The Galileo Affair

In popular mythology, the Catholic Church is viewed as being anti-science. The ready reference is the Church’s treatment of Galileo.  A bumper sticker response for the Catholic is “If the Church was as anti-science as you claim, please name some persecuted scientists other than Galileo?”  It is highly unlikely they will be able to do so.  In the unlikely event that they do, reply that you’d not heard of that case, ask if they can supply a reference; then say you will research it and get back to them.

Given the prevalence of misinformation regarding the “Galileo affair” it is beneficial to have some understanding of the circumstances, with a bit more depth than this bumper sticker response.

For perspective, we begin with the Polish(!) astronomer Nicolas Copernicus (1473-1543) a respected astronomer who speculated - contrary to the prevalent understanding – that the Sun and not the earth was the center of the universe.  By 1514 Copernicus had written out his heliocentric notions, sharing the manuscript only with close friends.  Continuing to think through these matters, by 1532 Copernicus had the makings of a book on astronomy – including his heliocentric theory.  However, he was hesitant to publish it for fear of ridicule by his contemporaries in astronomy, as much as for his concern for its apparent conflict with Scripture.

Nonetheless, in 1533, Pope Clement VII was impressed by a presentation of Copernicus’ theory.  And then in 1536, Cardinal Nikolaus von Schönberg wrote to Copernicus:

[I understand] you had also formulated a new cosmology. In it you maintain that the earth moves; that the sun occupies the lowest, and thus the central, place in the universe... I entreat you, most learned sir… to communicate this discovery of yours to scholars…

Evangelization Myths (5 of 7)

Eric Sammons has authored a new book “The Old Evangelization: How to Spread the Faith Like Jesus Did” and cites 7 common myths that deter Catholics from evangelizing. 

The fifth myth is: To attract people we must be nice, and careful not to offend.

Eric writes:

… the underlying thought is that we must avoid proclaiming any “hard teachings” that might offend people… [However,] what initially attracted me to Catholicism was its strong teaching against abortion. I understood that a Church which stayed true to even its hardest teachings in the face of cultural opposition was less likely to be simply a human institution. In other words, the “hard teachings” attracted me.

My take is slightly different. It is essential to not fear that some will find Christ’s teachings hard to take.  But don’t start there.

Consider, the original hard teaching: Jesus on eating his flesh (John 6:52-56). It is disciples of Jesus that have a hard time here.  In other words, Jesus did not challenge them at the outset.  As disciples, they have already gotten to know him before hearing his teaching on the Eucharist.  Furthermore, Peter and the other apostles receive this “hard saying” not because they thoroughly grasped it, but because they valued their relationship with him; saying not “I get this” but “Where else are we to go?” 

To effectively evangelize, get folks thinking about their relationship with God and why they should have one.  Then when they hear the hard teachings, they are more likely to embrace them as “the words of eternal life.”

Question regarding the Holy Spirit

Ken - I have a question. Jesus said He would send the Spirit to be with the apostles (and us). This happened at Pentecost, and I have known the Spirit to be active in my life.  My question is:  Was the Holy Spirit not a presence previously in the Old Testament in the lives of men?

In its definition of Holy Spirit, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

…the Holy Spirit is at work with the Father and the Son from the beginning to the completion of the divine plan for our salvation. (2nd Ed., p. 882).

“from the beginning” is underlined emphasizing that the Holy Spirit was “a presence” even in the Old Testament.

Only three Old OT texts specifically call out “the Holy Spirit”:

(1) Ps 51:11: “Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me”;

(2) Isa 63:10: “Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them”; and

(3) Isa 63:11: “Then his people recalled the days of old, the days of Moses and his people—where is he who brought them through the sea, with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them?”

In other cases, the Holy Spirit is referred to as “the Spirit of the Lord” or “the Spirit of God.”

… behold, a band of prophets met him; and the spirit of God came mightily upon him, and he prophesied among them. (1 Samuel 10:10).

But as for me, I am filled with power, with the Spirit of the Lord... (Micah 3:8).

In addition, the OT authors did not have the understanding of the Holy Spirit - or even the Trinity - that Christ would convey to the apostles, and that the Church Fathers would further come to understand after pondering Christ’s words.  As John records Jesus saying, "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you." (Jn 14:26). 

While the OT authors may not specifically reference the “Holy Spirit,” with Jesus’ revelation we can now read the OT with the perspective that the Holy Spirit was indeed a presence.

Have a question or comment: fycv.shorturl.com