The Galileo Myth

Summary

This video script challenges the popular narrative of Galileo's conflict with the Church, suggesting that the 'Galileo was tortured for his scientific views' story is a myth that emerged in the 1800s. It argues that the Church has historically supported science and that Galileo's real issue was his lack of empirical evidence and aggressive behavior. The script also discusses various models of the relationship between science and religion, advocating for a correlation model where both can coexist without contradiction, as truth cannot contradict truth.

Takeaways

• 📚 The common narrative of Galileo's conflict with the Church is a myth that emerged in the late 1800s, not a historical account of the actual events.
• 🤔 The Church has historically supported and been at the forefront of scientific advancements, contrary to popular belief.
• 🗣️ Public figures like Bill Maher and some religious leaders perpetuate the idea of an inherent conflict between science and religion, which is not universally accepted.
• 🌍 The debate between science and religion is often fueled by high-profile confrontations, such as the one between Bill Nye and Ken Ham, which do not represent the views of all scientists or religious individuals.
• 📈 In Galileo's time, there was no scientific consensus on the heliocentric model, and Galileo's own evidence was not as robust as needed to prove his claims.
• 💬 Galileo's troubles with the Church were as much due to his aggressive and confrontational manner as they were to any supposed conflict between his science and religious doctrine.
• 🏛️ Galileo was not tortured by the Church; instead, he was placed under house arrest in comfortable conditions where he continued his work.
• 📖 The story of Galileo as a martyr for science was crafted during the Enlightenment by figures like Voltaire to criticize the Church and promote a secular worldview.
• 🔬 Many scientists and religious figures throughout history have not seen a conflict between their faith and scientific inquiry, including modern scientists who are also religious.
• ✝️ The Catholic Church teaches a correlation model where scientific truth and divine revelation are not in conflict but can inform and enrich each other.

Q & A

What is the common misconception about Galileo's conflict with the Church?

The common misconception is that Galileo was persecuted by the Church because his scientific views contradicted the Bible, leading to his torture. However, this narrative was not prevalent until the late 1800s and does not fully represent the historical context.

How does the script challenge the idea that religion and science are inherently at odds?

The script argues that throughout history, the Church has often supported and been at the forefront of scientific advancements, suggesting that the conflict is not inherent but rather a result of specific historical narratives.

What role did Galileo's personality and approach play in his troubles with the Church?

Galileo's brash and aggressive presentation of his theories, along with his disregard for the Church's instructions and smear campaigns against the Pope and other scientists, contributed significantly to his troubles.

Why was Galileo put on trial according to the script?

Galileo was put on trial not because his findings contradicted the Bible, but because he was teaching as fact what he could not scientifically prove, and he had previously promised the Church not to teach such unproven theories.

How was Galileo treated during his trial and after his conviction?

Contrary to the myth of torture, Galileo was treated well during his trial, housed in a luxurious hotel, and after conviction, he was given house arrest in a comfortable country home where his daughter cared for him.

Who are John William Draper and Andrew Dixon White, and how are they related to the Galileo myth?

John William Draper and Andrew Dixon White are 19th-century authors who propagated the conflict narrative between religion and science, including the Galileo myth, in their works, which significantly influenced the popular understanding of this historical event.

What is the 'concert model' mentioned in the script, and why is it considered flawed?

The 'concert model' suggests that science and religion are perfectly in sync, with scientific findings supporting religious teachings. It is considered flawed because it tries to force coherence where none exists, reducing the complexity of both science and religion.

What is the 'contrast model' and why does the script argue against it?

The 'contrast model' posits that science and religion are separate and non-overlapping, with each having its own domain. The script argues against it because science and religion often address the same topics, and truth from both domains should not contradict each other.

What is the 'correlation model' and how does it view the relationship between science and religion?

The 'correlation model' is the belief that since God is the creator of all, scientific truths and divine revelations cannot fundamentally contradict each other. It suggests that apparent contradictions indicate a misunderstanding in one's interpretation of either science or revelation.

How does the script suggest Christians should view science?

The script suggests that Christians should view science as a valuable resource that can guide theological thinking and be informed by an understanding of God's creation, aligning with the Church's historical stance.

What does the script imply about the modern perception of the relationship between religion and science?

The script implies that while the conflict model is still propagated by some, most religious people and scientists do not see an inherent conflict between religion and science, and that the relationship is more complex and nuanced than often portrayed.

Outlines

00:00

📚 The Myth of Galileo's Persecution

This paragraph challenges the popular narrative that Galileo was persecuted by the Church for his scientific views. It suggests that the Church has historically supported science and that the conflict between Galileo and the Church was more nuanced than often portrayed. The paragraph also critiques the idea that religion and science are inherently at odds, highlighting that there are many religious individuals who embrace science. The story of Galileo's supposed torture by the Church is questioned, with the suggestion that this narrative was a later invention to discredit the Church.

05:00

🌟 The Role of Religion in Scientific History

The second paragraph delves into the historical contributions of Christianity to science, refuting the notion that religion has been a consistent adversary of scientific progress. It mentions that many early scientists were religious and that the Church has often been a patron of scientific inquiry. The paragraph also addresses the influence of certain 19th-century authors who propagated the conflict narrative between religion and science, which has been largely debunked by modern historians. It emphasizes that the majority of religious people, including scientists, do not see an inherent conflict between their faith and scientific pursuits.

10:02

🔍 Models of Religion and Science Interaction

The final paragraph discusses different models for understanding the relationship between religion and science. It critiques the 'concert model' which suggests an artificial harmony between the two, and the 'contrast model' which posits that science and religion operate in completely separate realms. The paragraph advocates for the 'correlation model', which is based on the idea that truth from both science and revelation cannot contradict each other. It emphasizes the Church's historical stance that science should inform and be informed by theological understanding, and encourages a dialogue between the two to deepen our knowledge of God's creation.

Keywords

💡Galileo

Galileo Galilei was an Italian astronomer, physicist, and engineer who played a major role in the scientific revolution during the Renaissance. In the video, Galileo is discussed in the context of his conflict with the Church, which is often cited as an example of religion opposing science. The script challenges the common narrative by suggesting that Galileo's troubles were more due to his lack of empirical evidence and his aggressive presentation of his theories rather than a fundamental opposition between science and religion.

💡Copernicus

Nicolaus Copernicus was a Renaissance mathematician and astronomer who formulated a heliocentric model of the universe, placing the Sun at the center of the system. The video mentions Copernicus in relation to Galileo's support for his model, which was a point of contention with the Church at the time. The debate over whether the Earth was the center of the universe (as per Ptolemy's geocentric model) or if the Sun was (as per Copernicus's heliocentric model) was a central scientific issue of Galileo's era.

💡Empirical Evidence

Empirical evidence refers to information that is obtained through observation and experimentation. In the video, it is highlighted that Galileo lacked sufficient empirical evidence to support his heliocentric model, which was a significant factor in his conflict with the Church. The script emphasizes the importance of empirical evidence in the scientific method and how Galileo's lack of it contributed to his troubles.

💡Enlightenment

The Enlightenment was an intellectual and philosophical movement in Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries that emphasized reason, individualism, and skepticism. The video suggests that the narrative of Galileo as a martyr for science against an irrational Church began to grow during the Enlightenment, particularly with figures like Voltaire, who sought to portray the Church as antithetical to reason and science.

💡Conflict Model

The conflict model is a historical view that suggests an inherent and ongoing conflict between science and religion. The video critiques this model, arguing that it is based on a misunderstanding of history and that many religious figures have been supportive of scientific inquiry. The script points out that this model was propagated by certain 19th-century authors and has been perpetuated despite historical and contemporary evidence to the contrary.

💡Concert Model

The concert model is one of the ways the relationship between science and religion is conceptualized. It suggests that science and religion are in harmony, with each providing complementary truths. The video critiques this model for trying to force coherence between scientific facts and religious texts, which can cheapen both by misrepresenting their purposes.

💡Non-overlapping Magisteria

Non-overlapping magisteria is a concept that suggests science and religion operate in separate domains and thus do not conflict. The video mentions this as part of the contrast model, which posits that science and religion address different aspects of reality and should not be in conflict. However, the script argues that this model fails because science and religion often address the same topics, such as the origin of the universe or human nature.

💡Correlation Model

The correlation model is the view that science and religion can coexist without contradiction because both can reveal truths about the world and its creation. The video supports this model, suggesting that truth from science and truth from revelation should not conflict, and any apparent contradictions indicate a misunderstanding of either science or revelation. This model is aligned with the Catholic Church's historical stance on the relationship between faith and reason.

💡Scripture

Scripture refers to the sacred texts of a religion, in this case, the Bible for Christianity. The video discusses how some interpretations of scripture, particularly literal interpretations, can conflict with scientific findings. It argues against reading scripture as a science textbook and for understanding it in its proper theological and poetic context.

💡Heliocentric Model

The heliocentric model is the astronomical model that places the Sun at the center of the solar system, with the planets orbiting around it. The video discusses Galileo's support for this model, which was a departure from the then-accepted geocentric model. The heliocentric model is a key point in the historical debate over the nature of the universe and the Church's response to scientific theories.

Highlights

The common narrative of Galileo's conflict with the Church is a myth that originated in the late 1800s.

The Church has historically been a supporter and leader in the advancement of science.

The perception of religion as the enemy of science is not supported by historical evidence.

Galileo's troubles stemmed more from his brash presentation of unproven theories rather than a scientific-religious conflict.

Many scientists of Galileo's time argued for both the Copernican and Ptolemaic models, indicating scientific disagreement.

Galileo's scientific evidence was not as robust as needed to support his claims at the time.

Galileo's trial was not for scientific heresy but for teaching unproven theories as fact.

The Church was open to new scientific findings and willing to reinterpret Scripture if properly evidenced.

Galileo was not tortured but was given a comfortable house arrest where he furthered his research.

The myth of Galileo as a martyr for science was propagated during the Enlightenment to discredit the Church.

The conflict model between religion and science was popularized in the 19th century by certain authors.

Many religious individuals, including scientists, do not see an inherent conflict between faith and science.

Historians have rejected the conflict model, and most scientists acknowledge no inherent discord between religion and science.

The Church promotes a correlation model where scientific truth and divine revelation are seen as complementary.

The Church encourages the use of reason and scientific exploration as gifts from God.

Science should guide theological thinking and be informed by an understanding of God's creation.

Transcripts

everyone's heard the story of Galileo's

run-in with the church after proposing a

view of the universe backed by science

but contradicting the Bible the church

declared his work heretical and tortured

him because the church doesn't like

science or so the story goes but what if

I told you that this version of history

wasn't told until the late 1800s and the

church has not only supported science

throughout its entire history it has

often been on the forefront of making it

better

in our public sphere science and

religion are at odds on the one hand

there are people like Bill Maher who

believe that religion is the enemy of

all things intellectual I do admit there

are things in the universe I don't

understand okay but my response to that

is not to make up silly stories to

believe intellectually embarrassing

myths from the Bronze Age but you

believe whatever you want on the other

hand there are zealous religious leaders

who believe that science is a threat to

the Bible and faith instead of looking

for the truth of the creator described

in his divinely revealed book science

has chosen confusion suppositions and

deceit with millions of ministers and

parishioners following blindly as a

result we're left with ridiculous things

like this debate between scientists Bill

Nye and creationist museum founder

Canham and attempt to once and for all

prove who's right religion or science oh

it's because of things like this that

we're constantly told that science and

religion are at odds scientists should

fear religion because of what happened

to Galileo and Christians should fear

science because Charles Darwin in the

modern scientific movement challenged

our faith but or either of these things

true the legend of the Galileo if

there's much more famous of the facts so

that mean though the facts are we mean

Galileo got in trouble right but the

legend is is because of science and

religion or in conflict the reality is

that in Galileo's time there are plenty

of scientists on both sides that the

question of whether the world was as

Copernicus said it was or as Ptolemy

said it was they were first Sun at the

center of the system and there was

enough evidence at the time to know for

sure which was true at the time there

were a lot of reputable scientists

arguing for the other side and Galileo

didn't have sufficient empirical

evidence what science is based on to

actually prove what he was claiming some

of his evidence was actually kind of

laughable today like the fact that the

waves of the ocean were caused by the

Earth's rotation that's just bad science

but with Galileo lacked in scientific

proof was nothing compared to what he

lacked intact is very brash and

aggressively he presented the theory he

presented it in Italian

rather than Latin and that offended a

lot of people he made the Copernican

system a system that was favored by a

lot of clerics and philosophers and

just he made them sound like they were

just stupid

so he got a lot of people angry and

that's partly what got him into trouble

taken together it's no wonder that

Galileo was eventually silenced he

presented a new theory for which he did

not have sufficient evidence and when

told not to teach things he couldn't

prove he attacked the church the Pope

and even his fellow scientists with

smear campaigns not exactly a charmer

that Galileo

in 1633 after Galileo ignored the

church's cease and desist order he was

brought to trial but it's important to

get the facts straight about this trial

Galileo was not put on trial because his

scientific findings contradicted the

Bible according to Robert Bellarmine

sankt and doctor in the Catholic Church

and one of the most important figures of

Galileo's time the church was open to

new findings and he is even well-known

to have said that if evidence was

properly put forth the church would have

to reconsider its interpretation of

certain passages of Scripture no Galilei

was actually put on trial because his

scientific findings were very

unscientific he was teaching as fact

what he could not prove his fact

something that many scientists of his

day disagreed with more importantly he

was teaching as fact with he had

promised before a court a decade earlier

to no longer teach this is why Galileo

was condemned but does that really

warrant torture on the part of the

church sure he was guilty but it seems a

bit extreme that's an excellent question

if in fact Galileo was ever actually

tortured in reality he was treated well

in his final trial housed in a luxurious

hotel overlooking the Vatican garden and

assigned a personal valet when he was

eventually convicted he was given house

arrest in a country home near Florence

where his daughter took care of him it

was here in the comfort and isolation of

his final years that he finally produced

the evidence we use today to support his

system so where does the story of

Galileo that I was taught in school come

from the legend begins to grow kind of

in the early modern era with the

Enlightenment to people like Voltaire

who want to make the church look as bad

as possible as irrational as possible to

present the church and Christianity as

antithetical to reason to science to

progress in Galilei who became a useful

story to make that claim and it became a

kind of martyr for science which he

never was well there are many factors

that led up to this this conflict model

as it is called between religion and

science can really be attributed to two

men in the 19th century John William

Draper who wrote history of conflict

between religion and science and Andrew

Dixon white who wrote a history of the

warfare of science with theology in

Christendom it's from these men that we

get not only the popular stories of

Galileo but also the myth that people

the Middle Ages believed that the earth

was flat the idea that the church

suppressed scientific study and

condemned scientists and that

Christianity is a stupid religion that

is inherently at odds with science

anyone who has studied Christianity for

a minute knows that these are blatantly

untrue statements besides the fact that

even ancient theologians like Augustine

understood the story of Genesis

shouldn't be taken literally at the

expense of empirical observation

Christians have always been at the

forefront of scientific study we founded

universities to study the natural world

formulated the earliest scientific

method and paved the way for modern

scientific inquiry in the modern era

jean-baptiste Lamarck proposed the

theory of evolution 100 years before

Darwin Gregor Mendel and Augustinian

friar is regarded as the father of

genetics in the Big Bang Theory you know

the best explanation we have for the

creation of all things in the universe

yeah first proposed by Father George

Lemaitre Catholic priests and they say

the church doesn't like science

seriously and yet these books by Draper

and white were not only influential in

the scientific communities propagating

suspicion towards religion because of

stories like Galileo's they were picked

up by conservative and fundamentalist

Christians as well science was the enemy

of religion a threat to biblical

interpretation of faith despite the fact

that Darwin himself said that his

findings were not incompatible with

faith in God some Christians fed into

the conflict model and hold it even

today luckily this is a very small

number of people historians in the 1970s

outright rejected this view of history

and most of the best scientists of the

world admit that there is no inherent

conflict between religion and science

most religious people in America fully

embrace science so the the argument that

religion has some issue with science

applies to a small fraction of those who

declare that they are religious

they just happen to be a very vocal

fraction and so you get the impression

that there's more of them than there

actually a considerate also that in

America forty percent of American

scientists are religious so this notion

that there's some that if you're

scientist you're an atheist or if you're

religious you're not a scientist that

just empirically false

it's an empirically false statement but

just because most people don't see an

inherent conflict between the two

doesn't mean that everyone fully

understands how they should be related

in fact there are three other models for

understanding the relationship - that

have pretty obvious flaws and the one

the church professes the first flawed

model is called the concert model in

this way of thinking science and

religion are playing perfectly in sync

all the notes lining up in harmony if we

look hard enough into the world

proponents say we can find scientific

proofs for all the teachings in the

Bible for instance science tells us that

first that life began in the oceans then

emerged on land and Genesis life begins

in the ocean and then life appears on

the land that's coincidence but if you

want to have this concert Madhi want to

have what science tells you and what the

Bible tells you agree see what all the

miracle stories to have scientific

explanations or naturalistic

explanations it's we're just trying to

make them completely coherent the

problem of course is that they are not

completely coherent because they were

never meant to be that way to read

scripture as if it were a science

textbook when it was written as poetry

or theology cheapens both scripture and

science and yet turn on the History

Channel right now and you'll probably

find someone trying to explain how they

cross the Red Sea because of the rare

climatological occurrences or how

explorers might have found Noah's Ark in

a mountain somewhere missing the point a

bit as a response to this model others

have gone the opposite direction

proposing what is called the contrast

model sometimes this contrast model

spoken of as two separate men

non-overlapping magisteria that science

does what it does religion does what it

does and they have nothing good to do

with each other but not in conflict

they're just not really talking to each

other or about the same things the

problem with this model quite obviously

is that science and religion are often

talking about the exact same thing

the creation of the world what it means

to be human sexuality ethics there's no

doubt there's a different way of

understanding these things science being

based on pure empiricism and religion

incorporating divine revelation but the

content and purpose of their study is

often the same for this reason we get to

the final most coherent model the model

that the church has supported for

centuries the correlation model based on

the belief that the triune God is the

creator and animated of all that exists

Catholics have always proposed that

everything can reveal something about

God not just divine revelation in

Scripture so in other words the church

would say and people have often said

truth cannot contradict truth so if

science is a path to truth and

revelations a path to truth these two in

some ways they cannot contradict if it

seems they contradict there's some

problem in the way you understand the

science or some problem the way you

understand revelation with this model

leaves us with and what the Catholic

Church has taught for centuries is that

we need to take to heart with st. Paul

wrote in the first letter to the

Thessalonians test everything keep what

is true God gave us the ability to

reason to think to explore into dialogue

why would we want to deny one of the

faculties God gave us is a grave mistake

for us as Christians to view Sciences

anything other than an incredible

resource something that should guide our

theological thinking and be guided by

what we know about God's creation that's

the way we've always understood it and

the way we always should thanks to dr.

David Bosworth for helping with this

conversation as well as for all the work

he does to incorporate science into the

seminary classroom check out the

description for a link to this article

featuring his work also if you liked

this segment of Catholicism and focus

the series that brings clarity to some

of the church's most misunderstood

issues check out these other videos as

well and be sure to subscribe to the

breaking in the habit youtube channel