Lindemann on Copernicus & the Lutheran Theologians: Lindemann (again), Part 1 of 8

      In my original series on Copernicanism, I published the English translation of the 1873 pamphlet An Astronomical Debate by Prof. J. C. W. Lindemann (🔗) of the Old Missouri Synod's teachers college in Addison, Illinois.  Recent research on Old Missouri publications turned up another writing of Lindemann of similar length (20 pages) that may be just as important, if not more so, and so was considered worthy of a complete translation for my blog.  Many hours and days were spent in translation, hyperlinking the many references to theologians and scientists, and adding their images.  Although the professor is modest about this work of his, this writing is a landmark in the 19th century on the topic of science and religion, and is superior in many respects to other historians, or to Wikipedia's reporting on the Copernicus "Controversy".  Wikipedia focuses mostly on Roman Catholic opposition to Copernicanism, but Lindemann's report is far more significant in that he reports on the judgment of orthodox, Scriptural, Christian teachers and pastors, almost all Lutheran, not papists.
This presentation follows in part the list of Lutheran theologians mentioned in my Copernicanism series, Part 19c. and is more detailed in this regard than that of Pastor F.E. Pasche in his great book. — I consider Lindemann one of the greatest historians on this subject, especially for his time and ours.  Even Cornell University's first president Andrew Dickson White had to take note of his writing! Why? Because he recognized the scholarly ability of Lindemann… of the OLD Missouri Synod. — The following is a presentation of the full article in an 8-part series.  Part 1 is an introduction to the primary scientists and theologians involved.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Excerpt from Evangelisch-Lutherisches Schulblatt, vol. 8 (1873) pp. 65-74, 107-116; translation by BackToLuther; all highlighting, red text in [] square brackets, images, and hyperlinks are mine, underlining in original.

Copernicus and the Lutheran theologians. *)

[by J. C. W. Lindemann]

*) This essay does not in the least claim completeness or an approximate exhaustion of this subject. There are too few tools available to me [long before the Internet!], and the time is too short to deal with this important and instructive topic in more detail. In any case, what is offered here gives some light; and perhaps it will cause others to do more, or at least collect individual contributions that could later be turned into a whole. At least I would be grateful for any information, like this or that of our truly Lutheran theologians, about Copernicus’ claim.

        —————————

Up until the time of the Reformation, the whole world believed that the Earth was in the middle of the universe, and that the Sun moved around it, similar to the way the Moon does. Aristarchus of Samos († around 270 BC) already had taught †): “The Earth revolves around its axis and at the same time in an oblique circle around the Sun”; but his opinion received little acclaim and it was soon forgotten. Anyone who thought about the establishment of the visible world judged by appearance and by daily experience. He saw the Sun, Moon and all the stars in motion; but the senses did not notice any movement of the Earth. And what the philosopher recognized from nature, the Christian found confirmed in his Bible. He also knows only a “firmly founded” earth and “circulating” heavenly bodies. 

Fibonacci, Cusa, Peurbach, Regiomontanus

And it was not just the Christian people who believed these statements in Scripture to be true and certain — not just the theologian who had not studied mathematics or astronomy; no, even the Christian astronomer found no reason to stray from examination and Scripture. Leonhard von Pisa [Fibonacci], Heinrich von Hessen (1370) [Henry of Langenstein  (1325–1397), Johann von Gmunden  (1400), [page 66] Nicolaus von Cusa (1430), Georg Peurbach (1450), Johann Müller (Regiomontanus, 1460), to name only those German men whose names still sound very good in the history of astronomy, those and many others built their teaching and observation on a fixed Earth. 

What they taught about the establishment of the world, the course of the stars, and so on, was mainly considered to be true after 5500 years. And two other men, the Landgrave Wilhelm IV of Hesse († 1592) and the Dane Tycho Brahe († 1610 in Prague), also confirmed this in the next period. A famous astronomer of our century calls him “a prince even among astronomers”, and even the “king of them”.

—————————

†) Pythagoras (about 500 BC) had also taught that the Earth turned around a central fire; but this was not the Sun for him. In general, his view bears no resemblance to that of Copernicus.

—————————

At the same time now that Dr. [Martin] Luther brought the Word of God back into honor, and reproduced it as the irrefutable certain basis of the faith of Christianity, at the same time that the “prophet of the Germans” testified that the infallible Word of God, and that alone, the sharp sword, the strong armor, the insurmountable castle in which a Christian could victoriously resist all attempts of the devil — 

at the same time Nicolaus Copernicus appeared and claimed that the arrangement of the world was quite different from what was previously thought: not the Earth but the Sun was fixed. He claimed that [the Earth] is a wandering star [Wandelstern] (planet, such as Venus, Jupiter, etc.) and not only revolves around its own axis every day, but also runs around the Sun once a year!

Copernicus (born 1473) had studied mathematics, medicine and theology and then lived as Canon [clergy] at Frauenburg in Prussia [now Frombork in Poland]. He is said to have been a much sought-after doctor, also a skilled builder and administrator. Since 1506 he had started to investigate the phenomena in the heavens. He laid down his thoughts on the results of his observations in his work “Six Books on the Orbits of the Celestial Bodies” [or De revolutionibus orbium coelestium], which he dedicated to the Pope at that time. It is said that he hadn't intended it for printing at all, but only wanted to tell some of his colleagues. But at the urgent request of several friends, he finally consented that it be printed in Nuremberg. When Copernicus received the first completed copy, he was already lying on his deathbed. He died on June 11, 1543, at the age of 71.

Copernicus, at any rate, determined and clearly knew that he was opposed to all of the old astronomy with his new claims; on the other hand, it is uncertain (at least to this writer) to what extent it became clear to him that he contradicted the Bible. [cp. this blog post reporting Copernicus was aware but it was “against his wishes”] He had also studied (Roman) theology; but at that time there were many “scholars of God” who had never seen a complete Bible, who knew very little about the content of it. [page 67] 

Now Copernicus may or may not have been aware of his antithesis to the Bible, this consciousness may have been dark or clear – it can be of little concern to us [but it was Walther’s concern and he corrected this in 1880.]. But this is certain, and this is what is important to us here: that others immediately recognized it for what it was actually about. Many scholars immediately fell in love with the new astronomy, either ignoring the contradiction to the Bible, if not rejoicing at it, or resorting to the most whimsical explanations in order to cover up the contradiction, if not to annul it. Others, however, firmly opposed Copernicus’s teaching and rejected it as untrue, false and godless. The latter especially because it questions, even denies, the credibility of the Holy Scripture.

Even in the philosophical and mathematical world, the view of Copernicus found many contradictions. Even then, doubts about the correctness of the same were expressed and questions were raised that have remained unsolved and unanswered to this day. But it would take us too far here if we wanted to take these struggles into account. So much is to be said how “science” has changed since then! If scholars within Christianity had not found any reason to contradict the Bible until then, things soon changed.  One cannot say it better than Dr. Johannes N. Richers in his Letters of Heaviness (Leipzig 1855), where it says p. 7-8: “The next or rather general meaning of the Copernican system obviously lies in the fact that it is the beginning of a completely new way of thinking, mechanical thinking, mechanical science in general; a way of thinking, according to which the whole of creation is only a great machine.” 

Man, too, now became more and more a great machine, especially since it had come through [Isaac] Newton that the “educated” had to accept and pass on the most groundless assertions, the greatest lack of understanding as irrefutable truth. [!]— But we turn to the theologians!

It is said — and the Copernicans like to tell it — that monks instigated the Nuremberg mob to destroy the printing press in which the book of Copernicus was printed. “They say a devilish work is under the press!” — 

It is also printed in many books, and it has long been believed by many people that the Inquisitors in Rome had forced Galileo [Galilei] to swear that it was a mistake that the Sun was fixed! The Romanists have disagreed with this report for a number of years, and it is also believed that it is based on error. The Roman Church, taken as a whole, has always been very tolerant of the Copernican system! What does she care if the Scripture is contradicted, if only that [page 68] the Pope's reputation remains undamaged. And that is held safer when the Bible is less respected.

But how did the Church, released from Babylonian captivity, stand against the teaching of Copernicus? What did the Lutheran theologians say about it?

= = = = = = = = = = =  continued in Part 2  = = = = = = = = = = = = =

“…a completely new way of thinking… creation is only a great machine”

     Yes indeed!… "What did the Lutheran theologians say about it?" Lindemann is a careful historian and does the "heavy lifting" of digging out the many actual references – a long list – beginning in the next Part 2.
= = = = = = =  Table of Contents  = = = = = = =
Part 1 – This Introduction, late medieval scientists, Luther, Copernicus-Newton-Galileo
Part 2 – Copernicanism; “fear of being considered stupid”, danger of loss of faith, Luther & Melanchthon
Part 3 – Lutherans vs. Copernicanism! "Lindemann's List", Osiander, Arndt, Herberger, Dietrich (& Owen)
Part 4 – Dillher; Weimar Bible: John Gerhard & company
Part 5 – David Hollaz: “these words are to be understood of Christ, the figurative Sun”
Part 6 – Stock, Scharff, Engelschall, J.J. Rambach – "Lindemann's List" grows against Copernicanism

Part 7 – Finale, +9: Rusmeyer, Schmidt, Geier, Carpzov, Hollmann, Rambach, Ströbel, Knak, Gruntvig

Part 8 – equivocators, accommodators, naysayers– "let history speak"; Pasche's praise
Postscript – J. C. W. Lindemann vs LC-MS: Fuerbringer, Harstad, Schaum & Collver, Harrison & Rast