Heliocentrism In Religion

During the early 17th century, many people were still very divided on the issues concerning the motion of the earth and the sun. The church argued for geocentrism while many other scholars and individuals argued for heliocentrism. However, this fight over the Earth’s movements was not only centered around the natural sciences, but the interpretation of the bible (Westman, 11/8). This discussion included a debate on the power and authority of the church due to the Bible influencing the view of the natural world and a large part of medieval people’s life. It was clear to members of the church, like Cardinal Bellarmine and Pope Urban VIII, that heliocentrism goes against the Scriptures and thus God’s word, but people like Galileo and Foscarini …show more content…
Because of this, Galileo had to show he was allegient to the Church despite supporting Copernicus, but he still supported heliocentrism and wanted the scriptures to be in agreement with it by interpreting the Scriptures differently and using his evidence found from using his telescope. Galileo also wrote several books concerning the planets’ movements and sunspots such as the Sidereus Nuncius and Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (Westman 11/3 ). These books show his support for heliocentrism and the agreement of the bible because Galileo believed the natural world and the bible should be in agreement since they were both created by God (Galileo ). If these observations he made are true, they have to agree with how God describes the world. Galileo viewed the bible differently than the church members. For example, in his Letter to Castelli, Galileo argues that the interpreters are at fault for the misinterpretation of the bible: “Only I would have added that, although the bible cannot err, nevertheless some of its interpreters and expositors can sometimes err, and in various ways” (Blackwell 196). Galileo argues that God’s word can never be wrong, but interpreters can be wrong because they try to accommodate to the common man’s language and interpreting the bible literally in places it should …show more content…
Foscarini interpreted passages from the bible with a heliocentric perspective in his Letter Concerning the Pythagoreans. Foscarini’s main goal was to show that the bible and the heliocentric model can support and agree with each other: “The mobility of the earth is no more paradoxical and strange than the notion of the antipodes or the notion that the torrid zone is inhabitable, views discuss by many ancients of great and respected authority.” (Foscarini 219) Foscarini discusses the likelihood of the Copernican model and even goes so far to mention that it is more probable than the Ptolemaic model. By trying to show how probable heliocentrism is, Foscarini tries to show how it is a normal thing and can be easily accepted just like geocentrism. Foscarini even goes further to reinterpret passages from the bible. He divides the passages into six groups and interprets all of them in a heliocentric view. Although he interprets the bible differently, nothing he is saying is new (Blackwell 94). He has simply explained how to interpret the bible in another way. However, he also holds the same view as Galileo: “For Knowledge through faith is more certain that any other knowledge which we have from any source or means” (Foscarini 220). Ultimately, faith is still the only reliable source that man had during this time. Even with Galileo’s