Not to perpetuate the hijack, but I’ve debated this issue on a couple of boards with fundamentalists who are convinced that Columbus got the idea that the world was round from the Bible because he alone dared to read it at a time when the RCC discouraged or prohibited people from doing so. They just plain won’t believe you when you tell them that most educated people in 1492 already knew the world was round.
I’m not sure why any modern Church official would need to admit to torture taking place unless the Church had denied it before which I doubt they have done since it was well known and widely practiced at the time.
The interrogatory was quite formal and ritualized and it was all recorded by a notary. One step was merely to show the person being interrogated the implements of torture and repeat the questions. I am not sure if the purpose was that some people would collapse just at the sight of them or if it was more of a formality of “don’t say we didn’t warn you” type.
One point which I see as pretty damning of the whole thing was that the Church did not feel it was right to execute people and so they sentenced people but then they released them to the secular authorities who would carry out the executions.
Another thing most people like to ignore is that the Spanish Inquisition was just the Spanish branch of the Holy Inquisition which existed in other countries. The demonization of the Spanish Inquisition was done by protestants in order to defame both Spain and the Catholic Church.
I think Bryan’s point may have sailed past you, Sailor. I could be wrong…
And your last sentence seems to suggest that the Spanish Inquisition was really not that bad just demonized by protestants. Seems to me the Spanish Inquisition did a pretty good job demonizing itself and didn’t need any help from protestants.
It’s not the Church denials that matter, but ITR’s rather comical ones.
Let’s not blow things out of proportion. It was just a bit of torture. A wee bit, comparatively speaking.
Sure. Galileo was shown a bunch of a feather dusters and told that if their torture didn’t work, he’d be executed by being chased off a cliff by a pack of topless women wearing helmets and kneepads.
Two questions. How high is the cliff, and can I sign up?
Could be.
I did not say it was “not that bad” and “not that bad” is a relative term anyway. My point is that it was (1) certainly “not that bad” (compared to what was going on in Europe at the time) as its critics wanted you to think and (2) not unique to Spain anyway. The Inquisition was not a Spanish institution but an institution of the Catholic Church.
Just like critics of Spain like to point out the expulsion of the Jews and make you think it only happened in Spain but it had happened in England before. When it comes to religious intolerance Spain was not in a league of its own and, in fact, more people were persecuted and killed in wars of religion in England, France, etc than were in Spain. But at that time the sport of Protestants was to badmouth Spain and the Catholic Church and a lot of that propaganda has made it to modern times conveniently ignoring that similar things were happening in England.
Just like with Galileo, people simplify things to the point where they are meaningless.
According to Amazon’s “Search Inside” feature, the only reference to Galileo in Demon-Haunted World are 1) a reference to a spacecraft named for Galileo, and 2) one sentence of praise for the church’s 1992 acknowledgement that Galileo was right about the motion of the Earth (around page 277, if you’re interested.
Sailor:
I now understand what you were saying, thanks for the clarification.
Andy: Thanks.
Which of course is an entirely silly attack for Protestants to be making, since the Protestants of Galileo’s day (including Marin Luther himself) were no better than the Catholic Church on the whole heliocentrism thing. Indeed, given Protestantism’s belief in sola Scriptura, Protestants might be even more inclined than Catholics to say “A literal reading of the Bible implies an unmoving Earth in the center of the Universe, so these pointy-headed intellectual humanistic scientists with their Heliocentric Theory are all wet”. And in fact I recall reading someplace that certain conservative Lutheran groups in the American Midwest clung to geocentrism until well into the 19th Century; and to this day you can find a few apparently sincere geocentrists on the Internet–all of whom seem to be from the lunatic fringes of Calvinism.
If the life of Galileo is an “obscure topic”, then why do atheists bring it up so often?
If the fact that the atheist version of Galileo’s trial is totally wrong is “tiny”, then what is not tiny?
This thread is not an attempt to convert anybody to Christianity. This thread is an attempt to educate atheists, who, I assume, honestly believe the Galileo myth because they have been mislead by others. If you don’t like seeing ignorance get fought, you’re on the wrong message board.
As it happens, I entirely agree. Nothing related to Galileo could prove any merit in atheism since he was not an atheist. As I said, some of his academic enemies who started the whole mess by reporting him to Church authorities might have been atheists or deists or something else–I don’t know, and I certainly wouldn’t claim that their actions tell us anything about any group of people that’s around today.
I’m just tired of hearing people smear the Catholic Church with this particular set of lies. People say that it’s wrong to spread the fictional story of Darwin’s deathbed admission about evolution being wrong, and I agree. It’s equally wrong to take a lifelong, devoted Catholic like Galileo and smear the Catholic Church with a fictional version of his life.
I sincerely doubt that you started this thread in the interest of spreading knowledge.
You don’t seem to have even succeeded at that. Your own version of the history is flattering in no way to the church, and the quotes from the journals of those in the Vatican at the time are pretty clearcut. They intentionally sought to suppress information and used force and threat of force to achieve it.
But more importantly, this is a topic of the abuses of organized religion. Atheism is the lack of belief in deities. These two things have no relationship. I suspect that you’ve seen as many mentions of Galileo by Christians as by atheists, and that only because of the high proportion of atheists on the board. Usually it would be mostly Christians bringing it up.
Yeah, what kinda compulsive atheist started this thread, anyway?
Totally wrong? Galileo was put under house arrest for years, was he not? He was forced to publicly recant for fear of worse punishments, was he not?
…slow applause…
He was not confined until his death. He was confined for less than one year. And during that time, he was only “confined” part of the time, and was actually allowed to travel.
(The other question in your post has been adequately addressed by others, I believe.)
Can you summarize in a sentence or two the specific myth you are talking about?
It seems I incorrectly remembered where Sagan wrote about it, for which I apologize. I read The Demon-Haunted World many years ago. In D’Souza’s book he quotes Sagan as saying “Galileo was put in a Catholic dungeon and threatened with torture for his heretical view that the earth moved about the sun.” He provides the reference.
Can you tell me where I can find this transcript? I searched on google for the part that you posted, but I only found it on a message board and a blog. I hope you’ll forgive me if I don’t classify those as the most trustworthy sources.
Could you please provide direct quotes from me to back up this supposed “summing up” of what I said?
Let’s look at what actually happened in four of those thread. (The fifth was a philosophical debate, not a factual one, so I’ll omit it.)
In the first, few people defended multiple universes, and none defended the versions of the theory that I was critiquing. In the second, nobody attempted to justify Dawkins’ lies about Martin Luther King. In the third, nobody disputed that Darwin said what he said; they only tried to say it wasn’t so bad because he was a product of his time. In the last, again no one attempted to justify what Dawkins said. So in short, none of my arguments were shot down.