Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia: From Authentic SourcesGebler, Karl von
Religion
Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia: From Authentic Sources
Gebler, Karl von
Astronomers -- Italy -- Biography; Catholic Church. Curia romana; Galilei, Galileo, 1564-1642; Religion and science -- History
theory; and finally, by the writing of the famous “Dialogues” themselves,
in which he made every endeavour not to come into collision with the
published decree of 1616, while the very authorship of the work would
have infringed an absolute command to silence on the Copernican system.
We now go back to the first hearing of Galileo. Although his statements,
in spite of his submissiveness, obviously contradict the assertion of the
Inquisitor, that he had, in 1616, received an injunction not to hold,
teach, or defend the Copernican opinions in any way, the Inquisitor does
not take the least pains to solve the enigma. Everything is also omitted
on the part of the judges which might have cleared up the point; for
example, to summon the witnesses, whose names are on the note of 26th
February, 1616, and confront them with the accused. And as no attempt is
made to account for his ignorance of the prohibition, and it is simply
taken for granted, it must be allowed that Galileo’s judges, to say
the least, were guilty of a great breach of judicial order, in using,
without any close examination, a paper as a valid document on the trial,
which was destitute of nearly all the characteristics of one, namely,
the signatures of the accused, of the notary and witnesses, and in spite
of three contradictory depositions of the accused. No special arguments
are needed to prove that this breach of order did not proceed from
mere carelessness. And so, immediately after the accused has declared
that he does not remember any command but that intimated to him by
Cardinal Bellarmine, we find the Inquisitor asking him: Whether, after
the aforesaid command was issued to him, he had received any permission
to write the book which he had acknowledged to be his, and which he
afterwards had printed?
_Galileo_: “After receiving the command aforesaid, I did not
ask permission to write the book acknowledged by me to be mine,
because I did not consider that in writing it I was acting
contrary to, far less disobeying, the command not to hold,
defend, or to teach the said opinion.”
The Inquisitor now asks to be informed whether, from whom, and in what
way, Galileo had received permission to print the “Dialogues.” Galileo
briefly relates the whole course of the negotiations which preceded
the printing. As his narrative agrees entirely with what we know, it
is not reproduced here. The Inquisitor then asks: Whether, when asking
permission to print his book, he had told the Master of the Palace about
the command aforesaid, which had been issued to him by order of the Holy
Congregation?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account