가톨릭 신앙생활 Q&A 코너
갈릴레오는 과연 단죄되었던 것일까요? [교회사_갈릴레오] |
---|
2012-10-04 [110.14.3.*] 2012-10-06 ㅣ No.1271
2-2. 그리고 당시에도 저서를 출판하려면 교회의 검열을 받아야 하였는데 [주: 특히 갈릴레오의 경우에 가톨릭 교도권의 지원을 받았다고 알려져 있기에 필수적이었을 것으로 생각합니다], 이 과정에서, 많은 학자들이 그의 학설에 반대하였던 그 당시에 학문적으로 완전하게 검증되지 않은 그의 연구 결과에 대하여, 마치 교회가 인정/수용한 것같은 단어/표현을 갈릴레오가 자신의 저술(책)의 제목 중에 사용한 것이 논란의 시작이었다고 합니다. 다음의 발췌문을 잘 읽어 보십시오: 출처: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue_Concerning_the_Two_Chief_World_Systems (발췌 시작) 이 책을 저술하는 동안에, 갈릴레오는 이 책을 자신의 Dialogue on the Tides (조수에 대한 대화)로 언급하였으며, 그리고 원고가 승인을 받기 위한 심리(Inquisition)(지금의 출판 검열에 해당)에 들어갔을 때에 제목은 Dialogue on the Ebb and Flow of the Sea (바다의 썰물과 밀물에 대한 대화)이었습니다. 그는 책의 제목으로부터 조수에 대한 언급 모두를 제거하고 그리고 서문을 고치라고 명해졌는데, 그 이유는 그러한 제목에 대한 허락을 승인함이, 물리학적으로 지구의 운동을 증명하고자 노력하였던, 조수에 대한 그의 학설에 대한 승인처럼 보일 수도 있었기 때문이었습니다. 2-3. 이러한 명령에 대하여, 아마도 갈릴레오가 반발을 하였던 모양인데, 이것이 당시의 우르바노 8세 교황님에 대한 공격으로 보이게 되었으며, 결국에 그의 학설이 학문적으로 완전히 검증될 때까지, 그의 저술들이, 소위 말하는, 금서로 분류가 되었던 것 같습니다. 이에 대하여서는 다음의 발췌문을 잘 읽어 보시기 바랍니다: 출처: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei (발췌 시작) 태양중심설에 대한 갈릴레오의 옹호는, 대부분 지구중심설 혹은 티코 체계(Tychonian system) 둘 중의 하나에 동의하였던 시기인 자신의 일생 이내에 쟁점이 되었습니다. 그는 어떤 관측된 별의 시차의 결여 때문에 태양중심설을 의심하였던 천문학자들로부터의 반대를 겪었습니다. 이 사안은 1615년에 로마 교회의 심리(Roman Inquisition)에 의하여 조사되었으며, 그리고 그들은, 이것이 어떤 확립된 사실이 아니라, 오로지 한 개의 가능성으로서 지지를 받을 수 있다고 결론지었습니다. 갈릴레오는 이후에 Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (두 개의 주요 세계 체계에 관련한 대화) 에서 자신의 견해들을 항변하였는데, 이 항변은 교황 우르바노 8세를 공격하는 것으로 보이게 되었으며 그리하여 그 결과, 이러한 시점까지 둘 다 갈릴레오를 지지하였던, 교황과 예수회를 멀어지게 하였습니다. 2-4. 당시에도 지금처럼, 가톨릭 보편 교회의 교도권이 자연 과학 분야의 어느 특정 분야에 대한 전문가 집단이 아니었음에도 불구하고, 위의 발췌문에서 지적하고 있듯이, Dialogue on the Ebb and Flow of the Sea (바다의 썰물과 밀물에 대한 대화) 라는 제목의 저서에 대한 첫 심리 후에 가톨릭 교회 교도권은 애초에 대단히 합리적이고 또 중립적인 결정을 내렸으나, 그러나 이러한 결정에 대한 갈릴레오의 학문적 신념이 결국에 전혀 다른 종류의 문제로 비화되었던 것인데, 이것을 들고 나와서, "신앙과 윤리"에 관한 교도권좌에서의 선포의 무류성에 대한 어떤 반례(a counter-example)로 제시하는 것은 논리적으로 어불성설이라 아니 할 수 없습니다. 당시의 천문학 분야의 전문 학자들이, 구체적인 예가 없다는 것까지 언급하면서, 갈릴레오의 학설에 반대하였음에 꼭 주목하십시오. 이러한 상황에서 당시의 가톨릭 교회 교도권이 내렸던 결론은, 시쳇말로 어느 장단에 맞추어 춤을 추었던 것이 아니기에, 대단히 현명한 결정이었으며, 그 당시의 여러 자연과학 학문 분야들의 발전 정도에 비추어 볼 떄에도 또한 별로 하자가 없었다는 생각입니다. 2-5. 따라서, "신앙과 윤리"의 분야가 아닌 다른 분야에서의 어떤 역사적 일을 가톨릭 보편 교회의 교도권과 직접적으로 결부시킬 때에는, 그러한 결부를 시키는 분께서는 혹시라도 자신의 결부가 적절하지 않을 수도 있다는 생각을 또한 먼저 하면서, 상당히 유의하여야 할 것입니다. 3. 즉, 제가 알기로, 13세기쯤에 오면, 교회는 과학을 이미 포용하기 시작하였다고 알고 있습니다. 3-2. 또 한 가지 더 말씀을 드리면, 당시에 갈릴레오가 자신의 책의 제목에 사용한 단어들, "Dialogue" 와 "Tides" 는, 어쩌면 당시의 교회 교도권 측에, 다음과 같은 가톨릭 교회에서 사용하는 용어들을 연상케 하였던 것이 아닌가... 그래서, 특히, tides 라는 표현을 그 책의 제목에서 사용하지 못하게 교도권이 명령하였던 것이 아닌가... 하는 생각을 하고 있습니다: "Dialogue Mass(대화 미사)", "Tide[교회의 축제일, 절(節), 계절]", "glad tidings(복음)", "good tidings(복음)". 3-3. 게시자 주: 혹시 관심이 있으신 분들이 계실 수도 있을 것 같아 안내해 드립니다: 31 OCTOBER 1992 그리고 특히 이 파일의 제348쪽에는 다음과 같은 언급이 있습니다: Galileo and the Church
Vatican to republish the acts concerning Galileo's trial by the Roman Inquisition Translated from the online service of VATICAN CITY, Nov. 25 - The Vatican intends to republish the acts concerning the trial of Galileo with the condemnation sentence that was never signed by the Pope at the time Urban VIII, in order "to refresh the memory" of those who are still awaiting more 'apologies' from the Vatican for certain things that never were, according to Mons. Gianfranco Ravasi, president of the Pontifical Council for Culture at the start of a public session among the various pontifical academies. Part of those acts [official documents] concerning Galileo's trial by the Holy Inquisition were already published a few decades earlier, Ravasi recalled, but "it would be timely to present them again in their totality, with the addition of an accurate and contextual analysis." He said the sentence against Galileo was never signed by Pope Urban VIII time because there was a serious disagreement among the cardinals about it. Galileo will, in fact, be the center of a conference tomorrow promoted by Ravasi's Commission, which will be attended by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, alongside many eminent scientists. Additionally, a series of similar events is on the program in the following months, in connection of a Galileo Year in the Italian universities, and the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species. And just to further refresh some facts about Galileo's trial, here is some material that I posted in NEWS ABOUT BENEDICT last January during the La Sapienza episode. GETTING GALILEO STRAIGHT Left, Galileo statue at the Uffizi, Florence; Right, Minerva (goddess of wisdom) statue at La Sapienza. In the frenzy of fast-moving developments this week, the media coverage has hardly given the proper background about Galileo, the scientist whose name has been taken in vain by those who profess to defend him against Cardinal Ratzinger. Here, first, is a commentary - of the sort one usually does not expect to see in a populist TV channel's online offerings - that speaks for itself and sets the context for the misuse of Galileo as a stalking horse by the Sapienza 'scientists'. The Messy Relationship Between Religion and Science: Revisiting Galileo's Inquisition By Lauren Green Religion Correspondent, Fox News "The secular nature of science." The phrase evokes much praise by intellectuals and people of reason — but should it provoke fear? The phrase is taken from a letter written by a professor at La Sapienza University in Rome and signed by 66 of his colleagues, protesting a scheduled visit on Thursday by Pope Benedict XVI. This week, students joined the protest and have been on an "anti-clergy" campaign to voice their opposition to the Pope — over comments he made in 1990 about the church's inquisition trial of scientist Galileo, which a 20th century philosopher of science called "rational and just." The Pope has sent his speech to the university — and FOX News Channel Contributor Father Jonathan Morris says, "They misread his 1990 talk on Galileo, but they won't be able to misread this one. It will be rational and challenging, a call to recognize the unique and complimentary roles of faith and science." The Catholic Church's trial of Galileo in the early 17th century is the stuff of real concern for anyone who believes religion and science operate in two different realms of world views. Galileo had found, through scientific observations, that the earth revolved around the Sun and not the other way around, which was what almost the entire world believed at the time. A few forward thinking scientists — and clergy — began to see that a geocentric system didn't fit what they observed, but that a heliocentric system did. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the earth is the center of the Universe. That is a man-made supposition, and helps prove one of the great themes you will find in the Bible, that man will always look for ways to glorify himself, instead of God. Ironically, for scientists of the 17th century, including Galileo, their craft was about glorifying God. That if God is the creator of everything, the discoveries in science could only bring mankind closer to knowing him — not drive a wedge between them. Pope Benedict's 1990 comments may have been sorely taken out of context. Benedict is a scholar, who speaks in deep scholarly talk that sometimes takes many paragraphs to unfold, and sometimes several reads to grasp. But his conclusions are usually thought-provoking, as is the case in his 1990 speech on Galileo. Benedict quoted 20th century agnostic-skeptic and philosopher Paul Karl Feyerabend, who wrote about the trial: "The Church at the time of Galileo was much more faithful to reason than Galileo himself, and also took into consideration the ethical and social consequences of Galileo's doctrine. Its verdict against Galileo was rational and just, and revisionism can be legitimized solely for motives of political opportunism." Benedict was illustrating that when he is asked about the Galileo trial he's not asked, "Why did the Church try to get in the way of the development of modern science?" Instead he's asked, "Why didn't the Church take a more clear position against the disasters that would inevitably follow, once Galileo had opened Pandora's box?" Even though science has opened the door to advances in medicine — which has saved millions of lives and has created great opportunities for mankind — it has also opened the portals to weapons of mass destruction like the atom bomb, or tools of personal trauma like addictive drugs. Benedict added after citing Feyerabend that "The faith doesn't not grow from resentment and the rejection of rationality, but from its fundamental affirmation and from being inscribed in a still greater form of reason." In other words, science is a great gift, by which mankind has prospered. But as an all-encompassing worldview, science is a poor master. Science is great at telling us how to create, how to help, how to heal. It can't instruct us on why, why not, or who should benefit? That just may be the "greater form of reason" the Pope is referring to. The small group of protesting professors and students at La Sapienza University are doing to the Pope what they claim the Church did to Galileo - silence him. In a world where the marketplace of ideas is heralded, they have tried to muzzle a man who, as FOX News Rome Correspondent Greg Burke says, "would like nothing better than to sit in a college seminar-type room with (smart) people of different ideas for a good wide-ranging debate among intellectuals." You may not like the Pope's views, his doctrine, or even his wardrobe, but he does have a right to believe what he believes. And that is not a right that any man, or science, can give — or take away. ===================================================================== If the man on the street were asked what he knows about Galileo - assuming he knows about Galileo at all - he might say, "He was a medieval astronomer who was condemned by the Church for heresy because of his scientific views.' That is the reduction made in general history books used by those who acquire a basic education. But like all reductions, it does not tell the real story, and even distorts it somehow. While I am aware that the protesting physicists at La Sapienza willingly fell victim to the 'Wikipedia syndrome', I still would use a Wikipedia entry here - which, as far as I can see, has no egregious errors - for a quick overview and context of what it calls the Galileo affair. Galileo before the Holy Office, mid-19th century painting by Joseph Robert-Fleury. THE GALILEO AFFAIR Western Christian biblical references Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, and 1 Chronicles 16:30 include text stating that "the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved." In the same tradition, Psalm 104:5 says, "[the LORD] set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." Further, Ecclesiastes 1:5 states that "And the sun rises and sets and returns to its place, etc."[59] Galileo defended heliocentrism [the theory that the earth moves around the sun], and claimed it was not contrary to those Scripture passages. He took Augustine's position on Scripture: not to take every passage literally, particularly when the scripture in question is a book of poetry and songs, not a book of instructions or history. The writers of the Scripture wrote from the perspective of the terrestrial world, and from that vantage point the sun does rise and set. In fact, it is the earth's rotation which gives the impression of the sun in motion across the sky. By 1616 the attacks on Galileo had reached a head, and he went to Rome to try to persuade the Church authorities not to ban his ideas. In the end, Cardinal Bellarmine, acting on directives from the Inquisition, delivered him an order not to "hold or defend" the idea that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still at the centre. The decree did not prevent Galileo from discussing heliocentrism hypothetically. For the next several years Galileo stayed well away from the controversy. He revived his project of writing a book on the subject, encouraged by the election of Cardinal Barberini as Pope Urban VIII in 1623. Barberini was a friend and admirer of Galileo, and had opposed the condemnation of Galileo in 1616. The book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, was published in 1632, with formal authorization from the Inquisition and papal permission. Pope Urban VIII personally asked Galileo to give arguments for and against heliocentrism in the book, and to be careful not to advocate heliocentrism. He made another request, that his own views on the matter be included in Galileo's book. Only the latter of those requests was fulfilled by Galileo. Whether unknowingly or deliberate, Simplicius, the defender of the Aristotelian geocentric view in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, was often caught in his own errors and sometimes came across as a fool. This made Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems appear as an advocacy book - an attack on Aristotelian geocentrism and defense of the Copernican theory. To add insult to injury, Galileo put the words of Pope Urban VIII into the mouth of Simplicius. Most historians agree Galileo did not act out of malice and felt blindsided by the reaction to his book. However, the Pope did not take the suspected public ridicule lightly, nor the blatant bias. Galileo had alienated one of his biggest and most powerful supporters, the Pope, and was called to Rome to defend his writings. With the loss of many of his defenders in Rome because of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Galileo was ordered to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633. The sentence of the Inquisition was in three essential parts: - Galileo was required to recant his heliocentric ideas; the idea that the Sun is stationary was condemned as "formally heretical." However, while there is no doubt that Pope Urban VIII and the vast majority of Church officials did not believe in heliocentrism, heliocentrism was never formally or officially condemned by the Catholic Church, except insofar as it held (for instance, in the formal condemnation of Galileo) that "The proposition that the sun is in the center of the world and immovable from its place is absurd, philosophically false, and formally heretical; because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scriptures", and the converse as to the Sun's not revolving around the Earth. - He was ordered imprisoned, but the sentence was later commuted to house arrest. - His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at the trial, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future. According to popular legend, after recanting his theory that the Earth moved around the Sun, Galileo allegedly muttered the rebellious phrase 'And yet it moves' (Eppur si muove), but there is no evidence that he actually said this or anything similarly impertinent. [The summary of the penalties imposed by the Inquisition of Galileo shows, at the very least, that the Inquisition did not just summarily condemn everyone to being burned at the stake, as popular fantasy has it. But it also illustrates the delicate balancing act that the Church hierarchy sought to do, where Galileo was concerned, between upholding orthodoxy in the critical period of the Counter-Reformation, and acknowledging the possibility of a changing world-view because science was extending the frontiers of knowledge.] After a period with the friendly Ascanio Piccolomini (the Archbishop of Siena), Galileo was allowed to return to his villa at Arcetri near Florence, where he spent the remainder of his life under house arrest, and where he later became blind. It was while Galileo was under house arrest that he dedicated his time to one of his finest works, Two New Sciences. Here he summarized work he had done some forty years earlier, on the two sciences now called kinematics and strength of materials [basic courses for students of engineering even today]. This book received high praise from both Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. As a result of this work, Galileo is often called the "father of modern physics." The Inquisition's ban on reprinting Galileo's works was lifted in 1718 when permission was granted to publish an edition of his works (excluding the condemned Dialogue) in Florence. In 1741, Pope Benedict XIV [The Sapienza scientists would not appreciate this irony!] authorized the publication of an edition of Galileo's complete scientific works which included a mildly censored version of the Dialogue. In 1758 the general prohibition against works advocating heliocentrism was removed from the Index of prohibited books, although the specific ban on uncensored versions of the Dialogue and Copernicus's De Revolutionibus remained. All traces of official opposition to heliocentrism by the Church disappeared in 1835 when these works were finally dropped from the Index. On Oct. 31, 1992, Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, saying:
And here is a more explicit context for the Feyerabend statement cited by Cardinal Ratzinger, which makes it clear that what Feyerabend thought about the trial was distinct from what he thought about Galileo's science: By the standards of his time, Galileo was often willing to change his views in accordance with observation. Philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend also noted the supposedly improper aspects of Galileo's methodology, but he argued that Galileo's methods could be justified retroactively by their results. The bulk of Feyerabend's major work, Against Method (1975), was devoted to an analysis of Galileo, using his astronomical research as a case study to support Feyerabend's own anarchistic theory of scientific method. As he put it: 'Aristotelians [...] demanded strong empirical support while the Galileans were content with far-reaching, unsupported and partially refuted theories. I do not criticize them for that; on the contrary, I favour Niels Bohr's "this is not crazy enough.' And here is how the New Scientist, the leading Anglophone journal of general science, reported the Vatican clarification at the time. Vatican admits Galileo was right 07 November 1992 From New Scientist Print Edition In 1633, the Inquisition of the Roman Catholic Church forced Galileo Galilei, one of the founders of modern science, to recant his theory that the Earth moves around the Sun. Under threat of torture, Galileo - seen above facing his inquisitors - recanted. But as he left the courtroom, he is said to have muttered, 'All the same, it moves'. Last week, 359 years later, the Church finally agreed. At a ceremony in Rome, before the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope John Paul II officially declared that Galileo was right. [Of course, as the historical overview presented earlier shows, the Church officially conceded much earlier, and this manner of presenting John Paul II's statement is sheer melodrama!] The formal rehabilitation was based on the findings of a committee of the Academy the Pope set up in 1979, soon after taking office. The committee decided the Inquisition had acted in good faith, but was wrong. In fact, the Inquisition's verdict was uncannily similar to cautious statements by modern officialdom on more recent scientific conclusions, such as predictions about greenhouse warming. [Remember, this is the New Scientist saying this!] The Inquisition ruled that Galileo could not prove 'beyond doubt' that the Earth orbits the Sun, so they could not reinterpret scriptures implying otherwise. The verdict was not one to which the doctrine of papal infallibility applied, and the Vatican was never comfortable with it. Pope Urban approved it, but commuted Galileo's sentence from prison to house arrest. The Church finally admitted he was right in the 19th century. But the Galileo affair still embarrassed the Church, which now maintains an astronomical observatory at the Pope's summer palace at Castel Gandolfo. [The observatory is one of the oldest astronomical institutions in the world, having been established by Pope Leo XIII in 1891 following three similar institutions dating back to 1774, but tracing its roots to 1582 - antedating Galileo's trial by 50 years - when Pope Gregory XIII created a committee to study the scientific data and implications involved in the reform of the calendar.] Father George Coyne, who heads the observatory, says the affair was 'tragic, beyond the control of any one party'. It was the height of the Church's battle with Protestantism, says Coyne, 'and here was a scientist saying he interpreted scripture better than they did.' The trials were not a confrontation between science and faith, says Coyne, because "Galileo never presented his science to the Inquisition. Science wasn't even at the trial." (이상, 발췌 끝) 4-4. 그리고 여기를 클릭하면, 요한 바오로 2세 교황님처럼, 갈릴레오에 대한 베네딕토 16세 교황님의 확고한 옹호/지지 의사를 밝히고 있는 기사들을 읽을 수 있습니다. [이상, 내용추가 끝]. ---------- 작성자: 교수 소순태 마태오 (Ph.D.) 원 게시처: 여기를 클릭하십시오
0 1,265 1 |