That thread is certainly not unique, and similar claims are made by just about every prominent atheist. Carl Sagan included this fable in The Demon-Haunted World, for instance. And a fable is what it is. No such event ever took place. Moreover the reality is pretty much the opposite of the fable. Let’s move carefully through a list of actual facts that atheists tend to omit.
Galileo himself was a Catholic for his entire life, from childhood to death. He was a member of the church, a regular attendee, and there’s no evidence of his having any doubt of the basic soundness of Church authority.
The Catholic Church was a supporter of Galileo throughout his career. They not only provided moral support and encouragement, but also funding and other institutional support. Another fact that atheists often fail to mention is that Pope Urban VIII (the supposed villain of the tale) wrote a poem praising Galileo.
The claim is often made that the Church was afraid of Galileo’s heliocentric theory because they were a threat to Church Doctrine. This is completely false statement. The Church had no position on the issue of geocentric vs. heliocentric universe. They did not have any reason to care particularly about the issue. Two clergymen, Fr Clavius and Fr Grienberger, looked through his telescope and may have helped him take data.
Now one aspect of the Galileo is a half-truth: there was a sizable force in the scholarly world that was viciously opposed to the heliocentric theory. Aristotelean naturalists, who basically believed that Aristotle was prefect, held considerable sway in the 16th century. For instance, Professors at Oxford could be fined serious money if they contradicted Aristotle. Of course, these folks were often the intellectual opponents of Orthodox Catholics, since Aristotle was an atheist (or agnostic or deist, depending on how you look at it).
Now it was these academics who probably started Galileo’s troubles by reporting him to Church authorities as a heretic. (We don’t know exactly what they said, but we can make an educated guess.) Cardinal Robert Bellarmine investigated in 1616. He spoke with Galileo, and Galileo admitted there was no conclusive evidence for the heliocentric theory. In order to give the controversy time to calm down, Bellarmine asked Galileo to temporarily refrain from speaking out on the issue. Galileo promised to so in writing, and spent the next years on other scientific research.
In 1632 Galileo jumped back into the heliocentric vs. geocentric debate, breaking his promise. Moreover, he did it in a particularly aggressive work that openly mocked the Pope (for no apparent reason) and also treaded on other, purely theological and philosophical issues that were controversial because they related to the conflict of the Reformation. Galileo’s academic enemies came back and accused him of heresy again. His supporters (who included the Pope) wanted to basically give him a slap on the wrist, but the trial spiraled out of control. At this point we encounter several sub-myths:
A. Galileo was never imprisoned. He was placed under house arrest at a luxurious villa, and allowed to travel several times. (Kind of live being jailed at a beachfront condo or a luxury ski chalet. He probably had the time of his life.)
B. Some atheists will claim that Galileo was threatened with torture, tortured, or threatened with death. All of this if is flatly false.
C. Some will say that Galileo was prosecuted by the “Inquisition”, leaving readers to assume the Spanish Inquisition. Actually it was the final Inquisition located in Italy, the one that ordered six executions during its entire existence.
D. And lastly, that bit about Galileo staying true to his scientific findings under his breath, while pretending to admit to being wrong? Never happened.
1: It’s not an “atheist myth”, it’s one of many symplifications of history that are repeated. It was taught to me in the 70’s in High School, by a teacher who was not an atheist. I assume the story goes back well before then.
2: A summary of your facts could be that: a) Galileo was asked not to teach heliocentrism, b) he refused, c) he was imprisoned.
Since we’re talking myths here, I’ll just take this one on. Can we have a cite that he had “the time of his life”? I mean, certainly you’re not just pulling that out of your ass, right?
D’Souza traces the myth to a book called History of the Conflict Between Science and Religion, which is a very definite barrage of anti-Christian nastiness from the 19th century, and one that no one takes seriously today because the things it said were mainly false. That’s where it originates. These days I certainly see it brought up mainly by atheists as their “proof” that religion is opposed to science. Some other people may have been tricked into believing it.
No, that would not be an accurate summary. His trial and conviction were the result of a lot of things, including breaking his sworn promise and lying to the court. But above all, the standout fact is that the Pope tried to avoid the lengthy, publicized trial. Since the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church, that means that the Church was not trying to shut Galileo down.
Well, I actually said in parentheses that he “probably had the time of his life”. The point was that the numerous claims of torture, threatened execution, and the gothic tales of the Spanish Inquisition are complete make-believe. He was treated well.
What exactly were they apologizing for? Treating him well and showing him the time of his life?
The Church was adamantly opposed to any theory that suggested that the earth was not fixed in place. It would kind of disprove the whole shebang for literalists which most of them were back then.
Well, except for the part where, on March 5, 1616, the Congregation of the Index issued a decree stating:
As even the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia–not exactly the work of a bunch of Catholic-bashing atheists–notes, “In thus acting, it is undeniable that the ecclesiastical authorities committed a grave and deplorable error”.
I assume one of those six executions was the notorious burning of Giordano Bruno.
And do you have a cite for anyone actually assuming that “the Inquisition” must therefore be the Spanish Inquisition? I mean, probably somebody has, but it hardly seems inaccurate or particularly prejudicial to refer to a body called the Inquisition as, well, “the Inquisition”. A body which, as previously mentioned, has ordered an advocate of heliocentrism (among a great many other things) burned alive within living memory at the time of Galileo’s run in with the Roman Inquisition.
A slimeball like D’Souza is hardly someone I’d use as a cite.
That being said, like DanBlather said, it’s bad history, not an “atheist myth”. It’s not like atheists need Galileo to make religion look bad; historical religious atrocity is a well of anti-religious examples with essentially no bottom.
I agree that ITR’s version is bad history but it seems like you are saying something else. Was that intentional? Are you of all people saying that the church did not persecute Galileo and that it had no problem with heliocentrism?
From what I’ve read over the years, they DID have a problem with heliocentrism ( as shown in this thread), but much of their problem with Galileo had to do with his talent for making enemies ( including among scientific rivals ), and not the science. And they did persecute him, if relatively mildly.
It’s been a long time since I read anything factual ( as in non-fictional) on the subject though.
What I’m objecting to is the central narrative, which happens to be the one that that website presents, asserting that the Church tried to silence the heliocentric theory because they were afraid that it might prove something in the Bible false. That’s not what happened, as we can see in the letter by Cardinal Bellarmine (posted on the same site). His argument basically is:
-The heliocentric theory has some good points, but it has not been proven yet.
-Therefore at the present time I reject the heliocentric theory and prefer the geocentric theory, in agreement with scripture and with the majority of today’s scholars.
-However, if real evidence backing the heliocentric theory was provided, I would admit that I made a mistake and my interpretation of scripture was wrong. I just haven’t seen any such evidence yet. His final paragraph:
So his basic stance is, we’ll believe the heliocentric theory when we see some proof.
[/sup]