I did not assert anything. Let me quote my own post:
Quote:
|
I think that either this was done despite the fact that the benefactors were Catholics or maybe because unofficial atheists infiltrated the church.
|
It's a legitimate doubt which I expressed and which, if true, cannot be proven. Even the fact that the church was never infiltrated cannot be proved. So we end up in the same position we usually end up when discussing the existance/non-existance of God. Just like atheism/theism is a matter of faith, the infiltration or not in the church of atheists will probably remain a matter of belief too.
As Graeme said in his post, it would be illogical for such an anti-science Church to invest in the same science. I am not saying it's not possible that the Church underestimated the power of science and actually helped to bring to life something which in the end killed her but I think that is perfectly logical and sensible to have doubts on the faith of people who invested so heavily in science research.
In nature, it's not the first time that an offspring actually kills his own mother and maybe the relation between the science and the church is just that
