During class a few people mentioned how the Catholic Church during the 15-1600's was extremely corrupt. I also believe that to be true. It is hard to disagree that the church, at the time, held complete power over the public. The appeal of the Catholic Church had to do with the fact that everyone was a part of it and everyone openly believed in what the clergymen said, because there were no other options. When Copernicus flagrantly admitted his contradicting views in 1543 (on the day of his death), the Catholic Church did not immediately proclaim his ideas as false. The church waited until 1616 to openly denounce the ideas of Copernicus. In my opinion, they waited those 73 years for a reason... When the people of the Catholic Church found out about Copernicus' new theory they realized that it conflicted with their beliefs. Most likely, it took 73 years for a scientist with loyalty to the Church to find out that Copernicus' ideas are valid and consequently proved the notion of divine creation to be false. I know that sounds far fetched... so what do you guys think? I am a Roman Catholic and I have heard about confirmed corruption in a Westfield Parish five years ago. Last summer I closely followed the articles regarding the Catholic Church rape scandals and other serious allegations surrounding the Church. If we think of the Catholic Church as a profitable company with the priceless Vatican collections, it is difficult to comprehend why the Church does not spend more money on feeding the poor and educating our youth. They should embrace progress and science represents progress.
This is an article I found this summer—what are your takes on it?
This is one of those actions of the church that is completely ridiculous. This woman helped save a life, instead of losing two lives. The idea of excommunication almost makes the church seem like a club. It's another method of control, to keep the people in line. Can you really kick someone out of their faith? Especially a nun who has dedicated her life to the service of God?
ReplyDeleteIt is an interesting story, which I had heard about. However, I would like people to connect this all to the history. How would you connect it with what we are reading about for class tomorrow?
ReplyDeleteI wanted to talk about how corruption has been in the church since the 1500's and during Galileo's time... Sorry it got a little off topic, I was confused. I wrote about what came to my mind as I read.
ReplyDeleteI think we can connect this article to Galileo, and the real life sentencing of Galileo. Specifically, I think that the church is acting irrationally in this incident by potentially risking a woman's life... for an unborn child's life. I, however, think that the bishop did not truly support his decision, nor would any human nature, but he was sort of "forced" by the intentions of the church as a whole. When I say "forced", I mean that if he were to compromise the ruling of the church (which is in this case to allow abortion) to save an individual, he would undermine the church's power. Then, like a snowball effect, more and more of these potentially similar incidents would occur in which the church would lose authority in the process. Presently, the bible and the church are losing power as modern science evolves, so if they want to retain any authority, I think that they unfortunately cannot allow violations such as these.
ReplyDeleteThis is like Galileo and his ideas which challenged the church's authority, and forced the church to denounce such ideas as heresy in order to maintain control.
I'd like to hear some more specific support--from Lizzy or from others--about the role of the Church in this time period. Does the textbook provide any explanation for why the church didn't condemn at first, or touch on the subject at all.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I'm wondering if we can find evidence to back up the "the Church was corrupt" idea. Can anyone find links or evidence about the status and power of the church at that time? And of course, make sure they're reliable sources.