Slashdot Mirror
Copernicus Reburied As Hero
CasualFriday writes "Mikolaj Kopernik, a.k.a. Nicolaus Copernicus, the 16th-century astronomer whose findings were condemned by the Roman Catholic Church as heretical, was reburied by Polish priests as a hero on Saturday, nearly 500 years after he was laid to rest in an unmarked grave. On Saturday, his remains were blessed with holy water by some of Poland's highest-ranking clerics before an honor guard ceremoniously carried his coffin through the imposing red brick cathedral and lowered it back into the same spot where part of his skull and other bones were found in 2005."
Jacek Jezierski, a local bishop who encouraged the search for Copernicus, said that he considers Copernicus' burial as part of the church's broader embrace of science as being compatible with Biblical belief.
In the end it's just one big format war...
We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
Whatever makes them feel comfortable at night.
Say what you will about it being too little, too late, but I'm glad that they're going back and recognizing past mistakes and trying to do what little they can to right them. Especially so that others can see how they've changed in the meantime. Ideally it'll change the behavior of those still alive today...
I guess that makes it up to him! /s
I'm glad the church recognizes the value of bleeding-edge Renaissance science. Maybe next year they will find out the importance of electricity, birth control, or logic.
Sometimes, i just dont understand people's motivation for this sort of thing. Copernicus was a great man, why on earth do we need to dig up his corpse and rebury him to honor his achievements? The mere fact that we discuss him and his work 500 years later is the greatest honor. There are times were circus and spectacle are needed, this is not one of them.
Good-bye
Copernicus' burial in an anonymous grave in the 16th century was not linked to suspicions of heresy. When he died, his ideas were just starting to be discussed by a small group of European astronomers, astrologers and mathematicians, and the church was not yet forcefully condemning the heliocentric world view as heresy, according to Jack Repcheck, author of "Copernicus' Secret: How the Scientific Revolution Began."
"Why was he just buried along with everyone else, like every other canon in Frombork? Because at the time of his death he was just any other canon in Frombork. He was not the iconic hero that he has become."
I'm sure he's resting better now. Sure hope he has some descendants capable of enjoying the irony of it all. This can't be comforting unless you believe in an afterlife and, even then, what would it benefit Copernicus? Surely, by now he'd already know he's been vindicated. I suppose it can be seen as some indication of humanity's progress . . . kinda.
Does this mean he gets to go to heaven now? or just that his body got violated by a bunch of priests.
Ideally, it will make them understand their mistakes and avoid doing more. Like the p-pill, or condoms, or stop protecting pedophiles and many other current issues.
Ideally, this would mean the end of this money-making, power-driven organisation.
it was wrong. So in 2510 it will apologize to altar boys for abusing them.
I'm sure he feels just about the same being buried in the new grave as he did about being buried in the old one. He doesn't care at all.
Qxe4
No. Wait. He's dead. He doesn't care at all what you do to his bones.
They're doing this as a PR stunt to distract people from the mistakes they're making today.
Copernicus is known in almost every science class today. Who cares what The Church does with whatever-is-left-of-his-body now? 500 years later?
Personally I have zero use for the catholic church, the abuse of children would be enough for me to back a ban on the church. I do have to say how shocking the shift has been in the church towards science. Some things are backward still but a startling example was the church embracing the "creation of life", translated shoehorning hand assembled DNA into a cell and getting it to reproduce, the DNA not the cell. As little as a decade or two ago it would have been condemned. Granted they have finally entered the 20th century a 100 years too late but it is progress. Personally I'd like to see the church disbanded for all they had done over the centuries and still do to this day but they have changed their attitudes towards science.
I've been an admirer of Canon Kupfernigk since I learned about his work and his book at University. Since the root of his name means "copper" (Kupfer in German) and I spent a number of years working for a company that did interesting things with copper alloys, I adopted his name as my Internet nick. I'm pleased that the Church eventually caught up with the historians of science, but I have only one question for Benedict 16th: What the Hell took you so long?
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
That won't change the fact that a significant part of Polish society are still backwards and bigots, much like the corresponding part of the US society. One Copernicus rehabilitated half a millenium late does not a 21th century society make. Support reason!
Ezekiel 23:20
You can see how little scruple companies like the Catholic church have, when they dig up your remains to bury them again, just to make themselves look (not be, remember, Pope Kiddiefiddler) good...
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Bunch of hypocrites...
Um... since when was Copernicus condemned?
How does some religious group have the right to dig somebody up like that?
If only they actually treated modern scientists well. Its just the same bullshit again 500 years after that crap happened, and yet they still haven't learned. If you refuse to recognize the patterns of reality, how will you recognize the patterns of reality?
Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also,
Church Admits Touching Children and Covering it Up Not Such a Good Idea.
Pope John Paul George Ringo the Third officially stated via the openly gay pontiff's Jupiter-hosted website [www.catholic.popestuff2], "We've had a little time to think about it and we finally understand that whole uproar or whatever. Hey like the third testament says in Bieber 10:15 'Whatever you want shawty I'll give it to ya'."
He went on to say, "Here's some water! Hope that makes up for it."
Editor's Note: Catholicism was a dominant religion centuries ago in which old men in funny hats told others what to do.
Editor's Editor's Note: Religion was a wide-held belief that ideas found in stories millenniums old should be used to rule our lives. Not kidding.
(article translated from Chinese via Skybot Vacuum Cleaner with Babel Attachment)
That doctrine is actually much more modern than most people would guess, having been issued in 1870.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
You know about funerals, it's for those still living, not for the dead. Would this make Catholic church, particularly Polish Catholics, feel better about themselves? Don't make much difference to me - I know what he accomplished.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Mikolaj Kopernik, AKA Nicolaus Copernicus, the 16th-century astronomer whose findings were condemned by the Roman Catholic Church as heretical,
Do we have a cite for this?
How long until Richard Dawkins will be sainted? 2510?
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Excuse me but what are you talking about? Thanks for your answer in advance.
The only thing I can think of that might jibe with your parent's post is the church's ban on embryonic stem-cell research. Apart from that, then I don't know what s/he is talking about either.
I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable
I believe relic worship isn't practiced in any protestant belief, that's a catholic thing. Protestants don't have saints and don't pray to relics, a big part of the reformation was ditching all the "extended universe" canon stuff and going back to what's in the original book.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
You win!
I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable
There are a lot of misconceptions about what Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and all the other important figures during this time period were doing. For example, a lot of people don't realize that the system constructed by Copernicus still had epicycles. It was more aesthetically pleasing and slightly simpler mathematically than the Ptolemaic system but it wasn't actually more accurate. It wasn't until Kepler came around that a system that was genuinely superior in both simplicity and accurate. Also, people seem to forget that a major reason for Copernicus' work was that the Church wanted a more accurate astronomical system because they needed it to calculate the dates for Easter and other issues. And the Roman Catholic Church didn't even take a negative stance to heliocentrism until many years after Copernicus. Martin Luther and some of the other early Protestants reacted negatively far years before the Church did. The actual history is much more complicated than the standard narratives make it out to be. There are two excellent books on this topic. The first is Thomas Kuhn's "The Copernican Revolution" which presents the history pretty well although it gets filtered slightly through Kuhn's philosophy. The second is Alan Hirschfield's "Parallax" which takes a broader outlook over a much longer time period but with less detail on the period directly after Copernicus. Both books are very good reads.
They haven't changed a damn bit. This is done as one big PR stunt to make it look like they aren't completely anti-science. The "debate" about whether to teach science or religion in science classrooms is a huge thing right now. If the church's beliefs have been "comparable with science" for some time now then why did it take so long to rebury this guy? The answer is simple, they still think this guy is a heretic but they're pretending to honor him so it makes the "teach religion instead of science" argument more sensible. "SEE!! We can't possibly be anti-science, we just now honored a scientist we didn't like 500 years ago!!"
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
From TFA:
The tombstone is decorated with a model of the solar system, a golden sun encircled by six of the planets.
They stopped after Saturn because the next one is...you know...*dirty*
I suppose we should all go dig up their mothers and fathers bones and return the favor?
Its guilt from the church as they realize they are a closed minded establishment and look stupid. Only took them 500 years on this one.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Agreed. And the embryonic research cannot compare, embryo is a human being, and as such it IS the juristiction of the Church to say exploiting it and killing is unethical - it's not a question of mere scientific progress, just like Nazi experiments weren't. And if one thinks embryos/Jews are less human that won't make them so, nor said experiments acceptable. Nor should we or the Church tolerate it.
So, in 500 years, when everyone involved is dead they can (a) do something about the paedophiles in their ranks and (b) disband their ranks because their whole game is a worldwide money-making scam.
I'll wait with baited breath.
Requiem for the American Dream
Consider that for about 480 of the 500 years, this wasn't a major issue with the general public.
It's only in the Internet years that the campaigns have reached a level that made an impact with the upper levels of the hierarchy.
Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
... than a cathedral?
I highly recommend episode 3 of the 1980 television Cosmos. This episode made Copernicus my hero.
greetings earthlings
Then, they laugh at you. Then they win. Then you die. 500 years later, they remove your bones, use you to do a PR stunt, then they bath you with their bullshit water, and pretend nothing happened.
Oh, I hate theists a little bit more every day.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Why the sprinkle with holy water? What if after the way he was treated he died with nothing but contempt for the Church?
Im all in favor of reburying him as a hero, Im all in favor of an apology (despite its not likely he is able to hear nor accept/reject it due to the account of him being dead and all).
The moral thing the Catholic Church should do is issue an official apology to the scientific community as a whole for its actions, against Copernicus, Galilao, Darwin and every other bright mind they condemned that ended up being right (or laying the groundwork for other breakthroughs).
But of course its not in their nature, after all it's too busy condemning steam cell research and looking for ways to condemn synthetic organisms and preaching that condoms are evil (I also heard one preist say he's against finding a cure/treatment for AIDS as it would promote sexual immorality.)
This sig has been distributed under the Creative Commons license.
Bullshit... it's merely appeasement. And why haven't they released all of Da Vinci's papers... what? they never did that? FU. You will never be forgiven before god.
Copernicus was not condemned by the Catholic Church. They're thinking of Galileo.
Galileo was condemned because of his obnoxious, abrasive and abusive personality, not because his theories conflicted with Church teachings. He ridiculed the pope simply because he said that Galileo had failed to absolutely prove his theories beyond any possibility of doubt (which, in fact, he hadn't).
A lot of science, throughout history and even today, is more a battle of personalities than any unemotional, detached, intellectual analysis of facts. Politics and religious/atheistic beliefs and personal feuds have always been just as much (if not more) a part of science as data and theories.
And if one looks at Galileo's case as though it were an intellectual disagreement rather than a matter of anger and nasty remarks, they'll never understand what happened.
Now they should do the same for Galileo, whom the church denounced as a heretic.
Protestantism is a blanket term, encompassing a broad spectrum of Christianity. Christianity outside of the Catholic church include a wide range of beliefs, from anglo-catholicism, which is identical to catholicism except for its rejection of papal authority right to puritanism.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
In case anyone is interested, I just looked to see what was actually done about Copernicus. No action was taken during his lifetime. During the Galileo affair, motion around the sun was declared to be erroneous and heretical. Thus Copernicus' major work was taken out of circulation for 4 years, until it could be "corrected." 9 or 10 corrections were made, which appear to have been simply inserting the word "hypothetically" or equivalent, on the grounds that it was a hypothesis that hadn't been proven.
Note that I am not defending the actions of the Catholic Church. I just thought people might want to know what they were. The uncorrected version was put on the Index.The "corrected" version was not, so it continued to circulate. The source I looked at (http://hsci.ou.edu/exhibits/exhibit.php?exbgrp=1&exbid=14&exbpg=4) says that there was no official finding that Copernicus was heretical, although it appears that there was a general condemnation of heliocentrism (at least this is how I read a couple of seemingly contradictory statements).
a big part of the reformation was ditching all the "extended universe" canon stuff and going back to what's in the original book
Best. Description. Ever.
Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
Great Scientist's Remains Further Desecrated in Black Magic Ritual Effort to Distract Citizenry.
kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
What about non-embryonic stem cell research, or genetic research? Last time I checked the church was deeply against both despite the fact that neither is doing any damage to anyone, just a few fat cells or skin cells or stuff like that.
What about evolution? What about global warming, what about the big bang, or anything like that.
Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also,
I'm glad the church recognizes the value of bleeding-edge Renaissance science. Maybe next year they will find out the importance of electricity, birth control, or logic.
How about the Theory of the Big Bang? It was a Belgian priest who first formalized that.
What if it's a Protestant embryo?
The jurisdiction of the Church begins and ends with its followers. The days when you just of automatically became a member of the Church when sperm met ova ended centuries ago. I see no reason to give the Church any more jurisdiction than it has. This is the kind of logic that would have some Catholic potentate declaring to me that I couldn't kill myself if I suffered a painful terminal illness. The Church has no jurisdiction over me, and it certainly doesn't have any jurisdiction over a collection of cells that might eventually become a human.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
1. You have to put it into perspective though. All of the verses that posited an immovable Earth at the centre of everything are Old Testament, and by all accepted chronologies most were already 2000 years old or more at the time Copernicus got his ideas. (Though Earth being flat does get a nod in Matthew 4:8, which is late 1'st century AD. So even that would be very nearly 1500 years old in the time of Copernicus.)
I'd say that's pretty good covering their asses if it took that long before it was even possible to call them on it.
Stuff that was easier testable, well, they seem to have usually written the prophecy after the event.
2. Well, at least the Catholics seem to have given up on the throwing a fit part since the counter-reformation or so. Now it's just a mystery, or the Lord is using metaphoric language, or those who wrote it down didn't get it quite right. So when Genesis says there were trees with seed (at the earliest that would be the late carboniferous era, and even that's stretching it) before there was a sun created at all, well, the Lord was _actually_ saying there must have been some single-celled algae before the cloud cover first broke and the sun was visible.
I'm not kidding. If you listen to some of them, some verses in Genesis even describe the Theia impact. Of course, you wouldn't recognize it without being told where and how to mis-read it.
It's a more perverse setup, where falsifying it is akin to nailing jello to the wall. No matter what's written there, and how you think you finally have proof that all possible interpretations are plain old wrong, there comes the "but we're not literalists" blanket excuse and that's the end of it. If it says "black" there and you've measured it as white, well,the Lord of course meant "white" and was just metaphoric about it. So, natch, you haven't falsified it.
Of course, I also never got a good answer to "so what good is a book which really doesn't tell you anything you didn't already know? Because apparently to find X in it, you already have to know about X so you can read something as meaning X."
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I hope the superstitiously religious understand that this is not gratifying to those of us who find it unnecessary to seek the church's blessing on facts.
If you count an embryo as a human being, then you should treat every sperm as sacred too. The simple truth is that it's not that clear cut. An embryo starts out as a clump of cells. This clump does not even meet the criteria for life, it does not think, does not feel pain, can't live outside a very alien environment (to us human beings), will not react to stimuli, essentially isn't human at all. At some point it does become human, of course. I'm not sure if anyone at this point can say when exactly that happens. But before it does, there's nothing human about it. It's an incomplete, tiny biological machine, no more human than a hair or nail.
Nah... Catholics dont worship relics. My point that you seemed to have missed was... Copernicus was never condemned. This article is a non-story.
BTW when Henry VIII was King, he got Thomas A'Becket's body dug up, and hung, drawn and quartered for disagreeing with the king at the time (Henry II) and then tossed away. Hence no pilgrims to Canterbury anymore.
That's the boot on the other foot - but another example of revising the past.
"The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
That figures. Typically verbose.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
So the Church basically says if you want to go against us you better be as good as Copernicus and your recognition will come in 500 years.
Can you call this anything but insanity?
Life is for the living.
I actually had to read that twice to make sure it didn't say An Hero...
My Catholic 8-Ball says: "Signs point to Yes."
-S
I really wonder if this has more to do with 'certifying' Copernicus as being of Polish ethnicity than rehabilitating him as a Catholic. There is a lot of dispute over whether he was a Pole or a German and this kind of stunt may just be the kind of salvo that modern nationalists might fire.
First they treat him like shit, then they dig him out of the ground and force their belated praise on his remains in order to look good. Maybe I am just being petty, but I can't help feeling that this sort of propaganda stunt is tasteless to say the least.
Like, if I for years beat up my wife, then suddenly one day felt I'd better show some remorse and be a 'good husband'. The word 'shameless' springs to mind.
Here's on non-embryonic stem cell research: http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/04/23/stem-cell-adult-research.html
Plus, here's the current story: http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/05/22/vatican.synthetic.cell/index.html
And as far as genetic engineering goes, the closest thing to official statement from church is this, and you should check that out too (ch3, pnt. 90): http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html (the thing they're worried about here is the same as the theme of the movie Gattaca - http://news.softpedia.com/news/Vatican-Worried-Over-Gene-Related-Racism-110002.shtml)
So that should show you you're wrong about first few points. Secondly, Church, unlike *some* Protestants in America doesn't condemn evolution, in fact the Church sees it as "one of possible theories". If that still sounds uninlightened, understand that the Church's role isn't to confirm scientific theories (no matter how plausible they are) - but they're not teaching to the contrary of science. I don't know about the global warming, and I don't know what the Church says on the topic (actually I can remember one high ranking bishop saying we should take care of the environment) - but if you do, be sure to tell me. However, I somehow get the feeling youo're wronge about this one too. And finally, same as for evolution undoubtedly goes for the big bang too - we see the Bible as authoritative in matters of faith, not science (and this is true since st. Augustine in 6th ct.), the above mistakes of the past as you can see have been addressed. You've mistaken us for your own special breed of Christians (afaik that would be [some?] Evangelicals).
Any more slanders I should address?
>The days when you just of automatically became a member of the Church when sperm met ova ended centuries ago
Oh? When did that ever happen? Must've been that time Church killed millions of people (or better yet: Protestants for reading the Bible) in middle ages. Oh wait, that didn't happen either. You become the memeber of the Church when you're baptized - always has been that way. However, one could potentially baptize you before you were born. Not common practice, but if the fetus is in danger - prehaps.
>This is the kind of logic that would have some Catholic potentate declaring to me that I couldn't kill myself if I suffered a painful terminal illness.
Shouldn't, not couldn't - suicide is illegal although the individual suffers immens psychological pain. It just isn't the answer. "Assisted sucide" is murder. Although you may disagree, I still don't see how this proves the Church wrong on any issue, this, let alone any other.
>The Church has no jurisdiction over me, and it certainly doesn't have any jurisdiction over a collection of cells that might eventually become a human.
It doesn't claim to have it. However, neither do you. Embryo is an individual with own rights. Church is simply telling it's a living human, just as science does. This prohibits you from killing it not because the Church is some tyrant, but because if one loses moral perspective, one shouldn't be allowed to kill still.
As harsh as this sounds, an embryo where I live enjoys no liegal protections. As to the Church's moral perspective, even before it turns out that it was protecting child molesters, its compass was always questionable. As it is, being an atheist, I see no reason at all to base my own morals on anything it says at all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Divination is witchcraft!
Againt, I avoided saying church for a reason, I am talking about a good portion of baptist and fundamentalist churches in America. You said the church, I didn't.
Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also,
We know what his contribution was. We also know that the Catholic Church is full of child molesters and anti-science, superstitious dopes. Like we needed them to legitimize him with a stupid publicity stunt - no matter what the underlying reason for it is? Thanks but no thanks, Father, I'll keep my scientific heroes on a pedestal high above the ignorant gutters that you inhabit.
The Church is not a human being that molests children. Such a guy may have been a part of the clergy, but not of the Church, and such a guy certainly has no influence over the Church doctrine - which is what we discuss here. Benedict XVI has helped noone cover up anything AFAI could gather (those stories that run on news sites are disputed - see links in this youtube video's description: http://ur1.ca/vm81). Media likes scandal, but there is none. However, there were bad popes, but luckily, those were prevented by God from making any official doctrine (they just wrote none). But if you are an atheist, you wouldn't care much for this explanation. However, you must recognize when Church is speaking in accordance with science and your own conscience (unless you numb it intentionally of course, and choose to see it some other way). If you were studying official doctrine, you'd have to say that as far as moral doctrine goes, they are consistent, and uncorrupted by any other factor.
If you haven't changed the topic without informing me, then you misuse they as a bucket for anything that calls itself Christian, while generalizing based on the minority.
Also you said you didn't say this:
>Last time I checked the church was deeply against (blah)
No disrespect, blah here stands for other text - claims that are disputed (when it comes to the Church).
The very nature of religion is to oppose things which conflict with its holy texts. Religion itself does not guarantee those who claim to follow it will perfectly fill the molds, and nor did I claim that they do. I am not generalizing, i am just stating the nature of religion, and I don't know why people always assume when I talk about the nature of religion that I am talking about a specific church, or their parents, or something else crazy like that, or label me as this or that. If only the facts could be discussed without such bullshit.
Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also,
Man, the topic IS Catholic Church, and then you come in and say "they", and "the church".
Then you say you're talking about baptists and whatnot, and now about "religion". Which is it?
If it's the latter as you now claim - the subject is so wide that you can't help but to generalize. Sure the nature of religion is to promote its doctrines, but you were talking about very specific points that didn't apply to the Church from the topic.
Perhaps you should shake off your prejudices and find some intelligent Christians to talk to. Then form your opinion and tell me if indeed "religion" is colour black, and "science" colour white or is it more complex than that and you've been... grossly over-generalizing.
Your complaint would apply to any organization where ill deeds were covered up. I still firmly believe that an organization can be held culpable for the misdeeds of its members, and most legal systems accept this premise as well. At any rate, I was only bringing up the child molestation because it demonstrates my utter lack of faith in the Church's moral compass. But it has a long history of interference in secular affairs to enrich and empower itself, supporting tyrannies, working against liberalization that I see no reason at all to take it as a moral guide. You are clearly a Catholic, or at least very sympathetic, but you'd better consider that a lot of folks aren't, and they aren't willing to give the Church a free pass, or give its proclamations any particular weight at all.
For me, the rights of women outweigh the rights of a fetus. There are, in any discussion of liberties, going to be conflicts, and there is going to be a winner and a loser in the debate. In many countries, the Church has been the loser, simply because one key liberty, freedom of worship, also means freedom from worship, from having positions whose moral formula effectively devolves into "God says so". Now, I'm guessing your Polish, and clearly the Polish state has sided more on the "God says so" side of things, and that is Poland's business. But I'm not Polish, do not live in a country that is effectively a Catholic state, or indeed have any sort of state church or official religion, so there is no special deference to the Church's theological position.
But as to culpability, the Pope and other senior clergy in the Church are essentially invoking the Kenneth Lay defense of claiming ignorance. There are at least some documents that suggest Ratzinger knew very well of some of cases, as would be expected, considering his jurisdictional authority. But, like any organization on the run from its wrongdoings, the higher ranking officials will always seek to pin it on lower level patsies. For me, it always simplifies down to "What does God need with a starship?" In other words, if the Church is the organ of God in the world, why precisely does it need to try to hide its sins?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I have tried talking to intelligent christians, but after the first few minutes of polite debate they always degrade to calling me a heathen, saying that I, an eagle scout, honors student, community servant blah blah blah, am immoral. Then it typically degrades to them shouting profanities at me, simply because I ask a single, polite question. Even the most intelligent religious people I have ever been able to talk to fall victim to the same patterns.
So the church dislikes some modern science, well accepting stuff from a couple hundred years ago (evolution), and other branches of Christianity don't even accept that, what is your point here? There is still a general dislike of science. Sure some don't mind it, but you have to be able to separate religion and science in your life, which is kind of like living a double life, and having a mistress on the side. In all the debates I have had with christians, however intelligent they claim to be, the second the debate reaches the level of their definition of morality, truth, and so on, they basically just flip a shit at me and go crazy, refusing to debate the validity of such topics. And the topic of 'truth' is where science comes in. if 100% devout and bible is the only truth is black, and 100% only science is white, then most modern 'christians' are pretty light gray. The topics are mutually exclusive, you just can't have 100% of both, it doesn't work without lying to yourself about one or the other.
Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also,
>So the church dislikes some modern science
There are two things that may be happening here. You either:
1) Erroneously call the whole Christianity "the church", which then leads to you generalizing in the extreme.
or
2) Are lying
Plus I can't imagine devout Christians shouting profanities at you. Could it be you're looking for these that would tell you off?
"Science" (it's funny to talk about such a broad subject as if it were an entity) is most certainly not in opposition to faith (real Faith that is). Misuse of science can be though.
Chatolicism does not claim you have to obey the hirearchy. As a matter of fact in many issues it is stablished cannon that the religious authorities are fallible (i.e. they can get things wrong).
Also it is not the Church who threatens you with attonement for your sins ro who forgives your sins if you repents, it is God himself, the Church only spreads this message.
Of coures all the above is nonsense (I am an atheist raised as a Catholic), but if you are going to criticize something at least inform yourself properly before issuing statments that frankly show you in a very bad light.