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
Galileo’s trial now proceeded strictly according to the programme settled
by the Congregation of the Holy Office under the papal presidency. On the
evening of Monday, 20th June, Galileo received a summons from the Holy
Office to appear the next day.[390] In this final hearing the accused
was to be questioned, under threat of torture, about his intention, that
is, as to his real conviction concerning the two systems. On the morning
of the 21st Galileo appeared before his judges. After he had taken the
usual oath, and had answered in the negative the query whether he had any
statement to make, the examiner began as follows:—
Interrogated whether he holds or has held, and how long ago, that the sun
is the centre of the world and that the earth is not the centre of the
world, and moves, and also with a diurnal motion;
He answered: “A long time ago, _i.e._, before the decision of the Holy
Congregation of the Index, and before the injunction was intimated to me,
I was indifferent, and regarded both opinions, namely, that of Ptolemy
and that of Copernicus, as open to discussion, inasmuch as either one or
the other might be true in nature; but after the said decision, assured
of the wisdom of the authorities, I ceased to have any doubt; and I held,
as I still hold, as most true and indisputable, the opinion of Ptolemy,
that is to say, the stability of the earth and the motion of the sun.”
Being told that from the manner and connection in which the said opinion
is discussed in the book printed by him subsequently to the time
mentioned—nay, from the very fact of his having written and printed
the said book, he is presumed to have held this opinion after the time
specified; and being called upon to state the truth as to whether he
holds or has held the same;
He answered: “As regards the writing of the published dialogue, my motive
in so doing was not because I held the Copernican doctrine to be true,
but simply thinking to confer a common benefit, I have set forth the
proofs from nature and astronomy which may be adduced on either side;
my object being to make it clear that neither the one set of arguments
nor the other has the force of conclusive demonstration in favour of
this opinion or of that; and that therefore, in order to proceed with
certainty we must have recourse to the decisions of higher teaching, as
may be clearly seen from a large number of passages in the dialogue in
question. I affirm, therefore, on my conscience, that I do not now hold
the condemned opinion, and have not held it since the decision of the
authorities.”
Being told that from the book itself and from the arguments adduced on
the affirmative side,—namely, that the earth moves and that the sun is
immovable,—it is presumed, as aforesaid, that he holds the opinion of
Copernicus, or at least that he held it at that time; and that therefore,
unless he make up his mind to confess the truth, recourse will be had
against him to the appropriate remedies of the law;
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