Just the threat of torture was enough for Galileo to "admit" he was wrong and the Pope was right

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/horizon/sept98/galileo.htm

Two Views of the Universe
Galileo vs. the Pope

By Hal Hellman
Special to The Washington Post
Wednesday, September 9, 1998; Page H01

On June 22, 1633, Galileo Galilei was put on trial at Inquisition headquarters in Rome. All of the magnificent power of the Roman Catholic Church seemed arrayed against the famous scientist. Under threat of torture, imprisonment and even burning at the stake, he was forced, on his knees, to "abjure, curse and detest" a lifetime of brilliant and dedicated thought and labor.

By then an old man of 69 who in his defense referred to his "pitiable state of bodily indisposition," Galileo was charged with "vehement suspicion of heresy." He had to renounce "with sincere heart and unfeigned faith" his belief that the sun, not Earth, was the center of the universe and that Earth moved around the sun and not vice versa, as ecclesiastical teaching dictated.

Because he was willing to do this, at least verbally, the more serious of the threats remained only that. As one of his punishments, for example, he was to recite the seven penitential psalms once a week for three years. He also was placed under house arrest for the rest of his life.

Finally, his book, Dialogue on the Great World Systems, Ptolemaic and Copernican (1632), which lay at the heart of the trial, was added to the index of banned books, Index Librorum Prohibitorum, maintained by the Inquisition.

Ten cardinals sat in judgment of Galileo. Pope Urban VIII was not present in person, but he was there in spirit, for his personal feelings of anger and frustration were the driving force behind the extraordinary proceedings. Urban recognized just how seriously Galileo's new science challenged established church doctrine. Worse, Galileo had declared that the book of nature was written in the language of mathematics, not in biblical terms.

[Mari333]

1. how long did it take for the church to admit they were wrong?

oh yeah...1992!!!!
stubborn old assholes arent they.

[bertman]

3. Stubborn. Old. Vindictive. Misogynistic. Anti-science. Anti-equality. Homophobic.

Just what everyone wants in a religion.

Edited to recommend this thread. Too many of us have no knowledge of the countless atrocities committed by these "disciples of Christ" in the name of the Prince of Peace.

[Mari333]

4. sounds like the GOP ! nt

[Porlock Junior]

25. To be perfectly, utterly fair,

they effectively admitted error early in the 19th century, when they published the full, unexpurgated text of all his works. One apparatchik held up the publication of some of this heretical stuff, and the hierarchy had to threaten to discipline him (no instruments of torture, though) -- fulfilling a prophecy Galileo had written in the margins of a copy of the Dialogue.

And through the 20th century, if you asked a sensible Jesuit about it, he'd be likely to concede instantly that the Church had messed up. But facing the facts squarely and officially: Yes, 1992 and some critics within the Church -- Jesuits again -- were disappointed with the statement's failure to face it squarely enough.

[TahitiNut]

2. "Facts" are merely tools of Satan meant to test our Faith.

:dunce: A truly Holy person can deny "facts" and maintain their Faith.

[John Q. Citizen]

5. The Vatican had to torture. The fate of millions of souls was hanging by a tread if they didn't get

the info in time...

[juno jones]

6. And let us not forget those

who might number in the millions who were ultimately tortured and killed by the inquisition. Jews, Moors, heretics, apostates, pagans, essentially anyone who disagreed with the church or had money and property coveted by the church.

They had waterboarding back then too. And child rape. For nothing is new under the sun.

[mod mom]

7. THANK you for the link! I just finished overseeing the completion of major projects

with my 7th grader that covered medieval Europe, the Renaissance and Reformation, and the Enlightenment and Revolution. This article was very topical since it covered material that we went over Galileo, the Inquisition and Machiavellian authority. I forwarded it to my son's Humanities teacher.

:hi:

[Mari333]

9. NO ONE EXPECTS THE INQUISITION

well, someone had to post it.

[pnutbutr]

8. burning at the stake

is a bit more than torture to be completely honest. Not defending torture in any way, just pointing out the agenda of the OP in posting the thread title.

[hayu_lol]

10. pnutbutr, thanks for noting that about 'burning at the stake'...

Only a short time before Galileo was tried, the church had burned Giordano Bruno at the stake for the same 'heresy.'

The real crime here was that Galileo was unable to correspond with other great minds during his house arrest. Whatever further discoveries he might have made were squelched.

[NNN0LHI]

11. Would you consider being burned at the stake torture?

Or do you think someone dies instantly from it?

Don

[pnutbutr]

12. No

I wouldn't classify it as torture since it's purpose is death.

[NNN0LHI]

13. You think being slowing burned to death is not torture?

This can't be real.

Don

[pnutbutr]

14. I explained why

you obviously don't agree. What then, do you believe is the intention of burning at the stake?

[wolfgangmo]

15. a bit parsed, no?

So you only count things that don't result in loss of life as torture. Don't you think that might open the door to future john Woo's? One could conclude that as long as the result is death then whatever information gained is not the result of torture. I could drive a fright train through that loophole.

[pnutbutr]

17. :rofl:

you don't acquire information by killing. :rofl:

[newspeak]

18. actually victims

were tortured, death was the release. Of course, some who were burned at the stake-those sadists would get the fire burning, then put it out and start it again so the victim slowly burned to death.

Now which congressman last night got "worst person in the world" on KO for stating that torture works, it has worked for five hundred years, that's why we keep doing it? The most extreme ignorant statement I HAVE EVER HEARD!!!! Torture did not work unless you want someone to agree with you, if you want a lie. Because if anyone believes that thousands of women in Europe were sleeping with demons and riding brooms, I've got a bridge to sell ya'll.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. But the threat of imminent death IS torture.

[pnutbutr]

21. So then

we are all being tortured constantly.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. I suppose in the same way that you're an intelligent, honest human being.

Sure.

[pnutbutr]

23. awwww

the praise was unexpected but much appreciated. I wuv u 2.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

16. What a fantastic OP!

I have said that if anyone even suggested that I was going to be waterboarded I would admit to almost anything to keep it from being done to me...
Enhanced interrogation my ass.

K&R!!!

[LeftOfSelf-Centered]

19. Exactly!

As Jesse Ventura said on Larry King "You give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and an hour and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders."

It's only useful to those with an agenda, it has nothing to do with reliable information.

K&R

[NNN0LHI]

24. I nearly did drown in the Kankakee River when I was a kid about 7 miles from where I am right now

It was the most terrifying experience I can ever remember happening to me.

Don