From the perspective of Catholic tradition, the modern narrative presenting the condemnation of Galileo Galilei as the "definitive clash between autonomous science and religious dogma" is not merely an anachronistic simplification but an ideological distortion that serves the interests of modernism and the characteristic mentality of our time. This view, propagated by secularist and progressive currents, ignores the theological, juridical, and scientific context of the era, reducing a complex episode to a Manichean confrontation between "enlightened reason" and "ecclesial obscurantism." Instead, the 1633 condemnation by the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office represented a legitimate defense of the divinely instituted authority of the Church in interpreting the Holy Scriptures, against a scientific hypothesis that was not yet proven and threatened the unity of the faith. Far from being an "error," it was an act of pastoral prudence. The true mistake arises only in the 20th century, with the request for forgiveness promoted by John Paul II, which constitutes a capitulation to the "spirit of the age" (Amerio, 2011, p. 32), weakening the notion of a perennial authority and representing a symptom of the post-conciliar Church's "self-demolition" (Amerio, 2011, p. 6).
🔭The Condemnation of Galileo: A Defense of Revealed Truth, Not an ErrorTo understand the case, it is essential to return to the historical facts without the filter of modern historicism. In 1616, the Congregation of the Index, under the authority of Pope Paul V, declared Copernican heliocentrism "false and contrary to Holy Scripture," prohibiting its defense as an absolute truth. This was not an arbitrary rejection of science, but a response to a theory that, at the time, lacked irrefutable empirical proof—Galileo himself could not demonstrate the Earth's motion with conclusive evidence, such as stellar parallax, which would only come centuries later. The theory thus remained in the realm of mathematical hypothesis, not physical certainty. More importantly, heliocentrism clashed with biblical passages interpreted literally by patristic and magisterial tradition, such as Joshua 10:12-13 ("Sun, stand thou still at Gibeon"), which suggest a geocentric cosmology.
Galileo, a devout Catholic, was warned in 1616 not to teach heliocentrism as fact, but as a hypothesis. However, in 1632, he published the Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, where he openly defended the Copernican theory, ridiculing opponents and disobeying the papal injunction. This led to his condemnation in 1633 for "vehement suspicion of heresy," with a sentence of perpetual house arrest—a lenient penalty by the standards of the time, without physical torture, as modern myths allege. From a traditional standpoint, this action by the Inquisition was not a "clash" against science, but an affirmation of the primacy of theology over the natural sciences. As the Council of Trent teaches, the interpretation of Scripture belongs to the Church, not to private individuals, and science must be subordinate to Revelation when there is an apparent conflict. Galileo, therefore, fell into the error of meddling in theological matters, proposing an innovative biblical hermeneutic for which he had no authority, prefiguring the principle of independence that would become the root of later crises (Amerio, 2011, p. 22).
This perspective rejects the idea of an "inherent conflict" between faith and reason. On the contrary, the Church fostered medieval and Renaissance science. The condemnation was disciplinary, not infallibly dogmatic, and geocentrism was never defined as an irrevocable article of faith. Thus, to call this a "definitive clash" is a historical falsification that ignores how the Church permitted the hypothetical study of heliocentrism after 1616 and removed Copernican works from the Index in 1758.
🔄John Paul II's Request for Forgiveness: The True Deviation of the Post-Conciliar Church
If the 1633 condemnation was not an error, the true deviation emerges in the context of the post-conciliar period, culminating in the request for forgiveness articulated by John Paul II. On October 31, 1992, the Pope acknowledged "errors" in the trial against Galileo, admitting that theologians of the time failed to distinguish between faith and mutable scientific interpretations. This was expanded on March 12, 2000, during the Great Jubilee, when John Paul II publicly asked for forgiveness for the "sins of the children of the Church," including the treatment of Galileo.
From the viewpoint of tradition, this act represents a more profound error, influenced by the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, which promoted an "opening to the world" that, in many cases, turned out to be a "veritable invasion of worldly thought into the Church" (Amerio, 2011, p. 9). Firstly, by admitting "errors" where there was no doctrinal deviation, the request weakens the authority of the historical Magisterium, suggesting that the Church can "err" in matters connected to faith and morals, which contradicts the promise of perpetuity. This attitude is an example of the "denigration of the historical Church" (Amerio, 2011, p. 95), in which the past is judged by the mentality of the present to justify current transformations.
Secondly, this request promotes a historicist relativism, where truth seems to depend on the era, denying the perennial nature of dogma and the pastoral prudence that protects it. The Church appears to ask forgiveness for having defended the faith against dangerous innovations. This reflects the loss of the essential antithesis between the Church and the world, an accommodation rather than a healthy opposition to varying historical circumstances (Amerio, 2011, p. 3). Thus, the "definitive clash" was not in 1633, but in the 20th century, when the Church yielded to the autonomy of secularized science, turning faith into something subjective and apologetic before the world.
In summary, the perspective of tradition inverts the narrative: Galileo's condemnation was a defense of the faith against incipient error, while the 20th-century request for forgiveness is the triumph of the modern spirit, which invites the Church to humble itself before secular idols. This reinforces the need to return to perennial doctrine, preserving Catholic integrity against the variations of the present time.
📚References
Amerio, Romano. Iota Unum: Estudio sobre las transformaciones en la Iglesia en el siglo XX. Corrected version, 2011.
Galilei, Galileo. Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. Translated by Stillman Drake. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967.
John Paul II. Homily on the Day of Pardon, March 12, 2000. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2000.