|
Nicolaus Copernicus (Koppernick or Koppernigk,
1473-1543) was born at Thorn, and was educated principally
at Cracow, Bologna, Padua, and Ferrara. He was a canon of the
chapter of Frauenberg, and most probably a priest. During his stay
in Italy he was brought into contact with the new views put forward by
Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa and others regarding the position of the
earth in the system of the universe. His own studies let him to the
conclusion that the sun was the centre round which the earth and all the
heavenly bodies moved in their course. He communicated his conclusions
to some of his special friends in 1531, but he hesitated to publish
them on account of the ridicule that such a novel opinion was sure to
excite. One of his pupils lectured at Rome on the subject, and
explained the theories of Copernicus to Clement VII
(1533).
Yielding at last to the entreaties of Cardinal Schonberg,
Archbishop of Capua, and Bishop Giese of Culm he entrusted his
work for publication to one of his pupils, Rheticus, professor at
Wittenberg, but the opposition of the Lutheran professors made it
impossible to bring out the book in that city. It was finally
published under the editorship of Osiander at Nurnberg in 1543.
In the preface to the work Osiander made considerable changes out of
deference to the views of Luther and Melanchthon, the most important
of which was that he referred to the system of Copernicus as an
hypothesis that might or might not be true. The work, "De
Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium" was dedicated to Pope Paul
III. The principal opposition to the novel views of Copernicus
came from the side of the Lutheran theologians, and it was only years
later, when feeling was aroused by the controversy regarding Galileo,
that any suspicion of unorthodoxy was directed against Copernicus by
Catholic writers. Needless to say Copernicus died as he had lived,
a devoted Catholic, fully convinced that he had done good service for
religion as well as for science.
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) was remarkable from a very
early age for his abilities as a student of mathematics and mechanics.
Indeed it was in these subjects and not in astronomy that he achieved
his most brilliant and most lasting successes. He taught at Pisa and
Padua, and was afterwards employed at the court of the Grand Duke of
Tuscany. In 1609 he perfected the telescope by means of which he
was enabled to make observations of the heavenly bodies, and from these
observations and discoveries he was led to the conclusion that the
heliocentric system as advocated by Copernicus was the only one
scientifically tenable. He came to Rome, where he was welcomed by
the Pope and the cardinals, and set up his telescope in the Vatican
gardens (1611). At first Galileo's views excited no great
opposition, but owing to the imprudent propaganda carried on by some of
his own friends, notably by the Carmelite, Foscarini, a violent
controversy broke out in which the scientific side of the theory was
almost completely forgotten. Against Galileo it was contended that
his system contradicted the Scripture, which spoke of the sun standing
still in its course at the prayers of Josue, and that it was,
therefore, inadmissible. At the time in Italy the ecclesiastical
authorities were markedly conservative and hostile to innovations,
particularly as there was then a strong party in Italy, of whom Paul
Sarpi may be taken as a typical example, who were liberal and
Lutheran in their tendencies and sympathies. Had the discussion been
confined to learned circles no notice might have been taken of it, but
once an appeal was made to the masses of the people it was almost
inevitable that Galileo should have been denounced to the
Inquisition.
In the circumstances a decision favourable to Galileo could hardly
have been expected. The old Ptolemaic system was so closely bound up
with the philosophic and scientific teaching of the age that its
abandonment meant little less than a complete revolution in the world of
learning. As yet the vast body of those who were specially versed in
the subject treated the new theory with derision, while the arguments
put forward by Galileo in its defence were so weak and inconclusive
that most of them have been long since abandoned. The hostile
attitude, too, of the Lutheran divines could hardly fail to exercise
some influence on the Roman consultors. In 1615 Galileo appeared
before the Inquisition to defend his views, but without any result.
The heliocentric system was condemned as being opposed to Scripture
and therefore heretical, and Galileo was obliged to promise never
again to put it forward (1616). The work of Copernicus and
those of some other writers who advocated the Copernican system were
condemned "donec corrigantur". The decision of the congregation was
wrong, but in the circumstances not unintelligible. Nor can it be
contended for a moment that from this mistake any solid argument can be
drawn against the infallibility of the Pope. Paul V was
undoubtedly present at the session in which the condemnation was agreed
upon and approved of the verdict, but still the decision remained only
the decision of the congregation and not the binding "ex-cathedra"
pronouncement of the Head of the Church. Indeed, it appears from a
letter of Cardinal Bellarmine that the congregation regarded its
teaching as only provisional, and that if it were proved beyond doubt
that the sun was stationary it would be necessary to admit that the
passages of Scripture urged against this view had been misunderstood.
Galileo left Rome with no intention of observing the promise he had
made. After the election of Urban VIII who, as Cardinal
Barberini, had been his faithful friend and supporter, Galileo
returned to Rome (1624) in the hope of procuring a revision of
the verdict; but though he was received with all honour, and accorded
an annual pension from the papal treasury his request was refused. He
returned to Florence, where he published eight years later a new book
on the subject, couched in the form of a dialogue between supporters of
the rival systems, the Ptolemaic and the Copernican, in which
Simplicissimus, the defender of the old view, was not only routed but
covered with ridicule. Such a flagrant violation of his promise could
not pass unnoticed. He was summoned to appear once more before the
Inquisition, and arrived in Rome in February 1633. At first he
denied that he had written in favour of his views since 1616, then
he pleaded guilty, confessed that he was in error, and appealed to the
court to deal gently with an old and infirm man. He was found guilty,
and was condemned to recite the seven penitential psalms once a week for
three years, and to be imprisoned at the pleasure of the Inquisition.
It is not true to say that Galileo was shut up in the dungeons of the
Inquisition. He was detained only for a few days, and even during
that time he was lodged in the comfortable apartments of one of the
higher officials. Neither is it correct to state that he was tortured
or subjected to any bodily punishment. He was released almost
immediately on parole, and lived for a time at Rome in the palace of
the Grand Duke of Tuscany. Later on he retired to his villa at
Arcetri, and finally he was allowed to return to Florence. In
1642, fortified by the last sacraments and comforted by the papal
benediction, he passed away. His body was laid to rest within the
walls of the Church of Santa Croce at Florence. Most of his
misfortunes were due to his own rashness and the imprudence of his
friends and supporters. His condemnation is the sole scientific
blunder that can be laid to the charge of the Roman Congregation.
That his condemnation was not due to any hatred of science or to any
desire of the Roman ecclesiastics to oppose the progress of knowledge
is evident enough from the favours and honours lavished upon his
predecessors in the same field of research, Cardinal Nicholas of
Cusa, Peurbach, Muller (Regiomontanus), and Copernicus.
|
|