And Other Legends About the Galileo-Affair

6. Jahrgang exte MARTIN MBS T 116 BUCER 2009 SEMINAR

Thomas Schirrmacher “But it Does Move!”, and Other Legends About Galileo Galilei 28 Theses regarding the trial of Galileo Galilei (Updated and enlarged version 2012)

BUCER IN S T E M

A I

M A

: E P 4 H

TheologicalTheologische Accents Akzente TableInhaltsverzeichnis of Contents

Foreword...... 5 1 Th e ‘encyclopedia’ rediscovered the story of Galileo in the 18th century...... 6 2 Myths of martyrdom and hagiography...... 7 3 Legends: The leaning tower of Pisa and “but it does move”...... 8 4 The Copernican system had long since established itself in the church at the time of Galileo...... 9 5 Galileo was held in high esteem by the church and the popes...... 10 6 The battle against Galileo emanated primarily from scientists and colleagues...... 11 7 Aristotle was seen as infallible, less so the Bible...... 12 8 Galileo was stubborn ad polemical...... 12 9 Galileo ignored other scientific researchers...... 14 10 Galileo was sometimes contradictory...... 15 11 G alileo was not a strictly experimental scientist...... 16 12 Galileo had no evidence...... 17 13 Th e Church only wanted proofs...... 18 14 G alileo withheld the evidence...... 20 15 Invented proofs...... 21

2 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

16 Galileo refuted Ptolemy, but he did not prove Copernicus...... 22 17 Galileo provided no response to Tycho Brahe...... 22 18 G alileo also defended what had long since been superseded...... 23 19 The later popes would not have allowed Galileo to be condemned, and earlier ones did not pursue his condemnation ...... 23 20 Galileo was a victim of Urban VIII...... 23 21 The Pope: From friend to foe...... 24 22 Galileo was a victim of Urban VIII’s politics...... 25 23 G alileo died two years too early...... 27 24 G alileo considered the Bible to be God’s Word...... 27 25 Galileo was a convinced Catholic ...... 29 26 Galileo wrote in Italian...... 30 27 G alileo did not separate faith and science...... 31 28 Galileo did not advocate the autonomy of science...... 31 Conclusion...... 32 Appendix: Brecht‘s Galileo...... 32 Annotation...... 33 The Author...... 41 Impressum...... 42

Theologische Akzente 3

“But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

“But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei 28 Theses regarding the trial of Galileo Galilei (Updated and enlarged version 2012)

Thomas Schirrmacher

Since I wrote a short essay under the Christian church and the so very bril- same title in 1990 – which has been liant and rational scientists. Galileo was repeatedly reprinted1 and hotly debated himself a deeply religious man, while on the internet for a great number of his keenest opponents were university years, I have decided to rework and scholars and not scholars within the expand the article on the basis of lit- church. Furthermore, no one placed erature which has appeared over the the Bible over scientific evidence, since last twenty years. By using the form neither Galileo nor a contemporary of a number of theses, I have done this was able to bring forth evidence for the reworking and expansion without mak- Copernican worldview (these were not ing basic changes to the work’s charac- found until later). And the Bible was ter as a brief introduction. also not the point of reference. Rather, it was the authority of the Greek phi- Foreword losopher Aristotle. “There is hardly a scientist who con- th The 17 century trial of Galileo tinues to be as controversially discussed Galilei endures as a repeatedly held out as Galileo Galilei … why is there argument against scientists who find not even any recognizable indication themselves able to reconcile their belief of a consensus …?“2 Olaf Pedersen in a creator and their scientific research. expressed his opinion in 1991 that after Faith supposedly makes a person blind 350 years of research and discussion a to scientific progress and hinders sci- convergent research opinion on Galileo ence. This is either a spoken or unspo- seems to be as far from being reached as ken opinion associated with the issue. it ever was: The image of the trial against Gali- “The story of Galileo Galilei (1564– leo Galilei, which silently stands in 1642), his scientific efforts, and his the background, does not stand up to struggle for recognition have long since historical research. Too many legends exceeded the limits of historical research are required to support the picture of and have become one of the defining a battle between the so very narrow myths of modern science. This idea of a

Theologische Akzente 5 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

conflict between light and darkness and tion to that, there are other important between reason and irrationality is at publications.11, 12 On the whole, how- the bottom of this myth.”3 ever, I believe I have had the opportu- The intention of the following the- nity to look through every important ses is well summarized in the words of work produced in European languages 13 Arthur Koestler: accessible to me. “In other words, I believe the idea that “Few episodes in history have given rise Galileo’s trial was a kind of Greek tra- to a literature as voluminous as the 14 gedy, a showdown between ‘blind faith’ trial of Galileo.” and ‘enlightened reason’ to be naively In view of the 5.912 titles listed as lit- erroneous.”4 erature on Galileo up to 1964, to which In the following there are several rea- another 1,500 were added over the sub- 15 sons, presented in thesis form, which sequent 20 years (to my knowledge, a have been pieced together and do not count over the last 25 years or so does allow Galileo’s trial to be cited as an not exist), and the twenty volume edi- 16 argument for any position on the relation of his works , it appears foolhardy tionship between religion and science. to expect to make a presentation of Gal- It is probably superfluous to point out ileo in article form which does justice to that the theses neither justify the meth- all the aspects involved. ods or the existence of the inquisition in any way nor place Galileo actual scientific significance and genius in question 1 The ‘encyclopedia’ rediscovered the story of Gal- (whereby Galileo’s actual discoveries th were never the subject of the inquisition ileo in the 18 century trial that was conducted). However: 1. Thesis: Since the Enlightenment, “The contrast-rich picture of a scien- the presentation of Galileo’s life has tist with the courage of a hero stan- become overgrown with legends, ding before the dark background of the myths, and prejudice. Inquisition thereby receives numerous “The most popular Galileo legend, colorful nuances.” 5 which puts the defiant expression ‘but I will essentially proceed on the bases it does move’ into the mouth of the of a selection of new German texts by Florentine scholar after renouncing and about Galilei6, Klaus Fischer’s sci- the teaching on the movement of the entific biography7, Arthur Koestler’s earth in 1633, comes from the time of investigation of the records of the case8, the Enlightenment. In addition to this Arthur C. Custance’s9 response, and glorifying picture, prevailing trends the scholarly exposition entitled “New created the Galileo they found to be Points of View on the Trial of Galilei” necessary: the pioneer of truth and the by the Czech Zdenko Solles.10 . In addi- renegade, the martyr of science and the

6 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

cunning and tactical zealot – in short, David Whitehouse for instance wrote the positive, the negative, the torn the following gushing flattery and falsi- hero.”17 fication of history in 2009, which have Above all it was volume four very little to do with historical truth: of the famous Enlightenment “Courage had left him, not, however, ‘L’Encyclopédie,’ with its article enti- his trust in science. Whatever the tled “Copernicus,” that discovered and church ordered, he knew that science popularized the modern Galileo leg- had now been freed and could no longer end.18 be treated like a child. To place his body Among the inventions of the and mind under house arrest was only a ‘L’Encyclopédie’which have been par- temporary victory. Science experienced roted up to the present day is the claim a tremendous upswing in the person of that the trial of Galileo crippled scien- Galileo Galilei, and yet it lasted over tific progress in Italy for centuries. This 350 years until the church began to claim was propagated anew by Bertrand think about what they had done to this Russell.19 man.” 24 Although it has long been docu- It sounds like the biography of a mented that scientific progress within saint. However, it can neither be histor- and outside of the church moved ahead ically documented nor is it psychologi- 20 as quickly as in the rest of Europe, cally coherent. That Galileo’s “courage” Hans Mohr still maintains the fol- released a “tremendous upswing” in sci- lowing: “The judgment was unable to ence is nonsense. In the first place, Gal- prevent the rise of the sciences and the ileo’s condemnation was hardly noted 21 demise of the old order.” outside of Italy. Science had long since found itself in an upswing, and this 2 Myths of martyrdom was also the case in non-Catholic areas and hagiography where the Pope had no influence and in 2. Thesis: The adulation of Galileo non-Catholic areas in which there was sometimes carries the traits of religi- no Inquisition at all. ous myths of martyrdom or medieval As examples of Galileo Galilei biog- hagiography. raphies which make Galileo into a hero is a monograph published under Ernan McMullin is correct when he the rororo label (a label used by the writes: “No other person in the his- Rowohlt Publishing house, or rororo tory of science captures the fantasy as for short) by the adherent of anthro- much as Galileo Galilei.”22 “Viewed in posophy, Joachim Hemleben,25 the this way, Galileo advanced to becom- ‘GDR biography’ (GDR refers to the ing a martyr for science. This opinion is prior German Democratic Republic, incorrect …”23 or East Germany) by Ernst Schmutzer and Wilhelm Schütz,26 and the chapter

Theologische Akzente 7 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher on Galileo in Siegfried Fischer-Fabian’s In the course of all of this, the point book entitled The Power of Conscience of dispute is a text by the Galileo (German title: Die Macht des Gewis- biographer Vincenzo Viviani,37 which sens).27 emerged sixty years after Galileo’s There are many prime examples for death. what appears to be a virtual modern “Neither Galileo’s friends nor his oppo- religious veneration of Galileo, in litera- nents ever speak about it. Nothing is 28 ture for young people as well as in the more improbable than something asso- 29 30 ‘adulation’ found in scientific works. ciated with such silence. We would indeed have to assume that Galileo did 3 Legends: The leaning not allow himself to describe experi- tower of Pisa and “but it ments as actually performed which he does move” only conceived of and thereby purposely concealed a dazzling experiment he 3. Thesis: In addition to the never actually performed.”38 expressed phrase “but it does move,”31 the best example of a Galileo legend Koyré has documented that Galileo is the experiment at the leaning tower could not have even envisioned the of Pisa. experiment, since he held to a completely different conception of physics Hence Alexander Koyré nevertheless than what allegedly was to be demon- states the following in “The Experiment strated.39 at Pisa: Case Study of a Legend,”32 a Arthur Koestler begins his section work in which Koyré shows that Gali- about Galileo in his famous, if dis- leo never conducted the experiment puted, history of astronomy entitled and indeed could not have conducted The Sleepwalker: A History of Man’s it: “For today’s average well-read indi- Changing Vision of the Universe40 in a vidual, Galileo’s name is firmly con- similar way: nected with the picture of the leaning tower.”33 “The story of the ‘experiment’ “The personality of Galileo, as it at Pisa has in the meantime fallen into emerges from works of popular science, the category of common intellectual has even less relation to historical fact property; one finds it in handbooks and than Canon Koppernigk’s. In his par- travel guides,34 indeed even scientific ticular case, however, this is not caused literature does not constitute an excep- by a benevolent indifference towards tion.35 This is the case even though as the individual as distinct from his early as 1909 the fact of the legendary achievement, but my more partisan character of the experiments had been motives. In works with a theological documented.36 basis, he appears as the nigger in the woodpile; in rationalist mythography, as the Maid of Orleans of Science, the

8 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

Saint George who slew the dragon of pagated by best-selling authors – most the inquisition. It is, therefore, hardly impressively by Arthur Koestler.”43 surprising that the fame of this outstan- ding genius rests mostly on discoveries 4 The Copernican system he never made, and on feats he never had long since estab- performed. Contrary to statements in lished itself in the church even recent outlines of science, Galileo at the time of Galileo did not invent the telescope; nor the microscope; nor the thermometer; nor 4. Thesis: The Ptolemaic system the pendulum clock. He did not disco- had already been rejected by high ver the law of inertia; nor the paral- Catholic officials and Jesuit astro- lelogram of forces or motions; nor the nomers prior to the time of Galileo. sun spots. He made no contribution to Many followed Copernicus’ system. theoretical astronomy; he did not throw Copernican teaching had long since down weights from the leaning tower established itself in the church at of Pisa, and did not prove the truth the time of Galileo. It was only the of the Copernican system. He was not demonstrative evidence which was tortured by the Inquisition, did not missing. languish in its dungeons, did not say Public espousal of the Copernican ‘eppur si muove’; and was not a martyr system was not dangerous in principle, of science. What he did was to found as one can see in the example of the the modern science of dynamics, which imperial astronomer Johannes Kepler.44 makes him rank among the men who “The Jesuits themselves were more shaped human destiny.”41 Copernican than Galileo. It is in the Additionally there is Gerhard Prause. meantime generally acknowledged that He has most notably rendered out- the reason Chinese astronomy develo- standing service in the battle against ped faster than European astronomy legends in the presentation of history,42 is simply found in the fact that Jesuit and he writes as follows with respect to missionaries conveyed the Copernican the viewpoint that the trial of Galileo is world view to them.”45 the greatest scandal within Christianity “While Martin Luther dismissed the and a proof of the backwardness of the author46 of ‘De revolutionibus orbium church: coelestium‘, as a ‘ fool,’ who ‘would “The truth is, however, that this is a reverse the entire art of astronomy,’ the primitive cliché, an adulterated story- Vatican left the work alone. It was only book tale, a legend which appears to be viewed as a ‘mathematical hypothesis’ immortal, although it has long since and had already long been used as an been corrected by professional historians aid for astronomical calculations. After and such corrections have been pro- significant Jesuit scholars such as Peter

Theologische Akzente 9 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

Clavius also confirmed the correctness in particular by the popes. His tea- of Galileo’s astronomical observations, chings were in fact celebrated. Copernicus and his adherents became His visit to Rome in 1611 after the ‘suspicious.’”47 publication of his Star Messanger “was 52 (In contrast to Luther, John Calvin a triumph” and an academic cer- 53 was of the opinion that neither Ptol- emony. “Pope Paul V received him, emy’s viewpoint nor that of Copernicus amicably gave him audience, and the could be substantiated with the Bible, Jesuit council honored him with vari- 54 since the Bible is written in a language ous ceremonies …” Jean-Pierre Maury for everyone and not in a special lan- writes the following regarding this visit: guage geared towards science.48) “Galileo’s discoveries are now reco- Copernicus’ decisive book was, by gnized by the greatest astronomical and the way, only on the index of forbid- religious authority of the time. Pope den books from 1616 to 1620 and was Paul V gives him private audience and again admitted after slight modifica- bestows so much honor upon him that tions.49 It was only Galileo’s Dialogue he prevents him from kneeling, which that remained on this list from 1633 to is actually the reigning convention. 1837.50 Several weeks later the entire Collegio “Whoever parades the church’s judicial Romano gathers in Galileo’s presence in murder of the ‘Copernican’ Giordano order to officially celebrate his discove- Bruno, or the case of Galileo, in order to ries. At the same time, Galileo meets all insinuate that at the time of Copernicus the Roman intellectuals and one of the there was open enmity on the part of the most famous, Prince Federico Cesi, asks Catholic Church toward heliocentric him to become the sixth member of the teaching, will be shown otherwise by Accademia dei Lincei, of which Prince 55 the simple fact of the dedicatory fore- Federico Cesi was the founder.” word. It was not until Bruno’s radicali- Pope Paul V received Galileo in 1616 zation of Copernican consequences with one week after the writings of Coper- its unmistakable anti-Christian impact nicus were placed under review and that Copernicanism was discredited in assured him, according to Galileo’s own the eyes of ecclesiastical rulers.”51 report, of his greatest esteem and support.56 Galileo’s first printed statement in 5 Galileo was held in high favor of the Copernican system, ‘Letters esteem by the church on Sunspots’ received much acclaim in and the popes Rome, and there were no critical voices 5. Thesis: Up until shortly before his heard. Among the cardinals who con- trial, Galileo was held in high esteem gratulated Galileo were Cardinal Bar- by the Roman Curia, the Jesuits, and berini, the later Pope Urban VIII who let him be denounced in 1633.57 In 1615

10 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei charges against Galileo were rejected “Not out of fear of his ecclesiastical by the court of Inquisition. From 1615 superiors – as is repeatedly and incor- until 1632 Galileo enjoyed the friend- rectly maintained – but rather because ship of many cardinals and the popes.58 he feared – and so he said – being And regarding the pope himself, ‘laughed at by university professors and under whom Galileo was denounced, hissed off the stage,’ he allowed his work the following is to be said: De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium “Soon after he was enthroned, Urban (On the Revolutions of the Celestial VIII received Galileo in the Vati- Orbs) to lie unpublished for 38 years. can in 1624 and gave him six private It was not until the requests of his eccle- audiences. This expression of honor was siastical superiors, in particular Pope not unusual insofar as Urban VIII was Clement VII, that Copernicus decided 61 an admirer of Galileo. Shortly before to publish his work.” the audiences were given, Galileo had Only few scientists at the time of published The Assayer and had dedica- Galileo openly backed the Copernican ted it to Urban VIII.”59 system, while many secretly held it to be correct. The masses openly rejected it.62 “Thus, while the poets were celebrating 6 The battle against Gali- Galileo’s discoveries which had become leo emanated primarily the talk of the world, the scholars in from scientists and col- his own country were with few excep- leagues tions, hostile or skeptical. The first, 6. Thesis: The battle against Galileo and for some time the only voice raised in public in defense of Galileo, was did not just emanate from Catholic 63 dignitaries but rather especially from Johannes Kepler’s.” Galileo’s scientific colleagues who Next to that, the Church simultane- feared for their positions. ously represented the interests of scien- Representatives of the church were tists bound to the Church, since after significantly more open to Copernican all the Jesuits in Rome pressed for the teachings than scientists and Galileo’s trial and were among the leading scien- colleagues. Galileo did not delay pub- tists of their time. lic affirmation of the Copernican world Especially in the case of Galileo, view out of fear of the church but rather one confronts the sluggishness of the out of fear of his scientific colleagues.60 scientific community demonstrated in This applies similarly to Copernicus Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scien- himself. Gerhard Prause aptly sum- tific Revolutions that makes scientific marizes the situation with respect to revolutions move ahead so tediously. Copernicus as follows: Often enough throughout history it was not the church but rather the scientific

Theologische Akzente 11 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher community which held up scientific prog- its postulations have remained valuable ress! There is no group and no move- up to the present time. However, the ment in history which can maintain progress of biology and physics has pro- that it has never held up the progress bably been impeded by the uncritical of science. Christian churches have also adoption of half-truths.”66 done it, just as they have often by the However, it is also important that same token promoted science. I cannot Matthias Dorn for instance has demon- recognize that they have stood in the strated that Galileo remained in Aristo- way of a scientific revolution more fre- tle’s grip, although he originally was a quently than others. Platonist.67 In this connection Lydia La Dous 7 Aristotle was seen as points out that it is wrong to think that infallible, less so the as a result of the earth no longer being in Bible the center of things, mankind had been dethroned through Copernicus. In fact, 7. Thesis: It was above all Aristotle’s the status of the earth and of human- sacrosanct position that made it dif- ity had been heightened compared with ficult to accept Galileo’s hypotheses, Aristotle’s view.68 not the position held by the Bible. Walter Brandmüller writes: 8 Galileo was stubborn “It was not the theology of that time ad polemical which disapproved of Copernicus’ teaching. Rather, it was the philosophers 8. Thesis: Galileo was an above-ave- (even if these individuals were closely rage stubborn, petulant, and aggres- tied to theology).”64 It was the claim to sive scientist and even produced totality on the part of the philosophers deadly enemies due to his constant – in this case the Aristotelians – and harsh polemic at those points where much less persecution by theologians, the Ptomelaic world view had long against which Galileo struggled.”65 since been renounced. The Tuscan envoy, under whose charge Even one of the sharpest critics of the Galileo stood, characterized Galileo in a church in the case of Galileo writes as letter to the Tuscan prince as follows: follows: “…He is passionately involved in this “The truth is that science started on quarrel, as if it were his own business, its modern path by taking over ideas and he does not see and sense what it derived from parts of the system starting would comfort; so that he will be snared with Aristotles. In some respects it was in it, and will get himself into danger … a happy choice. It enabled seventeenth For he is vehement and is all fixed and century science to formulate physics and impassioned in this affair, so that it is chemistry with a completeness such that impossible, if you have him around, to

12 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

escape from his hands. And this business ness which Tycho evoked. Rather, it was which is not a joke but may become of a cold, merciless enmity which genius great consequence, and this man is here plus arrogance minus humility produ- under protection and responsibility …”69 ced in circles of the mediocre. Without Anna Mudry begins her new German this personal conflict, the conflict which selection of Galileo’s works and letters70 the publication of the Sidereus Nuncius with the words: triggered would remain incomprehensible.”74 “The biography of the co-founder of modern science actually demonstrates Arthur Koestler writes: many contradictions, inconsisten- “His method was to make the opponent cies, and retractions which Galileo’s ludicrous – and he was always successful contemporaries sense as such. Indeed at this, regardless of whether rightfully they praised him as the ‘Columbus of so or not … The method demonstrated the new heaven.’ However, they also itself to be exquisite for celebrating tri- responded with pricked ears to his inner umphs in the moment and to produce turmoil. ‘This is due to the fact that as a enemies for life.”75 clever man he wanted and sensed what Zdenko Solle formulates it similarly: the holy church wanted and sensed. “Galilei did not shirk back from per- However, he caught fire for his own sonal attacks and ridicule, and yet this opinions, had fierce passions within was also the best way to produce ene- himself, and little power and caution to mies.”76 conquer them …’ This is what the envoy of the Tuscan grand duke, Piero Guic- Koestler writes the following about ciardini, reported on March 4, 1616 Galileo’s excessive response to an anti- back to Florence. And Guicciardini Ptolemaic writing by the leading Jesuit was not someone exactly sympathetic astronomer Horatio Grassi: towards Galileo, although he had an “When Galilei read the treatise, he intelligent feel for Galileo’s conflict.”71 had an outburst of fury. He covered its Koestler repeatedly points to this per- margins with exclamations like ‘piece sonal side of numerous disputes which of asininity,’ ‘elephantine,’ ‘bufoon,’ made it impossible to cooperate with ‘evil poltroon, and ’ungrateful vil- Galileo in a scientific sense.72 As early as lain’. The ingratitude consisted in the during his studies he received the nick- fact that the treatise did not mention name the “wrangler.“73 Koestler writes Galileo’s name – whose contribution to the following on Galileo’s responses to the theory of comets had been a casual the critics of his Message from the Stars: endorsement of Tycho’s views in Letters on Sunspots.”77 “In contrast, Galilei possessed the seldom talent of arousing enmity; not Klaus Fischer comments on the same the indignation alternating with fond- squabble:

Theologische Akzente 13 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

“It is difficult to decide what the most Decisive for the trial against Gali- notable thing about this dispute is: leo was the fact that words of the pope the open course of action of the Jesuits fond of Galileo were put in the mouth against Aristotelian celestial physics, of the character ‘Simplicio’ in Galileo’s Horatio Grassis’ almost submissive Dialogue in a way that expressed much behavior vis-à-vis Galileo’s authority, foolishness (see in this connection The- the immoderate aggression with which sis 20). Galileo demolished everything that Grassi uttered, or Galilei’s ingenious 9 Galileo ignored other rhetoric, which he skillfully played off scientific researchers against Grassi and Brahe, the former appearing to be the most pitiable of 9. Thesis: Galileo ignored all other figures who does not know what he is researchers, did not communicate his talking about …”78 research results to them, and believed Koestler writes as follows on a malign- that he alone made scientific discove- ing and scurrilously written communi- ries. As a consequence, Galileo’s tea- cation against Baldassare Capra79: chings which were condemned had already become obsolete, especially “In his later polemical writings, by developments reached by Kepler. Galileo’s style progressed from coarse invective to satire, which was sometimes “Judging by Galileo’s correspondence cheap, often subtle, always effective. He and other records of his opinion of changed from the cudgel to the rapier, himself, he was fantastically selfish and achieved a rare mastery of it …”80 intellectually and almost unbelievably conceited. As an illustration of the He also produced enemies in the pro- former, there is the now well-known cess – also among those who had been fact that he refused to share with his favorably disposed to him. colleagues or with acquaintances such A. C. Custance mentions as an exam- as Kepler any of his own findings or ple of Galileo’s oversensitivity to criti- insights; he actually claimed to be cism his reaction to rumors that a sev- the only one who ever would make enty year old Dominican had expressed any new discovery! In a letter to an doubt about his theses in a private acquaintance, he expressed himself as conversation. Galileo wrote a strong follows: ‘You cannot help it, Mr. Sarsi, letter and demanded an account. The that it was granted to me alone to dis- Dominican responded that he was too cover all the new phenomena in the sky old and too little schooled to judge Gal- and nothing to anybody else. This is the ileo’s theses at all. He had only made a truth which neither malice nor envy few private comments in order to not can suppress.’”82 appear uninformed. Galileo continued to feel “attacked.”81 At the same time, an example to mention relating to the preceding Thesis 8

14 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei is Galileo’s relationship to Johannes ging that any of his contemporaries had Kepler. Galileo had indeed written to a share in the progress of astronomy, Kepler but had never read or under- Galileo blindly and indeed suicidally stood him. Rather, he had ignored ignored Kepler’s work to the end, per- Kepler.83 Galileo used weak arguments sisting in the futile attempt to bludgeon and ignored Kepler’s significant stron- the world into accepting a Ferris wheel ger ones.84 with forty-eight epicycles as ‘rigorously Although Galileo had informed demonstrated’ physical reality.”90 Kepler very early on that he was a In short: Copernican and Kepler ‘blindly,’ i.e., “Galileo was perhaps no devout Catho- without his own evidence, aligned lic in the traditional sense. Yet he was himself with Galileo’s Message from deeply convinced that God had chosen the Stars,85 Galileo refused to give him him to not only make some discoveries one of his telescopes which he at the in the starry heavens but rather to make same time had given to political lead- to make all such new discoveries. He ers throughout the world.86 Kepler was viewed the contributions of other astro- first able to reproduce Galileo’s results nomers as inferior in comparison to his through a Galilean telescope which own. This was regrettable.”91 the Duke of Bavaria lent him.87 Gali- leo thereafter informed Kepler of his research results in the form of anagrams 10 Galileo was sometimes so that Kepler could not know what the contradictory results were and Galileo would be able to later demonstrate his rightful posi- 10. Thesis: Galileo was not first con- tion as discoverer.88 Afterwards, Galileo tradictory in the trial, where he advo- forever broke off all contact to Kepler. cated Copernican teachings in his He completely ignored Kepler’s famous writings and yet decisively denied the work Astronomia Nova, although it same verbally. represented a further development of Arthur Koestler writes the following Copernicus’ efforts going also beyond on the trial and Galileo’s defense: Galileo’s teachings.89 “To pretend in the teeth of the evidence “For it must be remembered that the of the printed pages of his books, that it system which Galileo advocated was the said the opposite of what it did was sui- orthodox Copernican system, designed cidal folly. Yet Galileo had had several by the Canon himself, nearly a century months’ respite to prepare his defense. before Kepler threw out the epicycles The explanation can only be sought in and transformed the abstruse paper the quasi-pathological contempt which construction into a workable mecha- Galileo felt for his contemporaries. The nical model. Incapable of acknowled- pretence that the Dialogue was writ-

Theologische Akzente 15 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

ten in refutation Copernicus was so tions and letters. Various authors sup- patently dishonest that his case would pose that behind his behavior was more have been lost in any court.”92 than anything a fear of derision from other scientists. It was not until Galileo “If it had been the Inquisition’s inten- became famous for his discoveries in tion to break Galileo, this obviously the areas of mechanics, dynamics, and was the moment to confront him with optics that he also voiced himself on the copious extracts from his books … Copernican astronomy in publications. to quote to him what he had said about Klaus Fischer occasionally points out the sub-human morons and pygmies that Galileo was able to write things who were opposing Copernicus, and to that were contrary to his own opinion,97 convict him of perjury. Instead, imme- and that he mostly did this in order to diately following Galileo’s last answer, injure others. the minutes of the trial say: ‘And as nothing further could be done in exe- cution of the decree, his signature was 11 Galileo was not a obtained to his deposition and he was strictly experimental sent back.’ Both the judges and the scientist 93 defendant knew that he was lying …” 11. Thesis: Galileo was not a strictly And yet this dichotomy, indeed even experimental scientist, in any event hypocrisy, pervades Galileo’s entire life. not in the area of astronomy. At first Galileo himself doubted the Klaus Fischer penned the following Copernican world view, for instance about Galileo’s writing De Motu (On in 1604/1605 when a clearly visible Motion): supernova rapidly became weaker and 94 “One can doubt whether Galileo had no parallaxes were able to be detected. made many experiments to prove his He defended the Copernican world theories. If that had been the case, it is view for the first time in a publication hard to understand why he never chan- in 1613 in the fiftieth year of his life. ged his position that light objects are However, in 1597 he had already con- accelerated faster in the beginning of fessed his belief in Copernicus’ system their natural motion than heavier ones. in a private letter to Johannes Kepler. According to Galileo’s own understan- For 16 years “he not only taught … the ding, such tests were neither necessary to old astronomy according to Ptolemy 95 prove his theory nor enough to disprove but expressly reputiated Copernicus.” it. His proceeding was axiomatically Furthermore, he did this although a orientated.”98 confession of adherence to Copernicus’ teachings would have been completely Koestler refers to Professor Burtt, who harmless at that time.96 Yet he only con- assumes that it was mainly those who fessed to this stance in private conversa- stressed empirical research who did not

16 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

follow the new teaching, because of its second, since his contribution to the first lack of proof (comp. the following theses revolution is to at least be designated as 12 and 13). problematic, whereas the second became a success without restriction and is tra- “Contemporary empiricists, had they ceable back to him.”101 lived in the sixteenth century, would have been the first to scoff out of court the new philosophy of the universe.”99 12 Galileo had no evidence William R. Shea comments as follows 12. Thesis: Galileo was never able to in order to provide better understand- present evidence for his theory. The ing of the situation: first pieces of evidence – depending “So that we do not misunderstand the on their interpretation – became historical situation, we have to think available 50 or 100 years after his about the fact that Galileo, whom we death. celebrate as the father of the scientific Since Galileo did not work empiri- revolution, was not the man known by cally in astronomy (see Thesis 11) but his scientific contemporaries. He had rather regarded the Copernican system not yet written the works on mechanics as an axiom, he did not initially feel the for which he later became famous, and necessity for proofs. It was not until he he was already close to fifty years of age was placed under pressure, since he sim- without having written on the world ply put forth the Copernican system as systems, something that he had already proven, that he got into difficulties for announced in 1610. His reputation lack of evidence. rested upon his discoveries with the Virtually all researchers agree that telescope, which were indeed ingenious Galileo was unable to introduce any but to a large degree attributable to the physical proof.102 Since it had already fact that in the Republic of Venice there been superseded by Kepler’s work, were good lenses available.”100 there was much regarding the theory There are two scientific revolutions defended by Galileo that also could not associated with Galileo: be demonstrated. Fischer summarizes as follows: “On the one hand there is the Coper- nican, that is to say the one on which “He did not have really convincing Galileo took sides and which he vehe- proofs such as the parallax shift or 103 mently contended for. And then there is Foucault’s pendulum.” a second one, namely the introduction “What Galileo had introduced as proof of the mathematically described experi- for the heliocentric system by 1633 was ment as a source of knowledge, which not less, but also not more, than he he initiated and which became a great already had in 1616.”104 success. Galileo’s renown is more to be With this said, however, we have substantiated and justified through the arrived at the core of the problem.

Theologische Akzente 17 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

There is no doubt: Neither Copernicus This destroys the wrong picture of Gali- nor Galileo had put forth more than leo as someone arguing for the truth a hypothesis. Nothing could be said and falling prey to the ignorance of the about there being compelling demon- Catholic Church. One cannot speak strability. It was not until Newton had of ignorance. On the contrary: There, formulated the gravitational laws that where Galileo was truly correct, he was the way for proof of the movement of followed. And where he was wrong or the earth was opened up. Additionally: his arguments overrated, one did not let that the sun was the center of the uni- himself be deceived. With this in mind, verse is something which astronomy has it is difficult to understand why Galileo repeatedly moved farther and farther did not use what actually at the time away from with each of its spectacular was the sole telling argument: Kepler’s discoveries.105 laws.”108 “However, building upon the research Galileo conducted in mechanics in 13 The Church the last years of his life, Newton only only wanted proofs discovered the gravitational laws in 1684. With this aid, Newton was able 13. Thesis: The pope and the Inqui- to demonstrate the actual existence of sition demanded nothing other from the heliocentric system. A further cen- Galileo than proofs and/or the ack- tury had to go by before Guglielmini nowledgement of the hypothetical was in a position to provide the first character of the Copernican world experimental proof for the movement view. of the earth. Only the combination of When for instance Hans Mohr writes: geometric and physical methods would “With all the means of a repressive have been capable of putting forth that power, the church of the time declared evidence, which Galileo at his time was to the natural scientist using the expe- not yet able to do at all.”106 rimental method that a critical world In 1728 the Englishman James Brad- view examination had to be disallo- 109 ley found the first true proof for the wed,” movement of the earth around the sun, it is unfortunately nonsense. This has and in 1734 this knowledge made its never been the topic. Indeed the pope way to Italy.107 explicitly declared that he wanted to In summary the following can be review the reigning world view if Gali- said: leo would provide pieces of evidence. “These demonstrations lead to the However, neither Galileo nor any awareness that that which Galileo of Galileo’s contemporaries had any maintained was not able to be establis- experimental proofs for Galileo’s view- hed …, a finding of central importance. point. To be sure, Galileo made experimental demonstration the center of

18 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei research. However, in the process it was ably, however, it was a question of not the Copernican world view which the contents of the Holy Scriptures. If was at issue, and the results achieved by a true proof for the heliocentric system it were never doubted by the Church. was present, one would have to be very Walter Brandmüller writes: cautious in interpreting the Scriptures “It is for this reason actually astounding and rather say that we have possibly not 111 that in a letter dated April 12, 1615 understood its manner of expression.” from Cardinal Bellarmine to the Car- Galileo wrote in a letter to Dini in melite Provinzial Foscarini, who like- May 1615 that the simplest way to har- wise occupied himself with the question monize science and the Bible would be of the day, wrote: ‘“Third. I say that to bring forth many pieces of evidence if there were a true demonstration … for Copernicus’ point of view. Due to then it would be necessary to proceed the fact, however, that his opponents with great caution in explaining the were not in a position to follow the passages of Scripture which seemed con- simplest and most obvious arguments, trary, and we would rather have to say it would have been a waste of time to that we did not understand them than compile these proofs.112 to say that something was false which Let us return to the claim made by has been demonstrated. But I do not Hans Mohr that Galileo is supposed believe that there is any such demons- to have introduced experimentation tration; none has been shown to me. It as planned and controlled observation is not the same thing to show that the in the natural sciences.113 The Church appearances are saved by assuming that at that time is supposed to have sup- the sun really is in the center and the pressed this experimental research with earth in the heavens. I believe that the “all the means of repressive power”114 first demonstration might exist, but and to have forbidden a review of the I have grave doubts about the second, Ptolemaic world view. Mohr shows and in a case of doubt, one may not that this is not the result of historical depart from the Scriptures as explained research. Rahter, he projects back onto by the holy Fathers …”110 the issue his aversion to the Catholic Church. This is due to the fact that the “As early as the first discussion regar- Church has indeed up to the present day ding Copernicus in 1615, Cardinal “always … been stiffly entrenched in Bellarmine, arguably the most impor- doctrinaire attitudes”115, as has recently tant theologian of his time, defended been the case with biomedicine. this position: Certainly one could say “Galileo fell into conflict with the the that problem in question, ‘Ptolemy ruling church of the time on account or Copernicus,’ was not a question of of his new way of thinking …,”116 faith. With respect to the (scientific) according to Mohr. Not a word is said object, this indeed was the case – argu- of the fact that it only was a question

Theologische Akzente 19 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher of whether Galileo’s theory was veri- nents were too dumb to understand it fied or only probabilistic – the pieces of anyway.”117 evidence were truly found much later. Galileo reacted similarly when the There is not a word of the fact that pope himself demanded evidence from Galileo’s view of astronomy had already him.118 To an earlier polemical letter been superseded by Kepler and others. dating from 1613, Koestler writes: There is not a word of the fact that that “Galileo did not want to bear the for which Galileo truly became famous burden of proof; for the crux of the and which was his ‘new way of see- matter is … that he had no proof.”119 ing things’ was never doubted by the Church. Nothing is allowed to becloud It should not be forgotten that the black and white picture. Copernicus’ hypothesis was never generally denied by the Inquisition. Rather, it was only not to be advocated as a 14 Galileo withheld proven theory or truth. “In fact, how- the evidence ever, there had never been any ques- 14. Thesis: Galileo always pretended tion of condemning the Copernican to have evidence, but he apparently system as a working hypothesis.”120 The did not introduce it because no one Copernican world view was simply “an would have understood it anyway officially tolerated working hypothesis When Cardinal Bellarmine, who was awaiting proof.”121 responsible for the trial of inquisition, Just so that no one understands me kindly asked for proof from Galileo, incorrectly: The church had and in my this was done in order to accommodate opinion never has the right to threaten Galileo’s wish to have the Copernican any scientist with punishment. That system considered as verified. Failing was naturally only possible given the this, Galileo was asked to defend the dual role of the pope as a political ruler Copernican system as a hypothesis. and a religious leader in the Baroque Galileo answered in a letter that was age. For that reason I agree with Mat- written in a sharp tone that he was not thias Dorn when he writes: ready to present evidence since no one “For that reason Feyerabend (19862) would understand it anyway. Arthur is also not to be agreed with when he Koestler comments as follows: maintains in his fourteenth chapter “How could he refuse to produce evi- that the church rightly condemned dence and at the same time demand Galileo on the basis of reason. Such an that the matter should be treated as if evaluation could arise only if one redu- proven? The solution to the dilemma ces the ‘case of Galileo’ to the ‘scientific was found in maintaining that he had aspect’ and thus takes Galileo’s deficit the proof but was refusing to present with respect to proof as the sole decision it with the justification that his oppo- criterion.”122

20 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

Alfred North Whitehead pointed out When Galileo was increasingly something else in 1949: pushed into a corner, he finally invented 124 “I will give you two illustrations, both a “secret weapon,” namely the com- from science: Galileo said that the pletely erroneous theory that the sea- earth moves and that the sun is fixed; sons were directly caused by the rota- the Inquisition said that the earth is tion of the earth. This easy to refute fixed and the sun moves-, and Newto- theory was supposed to constitute the nian astronomers, adopting an absolute absolutely certain proof for the Coper- 125 theory of space, said that both the sun nican world view. and the earth move. But now we say “The whole idea was in such glaring that any one of these three statements contradiction to the facts, and so absurd is equally true, provided that you have as a mechanical theory – the field of fixed your sense of ‘rest’ and ‘motion’ Galileo’s own immortal achievements – in the way required by the statement that it can only be explained in psycho- adopted. At the date of Galileo’s con- logical terms.”126 troversy with the Inquisition, Galileo’s Matthias Dorn writes: way of stating the facts was, beyond “Galileo erred in the meaning of the question, the fruitful procedure for the seasons, to which he attributed the sake of scientific research. But in itself major emphasis in the Dialogue. All it was not more true than the formula- rhetorical efforts at that time could not tion of the Inquisition. But at that time even cover up the defective nature of his the concepts of relative motion were in thinking.”127 nobody’s mind-, so that the statements were made in ignorance of the qualifi- “Which pieces of evidence was Gali- cations required for their more perfect leo able to present for the Copernican truth. Yet this question of the motions system of the world? In the Dialogue of the earth and the sun expresses a and in other writings the following are real fact in the universe; and all sides named and discussed in extenso: had got hold of important truths con- • The mountains and seas of the moon, cerning it. But with the knowledge of • the moons of Jupiter, those times, the truths appeared to be inconsistent.”123 • the phases of Venus, • the changes in the brightness of the planets, 15 Invented proofs • the sunspots, 15. Thesis: The ‘proofs’ which Galileo • the trade winds (not discussed here), finally produced were all erroneous • the seasons.“128 and were not accepted by anyone. It William A. Wallace has shown on is not the case that only the Church the basis of heretofore unknown manu- did not accept them.

Theologische Akzente 21 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher scripts129 that Galileo very well knew and Brahe,“134 since the Ptolemaic that he was missing the decisive piece of world view was counted as obsolete evidence for the Copernican view of the and in any case one proceeded on world, and that he glossed over it with the assumption that the earth moved rhetoric. Jean Dietz Moss has gone into around the sun. the matter and shown how it emerges Additionally, in a scientifically inaccep- from Galileo’s texts themselves that he table manner, Galileo had abstained was aware of the fact that actual proof from grappling with Tycho Brahe’s was due and that he whitewashed this system at all, not to even mention the 130 with eloquently expressed words. demonstration of its untenability.”135 However, it seems that would have 16 Galileo refuted Ptolemy, been his proper task: but he did not prove “There was hardly a leading expert who Copernicus still believed Ptolemaic astronomy. The 16. Thesis: Whatever Galileo intro- conflict was thus between Tycho Brahe duced as proofs for his theory might and Copernicus.136 demonstrate the untenability of Tycho Brahe, who was Kepler’s pre- Ptolemy, but it did not demonstrate decessor as the emperor’s court astrono- an alternative model such as that of mer, maintained the central position of Copernicus.131 the earth in his system, even though it Arthur Koestler writes the following orbited around the sun. in this connection: “He employs his “The arguments and observations usual tactics of refuting his opponent’s which Galileo referred to were indeed 132 thesis without proving his own.” And acknowledged, but they only denied Matthias Dorn aptly comments: the Ptolemaic system and did not in “That Galileo, perhaps with the intui- like fashion speak for the Copernican tion of an experienced scientist, favored system. They were compatible with the correct system of the world, indeed the Tychonian system, which had the speaks for him. Yet it cannot eliminate advantage of maintaining the central the argumentative weaknesses.”133 position of the earth.”137 Galileo had never rightly taken on this debate, if one disregards his 17 Galileo provided no polemic against and distortion of response to Tycho Brahe Brahe’s system in his writings against Horatio Grassi.138 17. Thesis: At the time of Galileo, science was not posed before a choice “It is indeed completely clear to us of Ptolemy or Copernicus. Rather, today that neither Copernicus nor it was a “choice between Copernicus Galileo provided any real proof that

22 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

corresponded to the actual relationship 19 The later popes would of the cosmos to the heliocentric system. not have allowed Gali- Without a doubt, and indeed above leo to be condemned, all through observations made with and earlier ones did not his telescope, Galileo provided several pursue his condemna- weighty, if not sweeping, reasons for the tion fact that the geocentric system could not be true. However, Tycho de Brahe, with 19. Thesis: Among Urban VIII’s pre- whom Galileo had not grappled, had decessors, no trial against Galileo already known that. Hence nothing was pursued, and among his succes- had yet been demonstrated for Coper- sors there would not have been a trial. nicus’ benefit. Thus our question has to Stated otherwise: the prior popes be whether this was also understanda- were for Galileo, and the popes after- ble by Galileo’s contemporaries. And in wards would not have allowed Galileo fact it was.”139 to be condemned. Evidence is found in Theses 5, 6, and 18 Galileo also defended 21. After all, in 1615 an initial trial what had long since before the court of the Inquisition was been superseded decided in Galileo’s favor on the basis of a favorable opinion provided by the 18. Thesis: Galileo fought likewise leading Jesuit astronomer.143 for the Copernican system as obsti- nately as for theories which looked to 20 Galileo was a victim of other scientists to be more of a relapse Urban VIII into the old conception of the world. This thesis actually emerges from The- 20. Thesis: Galileo became the victim ses 9, 15, and 17. Galileo held firmly to of the politics of Pope Urban VIII, Copernicus’ epicycles, although Kepler who had earlier been very partial to had already gotten beyond this.140 Galileo. The blame for this rests on His erroneous explanation of the political circumstances and the per- tides had to serve as the primary piece sonal attacks made by Galileo against of evidence for the Copernican system, the Pope. These were not, however, although it was also already untenable religious reasons. The trial proceeded at that time and Kepler had found the from the Pope, while the Inquisition correct cause in the gravitational pull of weakened the trial more than it inten- the moon.141 sified it. In 1618 Galileo interpreted visible Theses 20 and 21 go into the personal comets in a passionate piece of writing aspect of the matter, while Thesis 22 goes as a light reflex, in order that one did into the political aspect. And yet they are not believe the astronomer and Jesuit not easily separated from each other. Grassi that they were flying bodies.142

Theologische Akzente 23 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

Galileo’s trial took place under a duration. It was not, however, quite ruthless and cruel pope. In a Catholic simply a gigantic battle between Chris- encyclopedia on the popes, one reads tianity and science as such. the following: “Within the Church, Urban’s pontifi- 21 The Pope: cate was burdened by unlimited nepo- From friend to foe tism. Urban VIII is a tragic figure on the papal throne: his reign was filled 21. Thesis: It was not until shortly with failures for which he himself, prior to the trial that the friendship however, was responsible.” 144 with Urban turned to enmity, and this was due to Galileo’s making fun At the end of what was not exactly of the Pope in his major work entitled a flattering description of Urban VIII, the Dialogue. formerly Cardinal Barberini, who was As a cardinal, Urban VIII had been “cynical, vainglorious, and lusting for very partial to Galileo (see Thesis 5) and secular power,”145 Koestler writes that had even composed an ode to him.148 he After he became Pope Urban VIII in “was the first Pope to allow a monu- 1623, his fondness for Galileo increased ment to be erected to him in his even more.149 lifetime. His vanity was indeed monu- It was just prior to the trial that mental, and conspicuous even in an age Urban’s friendship turned to enmity. which had little use for the virtue of In addition to political reasons (The- modesty. His famous statement that he sis 22), the cause was also due to per- ‘knew better than all the Cardinals put sonal imprudence – if not insults – on together’ was only equalled by Galileo’s the part of Galileo. Galileo obtained that he alone had discovered everything permission from the Pope to print his new in the sky. They both considered major work, Dialogue, provided that themselves supermen and started on a certain corrections were made. Galileo basis of mutual adulation—a type of shrewdly circumvented the censorship relationship which, as a rule, comes to a by placing Urban’s favorite argument 146 bitter end.” in the mouth of the shallow-brained The Pope’s conduct also affected sci- Simplicio. Simplicio is one of three ence: scientists in the dialogue and always “The Pope paralyzed scientific life asks the ‘silly’ questions and defends in Italy. The center of new research the old world view. Urban VIII found moved to the Protestant countries in the out about this and became aware of north.”147 the contents of the book at some time between the end of June and the middle With that said, the Galileo affair was of July 1632.150 This was shortly before actually only an intra-Catholic and the disaster ran its course. Without this intra-Italian problem with a very short

24 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei he surely would have hardly lent Gali- As a defender of papal infallibility, leo’s enemies his ear. Ludwig von Pastor has attempted to “But it did not require much Jesuit cun- demonstrate in his history of the popes ning to turn Urban’s perilous adulation that the Pope was himself only slightly into the fury of the betrayed lover. Not involved in the trial and that the (anon- only had Galileo gone, in letter and ymous) Inquisition conducted the pro- spirit, against the agreement to treat ceedings more aggressively than the Copernicus strictly as a hypothesis, not Pope, as Galileo’s friend, would have 153 only had he obtained the imprimatur liked. Zdenko Solle, however, has by methods resembling sharp trickery, asserted good reasons for seeing the cir- but Urban’s favorite argument was only cumstances as being exactly the other 154 mentioned briefly at the very end of the way around. The Pope prompted the book, and put into the mouth of the entire trial for personal reasons, and the simpleton who on any other point was Inquisition, in contrast, conducted the invariably proved wrong. Urban even trial in a very relaxed manner, whereby suspected that Simplicio was intended some of the ten judges were more con- as a caricature of his own person. This, cerned with their own advancement. of course, was untrue; but Urban’s sus- Others, however, placed a brake on the picion persisted long after his fury had events. The result was that in the end abated …”151 three signatures were missing, at least two of which were arguably missing out Enrico Belloine writes: of protest! The only cardinal who pro- “The book was finally printed Febru- ceeded with zeal was the brother of the ary 21, 1632 under the title Dialogue Pope. Concerning the Two Chief World Sys- “That the whole trial was questiona- tems: Ptolemaic and Copernican. The ble could not be hidden from insiders. hostile reaction was already so strong in There was much resistance from high the summer that it came to a statement church officials and from the side of the from Pope Urban VIII. The Pope felt Jesuits.155 that he had been attacked and betrayed because one of his theses had been Koestler likewise sees the Pope as the reproduced in the Dialogue in a form actual cause of the trial: that held him up to ridicule. The thesis “There is little doubt that the decision which the pope had personally expressed to instigate proceedings was Urban said that God in his unending power VIII’s, who felt that Galileo had played could bring about the perceived pheno- a confidence trick on him.”156 menon in an unending number of various ways. As a result, mankind was not able to come upon the truth by obser- ving the phenomenon alone.”152

Theologische Akzente 25 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

22 Galileo was a victim of side and at the same time made a role Urban VIII’s politics model out of the ruthless French Cardi- nal Richelieu. In the process he encour- 22. Thesis: Galileo also became a aged the continuation of the war. victim of the politics of Pope Urban Between the years 1627–1630 Italy VIII, who in the Thirty Years‘ War additionally experienced the War of manoeuvered in an incomprehensible Mantuan Succession. At the same time, manner, tried to bring Italian cities there arose a dispute in the Thirty Years’ under his control, fought against War between the Catholic powers of internal opposition, and after initial France and Spain, with which the Pope success completely failed in 1644. had amicable arrangements. The head The condition of the Curia was com- of the Spanish opposition in the Vati- pletely determined by the political dis- can, Cardinal Borgia, let things develop putes of the time. Zdenko Solle writes: into a heated political dispute with the “The Council of General Inquisitors Pope, since a peace treaty was in sight became a picture of the party cadre of while the Pope continued to push for the Church at that time. Neither in the war.160 A tumult followed among the case of Borgia nor of Urban was it a cardinals. After that, the Pope con- question of astronomy or of doctrine. ducted a large-scale political cleans- Rather, it was always a question of ing within the Vatican, which more or 157 politics.” less by chance affected all of Galileo’s Additionally: backers.161 The Pope led numerous tri- “Let us return to the political situation als of inquisition and developed into an in Rome, which caused a state enemy to abominable ruler. be made out of our unsuspecting astro- The following two relationships pos- nomer158 sibly doomed Galileo, because they were directed against the Pope’s alliance Fischer expresses himself similarly: policy: “The concern for the salvation of one’s The close relationsihp to the de Medi- soul was certainly not the sole moti- cis, who supplied the Tuscan prince, vation behind church-related action. fought with Venice162 against the Pope, The Thirty Years’ War began in 1618, and they were not vindicated until 1644 and it ended the time of arguing with after the death of the Pope; 163 words. The Church found itself in its The relationship with Austria164 fiercest battle for self-justification since and the Emperor Rudolph II through 159 the earliest days of its history.” Kepler, since the Pope fought with During the Thirty Years‘ War, Pope France and Sweden against the Catholic Urban VIII initially supported the Emperor. The princes of Tuscany (and Catholic emperor. However, after Galileo’s protectors) and the emperor in Catholic France and Protestant Sweden Vienna were close friends.165 became allies, he changed over to their

26 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

Zdenko Solle has thoroughly docu- 23 Galileo died two years mented that it was emerging ‘modern’ too early nationalism which left Galileo between the Pope and the Italian cities and 23. Thesis: Galileo died two years between the parties of the Thirty Years‘ prior to the humiliation of his oppo- War.166 nent Pope Urban VIII in 1644. It was “Thus it was not the shadow of a dying in this year that the entire situation and dark night but rather the begin- changed, and the Medici’s again nings of the modern era which put pres- regained their honor. Galileo would sure on the researcher who had engrossed have surely no longer been condem- 173 himself in his scientific work.”167 ned. Galileo’s work had already appeared Joachim Hemleben, who is other- in 1656 with the permission of the wise completely partial to Galileo, has Church, but without the Dialogue.174 shown that Galileo would not have However, it contained an admiring let- been subject to a trial had he not moved ter from Pope Urban VIII to Galileo. from Padua to Florence. This was due In 1710 Dialogue was also published. to the fact that Padua was dependent on The censorship of Copernican writ- Venice, while Florence, however, was ings was altogether quickly ended and dependent on Rome.168 Thanks to Ven- removed.175 ice’s independence from Rome, there When Pope John Paul II apologized was a great degree of freedom in sci- in 1979 for the trial of Galileo and offi- ence which prevailed,169 such that even cially rescinded the court decision,176 Protestants were able to study there.170 it should not lead to the false conclu- This was impossible in Florence. One of sion that up until that time it had been Galileo’s best friends, Giovanni Fran- abided by. cesco Sagredo (1571–1620), had already warned Galileo in 1611 against mov- ing to Florence, because there he would 24 Galileo considered the be dependent on international politics Bible to be God’s Word 171 and on the Jesuits. However, Galileo 24. Thesis: Galileo was a scientific ignored these and all later warnings. researcher who believed in the credi- [Michael H. Shank has pointed out bility of the Bible and always sought that during Galielo‘ entire time of activ- to show that the Copernican world ity, Italy and Europe were entangled in view was by all means compatible wars, above all in the so-called Thirty with the Bible. He contended against Years‘ War and in defending against the 172 the reigning understanding of the expansion of the Ottoman Empire. ] Bible that did not do justice to the Bible, since it was blurred by Aristo- telian glasses.

Theologische Akzente 27 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

Galileo was not charged with infring- not only various contradictions but also ing upon the Bible, but rather with serious heresies and blasphemies, and it going against papal ordinances and would be necessary to attribute to God against the prohibition of holding that feet, hands and eyes, as well as bodily a hypothesis without proof expresses and human feelings like anger, regret, truth. Matthias Dorn writes: hate and sometimes even forgetfulness “The discussion about Galileo’s faith of things past and ignorance of future 180 receives an important endorsement ones.” through all of this: as problematic as his “I maintain that the authority of the devotion to the church might have been, Holy Scriptures has the sole goal of it was paired with a profound respect for convicting people of those articles and the Holy Scriptures, which was an inte- teachings which are indispensible for 177 gral component of his thought. Gali- their salvation and proceed beyond all leo did not lift science to the position human knowledge, and which are able of a corrective to the Holy Scriptures. to be made credible through no other Rather, in the case of contradictions he science and by no other means than only drew exegetical consequences of the through the mouth of the Holy Spirit type that led to a better understanding itself. However, that the same God who of the text but that neither rejected nor has endowed us with senses, the faculty 178 denied the text.” of judgment, and reason, relegated “One cannot speak of ‘demythologizing’ these and made intermittent use of and the biblical text (Hemleben 1987). wanted to convey knowledge to us in Galileo made very concrete efforts at ways other than through them, is some- interpretation and never doubted the thing I do not think it is necessary to revelatory character of the Holy Scrip- believe, especially not when it comes to tures. Also, Galileo did not advocate those sciences for which only an excee- the ‘theory of double truth’ (Kuznecov dingly small portion is contained in the 1970).”179 Scriptures, and above that only in scattered sentences; …”181 A letter to Benedetto Castelli dated December 21, 1613 was dedicated to Enrico Belloine wrote the following 182 expressing Galileo’s understanding of regarding this letter: the Bible. In this letter one reads the “The central topic of the letter was the following: differentiation de fide problems and “… that, through the Scripture cannot de rerum natura problems. The Holy err, nevertheless some of its interpreters Scripture, according to Galileo, con- and expositors can sometimes err in tains the absolute truth, as far as it has various ways … namely to want to limit to do with questions of faith. However, oneself always to the literal meaning of when it comes to questions of natural the words; for there would thus emerge philosophy, the Scriptures, even if they

28 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

are inspired by God, do not lay claim to the Holy Scriptures can contradict the scientific truth. Rather, they have to be Bible.”188 understood as statements from a point Finally, it has to be added that for of view which people without educa- his part, Galileo loved to charge others tion can also grasp. For that reason, with teaching against the Holy Scrip- it is necessary that when it comes to tures. questions of science that are able to be “On the other hand, Galileo tended to linked to certain portions of text in designate his point of view as ‘inspired the Holy Scriptures, a good Christian by God’ and to stigmatize those of his should not only take the literal wording opponents as ‘contrary to the Scrip- into account. A good Christian has to tures.’ The popular conception of Gali- interpret these connections very astu- leo as a martyr for freedom of thought tely, the more so as it only has to do with is a crude oversimplification. The fact a few Bible passages.”183 that his viewpoints differed from most According to Olaf Pedersen, Galileo recognized scholarly instructors did not primarily quotes St. Augustine, Hiero- make him into a freethinker.”189 nymus, Thomas of Aquinas, and additional medieval theologians in his theological letters.184 However, he appar- 25 Galileo was a ently does not know of the most signifi- convinced Catholic cant key witnesses which he could have quoted.185 As a theological amateur, 25. Thesis: Galileo was no secular Galileo was actually poorly armed for Enlightenment scientist. Rather, he the discussion.186 was a convinced Catholic. Even his It is not without good reason that his efforts to demonstrate the compati- chief witness is St. Augustine,187 even if bility of his teachings with the Bible his knowledge of the church father was led, among others, to conflicts with rather superficial. What he took from the Catholic hierarchy. St. Augustine could be summarized as Olaf Pedersen has most clearly follows: worked out that Galileo was a convinced Catholic and Christian.190 In his “Galileo emphasized that the Bible uses view there is not the slightest indication this manner of expression for the sake of that Galileo ever doubted the Catho- simple people, in order that they more lic Church, be it from the direction of easily understand statements regarding Protestantism, of indifference, or of salvation. ‘The Holy Scriptures and secularism.191 nature,’ he declares, ‘both trace back to For instance, Galileo made a pil- the divine Word: the first as dictation grimage to Loretio in 1618. He had from the Holy Spirit, and the second attempted it earlier and would again as a loyal executor of the commands of later as well, but he did not receive a God.’ No truth which is discovered in permit to travel.192

Theologische Akzente 29 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

Zdenko Solle writes as follows regard- the preface to the Dialogue) there is no ing the relationship between faith and reason to doubt the honest intentions of science in the case of Galileo: the faithful Catholic Galileo.”195 “As a deeply religious scientist, Galileo Indeed Ludwig Pastor, as a defender could not live with the appearance of a of papal infallibility, maintains that the discrepancy between science and faith, Pope saw a Protestant danger in Gali- and he started to interpret the Bible. leo, and yet there are others who doubt As a layman, he experienced much resi- this.196 After all, Galileo’s first critic was stance from theologians ... His attempts a Protestant pastor from Bohemia,197 to interpret the Bible were one of the even though after the trial his writings reasons which led to the trial. Another were published in Protestant countries reason was his attempt to popularize and thereby became known. Inciden- the Copernican system.“193 tally, Galileo was a declared anti-Prot- 198 The foreword of the Dialogue itself estant. contains clear statements regarding the Galileo was, by the way, legally a cler- fact that Galileo did not want to stand gyman, even if only in order to receive in opposition to the Bible194 and to the a benefice: Church. Albrecht Fölsing writes regard- “Galileo was not expected to wear the ing this: clothes of an order or to change his life- “Many of Galileo’s admirers in the 19th style: he did, however, have to have his and 20th century could understand this hair cut and received the religious rite preface only as a concession to censor- of the tonsure from Archbishop Ales- ship. Some interpreted it as a rogu- sandro Strozzi on April 5, 1631. Since ish by-passing of the Decree, others as that time Galileo was a member of the unworthy submission, again others as a clergy and was occasionally so identified 199 mockery of the authority of the Church in legal documents.” ... We, on the other hand, want to sug- gest this text to be an authentic expression of Galileo’s intention under the 26 Galileo wrote in Italian existing conditions. The content is more 26. Thesis: While Galileo interpre- or less the same as in the introduction ted the Bible as a non-theologian and to the letter to Ignoli in 1624, which composed his writings in popular needed no approval from a censor, as Italian, thus becoming a precursor to it was not written for print, but which Italian nationalism, he experienced was intended to test how much freedom resistance similar to that Martin for scientific discussion the Pope and the Luther received 100 years earlier, Roman See would allow. Even if one from the side of the church as well as takes into account those tactical aspects from the side of science.200 of these texts (the letter of 1624 and

30 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

“Galileo did not compose his most Somewhat later he writes the follow- important works in Latin but rather ing about the misinterpretation of Gali- in Italian. The danger thus existed that leo’s work: the dispute about the correct world “This misinterpretation led to the ina- would no longer be a purely academic bility to correctly evaluate Galileo’s affair but rise to the position of being a early writings (‘Juvenilia’), to ignoring 201 subject of public discussion.” many sections with speculative and metaphysical content scattered throug- 27 Galileo did not separate hout Galileo’s writings, yea, even to faith and science a misinterpretation of how Galileo understood the relationship between 27. Thesis: Galileo was not a scien- science and faith, how he interpreted tist who rejected all metaphysics or the relative scientific importance of called for a separation of faith and religious statements, the binding nature science. of the Inquisition for science and the Klaus Fischer makes the following scientific significance of his own cosmo- fundamental comment on a quote from logy, cosmogony, and other natural phi- Galileo’s ‘Letters on Sunspots‘: losophical considerations such as those “In those last sentences, one can hear regarding atomism.”203 a somewhat different Galileo from the picture of Galileo which the traditional interpretation paints. The main 28 Galileo did not advocate line of historiographers of science from the autonomy of Wohlwill to Drake presents Galileo science as an anti-metaphysician and anti- philosopher, as the initiator of a physics 28. Thesis: Galileo never advocated based on experiment and observation, the autonomy of science and was not as the defender of science against the – as is often maintained – its father. illegitimate demands of religion, as the This has been most convincingly promoter of a separation of faith and documented by Matthias Dorn in his science. And now we hear a confession investigation Das Problem der Autono- of love for the great Creator being the mie der Naturwissenschaften bei Gali- final goal of all our (and thus including lei (English translation of the title: The our scientific) work! Science as percep- Problem of the Autonomy of Science in 204 tion of God’s truth! ... The ruling his- the Case of Galileo). The Baroque’s toriography of science cannot be freed holistic view did not allow nature and 205 from the reproach that they have read revelation to simply be separated. Galileo’s writings too selectively.”202 “This is somewhat understandable when seen against the backdrop of the Baroque. In contrast to our world,

Theologische Akzente 31 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

which is divided into independent towards science. This ‘case’ has very and autonomous areas where religion little to do with the historical events struggles for existence as one area of surrounding Galileo.”208 life among others, the individual of From the side of the Pope and from the Baroque era saw the heavens and Galileo’s side, there were piles of mis- earth, time and eternity, the divine takes and weaknesses, and on both and the human, the church and the sides this was in part due to philosophi- world, science, technology, and faith as cal reasons and in part due to egos. a rapturously magnificent display and To draw any generalizing conclusions as a harmonious component of the one regarding all scientists and theologians immense and all encompassing cosmos and churches is a falsification of history of being which proceeds from and and itself unscientific. strives towards God.”206 Appendix: Brecht‘s Galileo Conclusion There is an additional Galileo legend A genius, according to the Galileo to point out where Galileo is not viewed myth, defends the results of his empiri- as an honest scientist but rather as a cal research against religious obscu- traitor. This myth can be traced back rantists and in the process becomes a to Bertold Brecht’s play entitled Life precursor to the liberation of western of Galileo,209 in which Brecht presents thought from all forms of authoritar- Galileo as a conscious parallel to the ian tradition. Reality is, as usual, more moral failure of the discoverers of the complicated and not so melodramatic. atom bomb. “Whoever occupies himself seriously “In our age and well beyond the with the life and work of Galileo Gali- German-speaking realm, the picture lei quickly determines that the topic is of Galileo is largely determined by enormously multi-layered and complex Brecht’s Life of Galileo and in the pro- …” 207 cess likewise shaped from a moral point 210 Let us summarize the results with the of view.” words of Lydia La Dous: Gerhard Szczesny has contrasted “The ‘case of Galileo’, in the sense that Brecht’s work with reality in the com- Galileo Galilei had problems with the prehensive investigation Dichtung und Catholic Church and finally was con- Wirklichkeit (Translation of the title: demned because he advocated a new Literature and Reality; German full scientific opinion unsuitable for the title Bertold Brechts “Leben des Galilei” Church is repeatedly taken today as Dichtung und Wirklichkeit; originally an alleged demonstration of the fact addressed in Das Leben des Galilei und of hostility on the part of the church der Fall Bertolt Brecht – full title of the original in English The Case against Ber-

32 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei told Brecht: With Arguments drawn from his ‘Life of Galileo’). Brecht turned Gali- leo upon his head in order to propagate his political aims.

AnnotationAnmerkungen

1 1990 original 1990 “‘Und sie bewegt sich 4 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers: A History of doch!‘ und andere Galilei-Legenden.“ Factum Man’s Changing Vision of the Universe. London: 3/4/1990: 138–145; almost completely unchan- Hutchinson Publ., 1959. p. 432. ged reproductions: Galilei-Legenden und andere 5 Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Galilei– Beiträge zur Schöpfungsforschung und zur Chro- Prozeß. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Aka- nologie der Kulturgechichte 1979–1994. Biblia et demie der Wissenschaften, 1980. P. 6. symbiotica 12. Verlag für Kultur und Wissen- 6 Galileo Galilei, Schriften, Briefe, Werke schaft: Bonn, 1995. pp. 11–37; Professorenforum- . 2 Journal 1 (2000) 1: 3–17; Ichthys 33 (Jan 2002): Bände. (Ost-)Berlin: Verlag Rütten & Loening, 15–31; “’Und sie bewegt sich doch!‘ und andere 1987 and München: C.H. Beck, 1987 (equiva- Galilei-Legenden.“ pp. 4–22 in: Peter Zöller- lent pages). Greer, Hans-Joachim Hahn (eds.). Gott nach 7 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. München: C. der Postmoderne. Journal des Professorenforums H. Beck, 1983. Fischer does an excellent job of Bd. 1. Münster: Lit, 2007; “Und sie bewegt sich familiarizing the reader who is less well versed in doch!“ und andere Galilei- Legenden. MBS Texte the natural sciences with the extent of concrete 115 (Theologische Akzente). Bonn: Martin Bucker scientific advances achieved by Galilei during his Seminar, 2009, also downloadable at www. lifetime. bucer.eu/mbstexte.html as well as several other 8 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., pp. download possibilities on the internet; English: 357–504; comp. Note 17. “’But it does move!‘ and other Legends about the 9 Arthur C. Custance, “History Repeats Itself,” Galileo-Affair.“ pp. 153–173 in: Andrew Sandlin pp. 152–167 (chapter 3 of) “The Medieval (ed.). A Comprehensive Faith: An International Synthesis and the Modern Fragmentation of Festschrift for Rousas John Rushdoony. Friends of Thought,” pp. 99–216 in: Arthur C. Custance, Chalcedon: San Jose (CA), 1996; Legends About Science and Faith, The Doorway Papers Vol. VIII, the Galileo-Affair. 2. expanded edition. RVB: Academic Books, Zondervan Publishing House, Hamburg, 2001.1; 2008.2. S. 8–31; abridged: Grand Rapids/USA 1978. “The Galileo Affair: History of Heroic Hagi- 10 ography?“ Creation ex nihilo Technical Journal Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum (Australia) 14 (2000) 1: 91–100. Galilei-Prozeß, (with new files from the Behe- mian Archives). Issued by Günther Hamann. 2 Matthias Dorn. Das Problem der Autonomie der Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei. Sudhoffs Archiv Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte, Beihefte 43. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2000. p. 361. Band. Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für 11. Geschichte der Mathematik, Naturwissenschaften 3 Olaf Pedersen. Galileo and the Council of Trent. und Medizin. Heft 24. Wien: Verlag der Öster- Vatican Observatory Publications: Studi Galilei- reichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1980. ani 1/6. Vatikanstadt: Specola Vaticana, 1991. p. 1.

Theologische Akzente 33 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

11 William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. Galileo 14 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit. p. Galilei: Aufstieg und Fall eines Genies. Darmstadt: 431. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2006; Philip 15 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. München: C. J. Sampson. Six Modern Myths: Challenging Chri- H. Beck, 1983. p. 9 estimates that including the stian Faith. Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000. 5562 and 350 titles in the bibliographical list on pp. 27–46; Lydia La Dous. Galileo Galilei: Zur Galileo up to 1964 (information on p. 222), by Geschichte eines Falles. Topos plus Taschenbücher 1983 there were seven to eight thousand works on 613. Kevelaer: topos, 2007; Rivka Feldhay. Gali- Galileo. Additional biographical literature is in leo and the Church: Political Inquisition or Criti- ibid., p. 222 and a good overview of the literature cal Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University in ibid., p. 225–230. Press, 1995; Ernan McMullin (ed.). The Church 16 Le Opere di Gali- and Galileo. Notre Dame (IN): University of The complete Italian edition leo Galilei Notre Dame Press, 2005; Matthias Dorn. Das . Edizione Nazionale, ed. by Antonio Problem der Autonomie der Naturwissenschaften Favaro. 20 Bände. Firenze (Florenz) 1890–1909. bei Galilei. Sudhoffs Archiv Beihefte 43. Stutt- Vol. XIX. which also contains both of the oldest gart: Franz Steiner, 2000; Walter Brandmüller. Italian biographies, is, however, not complete. Galileo Galilei und die Kirche: Ein “Fall“ und seine Lösung. The volumes are listed in Klaus Fischer. Galilei Aachen: MM Verlag, 1994; Walter Brandmüller. . op. cit., pp. 223–224, additional English Galilei und die Kirche: Das Recht auf Irrtum. and German editions in ibid., pp. 224–225 and Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1982; Walter additional Italian editions in Johannes Hemle- Galileo Galilei Brandmüller. “Galilei – Ein Forscher im geistes- ben. . Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1969. p. geschichtlichen Spannungsfeld des Barock.“ pp. 173. 113–130 in: Uta Lindgren (ed.). Naturwissen- 17 Anna Mudry. “Annäherung an Galileo Gali- schaft und Technik im Barock: Innovation, Reprä- lei: Einführung der Herausgeberin.“ Vol. 1. pp. sentation, Diffusion. Köln: Böhlau, 1997; Walter 7–41, here p. 8 in: Galileo Galilei. Schriften, Brandmüller, Ingo Langner. Der Fall Galilei: und Briefe, Dokumente. 2 Bände. (Ost-)Berlin: Verlag andere Irrtümer. Augsburg: Sankt Ulrich, 2006 Rütten & Loening, 1987 and München: C.H. (Interviews with Brandmüller). Beck, 1987 (equivalent number of pages). 12 A good abbreviated presentation without 18 For instance Philip J. Sampson. Six Modern sources is found in the mentioned contribution Myths. op. cit., p. 28 or Walter Brandmüller. by Gerhard Prause. From the viewpoint of the Galilei und die Kirche. op. cit., p. 184. Catholic Church, there have also been compre- 19 Siehe Philip J. Sampson. Six Modern Myths. op. hensive presentations and justifications regarding cit., p. 39 on Bertrand Russel. History of Western the trial of Galileo which have appeared and Philosophy. London: Unwin, 1947. p. 556. which have not been taken into consideration. 20 Comp. the examples in Walter Brandmüller. However, they tend in a similar direction, for Galilei und die Kirche. 1994. op. cit., pp. 124– example B. G. V. Coyne, M. Heller, J. Zycinski 125, 165. (eds.). The Galileo Affair: A Meeting of Faith and 21 Science: Proceedings of the Cracow Conference 24 Hans Mohr. “Naturwissenschaft und Ideolo- to 27 May 1984. Vatikanstadt: Specola Vaticana, gie.“ From Politik und Zeitgeschichte (supplement 1985. to the weekly newspaper Das Parlament) No. B15/92 (April 3, 1992): p. 12. 13 The first critical investigation from the church 22 on the Galileo myth is found in James Brod- Ernan McMullin (ed.). The Church and Gali- rick’1928 The Life and Work of blessed Robert leo. Notre Dame (IN): University of Notre Dame Francis Cardinal Bellarmine S. J.: 1542–1621. 2 Press, 2005. p. 1. vols. London : Oates & Washbourne, 1928; simi- 23 Matthias Dorn. Das Problem der Autonomie der lar and later Jerome J. Langford. Galileo, Science Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei. op. cit., p. 13. and the Church. Ann Arbor (MI): University of 24 Galileo: Leben und Schicksal 1 2 David Whitehouse. Michigan Press, 1971 ; 1971 ; South Bend (GB): eines Renaissance-Genies 3 . Köln: Evergreen, 2009. St. Augustine’s Press, 1998 . p. 11.

34 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

25 Johannes Hemleben. Galileo Galilei mit 32 Chapter heading in Alexander Koyré. Galilei: Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten. rowohlts Anfänge der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaft. Kleine monographien 156. Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1969. In kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek. Wagenbach: the end, Hemleben sees the path from Galileo Berlin. 1988. p. 59 (pp. 59–69); comp. Wil- via Newton into the modernity as being on the liam A. Wallace. “Galileo’s Concept of Science: wrong track. As an alternative, he offers the path Recent Manuscript Evidence.“ pp. 15–40 in: via Novalis and Goethe to Rudolf Steiner. George V. Coyne, Michal Heller, Jozef Zycinski 26 Ernst Schmutzer, Wilhelm Schütz. Galileo (eds.). The Galileo Affair: A Meeting of Faith and Galilei. Biographien hervorragender Naturwissen- Science: Proceedings of the Cracow Conference 24 schaftler, Techniker und Mediziner 19. Leipzig: B. to 27 May 1984. Vatikanstadt: Specola Vaticana, G. Teubner, Leipzig 1983–5. 1985. 33 27 Siegfried Fischer-Fabian. Die Macht des Gewis- Alexander Koyré. Galilei. op. cit., p. 59. sens. München: Droemer Knaur, 1987. pp. 34 Ibid., p. 68, Note 1. 149–200 (fourth chapter: “Galilei oder ‘Eppur 35 Examples in ibid., pp. 59–62. si muove’”). Fischer-Fabian begins his chapter 36 on Galileo by pointing out which legends about Emil Wohlwill. “Die Pisaner Fallversuche.“ Mitteilungen zur Geschichte der Medizin und Galileo have long since been refuted (p. 149). Naturwissenschaft 4 Then, however, he lets them stand as anecdotes, (1905): 229–248; Emil . Galilei und sein Kampf für die coperni- which expose the core of the matter (p. 150). Wohlwill canische Lehre. Erster Band: Bis zur Verurteilung Despite repeated reference to legends (e.g., p. der copernicanischen Lehre durch die römischen 193; Galileo was not tortured), the chapter falls Kongregationen into a herization of the controversial scientist. . Hamburg: Leopold Voss, 1909. p. 115; Emil Wohlwill. Galilei und sein Kampf für 28 For example, the adoration of Galileo, with its die copernicanische Lehre. Zweiter Band: Nach der many remaining legends in the book for young Verurteilung der copernicanischen Lehre durch das people by the French physics professor Jean- Decret von 1616. Hamburg: Leopold Voss, 1926. Pierre Maury. Galileo Galilei: Und sie bewegt p. 260 ff. sich doch! Abenteuer – Geschichte 8. Ravensburg: 37 Otto Maier, 1990 [comp. my discussion in Quer- Translation of the decisive section in Alexander Galilei schnitte 4 (1991) 1 (Jan-March): 23], e.g., Using Koyré. . op. cit., p. 63. a telescope, Galileo allegedly discovered „irre- 38 Ibid., p. 64. futable evidence for the Copernican world view“ 39 Ibid. (Jean-Pierre Maury. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 40 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers: A History of U4). Man’s Changing Vision of the Universe. London: 29 Hans Christian Freiesleben. Galilei als Forscher. Hutchinson Publ., 1959, reprint 1989; first Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchgesellschaft, 1968. p. 8. German translation: Arthur Koestler. Die Nacht- 30 E. g., complete ibid.; Hans Mohr. “Naturwis- wandler: Das Bild des Universums im Wandel der senschaft und Ideologie.“ From Politik und Zeit- Zeit. Bern/Stuttgart: Alfred Scherz Verlag,1959 geschichte (Supplement to the weekly newspaper (pages are equivalent with the 1980 paperback Das Parlament) No. B15/92 (April 3, 1992): pp. edition quoted here). Koestler above all treats 10–18, in part. pp. 11–12. Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo and marshals 31 However, see Matthias Dorn. Das Problem der many new and much discussed theses; comp. Autonomie der Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei. the literature for and against in Joachim Hem- Galileo Galilei op. cit., p. 164–165 who points out that there leben. . op. cit., p. 159 and in is for the first time possible evidence from the Arthur C. Custance. “History Repeats Itself.” life of Galilei himself, since the said phrase was op. cit., p. 152f, part. Note 106. Custance refers found behind a picture frame from the alleged a lot to Koestler and sees in his work an excellent property of Galileo. workup of the files of the trial. However, he does not share Koestler‘s philosophical starting point of a split between faith and reason in Galilei.

Theologische Akzente 35 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

41 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 55 Jean-Pierre Maury. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 358 with omission of emphases. Klaus Fischer. 96. A completely false presentation is found in Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 34, however, correctly Hans Christian Freiesleben. Galilei als Forscher. points out that even if all the doubtful inventions op. cit., p. 8, who writes the following about and discoveries were traceable back to Galileo, the time beginning in 1610: “From this point Galileo’s meaning would not yet be thereby even onwards, Galileo attempted to aid the Coper- closely captured. nican teaching to reach recognition, also in 42 Part. Gerhard Prause. Niemand hat Kolum- particular through ecclesiastical authorities. bus ausgelacht: Fälschungen und Legenden der Unfortunately he achieved just the opposite.” Geschichte richtiggestellt. Düsseldorf: Econ, o. J.7 56 Details in Annibale Fantoli. Galileo.: For (19661 expanded edition). Copernicanism and for the Church. Vatikan Stadt: 3 43 Gerhard Prause. “Galileo Galilei war kein Mär- Libreria Editrice Vaticano, 2003 . pp. 186–187. tyrer.“ Die Zeit No. 46 (November 7, 1980): 78. 57 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., pp. Comp. the entire article and the more detailed 437+439. version in Gerhard Prause. Niemand hat Kolum- 58 Ibid., p. 449. bus ausgelacht. op. cit., chapter 7: “Galilei war 59 Hintergründe und Entwick- kein Märtyrer.“pp. 173–192. Matthias Dorn. lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. op. cit., p. 12. 44 Comp. Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. 60 Niemand hat cit., pp. 362–363. Thus in part. Gerhard Prause. Kolumbus ausgelacht. op. cit., pp. 182–183. 45 Arthur C. Custance. “History repeats itself.“ 61 op. cit., p. 154 with references; comp. postscript Gerhard Prause. “Galileo Galilei war kein Mär- in Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. tyrer.“ op. cit., p. 78. 503. 62 Comp. David F. Siemens. “Letter to the Editor.“ Science 46 Nicolas Copernicus. 147(1965): pp. 8–9. Siemens refers to Ber- nard Barber. “Resistance of Scientist to Scientific 47 Anna Mudry. “Annäherung an Galileo Galilei.“ Discovery.“ Science 134 (1961), p. 596ff; comp. op. cit., p. 29. Arthur C. Custance. “History repeats itself.“ op. 48 Details in Philip J. Sampson. Six Modern Myths. cit., p. 157. Emil Wohlwill presents this thesis in op. cit., p. 41. most detail. Galilei und sein Kampf für die coper- 49 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., pp. nicanische Lehre. Erster Band: Bis zur Verurteilung 464–465. Koestler refers to the point that many der copernicanischen Lehre durch die römischen books were brought into the index without this Kongregationen. a. a. O. belegt. always having disadvantages for the authors. 63 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. Thus the index also contained books by censors 375. and cardinals who condemned Galileo. 64 Lydia La Dous. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 111, 50 Joachim Hemleben. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. see also pp. 101, 154. 167. 65 Walter Brandmüller. Galilei und die Kirche. op. 51 Jochen Kirchhoff. Nikolaus Kopernikus mit cit., p. 156. Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten. Hamburg: 66 Alfred North Whitehead. Wissenschaft und Rowohlt, 1985. p. 53. moderne Welt. Zürich: Conzett & Huber, 1949. 52 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. p. 22. 432. 67 Matthias Dorn. Das Problem der Autonomie 53 Comp. William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. der Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei. op. cit., pp. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., pp. 57–58. 36 –37, 44. 54 Ibid.; comp. p. 433; comp. in detail on the visit 68 Lydia La Dous. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 33. Emil Wohlwill. Galilei und sein Kampf für die 69 Quoted in Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. copernicanische Lehre. Erster Band. op. cit., pp. op. cit., pp. 459; comp. the corresponding quote 366–392. by the Tuscan envoy in the introduction.

36 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

70 Galileo Galilei. Schriften, Briefe, Dokumente. 93 Ibid., pp. 499. ed. by Anna Mudry. 2 vols. (Ost-)Berlin: Verlag 94 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 94. Rütten & Loening, 1987 and München: C.H. 95 The Sleepwalkers Beck, 1987 (equivalent pages). Arthur Koestler. . op. cit., p. 362; comp. p. 437. 71 Anna Mudry. “Annäherung an Galileo Gali- 96 lei.“ op. cit., p. 8.; comp. an additional quote by Ibid., Thesis 1. the envoy to Thesis 4. 97 E. g., Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 72 In addition to the following quotes there are 138. additional examples of reactions of rage: Arthur 98 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 53. Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., pp. 438 + 99 Quoted by Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. 439ff + 445 + 367–368. op. cit., p. 467. 73 Ernst Schmutzer, Wilhelm Schütz. Galileo 100 William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 28. Galilei. op. cit., p. 84. 74 Ibid., p. 374. 101 Matthias Dorn. Hintergründe und Entwick- 75 Ibid., p. 459. lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. op. cit., p. 8; simi- Das Problem der Autonomie 76 Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Galilei- larly Matthias Dorn. der Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei Prozeß. op. cit., p. 9. . op. cit., p. 47. 102 Galileo Galilei 77 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. Comp. Klaus Fischer. . op. cit., 474. p. 123; comp. Arthur C. Custance. “History repeats itself.” op. cit., pp. 157+154–155. 78 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., pp. 128– 103 Galileo Galilei 129; comp. to the dispute of Thesis 10. Klaus Fischer. . op. cit., p. 122. 104 Galilei und die Kirche 79 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. Walter Brandmüller. . 368. op. cit., p. 152. 105 80 Ibid. Walter Brandmüller. “Galilei – Ein Forscher im geistesgeschichtlichen Spannungsfeld.“ op. 81 Arthur C. Custance. “History repeats itself.” cit., p. 119. op. cit., p. 153. 106 Walter Brandmüller. Galilei und die Kirche. 82 Ibid. op. cit., p. 153. 83 According to Lydia La Dous. Galileo Galilei. 107 Nach Lydia La Dous. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., op. cit., pp. 59, 91. p. 138. 84 Olaf Pedersen. Galileo and the Council of Trent. 108 Matthias Dorn. Hintergründe und Entwick- op. cit., p. 17. lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. op. cit., p. 4. 85 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 109 Hans Mohr. “Naturwissenschaft und Ideo- 375–376. logie.“ From Politik und Zeitgeschichte (supple- 86 Ibid., p. 381. ment to the weekly newspaper Das Parlament) 87 Ibid., p. 383. No. B15/92 (April 3, 1992): p. 11 = Hans Mohr. 88 Strittige Themen im Umfeld der Naturwissenschaf- Ibid., pp. 382–383. ten: ein Beitrag zur Debatte über Wissenschaft und 89 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 169. Gesellschaft. Berlin: Springer, 2005. p. 95. 90 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 110 Walter Brandmüller. Galilei und die Kirche. 444; comp. the subsequent section. op. cit., p. 155. Regarding the letter see Annibale 91 William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. Galileo Fantoli. Galileo. op. cit., pp. 142–144. The text Galilei. op. cit., p. 45. of the letter is in Galileo Galilei, Schriften, Briefe, Werke. Bd. 2. op. cit., pp. 46–48. 92 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 493. 111 Walter Brandmüller. “Galilei – Ein Forscher im geistesgeschichtlichen Spannungsfeld des

Theologische Akzente 37 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

Barock.“ pp. 113–130 in: Uta Lindgren (ed.). 129 William A. Wallace. “Galileo’s Concept of Naturwissenschaft und Technik im Barock: Inno- Science: Recent Manuscript Evidence.“ op. cit. vation, Repräsentation, Diffusion. Köln: Böhlau, 130 Jean Dietz Moss. “The Rhetoric of Proof in 1997. p. 116. Galileo’s Writings on the Copernican System.“ 112 Text in Annibale Fantoli. Galileo. op. cit., p. pp. 41–65 in: G. V. Coyne, M. Heller, J. Zycin- 146 and Galileo Galilei, Schriften, Briefe, Werke. ski (eds.). The Galileo Affair: A Meeting of Faith Bd. 2. op. cit., pp. 48–50. and Science: Proceedings of the Cracow Conference 113 Hans Mohr. Strittige Themen im Umfeld der 24 to 27 May 1984. Vatikanstadt: Specola Vati- Naturwissenschaften: ein Beitrag zur Debatte über cana, 1985. Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft. Berlin: Springer, 131 Nach Walter Brandmüller. “Galilei – Ein For- 2005. pp. 94–95. scher im geistesgeschichtlichen Spannungsfeld.“ 114 Ibid., p. 95. op. cit., p. 118. 132 115 Ibid. Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 485. 116 Hans Mohr. “Naturwissenschaft und Ideolo- 133 gie.“ From Politik und Zeitgeschichte (supplement Matthias Dorn. Das Problem der Autonomie to the weekly newspaper Das Parlament) No. der Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei. op. cit., p. 58. B15/92 (April 3, 1992): p. 11. 134 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 117 Ibid., p. 456; comp. on the entire controversy 433. pp. 452–458, especially 456–457. 135 Walter Brandmüller. Galilei und die Kirche. 118 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p.148. op. cit., p. 153. 136 119 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 139; 443. comp. p. 123. 137 120 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. Ibid., p. 121. 443. 138 Comp. ibid., pp. 128–129; the quote theref- 121 Ibid.; comp. the entire section. rom on Thesis 4 and Arthur Koestler. . op. cit., p. 483. 122 Matthias Dorn. Hintergründe und Entwick- 139 lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. op. cit., p. 13. Walter Brandmüller. Galilei und die Kirche. op. cit., p. 152. 123 Alfred North Whitehead. Wissenschaft und 140 moderne Welt. Zürich: Conzett & Huber, 1949. Comp. beyond Thesis 5: Arthur Koestler. pp. 237–238; comp. similarly Lydia La Dous. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 383 and Arthur C. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 29. Custance. “History repeats itself.“ op. cit., p. 154. 141 124 Alfred North Whitehead. Wissenschaft und Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., pp. moderne Welt. op. cit., p. 472. 470–473 + 459–461. 142 125 Ibid., pp. 472–474; comp. what was said on Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Gali- the seasonal theory in Thesis 10. lei-Prozeß. op. cit., p. 14; comp. Arthur Koest- 126 ler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 475. Numerous Ibid., p. 461. additional examples are found in Arthur Koest- 127 Matthias Dorn. Hintergründe und Entwick- ler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit.; Klaus Fischer. Gali- lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. op. cit., p. 4. leo Galilei. op. cit. 128 Matthias Dorn. Hintergründe und Entwick- 143 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. Lecture at the 447–449. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, July 144 Rudolf Fischer-Wollpert. Lexikon der Päpste. 3, 1992 (Manuscript), now available at: http:// Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1985. p. 118. home.arcor.de/matthias.dorn/downloads/dorn_ 145 hintergruende_galilei_prozess.pdf. S. 3. Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. 478.

38 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

146 Ibid. p. 478–479; similarly Klaus Fischer. in: Ernan McMullin (ed.). The Church and Gali- Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 145–146. leo. Notre Dame (IN): University of Notre Dame 147 Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Gali- Press, 2005. p. 60. lei-Prozeß. op. cit., p. 58. 173 Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Gali- 148 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. lei-Prozeß. op. cit., pp. 64–71. 479. 174 Comp. in detail Walter Brandmüller. Galilei 149 Ibid. und die Kirche. op. cit., pp. 178–180, 184; Walter Brandmüller. “Galilei – Ein Forscher im geistes- 150 Galileo S. Annibale Fantoli. . op. cit., p. 275. geschichtlichen Spannungsfeld des Barock.“ op. 151 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., pp. cit., p. 128. 490–491. 175 Comp. John L. Heilbron. “Censorship of 152 Enrico Belloine. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 88. Astronomy in Italy after Galileo.“ pp. 279–322 153 Ludwig Pastor. Gesichtspunkte zum Galilei- in: Ernan McMullin (ed.). The Church and Gali- Prozeß. a. a. O. S. 38–39. leo. Notre Dame (IN): University of Notre Dame Press, 2005. 154 Ibid., p. 64 and the entire book; comp. Thesis 6. 176 George V. Coyne. “The Church’sd Most Recent Attempt to Dispel the Galileo Myth.“ pp. 155 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 126 340–359 and Michael Sharatt. “Galileo’s Reha- (with additional references). bilitation.“ pp. 323–339 in: Ernan McMullin. 156 Arthur Koestler. The Sleepwalkers. op. cit., p. “Galileo’s Theological Venture.“ pp. 88–116 in: 490. Ernan McMullin (ed.). The Church and Galileo. 157 Nach Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Notre Dame (IN): University of Notre Dame Galilei-Prozeß. op. cit., p. 45. Press, 2005; Annibale Fantoli. Galileo: For 158 Ibid., p. 22. Copernicanism and for the Church. Vatikan Stadt: Libreria Editrice Vaticano, 20033. pp. 366–373; 159 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 144. Annibale Fantoli. “Galileo and the Catholic 160 Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Gali- Church.“ Vatican Observatory Publications: lei-Prozeß. op. cit., p. 25; comp. Klaus Fischer. Studi Galileiani vol. 4, issue 1. Vatikanstadt: Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 144. Specola Vaticana, 2002. p. 2. 161 Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Gali- 177 So also William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. lei-Prozeß. op. cit., p. 26–27. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., pp. 85–87. 162 Regarding Venedig‘s open resistance comp. 178 Matthias Dorn. Das Problem der Autonomie Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 144. der Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei. op. cit., p. 89. 163 Zdenko Solle. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Gali- 179 Matthias Dorn. Hintergründe und Entwick- lei-Prozeß. op. cit., p. 54. lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. op. cit., p. 11. 164 Ibid, p. 55. 180 William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. Galileo 165 Ibid, p. 57. Galilei. op. cit., p. 71. The text is unfortunately not in Galileo Galilei, Schriften, Briefe, Werke. 166 Ibid, p. 64. Vol. 2. op. cit. 167 Ibid, p. 65. 181 Matthias Dorn. Hintergründe und Entwick- 168 Joachim Hemleben. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. op. cit., p. 10. pp. 62–64 et al. 182 Galileo’s letters on the question of the Bible 169 Ibid, p. 62. are discussed most in detail in Annibale Fantoli. 170 Ibid, p. 32. Galileo: For Copernicanism and for the Church. Vatikan Stadt: Libreria Editrice Vaticano, 171 Ibid, pp. 63–64. 20033. See Castelli 129–137 (to Castelli) and 172 Michael H. Shank. “Setting the Stage: Galileo 146–167 (to Christina) and Ernan McMullin. in Tuscany, the Veneto, and Rome.“ pp. 57–87 “Galileo’s Theological Venture.“ pp. 88–116 in:

Theologische Akzente 39 Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher

Ernan McMullin (ed.). The Church and Galileo. to Markus Welser, Augsburg, December 1612 Notre Dame (IN): University of Notre Dame (Gesammelte Werke V, pp. 191–192). Press, 2005, as well as on the letter to Christina 192 Ibid., pp. 97–98. Stéphane Garcia. “Galileo’s Relapse: On the 193 Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Gali- Publication of the Letter to the Grand Duchess Zdenko Solle. lei-Prozeß Christina (1636).“ pp. 265–278 in: Ernan . op. cit., p. 9.; comp. the judgment to Galileo Galilei McMullin (ed.). The Church and Galileo. Notre Thesis 7 quoted by Klaus Fischer. . Dame (IN): University of Notre Dame Press, op. cit., p. 114–115. 2005 and Olaf Pedersen. Galileo and the Council 194 Comp. Galileo’s positive stance on the Bible of Trent. op. cit., pp. 21–29. in Emil Wohlwill. Galilei und sein Kampf für die copernicanische Lehre Erster Band. 183 Enrico Belloine. Galileo Galilei. op. cit., pp. . op. cit., pp. 71–72. 485–524 + 542–555, especially p, 543. 195 Galileo Galilei: Prozess ohne 184 Olaf Pedersen. Galileo and the Council of Albrecht Fölsing. Ende: Eine Biographie Trent. op. cit., p. 30. . München: Piper, 1983. p. 414; comp. further pp. 414–415. 185 Examples ibid. 196 Ludwig Pastor. Geschichte der Päpste. 16 vols. 186 Above all ibid., p. 20. Freiburg: Herder, 1931–1933, her vol. 13, p. 630 187 In agreement Olaf Pedersen. Galileo and the and often, and critically thereto Zdenko Solle. Council of Trent. op. cit., p. 30; Annibale Fantoli. Neue Gesichtspunkte zum Galilei-Prozeß. op. cit., Galileo. op. cit., pp. 149–153, 156–157; Ernan p. 38. McMullin. “Galileo’s Theological Venture.“ op. 197 Ibid., p. 7. cit., pp. 90–99; H. J. Lee. “Men of Galilee, why 198 Galilei und sein Kampf für die stand gazing up into Heaven: Revisiting Galileo, Emil Wohlwill. copernicanische Lehre Erster Band Astronomy, and the Authority of the Bible.“ See . . op. cit., pp. 103–116 in: Journal of the Evangelical Theologi- 552–555; Olaf Pedersen. “Galileo’s Religion.“ cal Society 53 (1010): 65–79. op. cit., pp. 92–100. 199 Galileo 188 William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. Galileo William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. Galilei Galilei. op. cit., p. 71. . op. cit., p. 146. 200 189 William R. Shea, Mariano Artigas. Galileo Michael H. Shank. “Setting the Stage: Galileo Galilei. op. cit., p. 64. in Tuscany, the Veneto, and Rome.“ pp. 57–87 in: Ernan McMullin (ed.). The Church and Gali- 190 Olaf Pedersen. “Galileo’s Religion.“ See leo. Notre Dame (IN): University of Notre Dame 75–102 in: G. V. Coyne. M. Heller, J. Zycinski Press, 2005. p. 73. On p. 58 reference is made to (eds.). The Galileo Affair: A Meeting of Faith and the fact that Galileo wrote Italian but was not Science: Proceedings of the Cracow Conference 24 an ‚Italian,‘ and that such an idea did not arise to 27 May 1984. Vatikanstadt: Specola Vaticana, until the 19th century. He also refers to the fact 1985. Especially pp. 88–92 on Galileo‘s belief in that Galileo never crossed the Alps and geogra- God and pp. 92–100 on Galileo‘s affiliation with phically remained solely restricted to Italy. the Catholic faith and his rejection of all non- 201 Hintergründe und Entwick- Catholic ‘heresies.’ See also Matthias Dorn. Das Matthias Dorn. Problem der Autonomie der Naturwissenschaften lungen des Galileo-Prozesses. . op. cit., p. 6. bei Galilei. op. cit., pp. 75–91 (additional authors 202 Klaus Fischer. Galileo Galilei. . op. cit., p. 114. on the topic p. 75) and Olaf Pedersen. Galileo 203 Ibid., p. 115. and the Council of Trent. Vatican Observatory 204 Matthias Dorn. Das Problem der Autonomie Publications: Studi Galileiani 1/6. Vatikanstadt: der Naturwissenschaften bei Galilei. Sudhoffs Specola Vaticana, 1991. Archiv Beihefte 43. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 191 Ibid., p. 88–94. As the clearest testimony 2000. next to additional quotes (pp. 90–92) Pedersen sees on p. 89 Galileo’s third letter on sunspots

40 MBS Texte 116 “But it does move!” and other Legends about Galileo Galilei

205 Especially so in Walter Brandmüller. “Galilei 208 Lydia La Dous. Galileo Galilei. . op. cit., p. 68. – Ein Forscher im geistesgeschichtlichen Span- 209 Written 1938/1939; paperback edition: Ber- nungsfeld des Barock.“ . op. cit., p. 120. tolt Brecht. Leben des Galilei. edition Suhrkamp. 206 Brandmüller. “Galilei – Ein Forscher im gei- Berlin: Suhrkamp, 1963. stesgeschichtlichen Spannungsfeld.“ . op. cit., p. 210 Anna Mudry. “Annäherung an Galileo Gali- 119. lei.“ . op. cit., p. 9. 207 Lydia La Dous. Galileo Galilei. . op. cit., p. 7.

TheÜber Author den Autor

Thomas Schirrmacher (*1960) earned four doctorates in Theo- logy (Dr. theol., 1985, Netherlands), in Cultural Anthropology (PhD, 1989, USA), in Ethics (ThD, 1996, USA), and in Sociology of Religions (Dr. phil., 2007, Germany) and received two honor- ary doctorates in Theology (DD, 1997, USA) and International Development (DD, 2006, India). He is professor of ethics and world missions, as well as professor of the sociology of religion and of international development in Germany, Romania, USA and India, and is president of Martin Bucer Theological Seminary with 11 small campuses in Europe (including Turkey). As an international human rights expert he is board member of the International Society for Human Rights, spokesman for human rights of the World Evangelical Assocation and director of the Interna- tional Institute for Religious Freedom. He is also president of Ge bende Hände gGmbH (Giving Hands), an internationally active relief organisation. He has authored and edited 74 books, which have been translated into 14 languages. Thomas is married to Christine, a professor of Islamic Studies, and father of a boy and a girl.

Theologische Akzente 41 StudycentersStudienzentren

Studienzentrum Berlin ITG Studienzentrum Innsbruck Martin Bucer Seminar Martin Bucer Seminar Österreich c/o Paulus-Gemeinde Pankow Josef-Wilberger-Straße 9 Florastraße 35, 13187 Berlin Pankow A-6020 Innsbruck E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected]

Studienzentrum Bielefeld ITG Studienzentrum Linz Martin Bucer Seminar Martin Bucer Seminar Österreich Eibenweg 9a, 33609 Bielefeld Passaustraße 19, A-4030 Linz E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected]

Studienzentrum Bonn Studienzentrum München Martin Bucer Seminar Martin Bucer Seminar Friedrichstr. 38, 53111 Bonn Riegerhofstr. 18, 80686 München E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected]

Studienzentrum Chemnitz Studienzentrum Pforzheim Martin Bucer Seminar Martin Bucer Seminar Mittelbacher Str. 6, 09224 Chemnitz Bleichstraße 59, 75173 Pforzheim E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected]

Studienzentrum Hamburg Studienzentrum Zürich Martin Bucer Seminar, c/o ARCHE Martin Bucer Seminar Doerriesweg 7, 22525 Hamburg Neubrunnenstraße 21 E-Mail: [email protected] CH-8302 Kloten E-Mail: [email protected]

Website: www.bucer.eu E-Mail: [email protected]

Studycenters outside Germany: Studienzentrum Istanbul: [email protected] Studienzentrum Prag: [email protected] Studienzentrum São Paulo: [email protected] Studienzentrum Zlin: [email protected]

We have put together a lot of information for the various courses and priorities and our study centers on our website www.bucer.eu that will answer most questions. All important technical data can be found at www.bucer.eu / basisdaten.html. ImpressumImpressum

Publisher: Martin Bucer Seminary is no university according to Ger- Thomas Schirrmacher, Prof. Dr. phil. man law, but just offers courses and lists all courses in a Dr. theol. DD. final diploma. Whitefield Theological Seminary (Florida, USA) and other schools outside of Europe accept thoses Editor: courses under their own legal responsibility for grant- Ron Kubsch, M.Th. ing their degrees to students. Much of the teaching is by Editorial Committee: means of Saturday seminars, evening courses, extension Thomas Kinker, Th.D., Titus Vogt courses, independent study, and internships. Contact: [email protected] The work of the seminary is largely supported by the con- www.bucer.de tributions of donors. North American supporters may send contributions to our American partner organization, The International Institute for Christian Studies. Checks should be made out to IICS, with a note mentioning MBS MBS-Texte (MBS-Texts) and sent to: Theologische Akzente (Theological Accents) Es erscheinen außerdem folgende Reihen: The International Institute (The following series of MBS for Christian Studies: P.O. Box 12147, Overland Park, KS 66282-2147, USA Texts are also being published:) EU: Reformiertes Forum IBAN DE52 3701 0050 0244 3705 07 (Reformed Forum) BIC PBNKDEFF Pro Mundis Geistliche Impulse (Spiritual Impulses) Hope for Europe Ergänzungen zur Ethik (Ethics) Philosophische Anstöße (Philosophical Initiatives) Vorarbeiten zur Dogmatik (Preliminaries for a Systematic Theology)