I Thought This Was A Joke Until…

Rick,

Thanks for getting back to me. Again, not to be insulting, but your quick answer doesn't do much to change my impression that the geocentrics are pop controversialists and not serious scientists or even serious philosophers/theologians. You distorted what I wrote, created a false dichotomy and ignored my questions.

The geocentric group is being used on a national scale now to embarrass and marginalize the Church as paranoid and ignorant (you can't really believe the LA Times and Chicago Trib are interested in geocentrism for any other reason, can you?) That hurts evangelization and the ability of the Church to affect society. That's not just "calculating political advantages." Those are deadly serious considerations that have eternal consequences that seem to be ignored by your group. And if I read what you wrote to thepalmhq correctly, you agree that no one is going to hell for not being a geocentrist. Catholics have liberty of conscience. You agree that people can see the magisterial evidence differently. So why are you so committed to exposing the Church to this level of ridicule?

From what I can gather, your geocentrist group thinks that the Church's prestige and influence was harmed by the whole Galileo affair and so you're trying to recover that lost prestige and influence. If that's really what it's all about, then it's a good intention and hope. But I've seen better, more reasonable ways to defend the Church about the Galileo affair that don't require making the Church look so paranoid and ignorant here and now and so inept (or worse) at passing on her teachings over the last several centuries. The geocentric "attempt to help" with the Galileo affair is causing more real-world damage right here and now. Using a football metaphor, it basically looks to me as though a couple of water boys and second stringers (the geocentric group) are convinced they know better than the head coach (Pope) and all his assistant coaches (bishops, priests, et al) and that the team should put the second string punter (Sungenis, the geocentrist leader), who played a little third string tight end in his college days, in as quarterback during the Superbowl so he can heave a Hail Mary pass in the third quarter from his own 30 yard line. The risk/reward just doesn't compute.

And it's not about mere "personalities" here, it's about demonstrated ability and earning a position, like everyone else has to. It's about really respecting and following the coaches rather making yourself the coach. It's about humbly accepting your role on the team and working up the depth chart the right way, like good teammates do. What the geocentrists are doing reminds me of players who go to the media to promote themselves at their coaches' and team's expense rather than working their way up within the team and listening to the coaches. They may claim to be about the "team", but they're really all about themselves.

If you really think that science proves geocentrism and you're committed to it, then I recommend you do what legit scientists do, Rick. Go make your case to other legit scientists. Write the papers and submit them for peer review. Earn the degrees in the relevant fields. Learn how frustrating and slow the scientific process can be. Press on. But it's not very convincing or helpful to take a technical mathematical and astronomical case to the general public. That's not what serious scientists do. That's the approach of the pop controversialist and huckster and it just helps to subject the Church to more mockery and derision.

I'd still like to know if your geocentric group is into other conspiracy theories beyond geocentrism. Do others in the group believe the NASA conspiracy theories, the Jewish conspiracy theories, the 9-11 Truther conspiracies, too? Or is that just your leader, Sungenis?

Thanks.

Wes, I did not ignore your questions. I simply pointed out that they do not proceed from any scientific or theological objection, and hence are completely irrelevant to me.

I am not being used by anyone, Wes.

I am discussing the recent scientific evidence which dramatically challenges the Copernican Principle.

I have no conceivable obligation to remain silent on these issues until Wes, or anyone else, decides that it is politically acceptable for me to address them.

Frankly, your insinuations in this regard are profoundly uncatholic.

I am a redeemed child of God, and I enjoy Catholic liberty, as well as obligation, to strive to form my conscience as a Catholic.

If you have any observation as to how I have failed to do this, I would be delighted to hear it and consider it.

The rest of your drivel is an embarrassment, a grotesque evidence of a personality which is more worried about how they "look", than about what is True.

Rick,

You wrote, "Wes, I did not ignore your questions. I simply pointed out that they do not proceed from any scientific or theological objection, and hence are completely irrelevant to me."

I think your answer here brings the problem home, Rick. It's not all about what you want and what you think is important. My questions may be irrelevant to you, but they're perfectly relevant to me and any other non-scientist and non-theologian who is looking at your extraordinary proposals.

Considering that you intend on doing something so monumental as overturning modern science and convincing Catholics that geocentrism is actually a doctrine of the Catholic Church (to the surprise of the Pope), I think it's perfectly reasonable and legit to ask more about what else you believe to be true. As I said before, very few of us are experts in science or theology. I don't have the time to be. I'm certainly not qualified to judge and sort out complex scientific and theological matters. So of course it makes complete sense to look closely at things like credibility and authority. You say that's totally uncatholic of me. But what could be more Catholic than establishing who has genuine authority and who has credibility? So I'm not sure why you're being so evasive and defensive about these questions. The head of your geocentrist group has been very open about his belief in conspiracy theories involving NASA, Jews and 9-11 Trutherism. I just don't know if they're isolated to him or if they extend to you and the rest of your group.

But as you seem to want to focus only on you, then could you at least give your educational background and say where you personally stand on all those conspiracy theories? I can't find any answers at the Galileo Was Wrong website and blog.

I'm not denying you liberty in regard to your beliefs and teaching about geocentrism as you complained, Rick. But liberty has to be balanced by wisdom, prudence, humility and a firm grip on responsibility or it becomes destructive. From what I've seen, in my opinion, your group is using liberty recklessly. I don't see evidence of serious consideration being given to the negative effect your group is having on the Church and souls. Maybe you really just want to do something heroic for the Church. But if you look around, that's obviously not what's actually happening. And although I don't doubt that you and your geocentrist group had no intention of being used by the media to embarrass the Church and expose it to ridicule and derision, it's obvious that you are being used in just that way, nonetheless. The only real question, I think, is whether you care enough to take the necessary steps now to stop harming the Church further and making her an object of ridicule and derision.

Again, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you may really only have had the very noblest of intentions and wanted to do something heroic for the Church. But the objective results of your group's efforts are something completely different. So now that all of this in front of you (LA Times, Chicago Trib, blogs and websites across the country) and it can't reasonably be denied by anyone with two eyes and a little common sense, your decisions from here on will say a lot about your true interests and intentions. If you and your group continue on this path, then it will be hard to conclude that this is really about much more than a desire for notoriety.

At the very least, if you really only want to make a positive difference, then your group should stop making your geocentric case to the general public at this point. That's what pop controversialists and hucksters do. Be humble and patient enough to do it the right way (the way I mentioned in my previous comment above) and trust God to take care of the rest, in His time.

I'll say a prayer for your discernment, Rick.

Wes:

I have no intention, nor conceivable obligation, to submit to your demand that I cease pointing out the scientific observations which so disturb you.

Therefore we must agree to disagree on the question.

You are not my bishop, and I have received no remotely similar request.

Your arrogance, in presuming to issue such outlandishly inappropriate demands, is matched only by your astounding small-mindedness with regard to the actual scientific issues at stake.

I believe this concludes our business.