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
Professor Berti offers as an explanation of the absence of the three
signatures, that the Congregation in the name of which the sentence was
passed consisted of ten members, but that at the last sitting seven only
were present, so that seven only could sign, and adds, as it appears to
us unwarrantably, “that it by no means follows that the three absentees
were of a contrary opinion.”[402]
Pieralisi does not find the matter so simple, and devotes seven large
pages to account for the absence of the three prelates from the
Congregation. “Cardinal Borgia,” he says, “was on very bad terms with
Urban VIII., because he had addressed the Pope in a loud voice in a
consistory, and the Pope had imperiously told him to be quiet and to
go away.”[403] But it has been proved that even after this scene the
cardinal appeared at the consistories up to 12th February, 1635, although
there were complaints that he took walks in Rome instead of attending
the sittings of the Propaganda and the Holy Office. But it is not likely
that this cardinal, whose name stands at the head of the sentence,
would have absented himself from the final sitting without some good
reason. Pieralisi thinks that he was more friendly to Galileo than the
other cardinals, an opinion for which there is no evidence and which
proves nothing. Even Pieralisi confesses that he can find no reason for
the absence of Cardinal Zacchia, but assigns the following motive for
that of Cardinal Francesco Barberini: “He probably wished to uphold the
right enjoyed by the cardinal nephews, and afterwards by the secretaries
of state, of sometimes abstaining from voting in order to reserve to
themselves greater freedom in the treatment of public, private, and
political affairs.” The insufficiency of this explanation is too obvious
to need comment. Pieralisi himself comes to the conclusion that these
dignitaries did not wish to append their signatures to the famous
sentence, which is much the same thing as the conjecture that they did
not agree to it.
In accordance with this sentence, certainly not passed unanimously by
the members of the Holy Tribunal, which forms one of the foulest blots
in the melancholy annals of the Inquisition, Galileo was compelled
immediately after hearing it to make the following degrading recantation,
humbly kneeling, before the whole assembly:—
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