When did the Roman Catholic Church officially give up Geocentrism?

We all know that Galileo was tried and convicted in 1633 of promoting and verifying experimentally the Copernican model of a Heliocentric universe, which was a heresy in the eyes of the Church at that time. He escaped the fate of Giordano Bruno and was instead merely exiled and effectively silenced.

In 1992, Pope John Paul II issued an apology and lifted the edict of Inquisition against Galileo. This had no practical impact on anyone that I can see.

By this time, of course, the very idea of anyone holding a Geocentric model was absurd. Every sane person had moved on to the factually correct view of the universe, even Catholics, and nobody had been persecuted for it in centuries.

So, when did the RCC decide to stop trying to hold the tide back with a broom and accept the new world order?

Galileo was tried, in 1633, for producng a work that argued for geocentrism in defiance of an order discovered in the documents of the earlier trial to keep silent.

There were comments made at the first trial that he was declaring heresy, but the court could not get that statement ratified by the whole court because it was not true: the Church had never declared geocentrism a tenet of faith.

Galileo’s astronomical works were placed on the Index Librorum Prohiitorum as a “protection” of the faithful, but they were removed from the Index within a hundred years and were actually published with both a Nihil Obstat (this work contains nothing that stands in the way of the Faith) and with an Imprimatur (this book is officially approved for publication by the Church–or, at least, the diocese where the printer is located) within 100 years of his death.

In the intervening years, no other person was prosecuted (much less persecuted, as Galileo was) for pursuing his claims of geocentrism.

Pope John Paul’s apology was issued because the trial was clearly a political one in which the Church should never have engaged. There were many members of the Church who agreed with Galileo’s scientific propositions at the time, although they took umbrage at his insistence that theology be re-worked to address the issue.*

  • (Giordano Bruno is not a legitimate claimant as a martyr for science. He was tried for his insistence as a priest that Jesus was not God, not for any scientific claims he might have made. His execution was a Bad Thing, but it was not a result of hostility to science.)

tomndebb: Well, that’s hardly the first time the common understanding of an event has been different from what actually happened.

So Galileo was tried in 1633 for not keeping his mouth shut as a previous court had told him to. That much is understandable. But what modifications to theology did he propose?

And what convinced the Church to officially issue an Imprimatur instead of simply hoping everyone would forget the whole issue?

Heh heh, whenever anybody starts a sentence with “We all know,” you gotta be a little suspicious. :slight_smile:

1992.

*quoted from the linked Wikipedia article

Having reread the OP, I can only say: Just ignore me. It’s getting late and I should have known better …

Prior to 1615, Galileo published several works, notably the Letter to Castelli, that included a new exegetical model (interpretation) for various passages in which the sun was said to stand still or the Earth to be fixed in its place. This was at a point, just following the Council of Trent and the Counter-Reformation, when the Catholic Church was very leery of allowing “personal” interpretation of Scripture. A few priests, on three serparate occasions, attempted to condemn Galileo for heresy. On the first two occasions, the Office of the Inquisition dismissed the charges as unfounded and not worth pursuing. However, Galileo, himself, pushed the matter after being offered a chance to simply modify his claims to those of a “working hypothesis” instead of a Truth, and came to Rome, himself, in late 1615 to demand that the Church accept his interpretations of Scripture. (He had been told that if he wanted the Church to accept his “truth.” he had to prove it. However, the “proofs” he offered actually did not support his belief and, indeed, were themselves in error: he claimed that the motion of the Earth was the source of the tides. He also claimed that the planets moved in perfect circles, a point which other star watchers of the day already knew was an error.)

At that point, he was examined by the Holy Office for the first time. The result of this trial was a rejection of his claims to reinterpret Scripture accompanied by an order to stop publishing works defending heliocentrism. The initial panel included a claim of heresy, but a review board struck that language from the trial document, noting that the Church had never formally expressed an opinion on the topic.

Galileo accepted the verdict and went home. A few years later, an old friend of his was elevated to the papacy. Galileo figured that he could use his influence with the new pope to be allowed to publish on the subject, again. Unfortunately, the new pope was not interested in astronomy and was not eager to stir up the issue, again. After several more years, Galileo got tired of being ignored and published a work, Dialogue on the Two Great World Systems in which he portayed the pope as a simpleton and used that character to demonstrate the foolishness of the Ptolemaic system. When that happened, someone went back through the files of the earlier examination and discovered a letter that ordered Galileo not merely to refrain from defending heliocentrism, but even to refrain from discussing it. His Dialogue clearly discussed it in great detail, so he was in violation of the “order” that had been found in the files. Galileo aasserted at his trial that he had never seen the letter before the trial and there are some researchers who believe that the letter was, indeed, a forgery inserted by someone specifically to get Galileo in trouble, whether a member of the first examination acting independently or some later person fraudulently inserting bogus “evidence” is not certain.
However, at the time, the letter was accepted as a legitimate order from the first examination and Galileo was convicted of having violated that order.

The Imprimatur was issued simply because his books had originally been placed on the Index and by 1741 (99 years after Galileo’s death) everyone recognized that the heliocentric model was the correct one. Granting the imprimatur was a public declaration that the heliocentric view was not to be considered heresy, just in case some backwater diocese hadn’t gotten the word.

At that point the Church was reviewing and updating its views and saw no reason to hope anyone forgot anything. It would be another 40 years or so before Voltaire and subsequent people hostile to the Church would re-write the Galileo story to make it appear to be a feud between religion and science.

I’ll repeat what I said in this pit thread last week:

Interestingly enough, I have seen it claimed that “various Lutheran synods taught geocentrism well into the 19th century”.