth.
Anyway, I could ramble on for days over this. I enjoy thinking and reasoning, I enjoy science and discovery, and at last after many years, I enjoy Faith in God. I am sure and certain in my heart that God wants us to discover as much as we can about everything He has created because by coming to understand His creation we come to understand Him. The more that science discovers about our universe the closer we get to God. Perhaps it will only be at the very end of discovery, when the very last piece of the Truth is fitted into the puzzle of existence, that human kind will finally understand that it was God we were always searching for.
Stop brainwashing people
Brother Casey makes me think philosopher Colin Wilson (‘The Outsider’) was really onto something with: "For 99% of their lives, most human beings are in a state not too far from that of lobotomized pigeons." I grew up in a family of Catholic pigeons. Looking at the state of the world Christianity has cobbled together for us, it's clear which institution did the lobotomizing and why. The embarrassingly servile comments Casey elicits in his videos convince me Eckhart Tolle got it right as well: "The greatest achievement of humanity is not its works of art, science or technology but the recognition of its own dysfunction, its own madness.” Tolle is spreading the sort of insights the pre-Nicaean church fathers subscribed to before Constantine hijacked their eighty or so ecclesias to consolidate and politicize it as a branch of government with servile clergy. Modern Catholicism still follows the thinking set up by a murdering emperor (Constantine murdered his own wife and son). I'd feel ashamed if I'd stayed in that demented community of dead souls.
This was interesting and thought provoking. Thank you. When I teach this in history class I tend to present it as a conflict between a governing political power and the people and Galileo being a catalyst for the re-organization of social and political structures. That is his greatest significance in my view of human history. I think that you are correct about the relationship between religion and science.
I think that would be a much more accurate depiction of the situation.
These are the kind of vids I’m subscribed to you for
Why then has the Catholic Church apologised for its treatment of Galileo
Good point. I need an answer too.
Awesome view on a very complex argument. God bless us all!
Ultimately, there's absolutely nothing here that actually fixes the problem with the church silencing Galileo. Instead, it tries to shift the blame to the victim. So what if Galileo was tactless? Literally doesn't matter - being silenced for speaking the truth is a severe injustice. And guess what? The Ptolemaic model was clever when it was developed. By Ptolemy. In Ancient Greece. But by the time Galileo was doing his work, the Copernican model had come around. And guess what? It was easily verified and hard to falsify, whereas the Ptolemaic model was ridiculously convoluted and had to resort to circles within circles within circles to explain the motion of the planets.
So yeah, there's literally no argument here. Just an attempt at damage control. He also leaves out the part about Galileo's books being on the church's banned list. For over a century.
Galileo was a professed Christian who tried to reconcile his belief with the Bible. He was called a heretic for violating doctrine. And there was, in fact, a threat of physical violence if he didn't renounce his views and comply.
Wonderful. What science lovers.
1864, Pope Pius IX :
“...The Roman Pontiff cannot and ought not to reconcile himself or agree with, progress, liberalism and modern civilization.”
Cardinal Bellarmine, the foremost Vatican theologian in the early seventeenth century :
"to affirm that the Sun is really fixed in the center of the heavens and that the Earth revolves very swiftly around the Sun is a dangerous thing, not only irritating the theologians and philosophers, but injuring our holy faith and making the sacred scripture false."
I like it that I learn more about Catholic stand on many things and made me remember what I studied in Theology and Science in the University decades ago. I remained a Catholic Christian despite being in the model of the CONTRAST MODEL. I started going to Florence and Rome, Italy every summer in the last 2 years. I understood more on this period where Science and Theology "clashed". But so far, I feel that none really existed.
God created the universe, so that we may know it, so that we may know him.
Got a bone to pick with Casey in this one. He keeps going on about how Galileo didn’t have “sufficient evidence,” I mean this is debatable as there is obvious sufficient evidence for a heliocentric model and it was available at the time. Whether Galileo “had it,” or “enough of it...” I mean so what? Even if everything you say is true. Are you saying it’s okay to imprison, censure, silence, threaten with death and torture is they don’t recant, scientists because the church, (or any government) decides that they don’t feel the evidence is sufficient for the theories they propose. Hate to break it to you but that is anti-science. And just horrible besides. Your explanation and defense is just at as bad as the popular version of the story...
I have found that the Glileo myth is strongly enhanced by Berthold Brecht's Drama "The life of Galileo Galilei" which has been misread. It was an obvious allegory for how the NS regime dealt with the socialist movement but poeople chose to read it at face value ("church silences science")
This video misses the historical context in which the Galileo affair occurred. At the time, Protestantism was still on the rise and the Catholic Church couldn't deal with someone openly mocking them. Hence, they condemned Galileo and declared his theory heretical. All in all, this was a situation that was both spun out of control due to human fallibility, as well as one displaying the authoritarian power of the Church.
Siri just told me she's listening. I never touched my phone. I let 'her' listen to what you have to say.
Isn't it fair to say that even the most beautifully gilded cage is still a cage? Maybe during this season of the Covid-19 lockdown we can gain a bit of perspective on the idea of being placed under house arrest for the rest of our lives. Perhaps it is the American in me, having the idea of a separation of Church & State ingrained from a young age, but it seems possible that the Church at the time was a bit too powerful for its own good, or even the good of the people. The answer to a bad idea isn't to sequester someone, but to promote discussion.
If Galileo was surly & insulting in his delivery of his stance, wouldn't that have been an opportunity for the Church to demonstrate long-suffering compassion & the idea of turning the other cheek when wronged? It seems Galileo made the same mistake Socrates did, flaunting the political authorities of the time. I'm grateful the authority of the Church was hobbled in terms of exercising such control over people. Having traveled outside the US to places where theocratic rule & things like blasphemy laws exist, I would oppose any allowance of secular or political power to a religious institution. Power corrupts.
Indeed ,a lot of people are complaining of lockdown after a few paltry weeks, what must it have been like for Galileo. under house arrest till he died Doesn't bear thinking about, our boredom can be assuaged by TV . using computers etc poor Galileo What was done to that old man was unforgivable, and as to the Church agreeing that people could be cremated in tbe late 60s, the only reason the church conceded on cremstion was that people started to use their own reasoning, and got cremated, whether the church approved of it or not, that is the simple fact of the matter
Thaaank yooou, Im so tired of hearing this!
I also got rather tired of obnoxious, probably late teenaged atheist trolls, telling me "Occam's razor" says religion must be wrong. I sigh, and wonder that they have clearly not looked up who Occam was, and what he had to say about the use of his razor.
But it's not surprising.
By the middle of the 20th century, (and it's still going on today) a lot of American textbooks were full of just SO much trash, thanks to so many varied influences...echoes of the Enlightenment resenting religion, the protestant English hatred of the Catholic Spanish and the "black legend" ...
The Southern proponents of the "Lost Cause" trying to rewrite the history of the Civil War...
Not to mention comparatively benign but still inaccurate American myth making.
I remember a splash page in my highschool text book on American presidents that carefully quoted Lincoln out of context to explain that he was pro-slavery😔 it omitted the fact that he was so famously (but moderately) anti-slavery that his election triggered the secession.
The market strength of the Texas schoolbook board, plus pure ignorance, keeps it going even today.
It's kind of an educational horror show.
So THANK YOU for helping to correct one piece of the vast miseducation of Americans!
1:14 I don't think that debate was about what was right, science or religion.
It was about the theory of evolution and special creationism.
Ken Ham believes he's being scientific (though he admittedly said he would refuse to change his mind concerning an hipothesis) and Bill Nye didn't have issues with religion in general (he was discussing particular religious beliefs about the age of the Earth and the origin of species).
Great presentation Br. Casey. I very much enjoyed it and it was also highly informative, thank you.
They may not have tortured Galileo, but the threat was there. If scientists were always bullied and intimidated, there would be no room for the free enquiry that is imperative to the scientific method.
In the end, Galileo ended up agreeing with St. Robert Bellarmine, who firmly believed that the earth is motionless in the center of the universe. Please see below:
“The falsity of the Copernican system must not on any account be doubted, especially by us Catholics, who have the irrefragable authority of Holy Scripture interpreted by the greatest masters in theology, whose agreement renders us certain of the stability of the Earth and the mobility of the sun around it. The conjectures of Copernicus and his followers offered to the contrary are all removed by that most sound argument, taken from the omnipotence of God. He being able to do in many, or rather in infinite ways, that which to our view and observation seems to be done in one particular way, we must not pretend to hamper God’s hand and tenaciously maintain that in which we may be mistaken.” ~ Galileo Galilei, in a letter to Francesco Rinuccini, 29 March 1641 (1)
Notes:
1. Drake, Stillman, Galileo At Work: His Scientific Biography (Chicago, London, The University of Chicago Press, 1978), p. 417.
Let's be clear - Galileo was imprisoned and charged with Heresy and because the Church thought the BIble said the earth was the centre of God's universe. This is a fact, no matter how you try to dress it up. That we can say this was a mistake by people still stuck in the Medieval mindset may be true - but it still happened.
They only persist by continually lying and distorting the truth.
I learned about faith from you in a much shorter time. God bless you and your work!
Don't stop making videos!
Cosmologist on Geocentrism: “You Cannot Disprove It”
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct [for] 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.” ~ George F.R. Ellis, Professor of Complex Systems in the Department of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics at the University of Cape Town in South Africa, 1995 (1)
Notes:
1. Gibbs, W. Wayt, “Thinking Globally, Acting Universally,” (Scientific American, October, 1995), p. 55.
There is one major flaw in Br. Casey's discussion. His claim is that Galileo was presenting as fact something that he couldn't prove. Ok, I get that. Lot's more work needed to be done, as is always true in science. But the brother also states that there were many scientists who held the opposite view. True. And I'm sure they were teaching that view. And since that view, that the earth is the center of the solar system, is not true, they were obviously also teaching as truth something they couldn't prove. The issue for the church wasn't a literal statement in the bible but rather the larger implications of seeing the earth as not being the center, and therefore not the most important. I've known since I was a kid that Galileo was not actually tortured and was simply kept under house arrest in a nice place. That's how gentlemen of means were generally treated when they were in trouble (unless they went too far.)
The contention with Galileo was that he was teaching it as fact instead of a theory with very little evidence to support it. One of the Popes (urban viii I think) told him he could teach it but not hold the view as fact
I recommend Galileo's daughter. Its a biography compiled from Galileo's dauther's (who was a nun) letters to his father, along with other sources of course. I think it gives us some great insight into his own personality and the situation with the church. I wouldn't say he was brash and aggressive, nor would I ridicule his method of proof. During the time, a lot of science was based off the interpretation of Aristotelian philosophy, making Galileo one of the pioneers of empirical science in Europe. Yes, there is a big ugly myth around his trial. But lets not take the polar opposite position either.
So , was he killed?
@@hansongnaily lol, only by old age and disease!
Now that's is a hell of a lie , how can people make such a lie, just like Edison who clearly did bad things to Tesla...
@@hansongnaily I am referring to historical sources on the matter. In fact, I am referring to the closest historical document you can get to the man, which are the letters exchanged with his daughter. If you want to accuse people of falsehood, at least do your research.
@@gawayne1374 no I'm referring to the old story that says he was prosecuted, which I now know it's a lie. Thanks for your clarification :) I'm not saying that you are lying lol sorry.
Giordano Bruno?
Thank you for this video Br. Cole. This is one of the most irritating misconceptions about the Church I ever have conversations on. To add to the list of contributions to the sciences and reason by the Church, you can add the Jesuit foundation of seismology, and the preservation of any Ancient Greek and Roman literature and philosophy after the fall of the Roman Empire and through the dark ages.
There are some radically traditionalist Catholics who are claiming that Galileo was wrong and that the Earth is actually Geocentric after all. I was shocked when I read this in some of their paperwork.
The earth is geocentric? You mean the univers? Or the cosmos?
I meant that the Universe is geocentric. Sorry, I was tired that night.
Read "Galileo was Wrong", he has some evidence that geocetric view is actually true.
Good talk. Keep up the good work. God bless.
There was a papal apology by Pope John Paul II. Great video, by the way.
Galileo's trial put in the political and religious context of his century is a complex issue. There was abuse of power by both political and religious figures in many regions of Europe, and the Inquisition had too much power.
The sometimes ambivalent relationship between religious figures and scientific figures can be illustrated by the Jesuits, who pursued scientific knowledge in many fields. They often had a tense relationship with the rest of the hierarchy. Not all minds were equally enlightened, at any point in time. And local and regional power does not always present the best picture of the church, especially when religious people mingled with politics.
I think I would have been a great Jesuit in a other era. Today I am pursuing many scientific interests, and some of them are related to ethics and morals in science and technology.
As a piece of trivia... His Excellency John Paul II kissed my forehead during his visit in Montreal in 1984. I was a blessed kid, to say the least.
These older videos are so different from your current ones, it's nice to see how much you have developed in this plataform
8:43 With the exception of a few verses throughout and a chapter of First Samuel, the poetry doesn't begin until Job and terminates with Song of Solomon.
Well based on several articles I've read when reading Job. The story was fairly ancient and some believed Moses wrote it though it's unclear. I think it's almost the same time as the Genesis timeline though it still a matter of debate regarding when it was written because if my memory served me correct because of the linguistic features which shown something really ancient and something like in the 2nd temple period, so there's a possibility of addition (the Elihu story). But feel free to debunk me if you want
Edit : Oh wait, to clarify things, you agreed to what the friar said regarding Genesis as poetry ??
@@northumbria7393 No. I explicitly said that the poetry doesn't begin until 1 Samuel.
@@darkblade4340
Ohh right.. idk why, I thought you said that among the pentateuch and the first historical books of the Bible (Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel), only Genesis and Samuel had some elements of poetry in it Lol (and I thought the friar implied the Genesis as poetry in that timestamp you mentioned). Idk why I often classify it as such (Pentateuch and first historical books of the Bible), my bad...
I really like this video!. It deserves to be known to everybody
Science is just God's way of speaking to us and helping us understand his wonders.
What a brilliant mind you have Father Casey and the Gumption to bring to us all such well researched; thought provoking material. I can see from this and your other UA-cam presentations that "Your Work" is not only much needed at this time, but will contribute towards a Greater Understanding of & Even a Rebirth of Sorts of Catholicism & Christianity to the Wider Community; along with Friar Life and the fact that what is "Claimed" as either a Discovery or is said to be "Particular to a Field of Study, such as Science" has in fact had its Historical Origins in the Bible; with lots of Correlations or Cross-References to the other Scientific Fields of Study; IE> Factual Material that can Co-Exist together; as opposed to the Long Term Conflictual Model that you present as Either / Or. Great Work Father Casey. R
Great video. The Galileo myth is still very widespread
Because it has basis in fact.
watch the video@@StudentDad-mc3pu
Ok, I have to admit this was a good video. Thank you.
I'm pretty sure if you turned on the History Channel in 2016 you'd see Chumlee making a poor deal for an autographed trading card in Rick's pawnshop.
And he never did the fandango.
5:22 that chart still gets on my nerves
What is it even based on?
If you tune in the History Channel, Pawn Stars or some other "reality" show will be on.
Also the church doesn’t have a stand on evolution, so it is incorrect to say the book if genesis shouldn’t be taken literally. It is literally the base of our faith. Without it’s roots, the tree falls down.
I think the Brother has done a video on evolution. Worth a watch!
Is god subject to the same weaknesses as a tree?
Galileo clearly contradicted (and he was right!) church tenets, and in many cases proved his point beyond reasonable doubts. His rebuttals fall into 2 broad categories. One is Aristotle. Although not associated with the church directly, the church (and civil society as well) adopted his teachings to support their religious teachings and dogmas. Aristotle was a great philosopher, but his way of thinking is not the only valid one. But over time he was taken as the final authority not only on philosophy and morals, but also on science as well. The early church found his work very useful to develop christian theology, further endorsing his teachings. Thomas Aquinas in his great work Summa Theologica time and again quoted whom he only identified as “The Philosopher” without ever even giving his name, since everybody knew whom he was referring to. So it went: the Philosopher says…. And that was that. In similar fashion he also quoted “The Apostle”, in the understanding that he meant Paul of Tharsus, or St. Paul. Aristotle cast a long shadow for almost 2,000 years. But it so happens that Aristotle also wrote on natural sciences, and some of his opinions were not only false, but outright ridiculous. He taught about the spontaneous generation of life. A mental disturbance of the ladies whom he called hysteria was caused because the uterus (hysteroi) began wandering through the body and had to be restored to its right place, etc. Aristotle contended that “naturally” heavier objects fall faster to the ground. Nobody ever cared to check! Galileo climbed to the top of the leaning tower of Pisa with 2 roughly spherical shaped objects, one much heavier than the other, dropped them and proved Aristotle wrong. The Greek thinker also postulated that all celestial bodies are perfect, eternal, and fixed to the heavens, except for 4 pesky objects that changed position relative to the stars. Those were called planets, from planetoi, or wanderers in Greek. Further, Ptolemy, another great Greek thinker postulated the earth to be the center of the universe, and the sun, moon, stars and planets revolving around us. The church did not specifically support this as a dogma, but this view was in full accordance with Joshua 10, which narrates when the Israelites lay siege to the city of Jericho, and God promised his chosen people that the sun would remain fixed in the sky until the full defeat of the Philistines. So, if God said it, you better believe it, or else. And this was church teaching and dogma. Galileo perfected his telescope and with it he discovered sunspots, and showed everybody the image of the sun passing through his telescope and shown over a white piece of paper. So the sun was not perfect, as Aristotle claimed. Thirdly, with his telescope he discovered Jupiter’s 4 largest moons, today known as the Galilean Moons in his honour. They most certainly rotated around Jupiter, not Earth. End of story, watch and see. The Ptolomaic geocentric model was on his death throes. It is true and correct that he could not fully substantiate the heliocentric model (which later turned out to be the true one), the rest he did prove. Galileo was certainly impertinent, quarrelsome, irky and contentious, and that landed him house arrest for life. Others like Girolamo Savonarola was burned at the stake by the church for saying that there was life beyond earth. The collision between science and faith is clear. The former proved that the literal interpretation of the bible, until then sacrosanct, could not be upheld in the light of reason.
I find it hard that a book written by people who had no knowledge of the atom or indoor pluming is remotely relevant today. The monotheistic mythos are as wrong as the ploytheistic.
Quoting from the sentencing document on Galileo:
"The proposition that the Sun is the center of the world and does not move from its place is absurd and false philosophically and formally heretical, because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scripture."
Yeah because instead of giving a sound argument which didn't convince his opponent,he made his argument in rhetorical way that will instigate his opponent,read Berlamine (catholic saint) opinion on this.
Hypatia was a true martyr of science.
Excellent! Thank you!
I think what is happening here is that people are mixing up the story of Giordano Bruno and that of Galileo.
As an engineer and an atheist, I just want to know the truth. I don’t care about religion v science I just want to know what actually happened.
Jesus Christ of Nazareth died for your sins that’s what happened
Paul Feyerabend wrote a wonderful book about the Galileo case: "Against Method". In his book he presents a detailed research on this topic and shows how un-scientific Galileo worked and why he was silenced in fact. Oddly enough, it was actually the church that behaved "scientific". This popular myth, Galileo being the "scientific hero" against stupid religion is a silly legend caused by Bertolt Brecht and others.
¡Hello! Could you please update the link for the article? It doesn't work any more. Thank you!!!!
Catholic evolutionary biologist here. Love this video. I really dislike being lumped in with anti science conservative evangelicals
1992, 359 years later, the Catholic Church finally admits Galileo's theory that the Earth moves around the Sun was right. At a ceremony in Rome, before the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope John Paul II officially declared that Galileo was right. The formal rehabilitation was based on the findings of a committee of the Academy the Pope set up in 1979, soon after taking office. The committee decided the Inquisition had acted in good faith, but was wrong.
One of the biggest debate in physics currently is between the "functionalists" who believe that the universe is a clunky mess that cannot be fully understood and that doesn't have an underlying harmony, and the "aestheticists" who believe there is beauty, simplicity and symmetry to be found in the laws of the Universe. The functional faction favors enumerating findings without trying to unify them. The "beauty seekers" want to find unified theories. They have been dominant in the last 40 years and have unfortunately failed to yield any significant discoveries. However, I think they have the right attitude because I can't believe in a Universe that is a clunky mess of disjointed constants and a zoo of particles that exist "just because". (Read books by Sabine Hossenfelder advocating an ugly universe, versus Lee Smolin who just says that we need to find a better path to the universe's elegance). Unification of knowledge is important because it gives a more global understanding of the universe and makes us appreciate even more how elegant it is in all aspects. Physicists have been failing with String Theory and Supersymmetry for a few decades. It's okay. We're in no rush. They will find the right path to understanding the underlying beauty of Creation eventually.
3:38 Quotemining.
His words continue "but I do not think that such a proof is possible" - and he was so far proven right in that prediction.
Timothy Ferris' Coming of Age in the Milky Way gives a lot of the background you used here but maybe offered a bit more detail about Galileo and his relationship with Church authorities (often contentious at a personal level). Ferris notes that most of the Vatican officials were accepting of a non-geocentric picture and the conflict arose around the personal conflicts. Ferris' account seemingly suggests that Galileo's outlook was not viewed to have too little evidence by the educated classes of Europe including Vatican officials. Perhaps, you could comment on this.
So... do we understand science and revelation as co-equal methods of assessing the truth? If they're in conflict, and we cannot descern our error in our interpretation of one or the other right away, which should we live by?
sorry, stopped when you misrepresented Ken Ham.
Ham is a scam.
Pius XII Said, "most audacious heroes of research... not afraid of the stumbling blocks and the risks on the way, nor fearful of the funereal monuments" about Galileo. The church at the time might have been a little skeptic of something that might cause contradiction, but even within 50 years the Church had authorized the publication of his works
The Church allowing Galileo's works to be published within 50 years , that was big of them, but they didn't apologise for his wrongful house arrest for many many centuries. Religious people keep hounding Atheists into belief by threats of hellfire etc Why can they not leave non believers to make up their own minds on tbe evidence. I don't believe, but I certainly would never descend to calling believers nasty names etc. Its up to everyone yo make up their own minds of their own free will
Based on my line it’s not complicated at all; apostolic succession. It’s just again still working on the translations.
Awesome! God bless you, Father Casey! Thank you for this video and thank God for sending you to us!
8:57 The count of the flood is not poetry. Both the geological evidence and Jesus himself treat it as a literal event.
Except there is not enough water on Earth to completely submerge every continent.
@@Zimisce85 Yes there is. There is between 1 and 5 billion km3. Less than 5 billion km3 would be necessary.