Galileo's condemnation: The real and complex story

While Galileo was writing the Dialogue, an interesting conversation occurred between Urban and Tommasso Campanella in 1630. Campanella told the pope "that he had had the opportunity to convert some German gentlemen to the Catholic faith and they were very favorably inclined; however, having heard about the prohibition of Copernicus, etc., they had been scandalized, and he had been unable to go further." Urban answered "with the following exact words: 'It was never our intention, and if it had been up to us that decree would not have been issued' (30)." One has to wonder who the "our" and "us" refers to in the pope's reply. It could be the "us" is himself and therefore it is a royal personage referral. However, he was referring to a time when he was not pope, and so perhaps it was not a magisterial use. Thus, there may have been a faction opposed to the Index's decree concerning Copernicanism. And, according to Urban, if that group had had more influence, there would have been no decree at all. If so, then the influence of this faction is probably why the decree ended up coming from the Index rather than a higher authority such as the pope. Whatever he meant by "us," the important thing is that Urban had no problems with Copernicus' system. Given this, then we have to puzzle over exactly why Galileo got into so much trouble with the pope and the Church.

Campanella had found favor with Urban and certainly had a sympathetic ear for what the pope was saying. While in prison Campanella had written a defense of Galileo (c. 1616) that was later published in 1622. The first of eleven arguments was that since there was no theological problem when Copernicus first published his book, why are there problems now? Next, he pointed out that the book was dedicated to the pope at a time when "distinguished genius flourished within the Church." Third, Erasmus Reinhold, John Stadius, Michael Maestlin, Christopher Rothmann and many others accepted the theory, including The Imperial Mathematician, Kepler, and the Englishman William Gilbert. And so it went (31). Given that this was so, we again ask why did Galileo get into so much trouble with the pope and the Church?

A Dangerous Dialogue

Some think that Galileo used a rhetorical approach in his Dialogue because he knew he had no proof that Copernicanism was real (32). However, it is clear that Galileo believed Copernicus' epicyclic heliostatic system was real. In his Letters on Sunspots, Galileo stated, "I am quite sure that there exist circular motions which describe eccentric and epicyclic circles (33)." In a later letter he asserted that eccentrics and epicycles "must be accepted with absolute necessity (34)."

Even though Bellarmine's 1616 injunction carried the warning of Pope Paul V with it, many thought that, in the Dialogue, Galileo was arguing for the reality of Copernicanism. Nevertheless this was disobedience, not heresy. After the sound and fury were over, Descartes calmly wrote that no pope or council had declared Copernican theory heretical (35). He is right, so why allude to heresy in the trial? The answer is that there was more at stake than Copernicus' theory. What was at stake was the Church dogma concerning the Eucharist, a fact troubling to the pope and both troubling and useful to the Jesuits.