I did a Reddit AMA (or Ask Me Anything) on September 2. This was in the /r/Catholicism subreddit (the main Catholic subreddit). I want to present some of the best questions from the discsussion with my replies. I focused on my book on autistic prayer so I think there are more questions on that...
frmatthewlc.com
FrMatthewLC Reddit AMA on /r/Catholicism | FrMatthewLC
I did a Reddit AMA (or Ask Me Anything) on September 2. This was in the /r/Catholicism subreddit (the main Catholic subreddit). I want to present …
It is heresy to believe that the earth moves: Galileo repented of what he did at the end of his life. I see you like science but sometimes you give too much credit to modern "science". Which most often was created to attack Chistianity by attacking Christian cosmology. Support: Read the book "Galileo was wrong the Church was right "Furthermore, in order to curb impudent clever persons, the synod …More
It is heresy to believe that the earth moves:
Galileo repented of what he did at the end of his life.
I see you like science but sometimes you give too much credit to modern "science". Which most often was created to attack Chistianity by attacking Christian cosmology.
Support: Read the book "Galileo was wrong the Church was right
"Furthermore, in order to curb impudent clever persons, the synod decrees that no one who relies on his own judgment in matters of faith and morals, which pertain to the building up of Christian doctrine, and that no one who distorts the Sacred Scripture according to his own opinions, shall dare to interpret the said Sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which is held by Holy Mother Church, whose duty it is to judge regarding the true sense and interpretation of Holy Scriptures, or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers, even though interpretations of this kind were never intended to be brought to light. 112 The Council of Trent, Fourth Session, 1563
The Apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and all other observances and constitutions of that same Church I most firmly admit and embrace. I likewise accept Holy Scripture according to that sense which our Holy Mother Church had held and does hold, whose it is to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures; I shall never accept nor interpret it otherwise than in accordance with the unanimous consent of the Fathers. The Profession of Faith of the Council of Trent
On April 12, 1615, Robert Cardinal Bellarmine wrote a personal letter to Fr. Paolo Antonio Foscarini, who had been advocating the heliocentric view for some time. In the letter Bellarmine states:
Second, I say that, as you know, the Council prohibits interpreting Scripture against the common consensus of the Holy Fathers; and if Your Reverence wants to read not only the Holy Fathers, but also the modern commentaries on Genesis, the Psalms, Ecclesiastes, and Joshua, you will find all agreeing in the literal interpretation that the sun is in heaven and turns around the earth with great speed, and that the earth is very far from heaven and sits motionless at the center of the world. Consider now, with your sense of prudence, whether the Church can tolerate giving Scripture a meaning contrary to the Holy Fathers and to all the Greek and Latin commentators. Cardinal Bellarmine was referring to the ecumenical Council of Trent which stated the following decree regarding the authority of the consensus of the Fathers of the Church on the interpretation of Scripture: Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall, in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church, whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures, hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never intended to be at any time published. Contraveners shall be made known by their"
But the relativity theory works only in the physical realm (the world of models and quantities) In the corporeal world, the world in which you and I live, the earth doesn't move. In the same way we can think of imaginary false situations, we can also say that the frame of reference can be other than earth for convenience. For instance: People playing billiards on a moving train may found easier to …More
But the relativity theory works only in the physical realm (the world of models and quantities) In the corporeal world, the world in which you and I live, the earth doesn't move. In the same way we can think of imaginary false situations, we can also say that the frame of reference can be other than earth for convenience. For instance: People playing billiards on a moving train may found easier to put the frame of reference on the moving train to calculate the trajectory of the balls. Does this imply that the train is not moving? because the calculations were easier than putting the frame of reference on the earth? No, we cannot imply that, that would be insane. Science is more subjective than people think and there are a lot of subjective choices when doing science, and these choices affect the outcome. What I mean with all these is that: not because the relativity theory let us put the frame of reference on earth then we can imply that earth doesn't move. But because the theory of relativity let us put the frame of reference on earth then the theory of relativity is not false immediately. Science serves faith not the other way around.
Your whole argument shows such a lack of understanding of theology and science that would take a few thousand words to correct & I have not the time. Believing the earth is still in a non-relative sense is irrational but not heretical. Enjoy.
You can't answer it because what I have said is true. Irrational but not heretical!??? Are you implying that Catholic beliefs can be irrational!?? Are you saying that all the church fathers where irrational for truly believing that the earth was still in a non-relative sense (because the relativity theory, which is just the product of the imagination of some person (who invented the theory because …More
You can't answer it because what I have said is true. Irrational but not heretical!??? Are you implying that Catholic beliefs can be irrational!?? Are you saying that all the church fathers where irrational for truly believing that the earth was still in a non-relative sense (because the relativity theory, which is just the product of the imagination of some person (who invented the theory because he disliked the Michelson Morley experiment results which say the earth is still), and which not necessarily correspond to reality, wasn't invented at that time). I'm not going to keep debating because of your priestly dignity, which I honor and respect. But the answer you just give me is very disturbing. You should be correcting me, you should be teaching me, you should be more knowledgeable, you should be guiding the sheep. How sad that we can't trust our shepherds any more.
No. Catholic beliefs do not require one to believe anything specific about the earth's motion. The idea you push forward of a non-moving earth is irrational though as so contrary to evidence.
For the sake of truth I'm going to respond to your comment: The movement of the sun is linked to biblical statements which have been interpreted in a single way by all Church Fathers. And you are wrong to say that a non-moving earth is irrational as all evidence support a non-moving earth. It is a difficult topic, Father (I understand since it goes against all propaganda, like movies, books, "…More
For the sake of truth I'm going to respond to your comment: The movement of the sun is linked to biblical statements which have been interpreted in a single way by all Church Fathers. And you are wrong to say that a non-moving earth is irrational as all evidence support a non-moving earth. It is a difficult topic, Father (I understand since it goes against all propaganda, like movies, books, "education", etc. but not against reason and against the Church). Read the book I suggested you to read about this issue, there you will find all the scientific and theological evidence. The church position is that the earth doesn't move, period. To say otherwise is to go against the position of the Church and reason (because all experiments made to measure the movement of the earth give us the same result: the earth doesn't move). And it does matter ALOT whether the sun moves or whether the earth moves, since your position at the end of the day tells us that the bible is wrong in some topics. So if the bible is wrong with respect to the movement of the sun then what else can be wrong with the bible?? Read the book Father you will enjoy it. "Galileo was wrong the Church was right (And Saint Bellarmine was right)"
Also I recommend you to read Wolfgang Smith. He mentions the proofs against evolution. There is even a mathematical proof against it. Also is heresy to believe in evolution, it is not just "a harmless idea" that can be believed or not. It is heresy and I have mentioned to you 2 sources one to for each confirmation of the heresies. They are experts in the fields related to the topics, and they show …More
Also I recommend you to read Wolfgang Smith. He mentions the proofs against evolution. There is even a mathematical proof against it. Also is heresy to believe in evolution, it is not just "a harmless idea" that can be believed or not. It is heresy and I have mentioned to you 2 sources one to for each confirmation of the heresies. They are experts in the fields related to the topics, and they show how to believe in those ideas you end up believing concepts that are against Catholic teaching. Heliocentrism (or Copernicanism), evolution and relativism those are the most deadly ideas for the Christian Cosmology and a great blow to the faith at the end of the day. The 3 of them are rigorously dis-proven, but strongly defended by the evil people because satan knows how much damage he has made (and is making) with those hellish ideas. I do not pretend for you to take all this information seriously right now. It took me years for me to reach this point and to end up coming across these authors. Although I have always been fascinated with philosophy of science. But I hope someday you will appreciate what I told you in these comments. God bless you.
I'm going to leave most of this as going off on a tangent, but one note. A mathematical proof against evolution might lead one to question atheistic evolution, but does absolutely nothing to theistic evolution: God picked the right number out of a million a million times in a row.. OK, he's God, no big deal. This is just called providence.More
I'm going to leave most of this as going off on a tangent, but one note.
A mathematical proof against evolution might lead one to question atheistic evolution, but does absolutely nothing to theistic evolution: God picked the right number out of a million a million times in a row.. OK, he's God, no big deal. This is just called providence.
Wolfgang Smith is an expert on the topic of theistic evolution. He address your point, he was aware that, given that reason disproves atheistic evolution, people would then be led to believe in theistic evolution, which is also deadly to the faith.
