What evidence are you aware of that the Church condemned those particular propositions for being “science” (natural philosophy), rather than for being “errors” (falsehoods)?
My point was that the church considered the evidence for the propositions suspect since it was merely “science” (natural philosophy).
My point was that the church considered the evidence for the propositions suspect since it was merely “science” (natural philosophy).
I’m pretty sure I understood your point. I was asking for some reasons to think your point is true.