The Church as imagined by "Cosmos" |
About halfway through last Sunday’s premiere of Fox’s
reimagined Cosmos, host Neil deGrasse
Tyson told the story of Giordano Bruno, a sixteenth century Dominican monk who,
inspired by an apparent divine revelation, embraced and expanded on the
Copernican model of heliocentrism, which posits that the earth revolves around
the sun. Bruno went even further than
Copernicus in arguing that the sun itself was but another star and that the
other stars had planets themselves. In
fact, he argued, “the universe is then one, infinite, immobile.... It is not
capable of comprehension and therefore is endless and limitless, and to that
extent infinite and indeterminable, and consequently immobile.” The sequence culminates in Bruno yelling to
his Inquisitors, “Your God is too small,” before they condemn him to death for
heresy and burn him at the stake.
It’s a beautifully animated, well-told sequence that
effectively demonstrates the problems that religious groups have had in
embracing new ideas over the last several centuries. This, obviously, has led to a great outcry
claiming that Cosmos is
anti-Christian or even anti-religious. Surprisingly enough, not all of the anti-Church
interpretation has been coming from the religious right. Television critic Matt Zoller Seitz wrote atVulture
that Cosmos “[paints] organized
religion as an irrelevant and intellectually discredited means of understanding
factual reality.” For Seitz, the show
was an incredible rebuke of Christianity, “a striking departure” from Sagan’s
original which, while more spiritual and New Age-y than religious, at least “carved
out space” for believers. In this
interpretation, Sagan allowed Christians to find a place for themselves in the
cosmos, while Tyson seems to be excluding them intentionally.
The bulk of the criticism, however, came from Christian viewers. Unfortunately, it all gets bogged down in the
details of Bruno’s story (as told by Cosmos),
rather than dealing with the larger allegory that Tyson is trying to make. Some, like Tony Rossi at Patheos, chose to focus on the fact that Bruno was not a scientist, but more or less
lucked into his mostly correct interpretation of the heavens – a fact that
Tyson, himself, admits in the episode.
Jay W. Richards of Evolution News & Views
decided to criticize the Cosmos
argument that Bruno was executed because of his views on astronomy rather than
his views on the Trinity, Virgin Birth, and Transubstantiation. And Thomas L. McDonald brought a cultural relativism argument into play by arguing that we can’t apply
modern concepts such as Freedom of Expression onto a sixteenth century Church
that had no ability to even comprehend such ideas.
To be fair, these criticisms aren’t necessarily wrong. A ten minute vignette is probably not the
best venue for fully discussing such a complex issue. After all, Bruno was not a scientist, as
Tyson says. He had a vision, a dream,
and believed that to be The Truth. He
then turned that Truth into a version of Christianity that was at odds with the
Catholic Church. It’s probably accurate
to say that Bruno was burned at the stake not for his views on the Heavens but
for how his heavenly vision shaped his religious interpretation.
These are valid criticisms.
But it is here where the critics, McDonald especially, get it most
wrong. The story of Giorodano Bruno, as
told by Cosmos, is not just a
historical retelling. It is also an
allegory for our modern times. What the
religious critics – especially McDonald and his historical relativism – don’t
recognize is that there are still people
who think this way today. Certainly
there aren’t any people advocating for burning heretics at the stake, but there
are still people who think the Earth is six thousand years old because they counted
up all of the “begats” in the Bible.
There are people who believe that the Biblical story of the Creation
should not only be taken literally, but that this interpretation should be
taught in school science classes. Believe
me, I’m from Kansas. I know of what I speak.
Let me be clear. I am
a Christian. I believe that God created
the heavens and the Earth. But I also
believe that science is our best tool for exploring and understanding God’s
creation. Cosmos is not opposed to Christianity, nor is it opposed to
religion. It is opposed to the kind of
anti-science rhetoric that would have United States Senators and Presidential candidates trying to “teach the controversy” in school classrooms. It is opposed to those people who would exert
such a strong force in politics that they would make the Governor of Texas afraid
to even speculate on the age of our planet. It is opposed to those who would say that
evolution is “just a theory” but who don’t understand what exactly a scientific
theory is.
There is nothing inherently anti-Christian about Cosmos.
Rather, it is trying to say to those who would deny scientific
accomplishments, “Your God is too small!”
To those who would believe that they can restrict the immensity and
awesomeness of our Creator to a 1200-page book (or even to a 50-page section of
that book), “Your God is too small!” Cosmos insists that, if there is a God,
He is far beyond our definitions. He is
a God so omnipotent that He can merely press a button (The Big Bang) and set
the world He wants in motion.
Carl Sagan once said “science is not only compatible with
spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.” There is nothing in Fox’s Cosmos that denies this view. The story of Giordano Bruno as not meant to
be taken as a literal attack on the Catholic Church. Rather it, like the Cosmic Calendar, is an
allegory designed to inform us of the peril of ignoring progressive minds in
favor of staid traditionalism. Even if
Bruno was a kook (which he basically was), his ideas deserved
consideration. And the religious minds
of the time were unwilling to give consideration to ideas that did not fit
their preconceived notions of God. We
live now in a time that is much more forgiving of different ideas, but we are
still surrounded by people who are unwilling to give consideration to ideas
that do not fit their preconceived notions of God. Cosmos does
not set out to ridicule these people, but rather that to make them realize that
their God is just too small.
So thoughts?
Comments? Just want to tell me
that my blog sucks? Let me know in the
comments or on Twitter @TyTalksTV.
Robert Barron on science vs scientism --
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF8mgwgIKGE
Here's his critique on the COSMOS reboot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd3Y1tCwlBo