Astronomers vs Church

Allegedly, theologians in Galileo’s day were unwilling to consider any evidence that contradicted Ptolemy’s theory that the earth was the center of the universe. Copernicus’s and Galileo’s hypothesis that the earth revolved around the Sun, the story goes, was brutally suppressed. But history is not all that simple.Dr. Owen Gingerich, who appears on tomorrow’s program, has devoted much of his life to studying Copernicus and Galileo. As research professor of Astronomy and of the History of Science at Harvard and senior astronomer emeritus at Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, he has spent years studying questions like this. He’s convinced the primary issue between Galileo and the Church wasn’t whether the earth revolved around the Sun—the heliocentric theory. Instead it was "a turf battle over who had the keys to the truth, one that was especially exacerbated at that time because of the Catholic battle with the Protestants over the way to interpret Scripture." The primary issue was not heliocentrism, but "how literally Scripture should be interpreted."Gingerich reports, "About two-thirds of the copies [of Galileo] in Italy were censored and essentially none elsewhere … [T]he rest of the world saw that exercise as a local Italian imbroglio, and they were having none of it." The truth is that Pope Urban VIII had a strong interest in science. Although he accepted the view that Earth was the center of the universe, he authorized Galileo to write a book to explain the alternatives. If Galileo had simply presented his view, everything would have been fine.Instead Galileo presented the competing views as a drama for three actors. The character espousing Pope Urban’s view was named Simplicius. Gingerich observed, "Galileo has arranged the dialogue to make Simplicius’s words sound like the dying gasp of a man whose arguments had been drowned in a deluge of contradicting facts … The choice of words, and the context in which they were set, made Urban look like a complete fool." Urban was a powerful enemy, and Galileo was put on trial. But he wasn’t convicted of heresy, as everybody thinks. Galileo was convicted of teaching heliocentrism, when he had been forbidden to do so. It was a case of insubordination.

Is this a troll post? Defending the conviction of Galileo? Even the Vatican has recanted it, this is a joke, right?

"Galileo was convicted of teaching heliocentrism, when he had been forbidden to do so. It was a case of insubordination."

In other words he was convicted of teaching the truth. Off with his head.

This is just one (certainly one of the most prominent) instance of an idealist running foul of politics.

Idealists should be aware they'll probably be persecuted. It's classic tragedy, a good story and an inspiration to other idealists.

Politicians should be aware that if the idealist is right then the truth will eventually come out and they'll be judged by history. Unfortunately in this case we'll have to wait a few hundred more years to see if history decides the church's apology and pardon were sufficient.

Until that time the score remains Idealists 1, Politicians 0.

Dan,

I agree with your main point--Galileo was not in real trouble for believing, or even writing that the earth went around the sun. He got in trouble for making the pope a simpleton in his book. THe pope's view was represented as "Simplicio," the simpleton characer.

Galileo was in many ways like the bright, young, energetic new kid at work that has a bunch of good ideas, but calls the boss an idiot for not accepting them and making him a hero. THe boss gotta do something, even if the ideas are good. So he fires the young idea boy.

Galileo went on for a long time believing and teaching the heliocentric theory. He only got arrested after he called the pope a simpleton.

Alex