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."

83 of 369 comments (clear)

  1. I've seen this before... by masterwit · · Score: 5, Funny

    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
    1. Re:I've seen this before... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      embrace of science as being compatible with Biblical belief.

      But not vice versa.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:I've seen this before... by blai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're absolutely right. Not all beliefs are compatible with facts. Facts do not encompass all beliefs. Science is not a religion and religion is not a science. That's like saying a pen is bad because you can't build a house with it. That's not what it's for. It isn't what you think it is, nor is it what you think it isn't even if you are correct.

      --
      In soviet Russia, God creates you!
    3. Re:I've seen this before... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trouble is, religions have this nasty habit of attempting to make claims that are, in fact, empirically verifiable (or, typically, falsifiable), and then throwing a fit when science calls them on it.

      For sufficiently vacuous definitions of religion, and definitions of science that bend over backwards to be purely descriptive, the two are compatible. However, as an empirical matter, incompatibilities are frequently observed.

    4. Re:I've seen this before... by jeremyp · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bill Joy's epitaph will be :wq.

      Or possibly :q! if he has failed to write an autobiography.

      I don't know how you quit from emacs.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    5. Re:I've seen this before... by IrquiM · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't know how you quit from emacs.

      Death is the only escape!

      --
      This is blinging
    6. Re:I've seen this before... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't know how you quit from emacs.

      I think there are support groups for that.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    7. Re:I've seen this before... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Christianity, for instance, is pretty thin sauce without immaculate conceptions, Resurrection, or any revelations.

      Actually, it's the "immaculate conscriptions, resurrections, and trans-substantiations that weaken was is basically a decent and pragmatic way to live.

      "Be humble. Love one another. Help people who need help. Treat others like you would like to be treated."

      That's all a really great approach to walking the Earth. It's actually pretty profound when you think about the effect that such an approach to life would have on society.

      But when you add all the silly stuff with the rising up to heaven and bread-to-flesh and burning for eternity that all the importance of that excellent framework gets lost and the whole thing becomes the equivalent of a bad fantasy novel.

      It's a shame to think that we need miracles and fear and mumbo-jumbo just to act right.

      But it's the claims of victimization that make me most sick. It's not enough to believe what you want to believe. You've got to act like you're being persecuted. Like there's a "War on Religion" and the poor evangelicals have to hide in caves so they aren't victimized. Except those caves are multi-million dollar megachurches with state of the art video and sound systems. Except that they own television and radio stations in every market. Except that the government has to subsidize every dollar that they collect by giving tax benefits to the donors. But they're victims of those horrible secularists who from what I can tell, don't care if people want to handle snakes and pass the collection plate, but for the most part just want to be left alone.

      Victims my ass. Religionists started persecuting people as soon as they landed at Plymouth Rock. They couldn't wait to start burning women who looked funny at their husbands because they must be witches if they're not kissing their pious asses. You think for a minute that if they thought they could get away with it they wouldn't start putting homosexuals on a rotisserie? It's only because the secular members of society have drawn a few lines in the sand that they're not stoning women for adultery or having abortions and chopping off heads right here in the good old Christian USA.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:I've seen this before... by pushing-robot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Great post, but I think organized religion is more a symptom than a cause.

      Humans have a set of fundamental tribal instincts that exist regardless of high-level social structures. It's easy to see where they came from. If you wanted to be chieftain, you had to be dominant; you had to convey unquestionable authority. Intimidation and xenophobia were effective means of keeping everyone united and under your control—even begging you for protection. Strange events and coincidences could be spun as signs of your greatness and wisdom. If your people had some specific histories or beliefs, they could also be twisted into supporting your rule. And if others couldn't understand your reasoning, you could just call it mystic knowledge that only you and chosen believers can comprehend.

      Civilization has come a long way, but if you peel back the veneer of religion and politics you'll find we're still a bunch of savages looking for tribal identity. Whether you call yourself an evangelical Christian pastor, a fundamentalist Imam, or a member of the Communist Party of China, you still use the same tactics of intimidation against free thought and fear of foreigners, infidels, or minorities. You still use propaganda to twist events to your interpretations. You still hardly care about your group's beliefs except to turn them into justifications. And you still create a ruling caste that claims greater enlightenment than the masses.

      Religion's flaw is that it, like race or color or political party or organization, divides people. It delineates "is" and "is not". Whenever you define a group, you invite that chieftain element who prey on tribal instincts. As people look to the chieftain for direction, they care less and less about what their beliefs and values originally meant and begin to only see them as a justification for the same attitude of fear and hatred every chieftain preaches. And the tribe more and more resembles every other, especially the ones its people are told to hate and fear.

      The people sometimes deemed "liberal" or "freethinking" or "secular" are those who suppress that protective tribal instinct, and are less moved by the promises and threats of their chieftain. But freethinkers are a group like any other, and blaming religions or political parties or any other group just feeds the tribal instinct. Many have broken away, only to form their own tribes—and now embody everything they once fought against. Only when the majority of us can leave our tribal thinking behind and stop thinking of every grouping and delineation as a tribal boundary will the chieftains among us lose their voice. Only when we can stop fearing and hating that which makes others different will we be able to understand who anyone really is.

      Ourselves most of all.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  2. You know? I think I'm okay with that. by Sowelu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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...

  3. Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  4. Pomp and circumstance by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Pomp and circumstance by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why is it that when I have mod points that I want to use on a thread I always end up commenting instead?

      Anyhow, you may not find it important, but others do. This is the equivalent of saying "we fucked up big time and we are reversing ourselves". Large organizations show real remorse differently than individuals. So, this is a very large positive step.

      Now, why it took 500 years to figure this out is another story altogether.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    2. Re:Pomp and circumstance by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Copernicus' remains were recovered as part of an archaeological discovery. Would you suggest not reburying them? Or perhaps just tossing them back in the hole and throwing the dirt back in?

    3. Re:Pomp and circumstance by T+Murphy · · Score: 5, Funny

      How about send his remains to an Earth/sun Lagrangian point, so if you look at it the right way, it's like the sun is orbiting around him.

    4. Re:Pomp and circumstance by Vadim+Makarov · · Score: 2, Interesting
      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?

      I think in essence this is a church advert. (They couldn't care less of the science he has discovered. Religion needs promotion. Same happened at the death of Newton.)

      --
      17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
    5. Re:Pomp and circumstance by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      For example, even if it doesn't apply to Copernicus, being denied a Christian burial was a grave punishment.

      You mean that in this case, a naughty grave was punished by not being used to bury a famous scientist?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re:Pomp and circumstance by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Informative

      It would be significantly shorter than 500 years if they knew -where- Copernicus was buried...
      Location of his grave was one of bigger historical secrets in Poland. (and the fact that the suspected location was a chamber filled with thousands of bones from many, many corpses, mixed in disarray, didn't make it any easier. It's been a luck that his corpse was found in a casket, and not in 300 pieces mixed with all the rest...

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    7. Re:Pomp and circumstance by RevWaldo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd think that having his remains orbit the Earth Scotty-style would do as a fitting tribute. But this does raise the issue of "whose remains are they anyway"? The cathedral that the remains were originally buried and now reburied would probably have the final say on the launch, and its doubtful they'd go along. It's a little vexing that the church that condemned him in the first place essentially still control his remains five centuries on.

      .

    8. Re:Pomp and circumstance by VTI9600 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This was no ordinary discovery. According to TFA, they spent six years searching for the remains. Once they were found, they used DNA markers (!) and facial bone reconstruction to positively identify the man as Copernicus. Everyone joking about how the church is 500 years behind in technology should take note.

    9. Re:Pomp and circumstance by RobertLTux · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the trick is that he was buried in an UNMARKED grave (and i suppose it was not "holy ground")
      so as part of the paper work they had to

      Exume the body/bones
      "ReSanctify" the ground and prep for the burial
      Do a whole burial ceremony
      File the 21 chunks of paper that The Church requires

      Its all a bunch of Red Tape (and how many not Chinese bureaucracies are around that date from 2 Millenniums ago??)

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    10. Re:Pomp and circumstance by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anyhow, you may not find it important, but others do. This is the equivalent of saying "we fucked up big time and we are reversing ourselves". Large organizations show real remorse differently than individuals. So, this is a very large positive step.

      In other words, they're just trying to salve their own consciences. This is like the British government apologizing for how they treated Alan Turing. "Oh well, we're so much better now, so please forgive us." On one level it's idiotic because the guy is dead, in Copernicus's case loooong dead, so it does him no good. On another level, it's just a bunch of self-righteous bastards trying to show us how keenly they feel about it.

      If the Church wants to convince me that it isn't still an enemy of science, it can start by stopping spreading bullshit about the effectiveness of condoms. Apologizing for Copernicus is cheap, relatively speaking, because it doesn't mean having to sacrifice a current position. I'd like to see the Church do something in the way of contrition that had the vaguest bit of meaning in the here and now.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    11. Re:Pomp and circumstance by VTI9600 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually they used police forensic experts, who (surprise, surprise) were probably not priests. Darn. I guess you got me. You'll probably even point out that I goofed when I said they took six years even though they actually found the bones in 2005 after starting in 2004. In any case, it does not change the fact that the church is painfully well aware of advances in modern science and doing the best it can to reconcile those with their beliefs and those of their faithful followers.

    12. Re:Pomp and circumstance by Arancaytar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's like when in 1992, the pope apologized for putting Galileo on trial. Yeah, the gesture is pretty symbolic and centuries late, but it's at least one way to look like less of an asshat.

      Now, once they stop telling people in Africa that condoms cause AIDS, maybe their apology will actually appear sincere instead of lying through their teeth for the PR.

  5. Why was he buried in an anonymous grave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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."

  6. Pearly gates. by Dyinobal · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does this mean he gets to go to heaven now? or just that his body got violated by a bunch of priests.

    1. Re:Pearly gates. by jeffasselin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since heaven is a fantasy, then he obviously isn't going there. I vote for option #2.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    2. Re:Pearly gates. by adamziegler · · Score: 5, Informative

      You do know that Copernicus was a Catholic priest also right?

    3. Re:Pearly gates. by AshtangiMan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not a priest. Actually a cleric, a step below the priest in the hierarchy of the church. But still had to take a vow of celibacy.

    4. Re:Pearly gates. by Arancaytar · · Score: 2, Funny

      his body got violated by a bunch of priests.

      He's way, way too old for that.

  7. I'm sure by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:I'm sure by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And stupid people keep thinking burials are for the dead, not the living.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    2. Re:I'm sure by obarthelemy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd rather the church put a bit more effort in making life better for the living

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    3. Re:I'm sure by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm sure that all of his friends and relatives will find the grieving process much easier now he's been buried properly.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:I'm sure by IICV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah exactly! The living need to be advertised to -

      "Look at us! We're the new Catholic Church, we're no longer pro-heliocentrism! Give us a couple more centuries and we might even stop being anti-feminist* enough to allow contraception** or female priests***!"

      Because that's exactly what it is, unless you think that Copernicus still has a close, living relative somewhere who needs closure after 500 years.

      *not a guarantee
      **not very likely
      ***you're kidding, right?

    5. Re:I'm sure by Stuntmonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly. I gave up my Dawkins-like hatred for organized religion somewhere in my 40s. I'd rather attract "victims" (heh heh) to critical thought with sweet science than pour vinegar on someone's religion.

      The people in the history books who brought about social change were mostly all "obnoxious" in their time (Galileo, Rosa Parks, ...). These were people willing to go to the mat for what they believed. Time will tell with Dawkins, but he's certainly brave and I respect that. And there are certainly enough people on the other side willing to sacrifice everything for what they believe.

    6. Re:I'm sure by Chardish · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Billions of dollars spent annually on charities, schools, hospitals, homeless shelters, and relief efforts isn't good enough for you?

  8. I'm sure Copernicus feels better... by SetupWeasel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No. Wait. He's dead. He doesn't care at all what you do to his bones.

    1. Re:I'm sure Copernicus feels better... by SetupWeasel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Church has a lot more important things to apologize for. In fact, they could skip apologizing for anything for all I care if they would stop doing horrible things now.

    2. Re:I'm sure Copernicus feels better... by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know this ? For a fact ?

      Well, now I am. We have his skull out to examine, and yep, no working brain in there. So he's incapable of thinking or caring about anything.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
  9. What about today's mistakes? by khasim · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:What about today's mistakes? by VTI9600 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They're doing this as a PR stunt to distract people from the mistakes they're making today.

      If I designed a device to automatically lower fresh tinfoil hats from the ceiling whenever the one you're wearing now got worn out, I would make a mint.

      Who cares what The Church does with whatever-is-left-of-his-body now? 500 years later?

      Catholics care. They care because they believe in the sacrament of forgiveness. They care because they believe that people have immortal souls that can last more than 500 years after someone's death.

    2. Re:What about today's mistakes? by T+Murphy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Catholic church recognizes it has a bad history with reacting to science, so they are trying to make up for that, yet it seems any effort to do so just that brings more complaints. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

      By this point, the Catholic church has mostly improved from malicious to benign on the science front (they may contest doing research in certain areas of science on moral grounds, but they don't really try to contradict science anymore). Most of the anti-science creationism and whatnot isn't from the Catholic church.

      Disclaimer: I was raised Catholic and appreciate most of the philosophy but don't care for the religion.

    3. Re:What about today's mistakes? by syousef · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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?

      Q: What's the definition of infallible?

      A: Get it completely wrong, persecute people who used actual science to get it right - I mean REALLY persecute them - put your political agenda and your authority ahead of truth - threaten them with torcher, put them under house arrest, deny them medical aid, make them fear for their lives, threaten them with eternal damnation - then 400-500 years later admit that your predecessors made a mistake and make use of the very science you tried to bury to shout from the rooftops how good and holy you are to be able to admit the error at all - really put on a show - set up an observatory, rebury people. Turn the whole thing into a 3 ring circus.

      Yeah I wonder why I'm not sold. I wonder why your numbers are dwindling.

      You know what REALLY pisses me off? When people who wish to excuse the bad behaviour of the church point out that Galileo was politcally unwise to ridicule the pope as if it makes the treatment he received okay just because he spoke out of turn and made an ass of himself. As if it's okay to bury scientific truth and torcher/imprision someone for speaking out of turn.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    4. Re:What about today's mistakes? by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Strange that a religion that claims to be so forgiving is also always threatening eternal torment to anyone who disobeys them ... an organization that claims to be the standard bearer of all things good uses the exact same psychological framework as an abusive relationship?

    5. Re:What about today's mistakes? by VendettaMF · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So, you're saying that they are now forgiving Copernicus for being right all along?

      Even as religious statements go that's pretty lame.

      --
      kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
    6. Re:What about today's mistakes? by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Catholics care. They care because they believe in the sacrament of forgiveness. They care because they believe that people have immortal souls that can last more than 500 years after someone's death.

      Somehow I doubt Copernicus is going to forgive them.

    7. Re:What about today's mistakes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, then I guess I'll piss you off even further by pointing out that Galileo's views were discredited by actual DATA at the time. The most accurate data they had at his time did not support his interpretation. So no, scientific truth was not buried because of politics, scientific falsehoods (as judged by the scientific community of the day) were buried because of politics. Condemning the house arrest of political dissidents in an era when those unpopular with the rulers were often killed out of hand is as silly as complaining that Attila the Hun failed to abide by the Geneva Conventions.

      As to the infallibility question, the doctrine you refer to only applies when the Pope makes a ruling that he declares infallible, not in everyday decisions. Think of this as the difference between Lehman Brothers putting out a stock prediction and claiming to have received information from the future that this will be the price.

    8. Re:What about today's mistakes? by VTI9600 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why not? He was one of them. He was employed by them. They were his friends and family. They didn't kill him. He died of natural causes (a stroke in his 70's). They just said that his idea of a heliocentric earth (one of many achievements) was heretical, but well after the fact. And then they admitted that they were wrong. What's not to forgive?

    9. Re:What about today's mistakes? by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Strange that a religion that claims to be so forgiving is also always threatening eternal torment to anyone who disobeys them

      Could you please quote the Catholic cannon that says that?

      ... an organization that claims to be the standard bearer of all things good uses the exact same psychological framework as an abusive relationship?

      See above.

    10. Re:What about today's mistakes? by sznupi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Interestingly, those who are unwilling to accept God will thus be exactly where they wanted to be. A place without God.

      Or, putting it another way, everybody gets the heaven they wish for (faithfull wishing in practise for Borg collective, if early descriptions are to be believed...). Which is quite meaningless.

      The only reason Hell is considered terrible is that we, as humans, are said to constantly be in the presence of God as we live.

      The only reason hell (also in the sense "absence of god" of course / especially...that's something you can experience) is considered terrible is that faithfull are constantly reinforcing in themselves the notion that it is.

      Further, man sees faces, religions, and all those things that are merely skin deep. God sees your soul, your heart, and your entire being. To reject God is more than just to deny his existence. To reject God is to act in a manner that goes absolutely against His will. All who live can return to God. And if you truly, absolutely don't wish to, then you can go to the place you want to, known by us as Hell.

      ...which has a problem when put under logical scrutiny (hey, we are supposedly made in his image! That must include logic, morality, etc.; those are actually things which define us more as humans than just our bodies) - his will was, supposedly, to...put us in such situation in the first place, certainly knowing the consequences, right?
      And don't forget that Abrahamic deity often displays staggeringly amoral, staggeringly...human traits.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    11. Re:What about today's mistakes? by VTI9600 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Catholic church teaches that Hell is the absence of God's grace, and not a literal physical torment. Catholics do not threaten people with torture (admittedly, not in recent years). That sort of thing is what you will hear coming from the various non-Catholic Christian sects in the US. The church knows that they have made mistakes. Nowadays, they teach the concept of a "living" church...one that acknowledges that change is inevitable and usually for the best.

      I will admit though, that most of these reforms only took place as a result of Vatican 2, which took effect in 1965. It's better late than never...having been born after 1965, I really didn't notice.

    12. Re:What about today's mistakes? by earthforce_1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Whereas in heaven you get to lavish an eternity of praise upon an absolute dictator who is alleged to be perfect in all things forever.

      Wait a minute.. Heaven sounds like North Korea!!!

      Two tickets for Hell please...

      --
      My rights don't need management.
    13. Re:What about today's mistakes? by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      well I think the Catholic cannon contains the bible(?), and there are enough quotes about hell and eternal torment in that thing to sink a battleship.

      Well, I didn't ask what you (or anyone) think. I ask for a citation. See, in this site, where supposedly the majority of people are of an engineering tendency, the difference should be obvious.

      Also, and due to the supposed engineering nature of /. posters, we should know that a thought is an opinion, and than an opinion is not fact.

      Now that we have cleared that up... you thought wrong. A Bible (of which there are many versions) is not what we refer as Church cannon.

      Also, if you know a bit of what you are trying make an opinion of, different churches and denominations have different interpretations of the Bible (of which as we have already mentioned, has many versions.)

      So, regarding the book which you said has enough ammo to sink a ship, The Catholic church has clear statements (as visible footnotes at the bottom of almost every printed page) that passages are to be interpreted according to the times (following established cannon), and never to be taken literally or as historical facts (which is completely opposite with the bible nuts we have here in the US.)

      Anyone who has seen one should know this. Anyone who has never seen one should shut the hell up and do due diligence in researching the crap they want to criticize... as engineers and scientists do (and unlike many /. posters do.)

      So, back to the question, cite the cannon that threatens people with eternal torment.

    14. Re:What about today's mistakes? by sznupi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is it meaningless? Perhaps, perhaps not. The idea that we should *not* attempt to better people's situations seems to be a...not commonly held ideal.

      See, you're just providing an argument why it's meanigless. Sure, we do have a morality of which "making situation of people better" is an important part (China, for example)
      But you established previously that the "modern concept of heaven" doesn't include that. It's merely everybody gets the heaven they wish for (which somehow fits with general wishful thinking of religions; and how their concepts were washed out over the ages due to greater understanding of reality)

      "God is inherent in all things" is similarly meaningless. Somehow "hell"/"heaven" (since the distinction is meaningless already...) is now beyond "all things"?
      No, you've been just tricked by some social construct into thinking that you desperately need something which...(surprise!) this very same construct provides. The Church demonstrably does such things - it developing places it promotes sexual or, more generally, sexual practices which are harmful to the society...but which benefit the Church.
      It's like a complex gov beaurocracy set up to deal with certain problem - it has no motivation to fully eradicate the problem which assures its existence.

      And that gods are not beings of meat, as we are (nice that you're almost, unitentionally admitting that we're just meat)...was the point! Meat certainly doesn't define us with "in his image", it must about...mind.
      And gods were quite clearly defined for a long, long time; don't kid yourself they weren't. Also Abrahamic one (where are the miracles today?!). It's just that views defining them more clearly were less competitive, with less possibility of hatching onto human societies with all the progress happening around.

      It's not difficulty of reconciling omniscience (in loving god) with free will, it's an impossibility (yes, yes, "not an impossibility to gods..."; another meaningless thing, and not strictly true). By saying "for God, the cookies already exist within the world" you absolve him of any responsibility...while he has, according to mythology, the absolute one! And, funnily enough, you hint at one possible coherent explanation - that we're simply an ant farm of an amoral kid who has a bit too much power.

      PS. And as for the last part - sure, the ways by which Jesus from Nazaret lived are most likely (who knows how much whitewashing there was) decently fine even in our times (though - "don't judge"?! Who are you are kidding?...). But here's the problem - demonstrably, Christians (and other religions) are less likely to follow them. Just look at the top countries in any "nice" societal factors - high human development, low crime rates, low corruption, and so on. Notice their typical levels of secularism. Now look at the same factors in the most religious countries.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    15. Re:What about today's mistakes? by Evtim · · Score: 4, Informative

      How can I experience absence of God in Hell, since God created everything, including Satan and Hell?

  10. Re:So it takes 500 years for the Church to admit by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    Until then, they'll continue to bury their bones in inappropriate places.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  11. Future Slashdot Story on 5/23/2510 by webbiedave · · Score: 4, Funny

    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)

    1. Re:Future Slashdot Story on 5/23/2510 by webbiedave · · Score: 2, Funny

      Indeed. It turns out to be the best place for a data center.

    2. Re:Future Slashdot Story on 5/23/2510 by webbiedave · · Score: 2

      Yeah. They were all over that when the story broke. Right on top of it. Handled it great.

      That's kinda my point. Get it? Good. Now move on.

    3. Re:Future Slashdot Story on 5/23/2510 by paxcoder · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess all that storms, gas, and heat make it ideal for cloud computing.

      (btw your posts still aren't funny, and modders: "overrated" still isn't "i disagree")

  12. 1870 by mister_playboy · · Score: 4, Informative

    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 ::: Love is the law, love under will
  13. umm by nomadic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:umm by Exitar · · Score: 3, Informative

      His "De revolutionibus orbium coelestium" was in the Index of Prohibited Books from 1616 to 1835

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_revolutionibus_orbium_coelestium#Reception
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus#Copernicanism

    2. Re:umm by nomadic · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hmmm, interesting, but this was way later; the implication of TFA seems to be that Copernicus was persecuted like Galileo, rather than being a high-ranking churchman himself who was well-respected in the Church during his lifetime and given a Catholic burial.

  14. Re:Sure... by KDR_11k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the catholic church we're talking about, they've much more progressive than the American sects that oppose science (hence the acceptance of evolution in Europe, there are no debates about what should be taught in schools here).

    I'm aware that the catholic church is extremely conservative but compared to the madness of the American fundamentalists that make the news they're moderates.

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  15. So... by rrohbeck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How long until Richard Dawkins will be sainted? 2510?

  16. Re:Sure... by VTI9600 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There are lots of Catholic schools in America (Catholics too, obviously) and they all teach that the Church has accepted the notion that man came about by the process of evolution, albeit a process conceived of and initiated by God. Also, I would guess that the vast majority of Christian schools in the country are Catholic, even though Catholics only make up 30 percent of US Christians.

  17. Re:In other news... by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.
  18. End of thread. by glavenoid · · Score: 2, Informative

    You win!

    --
    I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
  19. The two books to read by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  20. Re:They stopped at six by jeremyp · · Score: 4, Funny

    Professor: "I'm sorry, Fry, but astronomers renamed Uranus in 2620 to end that stupid joke once and for all."
    Fry: "Oh. What's it called now?"
    Professor: "Urectum. Here, let me locate it for you."

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  21. Re:How comforting this must be for him by SakuraDreams · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The man is a national hero. You're not Polish and so you don't understand but try to get this - for almost 200 years Poland did not exist and Polish language, culture and identity were suppressed and systematically eliminated by Russia, Prussia, Austo-Hungary, then Germany and then the Soviet Union. We therefore value people like Chopin, Marie Curie-Sklodowska and Copernicus as national heroes to help preserve our identity. Hence the man is being honoured.

  22. Re:Sure... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Catholic Church isn't nearly as monolithic as you appear to believe. It is a world-spanning organisation, with a lot of internal dissension. Even among the Cardinals, there is a lot of disagreement, and there have been several issues over the last decade that have brought it very close to schism, particularly along continental boundaries.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  23. What did the Church actually do? by hedrick · · Score: 4, Informative

    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).

  24. Alternate headline... by VendettaMF · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  25. Big Bang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  26. Put it into perspective though by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
  27. Re:You know? I think I'm okay with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  28. Death is the only escape! by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know how you quit from emacs.

    Death is the only escape!

    That figures. Typically verbose.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  29. Re:Marketing by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 2, Informative

    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...

    READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE. The remains were lost in an unmarked grave for a long time. They were found in an archaeological search. That is what is done for the remains of anyone famous whose grave is not certainly known (as in Columbus, Crazy Horse or Genghis Khan.)

    Once the remains were found, they were buried in a grave that clearly has his name, and with the honors he deserved. Seriously, how much dumber can /. posters get?

  30. Re:Sure... by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Many scientists are responsible for modern theories. The term 'big bang' was actually just bullshit made up by the religious to insult the concept.

    Really, I always thought that Monsignor Georges Lemaître was a established scientist and mathematician, given that he was a not only a researcher but a professor of mathematics, astronomy and physics.

    But I guess it's cool to be a bigot and ignore the man's credentials just because he was in the clergy.

    Back then there weren't the same social issues with hanging or burning someone, at least not to the modern extent.

    Back then when? What the hell are you talking about. We are talking about modern scientists and about how, according to you, the church puts modern scientists down.

    The religious still put science down to the lowest possible level, even saying it has no logical backing because it is not based on the bible.

    Which religious, which religion? Are you that dumb that the only religious movement you know is the fundamentalist, creationist one? The Vatican funds and supports observatories and research centers. I'm not saying it is a perfect organization (shit look at the scandal of pedophilia). But if you can't coherently build your arguments, you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

    The religious still fight every scientific advancement that does not pertain to their interests.

    Which religious groups? Which religions? See, change religious with say, "black", "jew", "homo", "socialist" or whatever aggregation, distinction or nationality, and what you get? A bigot statement. You are just spewing drivel without being able to back it up despite the hard evidence that not just the Catholic church, but many other religious organizations do promote science.

    Get your head out of you ass. You seem to have a beef with the established creationist fundamentalists groups in the US (and so do I btw.). But you are as dumb as they are since you seem to be as bigot and willing to generalize.

    On the one end of the stupidity spectrum we have the bible nuts calling all scientists the work of the devil.

    On the other side, it is you calling all religious groups as anti-science. Congratulations, here is your bigot medal.

  31. Less about religion, more about nationalism? by seyyah · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.