[?] Subscribe To This Site

XML RSS
Add to Google
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My MSN
Subscribe with Bloglines


Home
Website Tools BLOG (Site Web Log)
Reference Material
Free e-mail "E-Zine"
Recommended Sites
Add Your Site Link
About Your Host
Your Personal WebPage
Submit An Article
Contact Me
Website Foundations Church, State & Law Pics
Mission Statement
Our Guiding Ethos
Critical Thinking
On Thinking Catholic
The Catholic Thinker
Cultural Morality
Catholic Culture
Dogmas of Secularism
Indifferentism
Culture Wars
Battle Lines
Constitutional America
The American Ideal
Scientism: Fads, Straw-Villains and Shell-Game Trickery The Modernist Heresy
Enlightenment=Scientism
The Darwinism Fad
The Freudianism Fad
The Marxism Fad
Radiocarbon Dating
The Femi-Nazi Front
The Eco-Nazi Front
The Homo-Nazi Front
HIV=AIDS=DEATH Hoax
The Great Communist Lie
This ain't Health Care
Global Consensual Fraud
The 2008 Bush-Obama Great Depression 2008 Financial Crisis
2008 Election Forecast
2008 Marxist Infiltration
Marxist Seeds of Disaster
2008 Obama Ethos
2008 Political Crisis
2008 World Economy
2008 Obama Election
Obamunism The Marxism of Obama
Deliverance From Evil
In Defense of Obama
Values Vs Ethos
Up From Obamunism
Sarah Palinism Why Hatred of Palen?
A Palin-Parker Ticket?
Elitism Versus Palinism
Cafeteria Catholicism Cafe-Catholicism 101
Cafeteria Catholic 1
Cafeteria Catholic 2
Cafeteria Catholic 3
Cafeteria Catholic 4
Cafeteria Catholic 5
Major Moral Issues Population Problem Hoax
Artificial Contraception
Abortion in America
Masturbation Industry
The Church and Slavery
Forums Cafeteria Catholic Forum
Pro Catholic Forum
Pro American Forum
Catholic Issues The 1962 Latin Mass
The Liturgical Wars
Eucharistic Presence
Papal Infallibility
Perpetual Virginity
Catholic Annulment
Catholic Prayer
This Rotten Church
Truth versus Evil
Authority Meets Truth
The Little Red Hen
Of Sheep and Men
Trashing Pius XII
Catholic Orthodoxy
Our Lady of Siluva
Historical Critical Crap
Freedom, Love and Evil
The Nature of Freedom
Right Versus Wrong
Catholic Communism
Proper Catechesis
American Issues American Constitution
Leftist Useful Idiocy
Pro-American Definition
Anti-American Definition
Anti-American Politics
Anti Anti-Americanism
Warning all Bourgeoisie
Marxist Fundamentals
Papal Global Economics
Us Arrogant Americans
Our Political Landscape
Bush Family Class
Colonial Communism
Oil Spill Crisis
War and Peace Gun Control
The Necessity Of  War
Limited War Doctrine
For God and Country
Hard, Cold History The Inquisition Myth
The Galileo Inquisitions
The Medieval Crusades
Byzantine 4th Crusade
The Godless Left
Rabbi Kahane's Letter
Solzhenitsyn Speaks
Jefferson Speaks
World Revolution Again
Islam Vs. All Other Forms of Government Islam and the Jews
Islam Opposes America
Murderous Islam
A Kinder Gentler Islam
The Islamic Theocracy
Outlawing Sharia
Israel Stands Alone
Israel: Islam's Nemisis
Faith & Reason Vs Islam
Islam Is The Enemy.
Mainstream News: Our Anti-American Propaganda Machine The Vietnam War
The SLIMC Vs. the Truth
Bush Lied People Died
Media Lies and Liars
Daily Gaggle Cartoon
Tet Lie Redux
Cronkite Lies Again
Site Definitions: Darwinism Defined
Freudianism Defined
Marxism Defined
Conservatism Defined
Definition of Libertarian
Capitalism Defined
Subsidiarity Defined
Communism Defined
Socialism Defined
Democracy Defined
Republic Defined
Pure Democracy Defined
Pure Socialism Defined
Social Democracy Def.
Site Rollover Links: GESGOEAOT
PEWAG
TTRSTF
TTRSPTF
TTRSJTF
SNRTACBT
STNSEACPB
WDN
SLIMC
BMDFP
HBAACOTE
ACLU
FLORMPORIF
MEJTML
MPAV
WBESSWG
Our Arguments & Open Challenges Arguments Pro and Con
Refuting Darwin
Refuting Freud
Refuting Marx
This Christian Nation
Church, State and Law
Opposing Libertarianism
Legislating Morality
"Private Matter" Relgion
The Sexual Revolution
Open Homosexuality
Refuting Pro-Choice
Opposing Sharia Law
Socialized Medicine
Socialized Education
Fair Tax Revolution
Against Earmarks
Against Unions
Affirmtive Action Racism
Against Diversity
Disgusting Moderation
Against Fads
Our National Language
Against Dispair
Against Death Penalty
Against Income Controls
The Anti-American UN
Scope of Government
Fatal False Premises
Topical Articles & Essays National People-hood
Atheizing America
Redirection of Ethos?
National Existence
Worldly Village-ism
It's Not MY Language
Chastity vs Sophistication
Racial Victimology
Poor Vic's Old Truck
Illegal Aliens and Taxes
Illegal Alien Problems
See SITE MAP on Home Page for all past articles The Way Out

The Galileo Inquisition

Vic Biorseth, http://www.Thinking-Catholic-Strategic-Center.com

Galileo Galilei

The Galileo Inquisition (investigation) came to mark a truly pivotal point in the history of Western Civilization. It was a fairly significant event at the time, but it would gain greater and greater importance in later centuries. Today any mention you see of the Galileo inquisition through the popular media will, in a broad-brush sort of way, write the whole thing off as a contentious issue of “science” that confronted a dogmatic Church in a dark, ignorant, superstitious era. In this long popularized “martyr” view, Galileo Galilei was a heroic scientist defending truth against a backward and oppressive Church that sought to stifle scientific progress. A very simple story, at least when the broad-brush is applied,

But the true story of the Galileo inquisition is considerably more complex and multi faceted.

The Galileo Inquisition in a Nutshell.

Rather than a simple conflict between science and religion, it was a conflict between Copernican science and Aristotelian science, and the latter had by that time become intertwined and woven into both Western culture and Church tradition, with a small-t. (Small-t tradition is that which is not related to Revelation; large-T Tradition is that which comes to us out of fixed and unchanging Christian Revelation, known as Public Revelation.)

Galileo expressed scientific views supporting Copernicus, and also his related biblical views, in a 1615 letter to the Grand Duchess of Tuscany. Although it was a private letter never intended for publication, the references to Scripture contained in it were focused upon, and became the basis of his first examination, trial and censure. This was the first of two trials of the Galileo inquisition. As a result of this censure he promised, under pain of further punishment, to not hold or publish Copernican theory as scientific fact, but only as unproven theory or hypothesis. As a matter of pure science, at that time, the theory was indeed unproven, by Galileo or by anyone, and was very much up in the air.

Not only were the two competing theories under hot debate in scientific circles, but the timing of events was crucial to the importance given the whole matter by the Church. The Reformation was introducing all sorts of new “revelations” born of non-authoritative group and even individual new interpretations of Scripture. In the midst of identifying and challenging new and heretical Scripture interpretations, along comes the Galileo inquisition and an apparent Scriptural re-interpretation by a layman, who was also challenging the established science of the day.

That’s what originally lit the whole fire.

Then, in 1632, Galileo published a major work in which he violated his 1615 agreement to not hold or teach Copernican theory as actual fact. That is what resulted in Galileo's conviction on suspicion of heresy resulting in a lifetime house arrest. The issue at hand, and for which he was ultimately sentenced was not Galileo’s science; it was the violation of his earlier agreement. The Galileo inquisition (actually it was inquisitions) provides some important lessons applicable both to the Church and to science today.

The Science involved in the Galileo inquisition.

We need to remember that, at the time of the Galileo inquisition, the whole world was of one mind regarding the nature of the universe, and that was the ancient Ptolemic earth-centered view. Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) taught that the universe was fixed, finite and spherical, with a fixed and stationary earth at its center. Enclosing the whole sphere of the universe is the larger sphere of Prime Motion, turned by the First Unmoved Mover. Between the inner sphere and the outer sphere were the multiple transparent spheres containing fixed and unchanging stars, planets, moon and sun. Aristotle was, primarily, a renowned philosopher.

Clement and Origen (185-254 A.D.) sought to reconcile Aristotelian-Greek wisdom in philosophy and the sciences with Scriptural wisdom. They imagined separate literal, moral, and spiritual senses of Bible passages, in the original ideas that would be expanded into the five senses seen in Concordism today. Augustine (354-430 A.D.) accepted this allegorical interpretation approach. Augustinian thought intertwined theology, philosophy and culture, a trend that would be expanded upon by Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274 A.D.)

The difficulty posed by this philosophical trend, at the time of the Galileo inquisition, was that the Church gave equal value to large-T Tradition and to Scripture. But it was getting more and more difficult to differentiate between large-T tradition and small-t tradition.

The Renaissance Period (1300-1600 A.D.) experienced a rebirth and reinforcement of Greek-Aristotelian philosophy and science, which was already deeply embedded in Roman Catholic philosophy and small-t tradition. The most serious scientific error of the day, probably, was general acceptance of an earth-centered cosmos. Even the newer and expanding Renaissance thought placed man at the center of the universe.

Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543 A.D.), a Renaissance man, developed a new cosmology, with the sun at the center, the earth rotating about a polar axis, and the earth and planets circling the sun,.

Enter Galileo Galilei (1564-1642 A.D.), another Renaissance man. He was at first dedicated to physics, but turned to astronomy after he built his first telescope. Then, he turned to astronomy, and his discoveries shocked the Aristotelian scientific world. He observed the rugged features on the surface of the moon, and he observed the motion of four of Jupiter's moons, and contemporary scientists could no longer say that all heavenly bodies revolve exclusively around the earth. He even observed the phases of Venus, perhaps most shocking of all at the time. The only reasonable explanation for Venus having phases, like the moon, was if Venus orbited the sun rather than the earth.

It appears that Galileo’s temperament made of him more of a grunt than a diplomat; he seems to have enjoyed a good fight, and the more he was pressed, the more belligerent he would become. Responses to his discoveries seemed to be extreme, one way or another. He enjoyed some quite enthusiastic support, but he also experienced vehement and even hostile opposition. He defended his theory with passion and attacked foes with dominating, forceful and even insulting sarcasm, which began to make him some serious and vengeful enemies, in science, in academia and in the Church.

He loved debate. He might have spent as much time arguing as doing science. His enemies charged that he was ramming Copernicus down the throat of Christianity. The Greek-Aristotelian science that was so intertwined with Church thinking was definitely going out of style, but Galileo was pushing so hard as to not allow time or space or wiggle-room for the Church or the larger culture, which needed to more slowly digest, understand and adapt. The Church, especially, recognized no significant dividing lines between theology and science; it was all philosophy, or the quest for ultimate truth. And so, for some, if Aristotelian thought was wrong, then that might make Christianity wrong, which was unthinkable.

Add to this the building list of “forbidden literature” born of Martin Luther’s (1483-1546 A.D.) renunciation of Church authority and new Scripture interpretations, among the many others, all born of the Reformation. The Church forbade Catholics access to this heretical literature, which included any and all literature challenging orthodox Scripture interpretation.

The Galileo Inquisition reads Galileo’s Letter.

“Concerning the Use of Biblical Quotations in Matters of Science” was the title of the famous 1615 letter from Galileo to Madame Christina of Lorraine, the Grand Duchess of Tuscany. The Galileo inquisition used this letter in his first trial to turn the matter from science to another (heretical?) Scripture interpretation by a layman, in an era of rampant lay re-interpretation of Scripture. In my opinion, if Galileo had never mentioned or written about Scripture interpretations, he probably would have eventually won his scientific argument after a long and costly but predominantly secular period of argument and proof. After all, he was correct.

Nevertheless, he did indeed mention and write about Scripture interpretation, in a time when Church authority was being publicly challenged on it, and we see what the result of that was. The Galileo inquisition directed him to relinquish holding Copernican theory as fact and to abstain from teaching or defending Copernicanism as doctrine or true, or even to discuss it as such. Galileo obediently renounced Copernicanism and agreed to teach it no more. In March 1616 there followed a decree of the Congregation of the Index prohibiting various “heretical” works, and to which were added any works advocating the Copernican system; it contained no mention of Galileo or of any of his works.

Then, in 1632, Galileo published a new major work that brought the whole issue and all the associated animosities up again. In this work was a dialogue between a Ptolemist and two Copernicans, in which the Copernicans devastate the Ptolemist arguments and prove the case for Copernican theory. Of course, being in violation of his 1615 agreement with Rome, it was taken by the Church to be an open public challenge of their authority. Again he was made to appear in Rome to explain himself.

There is a point of contention here that I cannot prove one way or the other. Galileo’s defense was that he had never held the Copernican theory to be true, and therefore didn’t believe he had violated his signed agreement. But when the signed agreement was produced, it seemed to be much longer and contain more detail than remembered, and it was clear that he had indeed violated it’s terms with his new work.

Some contend that the signed letter produced at the Galileo inquisition was a forgery, done by an enemy holding a high office in Rome, probably a cardinal. Others contend that this is false, and the letter is the original one from the original investigating inquisition. I don’t know how to prove this one way or the other; however, Galileo had indeed made a lot of vengeful enemies, and so an elaborate forgery is not out of the question in my mind. At any rate, the signed letter produced at this second inquisition went considerably farther than prohibiting holding the theory to be true, and prohibited holding it at all.

Galileo was a very brilliant man; whatever else he was, he most certainly was not stupid. I tend to believe that he was probably the victim of a vengeful forger.

As an interesting side note, both Luther and Calvin publicly condemned Galileo outright as a heretic, and would have had him burned at the stake if they could have gotten their hands on him.

Galileo was never tortured. He was never really imprisoned, in the normal sense of the term. While in Rome he was maintained in comfortable chambers with servants, and he spent the rest of his life under “house arrest” in his own home. He was condemned as “vehemently suspected of heresy” and sentenced to incarceration at the pleasure of the tribunal, and to recite the Seven Penitential Psalms once a week for three years. He remained a prisoner in his own home until his death in 1642; the same year Newton was born. He was blind for the last five years of his life, and in declining health.

The Galileo Inquisition Aftermath.

The Galileo inquisition was and is popularly portrayed as part of the mythical ”The Inquisition” involving torture and basic unfairness and unlimited power of investigators and the Church. There is a popular Goya illustration of Galileo bound with arms stretched out, hunched over with rocks piled on him, titled “For Having Discovered the Movement of the Earth.” Of course, that little falsehood goes right along with all the rest of the dark scientistic fiction regarding the Church.

The Enlightenment-Scientism inspired Scientist-Martyr version of the Galileo inquisition story has him saying “E pur si muove” as he rose from his knees after renouncing Copernicanism. This is pure fabrication; there is no record of any such thing until more than a hundred years after the events. The Martyr version also holds that the Galileo inquisition story was purely one that pitted the Church against science. In actual fact, most of the most heated debate was between scientists of the different camps; Galileo never even argued with the Church. He was a man of faith as well as science. And we would not even be discussing the Galileo inquisition if Scripture had not been brought into it (in my opinion.)

In those days, if you argued a new scientific theory, you would get the Church’s attention, because so many high-ranking churchmen were also men of science. But you would be arguing more or less on equal footing. But, in those days, if you argued a new Scripture interpretation, you immediately got the whole Church on it’s feet and antagonistic, and you would not be arguing more or less on equal footing. The Church jealously guards the sole right to interpret Scripture and Tradition for the universal Church, and was super-sensitive to that responsibility in those troubled times of various new Protestant heresies.

We can hope that Galileo is in Heaven and smiling about all of this. And we can hope that, one day, enlightened scientism will emerge from its dark, superstitious, un-empirical and purely dogmatic belief system, and re-learn how to do real science, as Galileo did. We can wonder what Galileo might think about today’s majority of TTRSTF who dogmatically, uncritically and even blindly embrace Darwin’s silly superstition regarding macro evolution. They do so in the absolute absence of, not only evidence for it, but even in the absolute absence of any observation of it, by anyone, ever, in all of history. (All that’s ever been observed by anyone, including Darwin, is micro-evolution, meaning strictly within species.)

The Galileo inquisition has made the Church, however slowly, to take a much closer look at science, and the doing of good science. However, the so-called Enlightenment has made much of modern science into scientism – a dogmatic belief system, pure and simple. Their only defense of macro evolution – meaning between species – is that it’s the only explanation they have, and they have no better one. That’s it. Complete lack of any empirical evidence for it, or even any observation supporting the theory is not seen as evidence against it. Therefore, what they do is not science.

The Galileo Inquisition was a whole lot more scientific than that.



Reference Material

Return to Web Site Log (Blog) page

Return to HOME PAGE

Build/Host/Maintain Your Own Personal Website using SBI! (Advertisement)


Comments


Date: Mon Feb 09 18:53:54 2009
From: Tyler Morehouse
Email:
Subject: Naples FL
Comment:

What you left out is more important than all you said here. The Catholic Church believed that the earth was flat and never changed that teaching. The Catholic Church opposed science before, during and after the trial of Galileo.


Date: Tue Feb 10 07:27:42 2009
From: Vic Biorseth
Subject: To Tyler from Naples
Comment:

Tyler:

I beg your pardon; the Catholic Church never taught any such thing.

The shape of the earth had nothing whatsoever to do with the Galileo argument. That’s not what the hot scientific debate of the time was about at all; it looks like you’ve missed the whole point of the controversy. Perhaps you should go back and re-study the history of it.

The shape of the earth had been settled long before Galileo’s day. No one in that era believed that the earth was flat. Everyone knew it was spherical, and that includes Catholic clerics who were also scientists.

I challenge you to produce any historical evidence of the Catholic Church opposing science, before, during or after the trial of Galileo.

Regards,

Vic


Please note the language and tone already established in this Website. This is not the place to stack up vulgar one-liners and crude rejoinders. While you may support, oppose or introduce any position or argument, your comments must meet our standards of logical rigor and of civil discourse. We will not participate in trading insults, and we will not tolerate participants trading insults with each other. Participants should not be thin-skinned or over sensitive to criticism, but should be prepared to defend their arguments when challenged. If you don’t really have a coherent argument or counter-argument of your own, sit down and don’t embarrass yourself. If you have something serious to contribute to the conversation, please keep it civil. We apologize to religious conservative thinkers for the need to even say these things.


ADD COMMENT
Please note that all fields followed by an asterisk must be filled in.
Name / Pseudo-Name:*
E-mail Address:
City / State / Country:
Comment:*

Please enter the word that you see below.

  


footer for the galileo inquisition page