The Galileo Affair revolves around two aspects which are his embrace of Copernican hypotheses and the church’s reaction to his position. Galileo was a popular natural philosopher and mathematician but at the same time, he considered himself a loyal Catholic. These two contradicting stances paved the way for him to be suspected of heresy in what is viewed to be a war between Science and Christianity. Galileo, while teaching mathematics lectured on astronomy, an undertaking that saw him defend the heliocentric theory that advanced that the earth revolved around the sun. There is a consensus that Galileo's persecution which culminated in indefinite house imprisonment is an alleged war between science and religion. While this assertion implies this fact, in reality, this was a war that included political and personal influences. The religious leaders of the time were involved in a battle of supremacy, considering that they were not able to prove the Galileo was a heretic. The perpetuation of religion versus science myths as in the case of the Galileo affair should not be accepted as it is lopsided 1 . In as much as Galileo’s stance on heliocentric view was in contradiction with Catholic teachings at the time which maintained that heavens were unmoving, it did not warrant persecution. However, the church was incapable of substantiating some scriptures such as Joshua 10:13 which indicates that the sun stood still, or that heavens stretching out as in Isaiah 40:22 2 . Galileo wrote various letters in his defense and though they made sense the religious leaders did not attempt to consider his views. Cardinal Bellarmine the church’s chief theologian, for instance, had looked through a telescope but refused to side with Galileo in a bid to promote social order. The insistence on social order indicates that the verdict was not tied to religion but rather politics with the leaders being keen on pleasing the masses.
Question: Does the condemnation associated with the Galileo Affair prove that science and religion are incompatible?
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Response to Bridgette’s Post
The post narrows the conflict to the interpretation of the scripture as opposed to debating whether the earth is at the center of the universe or not. This direction provides a new way of understanding if there was an alleged war between science and religion as many have been perceiving all this while. The post highlights the need to understand that Galileo was not a theologian but rather a natural philosopher, meaning that he depended on church leaders to interpret scriptures. Galileo was aware of the conflict that existed between the Catholic Church and Protestantism who too were keen on reinterpreting scriptures. The post, therefore, provides a different stance in that the issue was not merely science versus religion but rather the need for Catholic Church to maintain its control and influence. Galileo was a victim of poor timing, considering that he made his case amidst an interreligious conflict that paved the way for supremacy battles.
Response to Brian’s Post
This post provides a different perspective which is evidenced by its title ‘Pride and Humility’, an indicator that the conflict had nothing to do with religious and scientific tenets. Instead, the conflict was fueled in part by a misunderstanding, considering that Copernican heliocentrism being an astronomical theory could not be proved. However, this is not to mean that Galileo’s proposition that the earth revolves around the sun is a myth that contravenes the scriptures. The post points to loopholes in this conflict in that Nicolaus Copernicus, the main proponent of this theory was not convicted of heresy. The failure to convict Nicolaus points to the fact that the conflict was not religious but rather a mistrust in the political arena at the time. Pope Urban who was Galileo's friend chose to ignore Galileo’s claims to increase his chances of maintaining his political influence. To this end, the church chose to maintain fake truth as opposed to letting in new knowledge as it would contravene its previous beliefs, a decision that disadvantaged Galileo.
Bibliography
Aechtner, Thomas. “Galileo Still Goes to Jail: Conflict Model Persistence within Introductory Anthropology Materials.” Zygon 50, no. 1, (2015): pp. 209-226.
McGrath, Alister. E. Science & Religion: A New Introduction . Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2011.
1 Aechtner Thomas. “Galileo Still Goes to Jail: Conflict Model Persistence within Introductory Anthropology Materials.” Zygon 50, no. 1, (2015):212.
2 McGrath Alister. E. Science & Religion: A New Introduction. (Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2011):18.
