Unfortunately, no rehabilitation of the Inquisition of Galileo is successful. It is quite true that not everything Galileo did was good and that not everything the Catholic leaders did was evil, but that doesn't mean that that what the Catholic leaders did was really justified or fair. It's possible for Galileo to bear some responsibility for what happened to him while also concluding that what happened to him was wrong and unjust.
For example, the authors argue that the Church showed Galileo great deference, which they seem to have, but was that because they were afraid of the repercussions if they didn't do it or because they honestly wanted to make sure that he wasn't treated unfairly? Should we really think more kindly of the Church because they decided to commute his sentence to lifetime house arrest and lifetime censorship? Should we really think less of Galileo because he defied an order not to teach that the Earth orbits the Sun?
It is true that Galileo was not able to offer absolute proof that Copernicus was right, even though he was able to prove that Ptolemy was wrong. Tycho Brahe's compromise reproduced all existing observations while not raising problems with scripture - and it's entirely understandable that the Catholic leadership would prefer it. That does not, however, justify attempts to stifle those who still found Copernicus preferable.
On that score, the idea of Galileo as a defender of unfettered scientific inquiry against religious repression actually comes off as more accurate than perhaps the authors intended. That Galileo could have been wrong doesn't damage this impression of him - it remains a fact that religious leaders tried to suppress a possibly true description of the universe because of their preferences on how to read religious scriptures. Galileo may not have been very political or tactful in how he made his case, but his being "troublesome" doesn't justify what happened to him.
Shea and Artigas's book is, at least, not as bad as Wade Rowland's Galileo’s Mistake: A New Look at the Epic Confrontation between Galileo and the Church. Rowland makes numerous errors when it comes to history and theology, but he saves his biggest errors for science, which he is unapologetically hostile towards. He actually praises the Catholic Church for being similarly hostile towards science in Galileo's day.
Galileo in Rome: The Rise and Fall of a Troublesome Genius
Rowland is typical of many postmodernists, claiming that "All scientific knowledge is culturally conditioned. None of its laws or facts [is], strictly speaking, objective. ... Scientists do not discover laws of nature, they invent them." Shea and Artigas may not rehabilitate the Catholic Church's actions, but at least they don't stoop to such self-defeating nonsense. If you are interested in a nuanced and recent exploration of Galileo's work and experience, this is a good book to have.
« Back...
