Inquisitionsprozess gegen galileo biography

17th century conflict between Galileo Galilei and high-mindedness Roman Catholic Church

The Galileo affair (Italian: il processo a Galileo Galilei) began around 1610,^[1] and culminated with the trial and condemnation of Galileo Galilei by the Roman Catholic Inquisition in 1633.

Stargazer was prosecuted for holding as true the dogma of heliocentrism, the astronomical model in which say publicly Earth and planets revolve around the Sun even the centre of the universe.

In 1610, Uranologist published his Sidereus Nuncius (Starry Messenger), describing honesty observations that he had made with his different, much stronger telescope, amongst them, the Galilean moons of Jupiter.

With these observations and additional materials that followed, such as the phases of Urania, he promoted the heliocentric theory of Nicolaus Uranologist published in De revolutionibus orbium coelestium in 1543. Galileo's opinions were met with opposition within goodness Catholic Church, and in 1616 the Inquisition professed heliocentrism to be "formally heretical".

Galileo went deepen to propose a theory of tides in 1616, and of comets in 1619; he argued ramble the tides were evidence for the motion homework the Earth.

In 1632, Galileo published his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which defended heliocentrism, and was immensely popular.

Responding to uphill controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, the European Inquisition tried Galileo in 1633, found him "vehemently suspect of heresy", and sentenced him to homestead arrest where he remained until his death temper 1642.^[2] At that point, heliocentric books were against the law and Galileo was ordered to abstain from residence incumbency, teaching or defending heliocentric ideas after the trial.^[3]

The affair was complex since very early on Holy father Urban VIII had been a patron to Uranologist and had given him permission to publish portion the Copernican theory as long as he microwavable it as a hypothesis, but after the revise in 1632, the patronage was broken off entitlement to numerous reasons.^[4] Historians of science have apochromatic numerous false interpretations of the affair.^[2][5][6]

Initial controversies

Galileo began his telescopic observations in the later part be in opposition to 1609, and by March 1610 was able run into publish a small book, The Starry Messenger (Sidereus Nuncius), describing some of his discoveries: mountains introduce the Moon, lesser moons in orbit around Jove, and the resolution of what had been esteem to be very cloudy masses in the aspiration (nebulae) into collections of stars too faint obviate see individually without a telescope.

Other observations followed, including the phases of Venus and the life of sunspots.

Galileo's contributions caused difficulties for theologians and natural philosophers of the time, as they contradicted scientific and philosophical ideas based on those of Aristotle and Ptolemy and closely associated be introduced to the Catholic Church.

In particular, Galileo's observations take possession of the phases of Venus, which showed it hint at circle the Sun, and the observation of moons orbiting Jupiter, contradicted the geocentric model of Dynasty, which was backed and accepted by the Weighty Catholic Church,^[7][8] and supported the Copernican model modern by Galileo.^[9]

Jesuit astronomers, experts both in Church point, science, and in natural philosophy, were at foremost skeptical and hostile to the new ideas; nevertheless, within a year or two the availability custom good telescopes enabled them to repeat the statistics.

In 1611, Galileo visited the Collegium Romanum just the thing Rome, where the Jesuit astronomers by that period had repeated his observations. Christoph Grienberger, one donation the Jesuit scholars on the faculty, sympathized coworker Galileo's theories, but was asked to defend rectitude Aristotelian viewpoint by Claudio Acquaviva, the Father Accepted of the Jesuits.

Not all of Galileo's claims were completely accepted: Christopher Clavius, the most memorable astronomer of his age, never was reconciled just a stone's throw away the idea of mountains on the Moon, captain outside the collegium many still disputed the authenticity of the observations. In a letter to Uranologist of August 1610,^[10] Galileo complained that some be fond of the philosophers who opposed his discoveries had refused even to look through a telescope:^[11]

My dear Uranologist, I wish that we might laugh at honesty remarkable stupidity of the common herd.

What conduct you have to say about the principal philosophers of this academy who are filled with excellence stubbornness of an asp and do not hope for to look at either the planets, the minion or the telescope, even though I have cheerfully and deliberately offered them the opportunity a loads times? Truly, just as the asp stops betrayal ears, so do these philosophers shut their vision to the light of truth.^[12]

Geocentrists who did substantiate and accept Galileo's findings had an alternative prove Ptolemy's model in an alternative geocentric (or "geo-heliocentric") model proposed some decades earlier by Tycho Brahe – a model in which, for example, Urania circled the Sun.

Tycho argued that the regress to the stars in the Copernican system would have to be 700 times greater than rendering distance from the Sun to Saturn. (The closest star other than the Sun, Proxima Centauri, admiration in fact over 28,000 times the distance exaggerate the Sun to Saturn.) Moreover, the only clear up the stars could be so distant and undertake appear the sizes they do in the arch would be if even average stars were enormous – at least as big as the turn of the Earth, and of course vastly better than the sun.

(See the articles on authority Tychonic System and Stellar parallax.)

Galileo became go in a dispute over priority in the catch of sunspots with Christoph Scheiner, a Jesuit. That became a bitter lifelong feud. Neither of them, however, was the first to recognise sunspots – the Chinese had already been familiar with them for centuries.^[13]

At this time, Galileo also engaged alter a dispute over the reasons that objects waft or sink in water, siding with Archimedes wreck Aristotle.

The debate was unfriendly, and Galileo's roughspoken and sometimes sarcastic style, though not extraordinary break off academic debates of the time, made him enemies. During this controversy one of Galileo's friends, high-mindedness painter Lodovico Cardi da Cigoli, informed him go off at a tangent a group of malicious opponents, which Cigoli in the end referred to derisively as "the Pigeon league",^[14] was plotting to cause him trouble over the hillock of the Earth, or anything else that would serve the purpose.^[15] According to Cigoli, one divest yourself of the plotters asked a priest to denounce Galileo's views from the pulpit, but the latter refused.

Nevertheless, three years later another priest, Tommaso Caccini, did in fact do precisely that, as affirmed below.

Bible argument

Main article: Biblical cosmology

Further information: Scriptural inerrancy

In the Catholic world prior to Galileo's turmoil with the Church, the majority of educated group subscribed to the Aristotelian geocentric view that dignity Earth was the centre of the universe tell off that all heavenly bodies revolved around the Earth,^[16] though Copernican theories were used to reform justness calendar in 1582.^[17]

Geostaticism agreed with a literal clarification of Scripture in several places, such as 1 Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5, Ecclesiastes 1:5 (but see varied interpretations of Position 26:7).

Heliocentrism, the theory that the Earth was a planet, which along with all the nakedness revolved around the Sun, contradicted both geocentrism mushroom the prevailing theological support of the theory.

One of the first suggestions of heresy that Stargazer had to deal with came in 1613 put on the back burner a professor of philosophy, poet and specialist constant worry Greek literature, Cosimo Boscaglia.^[18][19] In conversation with Galileo's patron Cosimo II de' Medici and Cosimo's surround Christina of Lorraine, Boscaglia said that the telescopic discoveries were valid, but that the motion reduce speed the Earth was obviously contrary to Scripture:

Dr.

Boscaglia had talked to Madame [Christina] for a-ok while, and though he conceded all the belongings you have discovered in the sky, he aforesaid that the motion of the Earth was unbelievable and could not be, particularly since Holy Scriptures obviously was contrary to such motion.^[20]

Galileo was defended on the spot by his former student Benedetto Castelli, now a professor of mathematics and Benedictineabbot.

The exchange having been reported to Galileo unused Castelli, Galileo decided to write a letter brave Castelli,^[21] expounding his views on what he accounted the most appropriate way of treating scriptural passages which made assertions about natural phenomena.^[22] Later, acquit yourself 1615, he expanded this into his much thirster Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina.^[23]

Tommaso Caccini, systematic Dominicanfriar, appears to have made the first chancy attack on Galileo.

Preaching a sermon in Town at the end of 1614, he denounced Astronomer, his associates, and mathematicians in general (a variety that included astronomers).^[24] The biblical text for magnanimity sermon on that day was Joshua 10, make money on which Joshua makes the Sun stand still;^[24][25] that was the story that Castelli had to clear up for the Medici family the year before.^[26] Treasure is said, though it is not verifiable, dump Caccini also used the passage from Acts 1:11, "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven?".^[27]

First meetings with theological authorities

In look out over 1614 or early 1615, one of Caccini's guy Dominicans, Niccolò Lorini, acquired a copy of Galileo's letter to Castelli.

Lorini and other Dominicans bulldoze the Convent of San Marco considered the communication of doubtful orthodoxy, in part because it may well have violated the decrees of the Council rule Trent:

check unbridled spirits, [the Holy Council] decrees that no one relying on his bill judgement shall, in matters of faith and average pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, distorting the Scriptures in accordance with his own conceptions, presume to interpret them contrary to that esoteric which the holy mother Church...

has held put out of order holds...

— Decree of the Council of Trent (1545–1563). Quoted in Langford, 1992.^[28]

Lorini and his colleagues decided be familiar with bring Galileo's letter to the attention of excellence Inquisition. In February 1615, Lorini accordingly sent fastidious copy to the Secretary of the Inquisition, Imperative Paolo Emilio Sfondrati, with a covering letter fault-finding of Galileo's supporters:^[29]

All our Fathers of the worshipful Convent of St.

Mark feel that the report contains many statements which seem presumptuous or consider, as when it states that the words drug Holy Scripture do not mean what they say; that in discussions about natural phenomena the right of Scripture should rank last... . [The set attendants of Galileo] were taking it upon themselves combat expound the Holy Scripture according to their covert lights and in a manner different from primacy common interpretation of the Fathers of the Church...

— Letter from Lorini to Cardinal Sfrondato, Inquisitor in Riot, 1615.

Quoted in Langford, 1992^[28]

On March 19, Caccini arrived at the Inquisition's offices in Rome don denounce Galileo for his Copernicanism and various distress alleged heresies supposedly being spread by his pupils.^[30]

Galileo soon heard reports that Lorini had obtained capital copy of his letter to Castelli and was claiming that it contained many heresies.

He besides heard that Caccini had gone to Rome leading suspected him of trying to stir up worry with Lorini's copy of the letter.^[31] As 1615 wore on he became more concerned, and at last determined to go to Rome as soon chimp his health permitted, which it did at justness end of the year. By presenting his file there, he hoped to clear his name chastisement any suspicion of heresy, and to persuade honourableness Church authorities not to suppress heliocentric ideas.

The role of literature as a witness to scenery has changed as radically as the as- safety test of this role.

In going to Rome Stargazer was acting against the advice of friends extract allies, and of the Tuscan ambassador to Brawl, Piero Guicciardini.^[32]

Bellarmine

Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, one of the nearly respected Catholic theologians of the time, was hailed on to adjudicate the dispute between Galileo ahead his opponents.

The question of heliocentrism had be in first place been raised with Cardinal Bellarmine, in the sell something to someone of Paolo Antonio Foscarini, a Carmelite father; Foscarini had published a book, Lettera ... sopra l'opinione ... del Copernico, which attempted to reconcile Stargazer with the biblical passages that seemed to facsimile in contradiction.

Bellarmine at first expressed the picture that Copernicus's book would not be banned, on the other hand would at most require some editing so thanks to to present the theory purely as a artful device for "saving the appearances" (i.e. preserving justness observable evidence).^[33]

Foscarini sent a copy of his whole to Bellarmine, who replied in a letter obvious April 12, 1615.^[34] Galileo is mentioned by fame in the letter, and a copy was presently sent to him.

After some preliminary salutations bid acknowledgements, Bellarmine begins by telling Foscarini that take in is prudent for him and Galileo to authority themselves to treating heliocentrism as a merely supposed phenomenon and not a physically real one. Too on he says that interpreting heliocentrism as embody real would be "a very dangerous thing, doubtless not only to irritate all scholastic philosophers cranium theologians, but also to harm the Holy Devoutness by rendering Holy Scripture as false." Moreover, size the topic was not inherently a matter manipulate faith, the statements about it in Scripture were so by virtue of who said them – namely, the Holy Spirit.

He conceded that in case there were conclusive proof, "then one would scheme to proceed with great care in explaining depiction Scriptures that appear contrary; and say rather turn we do not understand them, than that what is demonstrated is false." However, demonstrating that heliocentrism merely "saved the appearances" could not be supposed as sufficient to establish that it was colour real.

Although he believed that the former haw well have been possible, he had "very textbook doubts" that the latter would be, and spitting image case of doubt it was not permissible observe depart from the traditional interpretation of Scriptures. King final argument was a rebuttal of an congruence that Foscarini had made between a moving Lie and a ship on which the passengers prevail on themselves as apparently stationary and the receding foreshore as apparently moving.

Bellarmine replied that in class case of the ship the passengers know focus their perceptions are erroneous and can mentally assess them, whereas the scientist on the Earth distinctly experiences that it is stationary and therefore rendering perception that the Sun, Moon and stars designing moving is not in error and does categorize need to be corrected.

Bellarmine found no fret with heliocentrism so long as it was set as a purely hypothetical calculating device and classify as a physically real phenomenon, but he sincere not regard it as permissible to advocate ethics latter unless it could be conclusively proved make safe current scientific standards.

This put Galileo in a-ok difficult position, because he believed that the to let evidence strongly favoured heliocentrism, and he wished support be able to publish his arguments.^[35]

Francesco Ingoli

In along with to Bellarmine, Monsignor Francesco Ingoli initiated a review with Galileo, sending him in January 1616 finish essay disputing the Copernican system.

Galileo later avowed that he believed this essay to have back number instrumental in the action against Copernicanism that followed in February.^[36] According to philosopher Maurice Finocchiaro, Ingoli had probably been commissioned by the Inquisition strike write an expert opinion on the controversy, champion the essay provided the "chief direct basis" take care of the ban.^[37] The essay focused on eighteen sublunary and mathematical arguments against heliocentrism.

It borrowed mainly from the arguments of Tycho Brahe, and miserly notedly mentioned Brahe's argument that heliocentrism required character stars to be much larger than the Phoebus apollo. Ingoli wrote that the great distance to ethics stars in the heliocentric theory "clearly proves ... the fixed stars to be of such magnitude, as they may surpass or equal the lion's share of the orbit circle of the Earth itself."^[38] Ingoli included four theological arguments in the structure, but suggested to Galileo that he focus excitement the physical and mathematical arguments.

Galileo did sound write a response to Ingoli until 1624, currency which, among other arguments and evidence, he catalogued the results of experiments such as dropping dexterous rock from the mast of a moving ship.^[39]

Inquisition and first judgment, 1616

Deliberation

On February 19, 1616, prestige Inquisition asked a commission of theologians, known introduce qualifiers, about the propositions of the heliocentric scene of the universe.^[40] Historians of the Galileo concern have offered different accounts of why the complication was referred to the qualifiers at this ahead.

Beretta points out that the Inquisition had infatuated a deposition from Gianozzi Attavanti in November 1615,^[41] as part of its investigation into the denunciations of Galileo by Lorini and Caccini. In that deposition, Attavanti confirmed that Galileo had advocated class Copernican doctrines of a stationary Sun and simple mobile Earth, and as a consequence the Obstruction of the Inquisition would have eventually needed figure up determine the theological status of those doctrines.

Become is however possible, as surmised by the Italian ambassador, Piero Guiccardini, in a letter to authority Grand Duke,^[42] that the actual referral may hold been precipitated by Galileo's aggressive campaign to prohibit the condemnation of Copernicanism.^[43]

Judgement

On February 24 the Qualifiers delivered their unanimous report: the proposition that birth Sun is stationary at the centre of representation universe is "foolish and absurd in philosophy, add-on formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in uncountable places the sense of Holy Scripture"; the debit that the Earth moves and is not use the centre of the universe "receives the tie in judgement in philosophy; and ...

in regard cluster theological truth it is at least erroneous top faith."^[44][45] The original report document was made near available in 2014.^[45][46]

At a meeting of the cardinals of the Inquisition on the following day, Saint Paul V instructed Bellarmine to deliver this elucidation to Galileo, and to order him to escape the Copernican opinions; should Galileo resist the ruling, stronger action would be taken.

On February 26, Galileo was called to Bellarmine's residence and sequential,

to abstain completely from teaching or defending that doctrine and opinion or from discussing it... rear abandon completely... the opinion that the sun stands still at the center of the world added the earth moves, and henceforth not to put a ceiling on, teach, or defend it in any way what, either orally or in writing.

— The Inquisition's injunction encroach upon Galileo, 1616.^[3][47]

With no attractive alternatives, Galileo accepted depiction orders delivered, even sterner than those recommended gross the Pope.^[3][48] Galileo met again with Bellarmine, superficially on friendly terms; and on March 11 pacify met with the Pope, who assured him deviate he was safe from prosecution so long in that he, the Pope, should live.

Nonetheless, Galileo's players Sagredo and Castelli reported that there were rumors that Galileo had been forced to recant endure do penance. To protect his good name, Uranologist requested a letter from Bellarmine stating the untrained of the matter. This letter assumed great monetary worth in 1633, as did the question whether Astronomer had been ordered not to "hold or defend" Copernican ideas (which would have allowed their reputed treatment) or not to teach them in unpolished way.

If the Inquisition had issued the reconstitute not to teach heliocentrism at all, it would have been ignoring Bellarmine's position.

In the finish, Galileo did not persuade the Church to freeze out of the controversy, but instead saw heliocentrism formally declared false. It was consequently termed heterodox by the Qualifiers, since it contradicted the verbatim meaning of the Scriptures, though this position was not binding on the Church.

Copernican books banned

Following the Inquisition's injunction against Galileo, the papal Leader of the Sacred Palace ordered that Foscarini's Letter be banned, and Copernicus' De revolutionibus suspended impending corrected. The papal Congregation of the Index favourite a stricter prohibition, and so with the Pope's approval, on March 5 the Congregation banned accomplished books advocating the Copernican system, which it titled "the false Pythagorean doctrine, altogether contrary to Venerated Scripture."^[3]

Francesco Ingoli, a consultor to the Holy Business, recommended that De revolutionibus be amended rather prior to banned due to its utility for calendrics.

Unplanned 1618, the Congregation of the Index accepted recommendation, and published their decision two years posterior, allowing a corrected version of Copernicus' book give in be used. The uncorrected De revolutionibus remained never-ending the Index of banned books until 1758.^[49]

Galileo's totality advocating Copernicanism were therefore banned, and his determination prohibited him from "teaching, defending… or discussing" Copernicanism.

In Germany, Kepler's works were also banned moisten the papal order.^[50]

Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Terra Systems

Main article: Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Pretend Systems

In 1623, Pope Gregory XV died and was succeeded by Pope Urban VIII who showed bigger favor to Galileo, particularly after Galileo traveled convey Rome to congratulate the new Pontiff.^[51]

Galileo's Dialogue For the Two Chief World Systems, which was obtainable in 1632 to great popularity,^[52] was an relish of conversations between a Copernican scientist, Salviati, breath impartial and witty scholar named Sagredo, and well-ordered ponderous Aristotelian named Simplicio, who employed stock explication in support of geocentricity, and was depicted tutor in the book as being an intellectually inept worry.

Simplicio's arguments are systematically refuted and ridiculed beside the other two characters with what Youngson calls "unassailable proof" for the Copernican theory (at minimum versus the theory of Ptolemy – as Finocchiaro points out, "the Copernican and Tychonic systems were observationally equivalent and the available evidence could suit explained equally well by either"^[53]), which reduces Simplicio to baffled rage, and makes the author's perpendicular unambiguous.^[51] Indeed, although Galileo states in the preamble of his book that the character is christian name after a famous Aristotelian philosopher (Simplicius in Denizen, Simplicio in Italian), the name "Simplicio" in European also had the connotation of "simpleton."^[54] Authors Langford and Stillman Drake asserted that Simplicio was sculpturesque on philosophers Lodovico delle Colombe and Cesare Cremonini.

Pope Urban demanded that his own arguments produce included in the book, which resulted in Stargazer putting them in the mouth of Simplicio. Thick-skinned months after the book's publication, Pope Urban Vii banned its sale and had its text submitted for examination by a special commission.^[51]

Trial and next judgment, 1633

With the loss of many of rule defenders in Rome because of Dialogue Concerning birth Two Chief World Systems, in 1633 Galileo was ordered to stand trial on suspicion of unorthodoxy "for holding as true the false doctrine unskilled by some that the sun is the sentiment of the world" against the 1616 condemnation, because "it was decided at the Holy Congregation [...] on 25 Feb 1616 that [...] the Hallowed Office would give you an injunction to surrender this doctrine, not to teach it to bareness, not to defend it, and not to sayso of it; and that if you did troupe acquiesce in this injunction, you should be imprisoned".^[55]

Galileo was interrogated while threatened with physical torture.^[50] Graceful panel of theologians, consisting of Melchior Inchofer, Agostino Oreggi and Zaccaria Pasqualigo, reported on the Dialogue.

Their opinions were strongly argued in favour locate the view that the Dialogue taught the Heliocentric theory.^[56]

Galileo was found guilty, and the sentence clench the Inquisition, issued on 22 June 1633,^[57] was in three essential parts:

• Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy", namely of having held authority opinions that the Sun lies motionless at dignity centre of the universe, that the Earth even-handed not at its centre and moves, and consider it one may hold and defend an opinion primate probable after it has been declared contrary money Holy Scripture.

  He was required to "abjure, adversity, and detest" those opinions.^[58]

• He was sentenced to calming imprisonment at the pleasure of the Inquisition.^[59] Discern the following day this was commuted to territory arrest, which he remained under for the siesta of his life.
• His offending Dialogue was banned; discipline in an action not announced at the pest, publication of any of his works was proscribed, including any he might write in the future.^[60]

According to popular legend, after his abjuration Galileo by all accounts muttered the rebellious phrase "and yet it moves" (Eppur si muove), but there is no verification that he actually said this or anything resembling.

The first account of the legend dates posture a century after his death.^[61] The phrase "Eppur si muove" does appear, however, in a photograph of the 1640s by the Spanish painter Bartolomé Esteban Murillo or an artist of his secondary. The painting depicts an imprisoned Galileo apparently aim to a copy of the phrase written haul the wall of his dungeon.^[62]

After a period form a junction with the friendly Archbishop Piccolomini in Siena, Galileo was allowed to return to his villa at Arcetri near Florence, where he spent the rest pointer his life under house arrest.^[63] He continued government work on mechanics, and in 1638 he obtainable a scientific book in Holland.

His standing would remain questioned at every turn. In March 1641, Vincentio Reinieri, a follower and pupil of Astronomer, wrote him at Arcetri that an Inquisitor abstruse recently compelled the author of a book printed at Florence to change the words "most special Galileo" to "Galileo, man of noted name".^[64]

However, to a limited in tribute to Galileo, at Arcetri the extreme academy devoted to the new experimental science, authority Accademia del Cimento, was formed, which is neighbourhood Francesco Redi performed controlled experiments, and many blot important advancements were made which would eventually aid usher in The Age of Enlightenment.

Modern views

Historians and scholars

Pope Urban VIII had been a fund to Galileo and had given him permission in the matter of publish on the Copernican theory as long although he treated it as a hypothesis, but puzzle out the publication in 1632, the patronage broke in arrears to Galileo placing Urban's arguments for God's divine right, which Galileo had been required to include, look onto the mouth of a simpleton character named "Simplicio" in the book; this caused great offense jab the Pope.^[4][65] There is some evidence that enemies of Galileo persuaded Urban that Simplicio was deliberate to be a caricature of him.

Modern historians have dismissed it as most unlikely that that had been Galileo's intention.^[65]

Dava Sobel argues that textile this time, Urban had fallen under the substance of court intrigue and problems of state. Her majesty friendship with Galileo began to take second threatening to his feelings of persecution and fear characterise his own life.

The problem of Galileo was presented to the pope by court insiders professor enemies of Galileo, following claims by a Romance cardinal that Urban was a poor defender elect the church. This situation did not bode spasm for Galileo's defense of his book.^[66]

In his 1998 book, Scientific Blunders, Robert Youngson indicates that Stargazer struggled for two years against the ecclesiastical outlaw to publish a book promoting heliocentrism.

He claims the book passed only as a result after everything else possible idleness or carelessness on the part game the censor, who was eventually dismissed. On honourableness other hand, Jerome K. Langford and Raymond List. Seeger contend that Pope Urban and the Judicature gave formal permission to publish the book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Ptolemaic & Copernican.

They claim Urban personally asked Galileo run into give arguments for and against heliocentrism in position book, to include Urban's own arguments, and compel Galileo not to advocate heliocentrism.^{[citation needed]}

Some historians invalidate Galileo's confrontation not only with the church, on the other hand also with Aristotelian philosophy, either secular or religious.^{[5][67][68][69]}

Views on Galileo's scientific arguments

While Galileo never claimed zigzag his arguments themselves directly proved heliocentrism to note down true, they were significant evidence in its favor.^[70] According to Finocchiaro, defenders of the Catholic church's position have sometimes attempted to argue, unsuccessfully, meander Galileo was right on the facts but think about it his scientific arguments were weak or unsupported coarse evidence of the day; Finocchiaro rejects this viewpoint, saying that some of Galileo's key epistemological premises are accepted fact today.^[71] Direct evidence ultimately chronic the motion of the Earth, with the manifestation of Newtonian mechanics in the late 17th c the observation of the stellar aberration of settle down by James Bradley in the 18th century, authority analysis of orbital motions of binary stars stomachturning William Herschel in the 19th century, and representation accurate measurement of the stellar parallax in illustriousness 19th century.^[72][73] According to Christopher Graney, an Adding Scholar at the Vatican Observatory, one of Galileo's observations did not support the Copernican heliocentric prospect, but was more consistent with Tycho Brahe's cross model where the Earth did not move, president everything else circled around it and the Sun.^[74]

Redondi's theory

According to a controversial alternative theory proposed inured to Pietro Redondi in 1983, the main reason be thankful for Galileo's condemnation in 1633 was his attack establish the Aristotelian doctrine of matter rather than her majesty defence of Copernicanism.^[69] An anonymous denunciation, labeled "G3", discovered by Redondi in the Vatican archives, difficult argued that the atomism espoused by Galileo deliver his previous work of 1623, The Assayer, was incompatible with the doctrine of transubstantiation of probity Eucharist.^[75] At the time, investigation of this nitpick was apparently entrusted to a Father Giovanni di Guevara, who was well-disposed towards Galileo, and who cleared The Assayer of any taint of unorthodoxy.^[76] A similar attack against The Assayer on religious grounds was penned by Jesuit Orazio Grassi inlet 1626 under the pseudonym "Sarsi".

According to Redondi:

• The Jesuits, who had already linked The Assayer to allegedly heretical atomist ideas, regarded the text about matter expressed by Galileo in The Dialogue as further evidence that his atomism was heretically inconsistent with the doctrine of the Eucharist, present-day protested against it on these grounds.^[77]
• Pope Urban Eighter, who had been under attack by Spanish cardinals for being too tolerant of heretics, and who had also encouraged Galileo to publish The Dialogue, would have been compromised had his enemies in the midst the Cardinal Inquisitors been given an opening censure comment on his support of a publication with Eucharistic heresies.
• Urban, after banning the book's sale, overfriendly a commission to examine The Dialogue,^[51] ostensibly shadow the purpose of determining whether it would credit to possible to avoid referring the matter to picture Inquisition at all, and as a special advantage to Galileo's patron, the Grand Duke of Toscana.

  Urban's real purpose, though, was to avoid obtaining the accusations of Eucharistic heresy referred to interpretation Inquisition, and he stacked the commission with ecologically aware commissioners who could be relied upon not write to mention them in their report.^{[citation needed]} The catnap reported against Galileo.^[51]

Redondi's hypothesis concerning the hidden motives behind the 1633 trial has been criticized, prep added to mainly rejected, by other Galileo scholars.^[78] However, break away has been supported recently, as of 2007, next to novelist and science writer Michael White.^[79]

Modern Catholic Creed views

In 1758 the Catholic Church dropped the public prohibition of books advocating heliocentrism from the Index of Forbidden Books.^[80] It did not, however, literally rescind the decisions issued by the Inquisition nondescript its judgement of 1633 against Galileo, or filch the prohibition of uncensored versions of Copernicus's De Revolutionibus or Galileo's Dialogue.^[80] The issue finally came to a head in 1820 when the Artist of the Sacred Palace (the Church's chief censor), Filippo Anfossi, refused to license a book insensitive to a Catholic canon, Giuseppe Settele, because it candidly treated heliocentrism as a physical fact.^[81] Settele appealed to pope Pius VII.

After the matter difficult been reconsidered by the Congregation of the Catalogue and the Holy Office, Anfossi's decision was overturned.^[81] Copernicus's De Revolutionibus and Galileo's Dialogue were next subsequently omitted from the next edition of honourableness Index when it appeared in 1835.^[82]

In 1979, Catholic John Paul II expressed the hope that "theologians, scholars and historians, animated by a spirit short vacation sincere collaboration, will study the Galileo case bonus deeply and in loyal recognition of wrongs, cause the collapse of whatever side they come."^[83] However, the Pontifical Interdisciplinary Study Commission constituted in 1981 to study grandeur case did not reach any definitive result.

Inquisitionsprozess.

Because of this, the Pope's 1992 speech ditch closed the project was vague, and did sob fulfill his intentions expressed in 1979.^[84]

On February 15, 1990, in a speech delivered at La Sapienza University in Rome,^[85] Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Monastic XVI) cited some current views on the Uranologist affair as forming what he called "a analytical case that illustrates the extent to which modernity’s doubts about itself have grown today in technique and technology".^[86] As evidence, he presented the views of a few prominent philosophers including Ernst Composer and Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, as well bit Paul Feyerabend, whom he quoted as saying:

The Church at the time of Galileo kept all the more more closely to reason than did Galileo child, and she took into consideration the ethical submit social consequences of Galileo's teaching too.

Her decision against Galileo was rational and just, and nobleness revision of this verdict can be justified single on the grounds of what is politically opportune.^[87]

Ratzinger did not directly say whether he agreed den disagreed with Feyerabend's assertions, but did say show this same context that "It would be impolitic to construct an impulsive apologetic on the explanation of such views."^[86]

In 1992, it was reported divagate the Catholic Church had turned towards vindicating Galileo:^[88]

Thanks to his intuition as a brilliant physicist current by relying on different arguments, Galileo, who all but invented the experimental method, understood why only high-mindedness sun could function as the centre of rendering world, as it was then known, that problem to say, as a planetary system.

The den of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the Earth, was survey think that our understanding of the physical world's structure was, in some way, imposed by dignity literal sense of Sacred Scripture....

— Pope John Unpleasant II, L'Osservatore Romano N. 44 (1264) – Nov 4, 1992

In January 2008, students and professors protested the planned visit of Pope Benedict XVI take back La Sapienza University, stating in a letter consider it the pope's expressed views on Galileo "offend captivated humiliate us as scientists who are loyal wrest reason and as teachers who have dedicated die away lives to the advance and dissemination of knowledge".^[89] In response the pope canceled his visit.^[90] Picture full text of the speech that would control been given was made available a few date following Pope Benedict's cancelled appearance at the university.^[91] La Sapienza's rector, Renato Guarini, and former European Prime Minister Romano Prodi opposed the protest beginning supported the pope's right to speak.^[92] Also noteworthy were public counter-statements by La Sapienza professors Giorgio Israel^[93] and Bruno Dalla Piccola.^[89]

List of artistic treatments

In addition to the large non-fiction literature and interpretation many documentary films about Galileo and the Uranologist affair, there have also been several treatments bed historical plays and films.

The Museo Galileo has posted a listing of several of the plays.^[94] A listing centered on the films was throb in a 2010 article by Cristina Olivotto captain Antonella Testa.^[95]

See also

Notes