No dogma was ever defined during these tribunals, so no teaching error ever occurred as a threat to infallibility. If you do not struggle with Christ hand picking Judas, or Peter specifically behaving as a hypocrite in Galatians 2, or any other Christian caught in sin, then why would you have problems with a Pope treating Gallileo not as well as he should have? See?
sambos, like millions before you, your faith is being tested by the Devil himself. Your Catholic instincts are telling you something is very wrong here. This is not supposed to happen, a heretic vindicated and the devinely guided Church WRONG.
Willy Jose: Why is it that if you place a website up on your post, THAT IS THE TRUTH OF IT?
“I, Galileo Galilei, son of the late Vincenzio Galilei of Florence, aged seventy years, appearing personally before this court, and kneeing before you, the most eminent and reverend Lord Cardinals, Inquisitors-General of *the universal Christian Republic against heretical pravity*, having before my eyes the most holy Gospels, and touching them with my hands, swear that I always have believed, and now believe, and with God’s help will always believe, all that the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church holds, preaches, and teaches. But because, after this Holy Office had juridically enjoined me to abandon altogether the false opinion which holds that the sun is in the centre of the world, and immovable, and that the earth is not the centre, and moves; and had forbidden me to hold, defend, or teach in any manner, the said false doctrine; and after it had been notified to me that the said doctrine is repugnant to Holy Scripture, I wrote and caused to be printed a book, wherein I treat of the same doctrine already condemned, and adduced arguments with great efficacy in favour of it, without offering any solution of them; therefore I am judged vehemently suspected of HERESY, that is, of having held and believed that the sun is the centre of the world and immovable, and that the earth is not the centre, and moves. Wherefore, desiring to remove from the minds of your Eminences, and all Catholic Christians, this vehement suspicion legitimately conceived against me, with a sincere heart and faith unfeigned, I abjure, curse, and detest, the above named errors, and HERESIES, and generally every other error and sect contrary to the above-mentioned Holy Church; and I swear for the future, I will neither say, nor assert by word of mouth, or in writing, anything to bring upon me similar suspicion. And if I shall know any HERTETIC, or one suspected of HERESY, I will denounce him to this Holy Office, or to the Inquisitor, or Ordinary of the place in which I may be. Moreover I swear, and promise, to fulfil, and observe entirely, all the penances that have been or shall be imposed on me by this Holy Office. And if -which God forbid- I act against any of these said promises, protestations, and oaths, I subject myself to all the penalties and punishments which the sacred canons, and other constitutions, general and particular, have enacted, and promulgated against such delinquents. So help me God, and His holy Gospels, which I touch with my hands.Perhaps the problem lies in differences of understanding the meaning and application of the word “heresy”.
Hi Cassini,
Willy, Read the above carefully. Now the heresy was defined and declared in 1616 and the Church of 1633 accepted it as immutable:
And observe in what emphatic and unmistakable terms Rome [of 1633] repudiated the notion that the decree might be interpreted as a practical direction, as a measure of caution for the time being, or as anything short of an absolute settlement of the question.
“Understanding,” the Congregation said, “that, through the publication of a work at Florence entitled *Dialogo di Galileo Galilei delle due massime Sisteme del Mundo Ptolemaico e Copernicano*, the false opinion of the motion of the earth and the stability of the sun was gaining ground, it had examined the book, and had found it to be a manifest infringement of the injunction laid on you, since you in the same book have defended an opinion already condemned, and declared to your face to be so, in that you have tried in the said book, by various devices, to persuade yourself that you leave the matter undetermined, and the opinion expressed as probable; the which, however, is a most grave error, since an opinion can in no manner be probable which has been declared, and defined to be, contrary to the divine Scripture.”Nita, here is the most accurate account of the infallibility of the 1616 decree you will find anywhere. But remember Fr Roberts believed the sun is fixed, that is he too was a heretic. The thesis was trying to undermine the Church’s claim to infallibility. What he did not know was that the sun has never been proven to be fixed. In other words, whereas the 1616 decree was of the ordinary infallible magisterium, it was not proven wrong and thus the Church’s infallibility remains intact as Christ promised it would. Indeed Fr Roberts became a double heretic for rejecting Vatican I’s dogma on infallibility. Note now that souls were being lost through the ignorance of understanding the Galileo case properly.Hi Cassini,
Can you give me a link to an official source for the text of Galileo’s abjuration that you cite. I tried tracking it down on the Vatican website, but didn’t have much luck. What they did show were some original documents in Latin – which I’m no longer able to translate.
The Vatican websiite did include some interesting info. asv.vatican.va/en/doc/1616.htm
Googling turned up similar translations to yours, but one also mentioned that he’d been find an official source to give as a link verifying the accuracy.
Would appreciate any help you can give – especially if you can find it on the Vatican site.
Catholic teaching, yes. Now apply it to the Galileo case.
Sometimes I come across an objection to Catholicism that seems to be a real problem - at first glance. As I study the issue, I realize there is nothing for me to be concerned about.
The Authority of the Anti-Copernican Inquisition
Randy, but you have something to worry about. If I had the time I could go through every one of these sites and point out the revision, obscurantism and denial of the affair. The idea was to get all Catholics to believe the 1616 decree was no more than the rantings of dopes who didn’t know the sun is fixed nor how to read the Bible properly. They malign and make fools of popes, saints and theologians like these here:
However, the application to a heretic is Exclusion from Fellowship or Excumunicated. If Galileo had not recanted his belief based on his observation surely this would have been the result.
By his statement here specifically the Holy Office felt that indicating the Earth - was not the center of the world - was “contrary to Holy Scripture”. It must be held then that the Holy office felt proper exegete of Holy Scriptures would indicate that the earth is not moveable and all other heavenly bodies are. However, from Galileo’s observations it would very much seem so. Since he did not have the instruments to accurately judge the milky way. The earth in comparison to the sum must their for move and the sun immovable. These were just observations. Yet he had to recant calling his accurate observation with his limited knowledge a lie. Something about that strikes me Orwellian. That is a problem for me.
There’s a Convent *of * Minerva? A roman goddess? I admit ignorance of this but why wasn’t the name changed to reflect a saint as is the custom in Europe?