We all know the story of the Galileo and the ignorant and superstitious Catholic Church: Galileo, the enlightened scientist, said, “The earth goes around the sun!” and the Catholic Church said, “Nu uh!” And then in Inquisition put Galileo on trial for his heretical views, and he only was allowed to live because, under threat of torture, he recanted. He was nevertheless put under house arrest for the rest of his life.
Well, if that’s the story of Galileo you know, then you don’t know the story of Galileo. Even though the Indigo Girls have a great song, Galileo, it’s actually not really true.
Now, the modern, so-called Enlightenment narrative regarding Galileo’s trial before the Inquisition has (unfortunately) been successful in its depiction as Galileo as the fearless, free-thinking, secular scientist who stood his ground against the ignorant, superstitious, and unscientific Catholic Church. But reality often tells a different story. In reality, the trial of Galileo, albeit certainly not a high point in the Catholic Church, had much more to do with politics and Galileo’s “spit’em in the eye” personality, than it had to do with science.
What’s Obvious to Us Wasn’t Always Obvious
We have to remember, from the time of Copernicus up until Galileo, the jury was still out in regards to the heliocentric vs. geocentric models of the Solar System. It’s obvious to us, but it wasn’t to the people back then. Such is the reality regarding scientific discovery. In any case, it must be made clear that at the time there was no monolithic view of the Catholic Church regarding the issue. Copernicus was a loyal Catholic; Galileo was a loyal Catholic; there were many other Catholics who were convinced of the heliocentric model.
At the same time, though, there were some Catholics who rejected the heliocentric model based on a more literal reading of certain passages in the Bible. For that matter, at the dawn of the Protestant Reformation, leaders like Martin Luther firmly rejected Copernicus’ theory because it seemed to conflict with passages like Joshua 10:12. Luther himself said about Copernicus, “This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down. Even in these things that are thrown into disorder I believe the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth.” John Calvin as well warned against people (like Copernicus) who said, “that the sun does not move and that it is the earth that moves.” In fact, Calvin described those who held a heliocentric view as “stark raving mad” and as “possessed” by the devil.
My point is simply this. Much like today, certain scientific theories garner different responses by a wide range of people, including Christians, and there will be inevitable debate and discussion until one argument eventually wins the day. But until that day happens, there is a certain level of uncertainty across the board, and unfortunately, much of that uncertainty is fueled, not by science, but by outside influences like politics and theology. This is what had happened with Galileo.
The Real Story of Galileo…He was a bit of a cheeky monkey!
At the time of Galileo, the scientific debate over a heliocentric universe was still going on. And yes, there were some in the Catholic Church who objected to it, on the grounds that it seemed to conflict with some parts of Scripture.
In defending his views on heliocentrism, Galileo has written a letter to the Grand Duchess of Tuscany in an attempt to argue that his views were not in conflict with Scripture. He quoted none other than St. Augustine, who advocated that reason should guide Christian thinking in those areas regarding the physical universe that Scripture has left somewhat obscure. He also argued that God accommodates his revelation to human beings, and works within the limited worldview and understanding of human beings at any particular time to communicate His revealed, divine truths. Therefore, Galileo argued, we should not automatically impose a literal understanding on every part of Scripture. In addition, Galileo argued that God have human beings the gift of reason in order to explore His creation and come to conclusions about the nature of reality, and that there was ample evidence throughout Church history that showed Christians doing this very thing.
In any case, in 1616, the Inquisition, specifically Cardinal Bellarmine, ruled against Galileo and ordered him to abandon his advocacy of Copernicus’ theories. But in 1623, Galileo’s friend, Cardinal Maffeo Barberini, was chosen as the next Pope, and thus became Pope Urban VIII. It was the Pope who actually encouraged Galileo to write a book that discussed the controversial issue of heliocentrism—there was only request: don’t actually advocate for it; just lay out the arguments for and against it. In other words, the Pope wanted to address and discuss the issue, but he wanted Galileo to just lay the facts out first.
Well, Galileo wrote the book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, but the way he wrote it got him into trouble. The book was written in the form of a dialogue between an advocate of the heliocentric view (a man named Salviati), and an advocate for the geocentric view (a man named Simplicio…that is, “Simpleton” or “Fool”). Now, did Galileo openly advocate for heliocentrism in his book? Technically no. But essentially naming the geocentrist “stupid-butthead” didn’t sit too well with the Pope or the Inquisition, especially when it was pretty clear that Galileo’s main opponent was Cardinal Bellarmine.
Simply put, it was Galileo’s tasteless joke directed at a Cardinal, and not his actual conviction of a heliocentric universe, that got him into hot water.
The point of all this is that although there has always been a certain degree of tension between “science” and “religion,” (or “philosophy” and “religion” for that matter), such tension is simply part of life—it is through that tension that greater understanding of God, Man, and Creation is achieved. Thomas Aquinas advocated for the use of Aristotle in his understanding of reality and his explanation of the Christian faith. Not everyone immediately agreed with him, but over time his philosophical arguments were accepted and advocated by the Catholic Church. By the same token, the initial scientific discoveries of Catholics like Copernicus and Galileo were also met with debate and skepticism in some circles of the Catholic Church. Over time, though, their views won the day—and that’s the way it has to be, for all truth is God’s truth; but before that truth can be fully comprehended and understood, there has to be a time for questioning and debate. If there is no seeking, there can never be any finding.
Okay, but Didn’t the Catholic Church Imprison and Torture Galileo?
In a word, no.
In his book, Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths About Science and Religion, Ronald Numbers sets the record straight as to what actually happened. When Galileo was called before the Inquisition, he spent 18 days (April 12-30, 1633) being interrogated. During that time, he stayed at the prosecutor’s six-room apartment, was given a servant, and was served meals twice a day that came from the Tuscan embassy (GGJ 73-74). Numbers further notes that, apart from possibly three days in June of that year, Galileo was never held in prison—not during or after the trial. And what was his ultimate punishment? He had to live in Florence…Italy…yeah, that was his punishment! Man, that’s harsh…
In addition, the fact was that Inquisition authorities in Rome hardly ever used torture. Therefore, it was highly unlikely that Galileo ever was tortured. No imprisonment, no torture. Numbers concludes his remarks on Galileo in this way: “The myths of Galileo’s torture and imprisonment are thus genuine myths; ideas that are in fact false but once seemed true—and continue to be accepted as true by poorly educated persons and careless scholars” (GGJ 78).
And While We’re on the Inquisition
One final note needs to be said concerning another stereotype of the dreaded Inquisition. Rodney Stark notes, that according to the standard account, “the Inquisition was created in 1478 by the Spanish monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella, and was charged with ridding Spain of heretics, especially Jews and Muslims who were pretending to be Christians. But the Inquisition also set its sights on all Protestants, witches, homosexuals, scientists, and other doctrinal and moral offenders” (Triumph of Christianity 333). Therefore, the standard charge is that the Inquisition ended up torturing and killing millions of innocent people—yet another blot on the shameful reputation of the Catholic Church.
But where did such a perception come from? The answer to that question, according to Stark, is simple—it is largely a fiction: “The standard account of the Spanish Inquisition was invented and spread by English and Dutch propagandists in the sixteenth century during their wars with Spain and repeated ever after by malicious or misled historians eager to sustain ‘an image of Spain as a nation of fanatical bigots’” (TC 335). The fact, though was that “…in contrast with the secular courts all across Europe, the Spanish Inquisition was a consistent force for justice, restraint, due process, and enlightenment” (TC 337).
One of the things often used to condemn the Inquisition is the Inquisition’s use of Auto-de-fe, or “Act of Faith” in their trials. Contrary to what some claim, Auto-de-fe was not a reference to execution or burning at the stake. In actuality, it was “a public appearance by persons convicted of various offenses who offered public confessions of their guilt and were thereby reconciled to the church. Only very rarely did an auto-de-fe end with an offender being surrendered to the civil authorities for execution” (TC 338).
In fact, as Stark details, of the 44,701 cases tried in the Spanish Inquisition over a span of 200 years, there were only 826 executions—a mere 1.8% of all cases brought to trial. That means that from 1480-1700, the Inquisition executed about ten deaths per year in Spain, and those, as Stark tells us, were usually to repeat offenders.
Now, it is true that the Inquisition did sometimes use torture, but compared to how much the secular courts used it, the Inquisition’s use was minimal. As Stark tells us, church law limited torture to one session lasting no more than 15 minutes, outlawed any danger to life or limb, and prohibited the shedding of blood. (TC 339).
But what about all the penalties the Inquisition doled about in regards to sexual taboos? Well, here are the stats: the Inquisition heard 1,131 cases of solicitation (i.e. a priest using his power to have sex with a woman)—that’s 2.5% of all cases. It also dealt with 2,645 cases of bigamy (5.9% of all cases). Surprisingly, 27% of cases for sexual offenses concerned bestiality.
Surprisingly, as far as sodomy (i.e. male homosexual sex acts) is concerned, there simply are no stats are available. Why is that? The reason is that in 1509 it was ordered that “no action be taken against homosexuals except when heresy was involved’” (TC 349). That’s right, the Inquisition did not feel that homosexual sex acts, although certainly considered a sin, warranted punishment from the Church.
Conclusion
All this is not to say that the Catholic Church was wrong to even bring Galileo to trial, or that the Inquisition never over-stepped the bounds of morality and decency. But it is to say that a lot of our assumptions about figures like Galileo or institutions like the Inquisition are often rooted, not in the actual facts of history, but rather in certain false narratives about that history that are trying to promote a certain agenda.
