Heresy
"But to want to affirm that... is a very dangerous thing, not only by irritating all the philosophers and scholastic theologians, but also by injuring our holy faith and rendering the Holy Scriptures false. For Your Reverence has demonstrated many ways of explaining Holy Scripture, but you have not applied them in particular, and without a doubt you would have found it most difficult if you had attempted to explain all the passages which you yourself have cited."
"And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree... Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators. Nor may it be answered that this is not a matter of faith, for if it is not a matter of faith from the point of view of the subject matter, it is on the part of the ones who have spoken."
"I say that if there were a true demonstration... then it would be necessary to proceed with great caution in explaining the passages of Scripture which seemed contrary, and we would rather have to say that we did not understand them than to say that something was false which has been demonstrated.But I do not believe that there is any such demonstration; none has been shown to me."
I left out the subject matter on purpose to show in general the way this Cardinal reasons when he addresses the Carmelite father who supports something contrary to the church's widely held beliefs.
How could the Carmelite support something directly contradictory to Scripture? Seven passages in the bible clearly delineate the "truth". So what could his reasoning be? Certainly he must be in error.
Have you figured out what the subject matter is?
The letter was written in 1615. The hot topic of the day - Galileo's theories that the earth moved around the sun. The Inquisition ruled that he was highly suspect of heresy because that theory contradicted these seven scripture passages:
Psalm 93:1 - The world will surely stand in place, never to be moved.
Psalm 96:10 - The world will surely stand fast, never to be moved.
Psalm 104:5 - You fixed the earth on its foundation, never to be moved.
1 Chronicles 16:30 - Tremble before him, all the earth; he has made the world firm, not to be moved.
Ecclesiastes 1:5 - The sun rises and the sun goes down; then it presses on to the place where it rises.
Joshua 10:12-13 - On this day, when the LORD delivered up the Amorites to the Israelites, Joshua prayed to the LORD, and said in the presence of Israel: Stand still, O sun, at Gibeon, O moon, in the valley of Aijalon! And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, while the nation took vengeance on its foes. Is this not recorded in the Book of Jashar? The sun halted in the middle of the sky; not for a whole day did it resume its swift course.
Job 26:7 - He stretches out the North over empty space, and suspends the earth over nothing at all.
These seven passages comprised the entire church's view that the sun revolved around the earth, and that this "truth" was irrefutable because it was directly defined in scripture. Even today there are people who hold that Galileo's trial was justified. Yeah. Sometimes it takes a LONG time to admit when you're wrong...
Today there are 7 more passages being used to justify a widely held belief. Could it be history repeating itself?
"And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree... Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators. Nor may it be answered that this is not a matter of faith, for if it is not a matter of faith from the point of view of the subject matter, it is on the part of the ones who have spoken."
"I say that if there were a true demonstration... then it would be necessary to proceed with great caution in explaining the passages of Scripture which seemed contrary, and we would rather have to say that we did not understand them than to say that something was false which has been demonstrated.But I do not believe that there is any such demonstration; none has been shown to me."
I left out the subject matter on purpose to show in general the way this Cardinal reasons when he addresses the Carmelite father who supports something contrary to the church's widely held beliefs.
How could the Carmelite support something directly contradictory to Scripture? Seven passages in the bible clearly delineate the "truth". So what could his reasoning be? Certainly he must be in error.
Have you figured out what the subject matter is?
The letter was written in 1615. The hot topic of the day - Galileo's theories that the earth moved around the sun. The Inquisition ruled that he was highly suspect of heresy because that theory contradicted these seven scripture passages:
Psalm 93:1 - The world will surely stand in place, never to be moved.
Psalm 96:10 - The world will surely stand fast, never to be moved.
Psalm 104:5 - You fixed the earth on its foundation, never to be moved.
1 Chronicles 16:30 - Tremble before him, all the earth; he has made the world firm, not to be moved.
Ecclesiastes 1:5 - The sun rises and the sun goes down; then it presses on to the place where it rises.
Joshua 10:12-13 - On this day, when the LORD delivered up the Amorites to the Israelites, Joshua prayed to the LORD, and said in the presence of Israel: Stand still, O sun, at Gibeon, O moon, in the valley of Aijalon! And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, while the nation took vengeance on its foes. Is this not recorded in the Book of Jashar? The sun halted in the middle of the sky; not for a whole day did it resume its swift course.
Job 26:7 - He stretches out the North over empty space, and suspends the earth over nothing at all.
These seven passages comprised the entire church's view that the sun revolved around the earth, and that this "truth" was irrefutable because it was directly defined in scripture. Even today there are people who hold that Galileo's trial was justified. Yeah. Sometimes it takes a LONG time to admit when you're wrong...
Today there are 7 more passages being used to justify a widely held belief. Could it be history repeating itself?