tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post6174806749936368695..comments2024-03-28T08:57:53.180+00:00Comments on Darwinian Conservatism by Larry Arnhart: Darwinism and the Catholic ChurchLarry Arnharthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14619785331100785170noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-17724548397901571782009-09-01T04:37:10.073+01:002009-09-01T04:37:10.073+01:00"Against the view of many Catholic theologian..."Against the view of many Catholic theologians that God had to miraculously create the body of the first man, Zahm suggests that the human body could have originally evolved naturally from primate ancestors. But then the human soul had to be created immediately by God."<br /><br />The reason I'm against theistic evolution is not that I think it contradicts the Bible, it's that there isn't enough evidence to convince me evolution is true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-70719267854328533042009-07-20T23:09:21.230+01:002009-07-20T23:09:21.230+01:00As far as I know, none of Darwin's writings we...As far as I know, none of Darwin's writings were ever put on the Index.Larry Arnharthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14619785331100785170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-42927834925786914262009-07-20T21:40:46.448+01:002009-07-20T21:40:46.448+01:00I thought that Darwin's book WAS put on the in...I thought that Darwin's book WAS put on the index. Good jon though LOLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-26869304281679047622009-05-01T05:37:00.000+01:002009-05-01T05:37:00.000+01:00"I've never heard the scientific community formall..."I've never heard the scientific community formally apologize for how they dealt with Semmelweis, nor have the French apologized for Lavoisier."<br /><br />What "scientific community", pray tell, would you like to apologize for the treatment of Semmelweis? Should the Illinois Surgery Association say that they are sorry for the behavior certain Austrian doctors in the mid-nineteenth century? Incidentally, Semmelweis' teachings on hand-washing were not accepted by his peers during his lifetime, but that is not why he was put into an insane asylum. He was put away because he had become very ill over the course of several years, prompting his family and friends to seek serious treatment for him. Furthermore, he has been celebrated ever since for his teachings, especially in Hungary and Austria.<br /><br />As for Lavoisier - I'm not sure that an institution like the Catholic Church is, strictly speaking, comparable to French Revolutionists (i.e. one is an institution with an ostensibly continuous tradition and the other was sometimes no more than an angry mob). Regardless of that, the French did apologize for what happened to Lavoisier. The government exonerated him less than two years after his death and sent a letter which admitted that he had been falsely convicted to his widow. None of this required the centuries that it took the Church to express regret over the handling of Galileo.<br /><br />It is true that both Semmelweis and Lavoisier suffered considerable injustice during their lifetimes. This truth, however, only establishes that other persons and groups than the Catholic Church have sometimes behaved in cruel and narrow-minded ways. It does not establish that the Church was not cruel and narrow-minded with respect to Galileo, or anyone else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-31623536364506661872009-04-27T16:34:00.000+01:002009-04-27T16:34:00.000+01:00There are some problems with Mr. Kellmeyer's comme...There are some problems with Mr. Kellmeyer's comments.<br /><br />As the Inquisition stated in 1633, Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy" for holding to the Copernican view of heliocentrism. There is no argument about this among scholars. Prior to Galileo's condemnation, the Holy Office determined that Copernicus' book needed to be put on the Index until further revision, and another theologian's book, reconciling Copernicus with the Bible (1615), was condemned outright. (We have Cardinal Bellermine's letter to the unfortunate Fr. Foscarini).<br /><br />Much as many Aristotelians did detest Galileo for his views, it was Cardinal Bellarmine who found Copernicus' heliocentism false and contrary to scripture. He summoned Galileo in 1616 and politely but firmly ordered him NOT to teach the view of Copernicus. A copy of their meeting at the time went even further, saying Galileo was ordered not to teach or hold it in any manner whatsoever. This is what doomed him.<br /><br />Pope Urban's wrath was not based on wounded vanity regarding his treatement in the Dialogo. Let's give the much maligned pope a little credit. Rather, when a copy of the 1616 injunction against Galileo was found in the archives of the Holy Office in the summer of 1632, the Pope felt Galileo had betrayed him by not mentioning the existence of it during their several friendly discussions about the issue.<br /><br />It's quite possible Galileo simply didn't remember it. But he was condemned by the Holy Office with the full approval of the angry Pope to house arrest for being 'vehemently suspect' of heresy, not just because the pope's pride had been hurt.<br /><br />Urban never forgave Galileo, and was known to erupt in a rage when even his nephew, Cardinal Barberino, tried to defend Galileo. Urban stated flatly he thought Galileo guilty of the greatest scandal in Christendom.John Farrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18280296574996987228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-11146541589454284502009-04-23T00:42:00.000+01:002009-04-23T00:42:00.000+01:00Um, actually, the Church did NOT condemn Galileo a...Um, actually, the Church did NOT condemn Galileo as a heretic for holding to heliocentrism. <br /><br />The Catholic Church initially celebrated Galileo's discoveries. <br />Cardinals, bishops and priests all looked through his telescope and marveled at what they saw. <br /><br />The university professors, however, hated Galileo because his discoveries threatened the philosophical system they had built on Aristotle and Ptolemy. It was university professors who refused to look through the lenses, declaring the newly discovered moons a figment of overactive imaginations.<br /><br />The academics used the tensions engendered by the Protestant Reformation to accuse Galileo of perverting Scripture. Only after relentless goading by these same academics did the Church reluctantly investigate the matter. Even then the first trial was not of Galileo.<br /><br />Only in 1633, when Galileo actively made fun of the Pope in his Dialogues did the Inquisition come after him with any real fervor. Even then, he was only branded as a suspected heretic, not as a heretic proper. <br /><br />He was never in a Church prison, never tortured and he retained his Church pension. Compare his treatment to that of Lavoisier by the French Revolution (the revolutionaries executed him), or Semmelweis by the medical establishment (Semmelweis was committed to an insane asylum for advocating handwashing prior to infant delivery and surgery). <br /><br />I've never heard the scientific community formally apologize for how they dealt with Semmelweis, nor have the French apologized for Lavoisier.Steve Kellmeyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07509461318016670424noreply@blogger.com