WARFARE OF SCIENCE. BY ANDREW DICKSON WHITE, LL. D., PRESIDENT OF CORNELL UNIVE8RSITY. NEW YORK: D. APPLETON AND COMPANY, 549 AND 551 BROADWAY. 1876. * —~ I I An't lr'-3m TO HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE, OF BROOKLYN, N. Y., . CHRISTIAN MAN, WHO HAS PROVED THAT HE WELCOMES ALL TRUTH, AND FEARS NONE, THIS LITTLE BOOK IS INSCRIBED, WITH FEELINGS OF THOROUGH RESPECT AND ESTEEM. I PREFATORY NOTE. Is its earlier abridged form this address was given as a Phi Beta Kappa oration at Brown University, and, as a lecture, at New York, Boston, New Haven, Ann Arbor, and elsewhere. In that form, substantially, it was published in THE POPuLAR ScIENCE MONTHLY. I have now given it careful revision, correcting some errors, and extending it largely by presenting new facts and developing various points of interest in the general discussion. Among the subjects added or rewrought are: in Astronomy, the struggle of Galileo and the retreat of the Church after its victory; in Chemistry and Physics, the compromise between Science and Theology made by Thomas Aquinas, and the unfortunate route taken by Science in consequence; in Anatomy and Medicine, the earlier growth of PREFA CE. ecclesiastical distrust of these sciences; in Scieintific Education, the dealings of various European universities with scientific studies; in Political and Social Science, a more complete statement of the opposition of the Church, on Scriptural grounds, to the taking of interest for money; and, in the conclusion, a more careful summing up. If I have seemed to encumber the text with notes, it has been in the intention to leave no important assertion unsupported; and in the hope that others -less engrossed with administrative care than myself-may find in them indications for more extended studies in various parts of the struggle which I have but sketched. A. D. W. CORNELL UNIVERSITY, March, 1876. 6 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. I PURPOSE to present an outline of the great, sacred struggle for the liberty of science-a struggle which has lasted for so many centuries, and which yet continues. A hard contest it has been; a war waged longer, with battles fiercer, with sieges more persistent, with strategy more shrewd than in any of the comparatively transient warfare of Coesar or Napoleon or Moltke. I shall ask you to go with me through some of the most protracted sieges, and over some of the hardest-fought battle-fields of this war. We will look well at the combatants; we will listen to the battle-cries; we will note the strategy of leaders, the cut and thrust of champions, the weight of missiles, the temper of weapons; we will look also at the truces and treaties and note the delusive impotency of all compromises in which the warriors for scientific truth have consented to receive direc 8 THE WARFARE 0F SCIEXCE. tion or bias from the best of men uninspired by the scientific spirit, or unfamiliar witl scientific nethods. My thesis, which, by an historical stL dy of this warfare, I expect to develop, is the following: In all modern history, interference with science in the supposed interest of religion, no matter how conscientious such interference may have been, has resulted in the direst evils both to religion and to science-and invariably. And, on the other hand, all untrammeled scientifjc investigation, no matter how dangerous to religion some of its stages may have seemed, for the time, to be, has invariably resulted in the highest good of religion and of science. I say " invariably." I mean exactly that. It is a rule to which history shows not one exception. It would seem, logically, that this statement cannot be gainsaid. God's truths must agree, whether discovered by looking within upon the soul, or without upon the world. A truth written upon the human heart to-day, in its full play of emotions or passions, cannot be at any real variance even with a truth written upon a fossil whose poor life ebbed forth millions of years ago. This being so, it would also seem a truth irrefragable, that the search for each of these kinds of truth must be followed out on its own lines, by its own methods, to its own results, without any interference from investigators on other lines, or 'EGI,iNILVG OF THE STRUGGLE. 1)y other methods. And it would also seem logidial to work on in absolute confidence that whatever, at any moment, may seem to be the relative positions of the two different bands of worklers, they nmust at last come together, for Truth is one. But logic is not history. History is full of inter- ferenees which have cost the earth dear. Strangest of all, some of the direst of them have been made by the best of men, actuated by the purest motives, and seeking the noblest results. These interferences, and the struggle against themn, mnake up the warfare of science. One statement more, to clear the ground. You will not understand me at all to say that religion has done nothing for science. It has done much for it. The wvork of Christianity has been mighty indeed. Through these two thousand years, despite the waste of its energies on all the things its Blessed Founder most earnestly condemned-on fetich and subtlety and war and pomp-it has ul(dermined servitude, mitigated tyranny, given hope to the hopeless, comfort to the afflicted, light to the blind, bread to the starving, joy to the dying, and this work continues. And its work for science, too, has been great. It has fostered science often. Nay, it has nourished that feeling of self-sacrifice for human good, which has nerved some of the bravest men for these battles. Unfortunately, a devoted army of good mnen 9 10 TIlE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. started centuries ago with the idea that inidependent scientific investigation is unsafe-that theology must intervene to superintend its methods, and the Biblical record, as an historical compendium and scientific treatise, be taken as a standard to deterinie its results. So began this great modern war. GEOGRAPItY. The first typical battle-field to which I would refer is that of Geography-the simplest elementary doctrine of the earth's shape and surface. Among the legacies of thought left by the ancient world to the modern, were certain ideas of the rotundity of the earth. These ideas were vague; they were mixed with absurdities; but they were germ i(leas, and, after the barbarian storm which ushered ill the moderm world had begun to clear away, these germ ideas began to bud and bloom in the minds of a few thinking men, and these men hazarded the suggestion that the earth is roundis a globe.' 1 Moost fruitful among these were those given by Plato in the Titrn(ets. See, also, Grote on Plato's doctrine of the rotundity of the earth. Also Sir G. C. Lewis's Astronomy of the Ancients, London, 1862, chap. iii., sec. i. and note. Cicero's mention of the antipodes and reference to the passage in the Timinus are even more remarkable than the original, in that they much more clearly foreshadow the modern doctrine. See Academic Questions, ii., xxxix. Also, T:tsc. Quest., i., xxviii., and v., xxiv. GEOGRAPHY. The greatest and most earnest men of the time took fright at once. To them, the idea of the earthl's rotundity seemed fraught with dangers to Scripture: by which, of course, they meant theiri inteTpectation of Scripture. Among the first who took up arms against the new thiinkers was Eusebius. lie endeavored to turn off these ideas by bringing science into contempt, and by making the innovators understand that he and the fathers of the Church despised all such inquiries. Speaking of the innovations in physical science, hlie said: "It is not throiugh ignorance of the things admired by them, )buLt through contempt of their useless labor, that we thinkl little of these matters, turning our souls to better things." 1 Laetautius asserted the ideas of those studying astronomy to be "mad and senseless." 2 See Eitse~ius, Prep. Ev., xv., 61. 'ee lactazn(ius, Iltst., 1., iii., chap. 3. Also, citations in lT'Vliecll, Hist. 1Itdisct. Sciences, Lond., 1857, vol. i., p. 194. To understand the embarrassment thus caused to scientific men at a later period, see Letter of _-Ag-icola to Joaclmiizuts irthl to soutl, west of the Azores and Canary Islands; and the Pope, in the plenitude of his knowledge and powers, declared that all lands I For Columbus before the Junta of Salamanca, see Irvinyg's Colutnbus, Murray's edition, vol. ii., pp. 405410. Figuier, Sa vants du Afeoycn Aye, etc., vol. ii., p. 394, et seq. Also, H?umboldt, istoire d(le iat Crogf-apvtie du Arouveau Contineit. t 19 20 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. discovered east of this line should belong to the Portuguese, anid all discovered west of it should belong to the Spaniards. This was hailed as an exercise of divinely illuminated power in the Church; but in a few years difficulties arose. The Portuguese claimed Brazil, and, of course, had no difficulty in showing that it could be reached by sailing to the east of the line, provided the sailing were sufficiently long-continued. The bull of Pope Alexander quietly passed into the catalogue of ludicrous errors.' But in 1519 Science gains a crushing victory. Magalhaens makes his famous voyages. Hle proves the earth to be round, for his great expedition circumnavigates it; he proves the doctrine of the antipodes, for he sees the men of the antipodes; 2 bult even this does not end the war. Many earnest and good men oppose the doctrine for two hundred years longer. Then the French astronomers make their measurements of degrees in equatorial and polar regions, and add to other proofs that of the lengthened pendulum: when 1 See Daunou, ttudes Historiques, vol. ii., p. 417. 2 For effect of Magalhaens's voyages, and the reluctance to yield to proof, see lienri Afartin, Histoire de France, vol. xiv., p. 395; St. Jfartin's Histoire de la Giog., p. 369; Peschel, Geschichte des Zeitalters der.irtdeckungen, concluding chapters; and for an admirable sumnmary, Draper, Hist. Int. Dev. of Europe, pp. 451453. GEOGRAPHY. this was done, when the deductions of science were seen to be established by the simple test of mneasurement, beautifully, perfectly, then and then only this war of twelve centuries ended.' And now, what was the result of this war:, The efforts of Eusebius and Lactiantius t deaden scientific thought; the efforts of Augustiine to combat it; the efforts of Cosmas to stop) it.-yo (logrn,. tisan; the efforts of Boniface, and Zalchary, an,." others t.) stop it by force, conscientious as they all were, had resulted in what? Simpn l)yi fN,:,in' into many noble minds this moiCst fortialtte coltvi(:ti,,n, thit Scieice and Religion are eneminies simiply in driving,away from religiom h,,.ts of the best men in all those centuries. The result was wholly bad. No optimism can change that verdict. On the other hand, what was gained by the warriors of science for religion? Simply, a far more ennobling conception of the world, and a far truer conception of Hiim who made and whlo sustains it. Which is the more consistent withI a great, true relig,ion —the cosnmography of Cosmas, or that of Isaac Newton? Which presents the niobler food 1 For general statement as to supplementary proof by measurement of degrees, and by pendulum, see Somnerville, Plays. Geog., chapter i., ~ 6, note. Also Hit6mboldt, Cosmos, vol. ii., p. 736, and v., pp. 16, 32. Also Ifontucla, iv., 138. 21 22 THE WTVARFARE OF SCIENCE. for religious thought-the diatribes of Lactantius, or the astronomical discourses of Thomas Chalmers? ASTRONOMY. The next great battle was fought on a question relating to the )osition of the earth among the heavenly bodies. On one side, the great body of conscientious religious men planted themselves firmly on tlihe geocentrie doctrine-the doctrine that the earth is the cenltre, and that the sun and planets revolve about it. The doctrine was old, and of the highest respectability.' The very name, Ptolemaic theory, carried weight. It had been elaborated until it accounted well for the phenomena. Exact textual interpreters of Scripture cherished it, for it agreed with the letter of the sacred text.2 But, most important of all, it was stamped with the seal of St. Thomas Aquinas. The sainted theologian-the glory of the Medieval Church, the "angelic doctor "-he to whom it was believed an I Respectability of Geocentric Theory, Plato's Authority for it etc., see Grote's Plato, vol. iii., p. 257. Also, Sir G. C. Lewis, Astronomy of the Ancients, chap. iii., sec. i., for a very thoughtful statement of Plato's view, and differing from ancient statements. For plausible elaboration of it, see Fromundus, Aniti-Aristarehus, Antwerp, 1631. Also ljfelanchthon, i?itia Doetrince Physicae. g For supposed agreement of Scripture with Ptolemaic theory, see Fromundus,.passimn, Melanchthon, and a host of other writers. ASTR0ONOM[Y. image of the Crucified had spoken words praisiliL: his writings-had shown in his treatise on,li( Heaven and Earth, by philosophy, theology,,, revelation, that the position of the earth mus -iL in the centre.' Still the germs of the heliocentric theory hlad been planted long b)efore, and wvell planted; it had seemed ready even to bloom forth in the fifth century, from the mind of Martianus Capella, and in the fifteenth from the mind of Cardinal de Cusa; but it could not be forgotten that St. Thomnas had elaborated the opposite view; the chill of dogmatism was still over the earth, and up to the beginning of the sixteenth century there had come to this great truth neither bloom nor fruitage. l See St. ThTomas Aquinas, Liber de Celo et Mundo, sec. xx. 2 For Germs of leliocentric Theory planted long bebfore, etc,, see Sir G. C. Lewis; also, Draper, Intellectaeel Developement of Europe, p. 512; and for a succinct statement of the claims of Pythagoras, Phlilolaus, Aristarchus, and Martianus Capella, see Hefer, Hist. de l'Astronomie, 1873, p. 107, et seq. For germs among thinkers of India, see Whewell, vol. i., p. 277. Also, lVhite2zc, Oriental aend Linguistic Studies, New York, 1874; Essay on the Lu~nar Zodiac, p. 345. 3 For general statement of De Cusa's work, see DrIaper, Intellecteal Development of Europe, p. 512. For skillful use of De Cusa's view in order to mitigate censure upon the Church for its treatment of Copernicus's discovery, see an article in the Catholic lVorild for January, 1869. For a very exact statement, in a spirit of judicial fairness, see lVhewell, iHistwoy of the Inductive Sciences, p. 275 and pp. 379, 380. In the latter, Whewell cites the exact 23 24 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. Quietly, however, the soil was receiving enrichment, and the air warmth. The processes of mathematics were constantly improved, the heavenly bodies were steadily though silently observed; and at length appeared, afar off from the centres of thought, on the 1)orders of Poland, a plain, simple-minded scholar, rwho ist, fairy littered to the X+( t ruth, now s o commonplace, then so astounding,, that the sin and planets do not revolve about the earth, but that the earth and planets,'-\-ev aboit the sun, and that man was iope. iii,t ha d been a pr ofessor at iome, bLit, K~opernik had been a professor at Dlome, but? words of De Cusa in the -)e Docta Ignorantia, and sums up in these words: "This train of thought might be a preparation for the reception of the Copernican system; but it is very different from the doctrine that the sun is the centre of the planetary system." In the previous passage, Whewell says that De Cusa" propounded the doctrine of the motion of the earth, more, however, as a paradox than as a reality. We cannot consider this as any distilncet anticipation of a profound and consistent view of the truth." For Aristotle's views and their elaboration by St. Thomas Aquinas, see the treatise De Celo et Afen(lo. It is curious to see how even such a biographer of St. Thomas as Archbishop Vaughan slurs over the angelic doctor's errors. See Vaytghan's Life cad Labors of St. T/loicas of Aqtin, pp. 459, 460. 1 For improvement of mathematical ptocesses, see Draper, JItcllectlu(l D,e!(,7opmet of Europe, 513. In looking at this and other admiral le summaries, one feels that Prof. Tyndall was not altogether right in lamenting, in his farewell address at New York, that Dr. Draper has devoted so much of his time to historical studies. ASTRONOM H[. as this truth grew within himn, he seemed to feel that at Roine he was no longer safe.' To publish this thought was dangerous indeed, and for more than thirty years it lay slumnbering in thle minids of Kopernik and the friends to whom he had privately intrusted it. 1 Kopernik's danger at Rome. The Catholic 1,Vorld for January, 1809, cites a recent speech of the Archbishop of Mechlin before the University of Louvain, to the effect that Copernicus defended his theory, at Rome, in 1500, before two thousand scholars; also, that another professor taught the system in 1528, and was made Apostolic Notary by Clement VIII. All this, even if the doctrines taught were identical with those of Copernicus, as finally developed, which idea Whewell seems utterly to disprove, avails nothing against the overwhelming testimony that Copernicus felt himself in danger-testimony which the after-history of the Copernican theory renders invincible. The very title of Fromundlus's book, already cited, published within a few miles of the archbishop's own cathedral, and sanctioned expressly by the theological Faculty of that same University of Louvain in 1630, utterly refutes the archbishop's idea that the Church was inclined to treat Copernicus kindly. The title is as follows: "Anti-Aristarchus I Sive I Orbis-Terroe I Imrmoblilis i In quo decreturn S. Congregationis S. R. E. I Cardinalium I IDC. XVI adversus Pytha I gorico-Copernicanos editurn defecnditur I Antwerpi,-e MDCXXXI." L'Ep;~iois, Galilee, Paris, 1867, lays stress, p. 14, on the laroaching of the doctrine by De Cusa, in 1435, and by AVwidmianstadt, in 1533, and their kind treatment by Eugenius IV. and Clement VII., but this is absolutely worthless in denying the papal policy afterward. -l,:i'ye, Gcschichte dles -laterialisinus, vol. i., pp. 217, 218, while admiitting that De Cusa and Widmanstadt sustained this idea atnd received honors from their respective popes, shows that, 25 26 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. At last he prepares his great work on the Ptevoltitioit of the Heavenly Bodies, and dedicates it to the pope himself. He next seeks a place of publication. He dares not send it to Poime, for there are the rulers of the older Church ready to seize it. He dares not send it to Wittenberg, for there are the lcql_:,f Ib(t]stlts n ess hostile. It is therefore intrusted to Osian(ler, of N'ureiniberg.' But, at the last moment, Osiander's courage fails himl. 1Ie dares not launch the new thought boldly. Hle writes a groveling preface; endeavors to excuse Kopernik for his novel idea. lHe inserts the apologetic lie that KIopernik procountids the doctrine of the movement of the earthl, not as af(cxt, but as an hyp)othesis; he declares that it is lawful for an astronomer to indulge his imagination, and that this is what lKopeinik has done. Thus was the greatest and most einnobling, perhaps, of scientific truths-a truth not less enno when the Church gave it serious consideration, it was con(dlemned. There is nothing in this view unreasonable. It would be a parallel case to that of Leo X., at first inclined toward Luther and the others, in their "squabbles with the begging friars," and afterwvard forced to oppose them. That Copernicus felt the danger, is evident, among other things, by the expression in the preface, Statior 2ize exl)ode7dun cuen tatli opinione clamitant." For dangers at Wittenberg, see Lange, Geschichte (c'cs Jfateri(iisnls?, vol. i., p. 217. ASTRONOMY. bling to religion than to science-forced, in corning into tile world, to sneak and crawl.: On the 24th of tIay, 154o, the newN-ly-printedcl book fi'rst arrived at the house of Kopernilk. It was pnt into his hands; but he was on his deatlibed. A few hours later he was beyond the reach of those mistaken, conscientious men, whose consciences would have blotted his reputation, and perhaps have destroyed his life. Yet not wholly beyond their reach. Even death could not be trusted to shield him. There seems to have been fear of vengeance upon his corpse, for on his tombstone was placed no record of his life-long labors, no mention of his great I Osiander, in a letter to Copernicus, dated April 20, 1541, had endeavored to reconcile him to such a procedure, and ends by saying, " Sic enim placidiores reddideris peripatheticos et theologos quos contradicturos mletuis." See Apologia Tychonis in Kepleri Opera Omnia, Frisch's edition, vol. i., p. 246. Kepler holds Osiander entirely responsible for this preface. Bertrand, in his Foiedateurs de l'Astronomie Afoderne, gives its text, and thinks it possible that Copernicus may have yielded " in pure condescension toward his disciple." But this idea is utterly at variance with expressions in Copernicus's own dedicatory letter to the pope, which follows the preface. For a good summary of the argument, see Fieguier, Savants de la Renaissance, pp. a78, 379. See, also, citation from Gassendi's life of Copernicus, in Flarnmarion, Vie de Copernic, p. 124. Mr. John Fiske, accurate as he usually is, in his recent Outlines of Cosmic Philosophy, appears to have followed Laplace, Delambre, and Petit into the error of supposilng that Copernicus. and not Osiander, is responsible for the preface. 2, i 28 THE WARFARE OF SCIEXNCE. discovery. There were graven upon it affecting words, which may be thus simply translated: ": ask not the grace accorded to Paul, not that given to Peter; give me only the favor which thou didst show to the thief on the cross." Not till thirty years after did a friend dare write on his tombstone a memorial of his discovery.' The book was taken in hand by the proper authorities. In due time it was solemnly condemned; to read it was to risk damnation; and the w-orld accepted the decree.2 The earnest theo ' Figuier, Savants (le la Renaissance, p. 380. Also, _amiimrarion, Vie de Cope nic, p. 190. 2 The "proper authorities " in this case were the " Congregation of the Index," or cardinals having charge of the "Index Librorum Prohibitorum." Recent desperate attempts to fasten the responsibility on them as individuals seem ridiculous in view of the simple fact that their work is sanctioned by the highest Church authority, and required to be universally accepted by the Church. Three of four editions of the "Index" in my own possession declare on their title-pages that they are issued by order of the pontiff of the period, and each is prefaced by a special papal bull or letter. See, especially, Index of 1664, issued under order of Alexander VII., and that of 1761, under Benedict XIV. Copernicus's work was prohibited in the Index "donee corrigatur." Kepler said that it ought to be worded " donee explicetur." See Bertrand, Fondateutrs de l'Astronomie Moderne, p. 57. De Aforyan, pp. 57-60, gives the corrections required by the Index of 1620. Their main aim seems to be to reduce Copernicus to the groveling level of Osiander, making of his discovery a mere hypothesis; but occasionally they require a virtual giving up of the whole Copernican doctrine, e. g., "correction" insisted upon for ASTROVOMY. loi-: f the period iinmmediately wheeled their I)atteirit2,f tarcd leaiiiii(", to supl1)toIt thle C,hrc in its effort to b)eat b)ack the terlil)le doctrilc that the erllt]L revolves about the stui. A1iioigo the XloSt -igoru us of themi in Xorthern Europe was I''o),it~dius. i'roin tlhe shadow of the Cathedral ofl-,tverp lie selit forth his faimous treatise, the a,-,i'.,,s, full of the strongest argulimenits agailist the ilew theory. IHis very titlepage was a contemptuous insult to the memory of Kopernikl, since it paraded the assumption that the new truth was only an old and exploded theory of Aristarchus. He declares that "sacred Scripture fights against tel CoperiicaIs."' To prove that tihe sui revolv-es about the earth, he cites the passage in the Psalims which speaks of the suin " whitlch eoiethl forthi as a bridegroomi out of his clmmail)er." To prove that the earth stands still, he quotes the passage firomi Ecclesiastes, " the earth standeth fast forever." To show the utter futilitv of the Copernican ideas, he indulges in scientific reasoning as he understands it-declaring that, if the hated theory were true, "the wind would constantly blow from the east; we should withli great difficulty hear sounds against such a wind;" that "buildings, and the earth itself, cap. 8, p. 6. For scholarly account of the relation of the Prohibitory and Expurgatory Indexes to each other, see Hezdham, Liter. ary Policy? of the Chur)ch of Ro;ze. 29 30 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. would fly off with such a rapid motion;" and, greatest weapon of all, he works Lip, by the use of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, a demonstration from theology and science combined, that the earth must stand in the centre, and that the suin must revolve about it.' Doubtless many will at once exclaim against the Roman Catholic Chutrch for this. Justice compels me to say that the founders of Protestantism were no less zealous against the new scientific doctrine. Said Martin Luther: "People gave ear to an upstart astrologer, who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise' some new system, which of all systems is, of course, the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy. But Sacred Scripture tells us that, Joshua commanded the sLun to stand still, and not the earth." Melanlchthon, mild as he was, was not behind Luther in condemning Kopernik. In his treatise, Initia -Doctrince Physicce, he says: "The eyes are 1See Fromundus's book, cited above, passim, but especially the heading of chapter vi., and the argument in chaps. x. and xi. For interesting reference to one of Fromundus's arguments, showing by a mixture of mathematics and theology, that the earth ;.s the centre of the universe, see Quetelet, Histoire des Scieices IfJ(ithgmatiques et Physiques, Bruxelles, 1864, p. 170. ASTROIVOMAY. witnesses that the heavens revolve ill the space of twenty-four hours. But certain men, either from the love of novelty, or to make a display of ingenuity, have concluded that the earth moves; and they maintain that neither the eighth sphere nor the sLun revolves... Now, it is a want of honesty and decency to assert such notions publicly, and the example is pernicious. It is the part of a good mind to accept the truth as revealed by God, and to acquiesce in it." ~Ielalcelitlio1I then cites passages from the Psalmus and(i f'roim Ecclesiastes wvllich he declares assert positively and clearly Tlmt the earth stands fast, aid thiat the sun nioves around it, and adds eigllt other proofs of his proposition that " the earth can be iiowhere, if not in the centre of the universe." And Protestant people were not a whit behind Catholic in following out these teachings. The people of Elbing made themselves merry over a farce in which Kopernik was the main object of ridicule. The people of Nuremberg, a great Prot 1 See Luther's Tischreden, 1rrnischer's A?tsfabe. Also, Jlelanchthon's Initia Doctrine Pthysicce. This treatise is cited under a miistaken title by the Catholic IVorld, September, 1870. The correct title is as given above. It will be found in the Corptes -Reformatorum, ed. Bretschneider, Halle, 1846. (For the above passage, see vol. xiii., pp. 216, 217.) Also, Lange, Geschichte des Alfaterialisnmus, vol. i., p. 217. Also, Prowe, Ueber die Abhd7ifigkeit des Copernicus, Thorn, 1865, p. 4. Also, note, pp. 5 and 6, where text is given in full. 31 32 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. estant centre, caused a medal to be struck, Witliinscriptions ridiculing the philosopher and his theory.' Then was tried, also, one piece of strategy very common formerly in battles between theologians themselves. It consists in loud shoutings that the doctrine attacked is outworn, and already refuted-that various distinguished gentlemnien have proved it false-that it is not a living truth, but a detected lie-that, if the world listens to it, that is simply because the world is ignorant. This strategy was brought to bear on lIopernik. It u'S shown that his doctrine was simply a revival (,f the Pythagorean notion, which had been thoroughly exploded. Fromundus, as we have seen in his title-page and throughout his book, delights in referring to the doctrine of the revolution of the planets around the sun, as " that Pythagorean notion." This mode of warfare was }mitated by the lesser opponents, and produced, for some time, considerable effect.2 But the new truth could neither be laughed down nor forced down. Many minds had received it; only one tongue dared utter it. This new warrior was that strange inortal, Giordano Bruno. For treatment of Copernican ideas by the people, see Catholic World, as above. See title-page of Fromundus's work cited in note at bottom of p. 392; also, Melanchthon, ubi supra. ASTROIVOX Y. TIe wvas hunted from land to land, until, at last, he turns on his pursuers with fearful invectives. For this he is imprisoned six years, then burned alive and his ashes scattered to the winds. Still the new truth lived on; it could not be killed. Within ten years after the martyrdom of Bruno,' after a world of troubles and persecutions, the truthl of the doctrine of Kopernik was established ly the tetlcscope of Galileo.2 hlerCint was fufilledl ie, f tll- anost touilching ,f; ll,t,cl tcic0s. TYears before, the einellmies of Ko l,li i 1ld said to hint, "If your doctrines were) true Venus would show,l.ases like the moon." K{:,perniik answered: "' -ou ale rigt-t; I lkiow ni.t what to say; but God is go(1,. aid will in time find ai an swer to this obljection." 3 The od- ) . See Batltolhness, Vie de Jordano Bruno, Paris, 1846,-vol. i., pp. 121 and pp. 212, et seq. Also Berti, Vita di Giordano Bruno, Firenze, 1868, chapter xvi. Also WThewell, i., 294, 295. That Whewell is somewhat hasty in attributing Bruno's punishment entirely to the Spaccio delta Bestia Trionfante will be evident, in spite of Montucla, to any one who reads the account of the persecution in Bartholmess or Berti; and, even if Whewell be right, the Spaccio would never have been written, but for Bruno's indignation at ecclesiastical oppression. See Tire-tboschi, vol. xi., p. 435. 2 Delambre, tistoire de l'Astronomie mnodernte, discours pr6liminaire, p. xiv. Also Laplace, Systeme du Monde, vol. i., p. 326, and for more careful statement, Cepleri Opera Ocnnia, edit. Frisch, tom. ii., p. 464. - 3 Canttt, Ifistoire Uvoivers(ll, vol. xv., p. 473. 33 34 THEE WARFARE 0F SCIENCE. given answer came when the rude telescope of (X1l i1,:, 1toased tlhe plases (of Vecus. On1 this new clmamplion, Galileo, thie war was long and bitter. The supporters of what was called "sound learning" declared his discoveries deceptions, and his announcements blasphemy. Semi-.(,iqetific 1rIofessors, endeavoring to curry favor w-itl tihe Churcli, attacked him with shani science; earnest preachers attacked him with perverted Scripture! 1 I shall present this warfare at somie length, because, so far as I can find, no careful outline of it has been given in our language, since the whole history was placed in a new light by the revelation of the trial documents in the Vatican Library, published for the first time by M. de l'Epinois in 1867. The first important attack on Galileo began whenli he announced that his telescope had revealed I A very curious example of this sham science is seen in the arrlgumentl, t]eqltly used at the timne, that, if the earth really movedl.1 - tone falling from a height would fall back of the point irame(liately- tlow its point of startin g. This is used by Fromun d';: ~,ir:t easttt. It appears never to have occurred to him to tes t, Li, TIatitti, }, dI(pping a stone from the topmast of a ship. But the most beautiful thing of all is that Benzenburg has experimentally demonstrated just such an aberration in falling bodies as is mathematically required by the diurnal motion of the earth. See JScions, Principles of Scien?ce, vol. i.', p. 453, and ii., pp. 31(}, 311. I ASTRO-VOJ~Y. the moons of tlhe planet Julpiter; thle eneily saw that this strengthened the Copernican theory, and ,gave battle immediately. Tlhe whlole theory was denounced as impossible and impious. Professors, bred in tlle mnixed science favored by the Clhurch,' ar,ued thlat tle Bible (dearly showed, )y- all applical)le t,.- tiere, -,mld be only seven 1lab'eta' tlat this w ],rove,'l )v thle seven (,)'le}t eal(ilejti,, Ls (f t,l \,)',vy[)5C, by tlihe,, 1.-l>.,t: le( C(lll,T:ti(:L, thle Tabl)ernacle, anid 19- tlh QV1,.',,I-';.' -, Asi' 2 the(-logians showed thle desttructive Coluls,1ateices wtliichl must logically result to flundamental Christian truths: bishops and priests nttered impressive warnings to their flocks; and multitudes of thle faitliful besought the Inquisition to protect the fold by dealing speedily and sharply with the heretic. In vain did( Galileo tryto save the great truths le had discovered, T)v his letters to the Benedictine Castelli and the Grand-duchess Christine, in whilch he a rgued( that literal il i ol iJttcp':)t tiollol not be applied to s(,ieiLee; it was de(lared that bv making such a- arigmnet hii h'eIii s was onlv See Delambre as to the discovery of the satellites of Jupiter being the turning-point with the heliocentric doctrine. As to its effects on Bacon, see Je,ons, Pi'incip!es of Science, vol. ii., p. 298. 2 For argument drawn fromi the candlestick and seven churches, see Delanibre. 35 36 THE WARFARE OF SC[ENCE. rendered more detestable; that he was "worse thani Tnither or Calvi." In vini (li(t ltir tr o prove the existence of satellites by showilng themn to the doubters through htis telescope. They either declared it impious to look, or, if they did see them, denouticed them as illlsi,i L' fw,, thLe devil. Good Father Clavius lel tlr-it to' see satellites of Jupiter, men had to make an lnsitituiinent which would create themn." The war oi the C(c-)erniean theory, whichl up to that time had Reeii carried onl quietly, now flamed forth. It was declared that the doctrline was proved false by the stainding still of the sun for Joslhua; lI)y the declarations that " the founl4ations of the earth are fixed so firm that they cannot be moved," and that the sun " runneth about from one end of heaven to the other." 2 Thle Dominican father, Caceini, preached a sermon from the text, "A Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? " and this wretched pun was the first of a series of sharper weapons; for b)efore Caceini finishes, hlie insists that "geonmetry is of the devil," and that " mathematicians Libri, vol. iv., p. 211. De Jfoyaen, Paracdoxes, p. 26, for account of Father Clavius. It is interesting to know that Clavius, in his last years, acknowledged that "the whole system of the heavens is broken down, and must be mended." 2 Caitt?, Histoire U-niveesele, vol. xv., p. 478. ASTRO'O IYOY. should be banished as the authors of all heresies;" and, for this, the Church authorities gave Caccinii promotion.' Father Lorini proved that the doctrine was no t only " heretical," but "atheistic," and besought the Inquisition to intervene. The Bishop of Fiesole screamed iu rage against the Copernicean system, and proposed to denounce Galileo to the granlddukle. The Archbishop of Pisa secretly sought to entrap Galileo and deliver himn to the Inquisition at Roiue. Thlle Archbishop of Florencee solemnly conldemned thlle doctrines of IKopernik and Galileo as unscriptural. But by far the ilost terrible chamipion who appeared ag(ainst him was t!)clarn, liu,,,e of the grieatest of tlieologiaiis, and one f thlle I)ooi-est of scientists. lIe was earnest, sincere, learned, but made the fearful mistake for the world of applying to scie6lnce, direct, literal interpretationr of Scripture." The weapons whlichl meii )f Bell,rmiii's stamp used wN-eie thleological. They held up before the wo lMd~ie dreadful consequences wliich must result l For Caccini's attack, see Delaimbre, -Hist. d7e l'Ast2oni., disc. pr6limi., p. xxii.; also, Libri, Hist. (les Scinces afhl., vol. iv., p. 232; also, -IJatin, Gctlilee, pp. 43, 44. 2 For Bellarmin's view, see Qtiiiet, Jesuits, vol. ii., p. 189. For other objectors and objections, see Libri, IJistoire des Sciences 3Jfathlnatiqu7es en Italie, vol. iv., pp. 233, 234; also, Arftin, W'ie de Gtlilee. 4 ,37 3I T-TE WARFARE OF SCIEXCE. to Christian theology were the doctrine to prevail thlat the heavenly bodies revolve about the sun, and not about the earth. Their most tremendous theologic engine against Galileo was the idea that his pretended discovery "vitiated the whole Chris tlan plan of salvation." Fathler Lecazre declared that it " cast suspicion on the doctrine of the \fI uca:latio".' ()thlers declared that it " upset the whole basis of tlteoloyv; that, if the earth is a planet, and one amono several planets, it cannot I e tliat tinvy suel great tlhings have been lonie espe cially for it, as thle Christian doctrine tealhes.. If there are ttlCr Iplauets, since God makes noth inig in- vain, thlley minst be inhabited; but how can these iilhabitants be descended from Adam? Itow cait tllev trace back their origin to INoah's ark; I:ow can they have l)een redeeed l)by the Saviour? 1 Nor was this argument confined to the theolo gians of the Roman Church; Melanehthon, Prot estant as he was, had already used it in his attacks upon the ideas of Kopernikl anld his school.' In addition to this prodigious engine of war, there w-as kept up a terrific fire of smaller artillery Lin the shape of texts and scriptural extracts. But the little telescope of Gai;eo' still swept See TrIouessart, cited in Fl'[7?i2eesion, Jfon(es Imayinaires et Pids, sixicrme edition, pp. 315, 316. 2 Initict Doct)ince Psie, pp. 220, 221. ASTRONOMY. the hel-vens, and the next revelatiorn antounceed was tile sv-tem-f — lI,UPttins anid ~lles in the iiooll. This was a sig(ial for aiiothler attack. It 7was dc(lare d l thiat this, ((111te(lI witl l th le st,tatellnt that t!ee iiloon si s l)y I ligt e;cf etc(t from the sun, was a contrad(lti,),f the sttehent in (-ele- sis tlhat the umoon is a l geat itr like ithe. I To miake the matter worse, a painter, placing the inoon in a religious picture in its usual position beneatd the feet of the Blessed Virgin, outlined on its surface mountains and valleys; this was denounced as a sacrilege logically resulting froml tlhe astronomier's heresy. The next struggle was aroused whlen the hlate(d telesce,-,),e revealed spo)ts,upon the sun,,rn( til.ei moti,i. x tt ii:ch ini(dicated tlhe sunr's rotation. Monsignor Elei, head of the UTniv-ersity of Pisa, forbade: the Professor of Astronomy, Castelli, to mientioii these spots. Father BusaeLs, at the University of [nnspruck, forbade the astronomer Seieiner to allow the new discovery to be known there. At the College of Douay and the UnTiversity of Lonvain it was expressly placed under the ban, and this became the general rule among, tl-he Catholic universities and colleges of Europe. The Spansis universities were specially inttolerant of this ancd similar ideas,' and up to a recent period tley were See 7cknor, itst. of Spct. Litepature, vol. iji. 30 40 THE WARFARE 0F SCIEXCE. strictly forbidden in the most important university of all-that of Salamanca. In 1820 the Abbe Settele, professor at the College of Rome, laving announciieed a work on Optics and Astronomv, the master of the sacred palace, under the authority of the old decrees against the teachings of IKopernik and Galileo, forbade the publication, and it was not until 1822 that Pope Pius VII. sanctioned a decision of the Inquisition permitting such teachings.' Such are the consequences of placing the instruction of mien's minds in the hands of those inainlv absorbed in the work of saving men's souls.2 Nothing could be more in accordance with the idea recently put forth b)y the Bishop of Alontpellier, that the Church is alone fully empowered to promulgate scientific truth or direct university instruction; but science gained the victory here also. -News came of observations of the solar spots, not only from Galileo in Italy, but from Fabricius in Holland. Father Scheiner then endeavors to make the usual treaty; he promulgates a pseudo-scientific theory-a statement based on a religious science "-which only provokes derision. But the war grew more and more bitter, and See Th. Hllartin, Galilee, pp. 34, 208, and 266. See jIra-ti?, Galilee, pp. 34 and 208; also a curious note in the erlier English editions, Lyeill, Pt'inciples of Geology, Introduction. ASTROIVOXY. the prilncipal weal3pons in it are worth examiningi'. They are very easily examined; you may pick them ul) oni any of the battle-fields of science-, but on that field they were used with more effect than on almost any other. These weapons are two epithets' IJfidel" and' Atheist." Thle battle-fields of science are thickly strewn with these. They have been used against almost every iman who has ever done anything new for his fellow-mven. The list of those who have been denounced as infidel and atheist includes almost all great men of scienee-general slcholars, inventors, philaanthropists. The deepest Christian life, the most noble Christian character, have not availed to shield combatants. Christians like Isaac Newton and Pascal and John Locke and John Milton, and even Iloward and Fanelon, have had these weapons hurled against them. Of all proofs of the existence of a God, those of Descartes have been wrought most thoroughly into the mninds of modern men; and yet the Protestant theologians of Holland sought to bring him to torture and to (leath b)y the charge of atheism, and the Roman Catholic theologians of France prevented the reinderiing of any due honors to him at his burial.l For curious exemplification of the way in which these weapons have been hurled, see lists of persons charged with "infidelity " anl " atheism," in Le -Dictionnaire (les Athees, Paris, An. viii. Also, H, Histo)'y of eRaionalism, vol. ii., p. 50. For case of Descar-t-cs, see Saisset, Descartes et ses p2-ecureseurs, pp. 103, 110. 41 42 THE WAR FARE OF SCIENCE. These epithets can hardly be classed withl civilized weapons. They are burning arrows. They -et fire to great masses of popular prejudices sioke rises to obscure the real questions; fire )iursts forth at times to destroy the attacked party. They are poisoned. They go to the hearts of lovilg womnen, they alienate dear children; they injire tihe man after life is ended, for they leave )oisoned wounds in the hearts of those who loved inm best-fears for his eternal happiness-dread of the Divine displeasure. Of course, in these days, these weapons, though often effective in disturbing good men and in searing good women, are somewhat blunted. Indeed, they not unfrequently injure assailants more than assailed. So it was not in the days of Galileo; they were then in all their sharpness and venom. Yet far more vile than the use even of these weapons-vile indeed beyond belief —was the attack by the Archbishop of Pisa. It is a remark made by one of the most mioder.tte and judicially fair of modern philosophic historians, that, of all organizations this world has lnown, the Romian Church has caused most nude:erved woe and shed most innocent blood; but, in the whole terrible succession of Torquemadas and Arbues and Granvilles, the vilest enemy of the human race is probably this same Archbishop of Pisa. ASTRONO'JO Y. This iman, whose cathedral is more truly consecrated by the remembrance of Galileo's observation of the lamp swinging before its altar, than by all the church services of a thousand years, began a siege against the great philosopher. Galileo, after his discoveries had been denounced as contrary to Scripture, had been induced to write to the Duchess Christine and to his friend Castelli two letters, to show that his discoveries might be reconciled to Scripture. The archbishop saw his opportunity: he determined to get hold of these letters and exhibit them as proofs that Galileo had uttered heretical views of theology and the Scriptures, and thus to bring the astronomer lhopelessly into the cluLtchl of the Inquisition. The archbishop begs Castelli, therefore, to let liiii see the original letter in the handwriting of Galileo. Castelli declines; the archbishop tlhei, wliilc, as is now revealed, writing constantly aid l)itterlv to .the inquisitors against Galileo, p)Iofesses to Castelli the greatest admiration of Galileo's,genius, and a sincere desire to know mole of his disco — eries. Castelli is seduced by this; but Galileo stll'dily forbids sending the letter, and the arelhbislhop is obliged to resort to open attack. The whole struggle to crush Galileo and to save him would be amusing were it not so fraught with evil. There were intrigues and couniiter-intrigues, plots and counter-plots, lying and spying, 43 44 TIIE TVWARFARE OF SCIENCE. and in the thickest of this seething, squabbling, screaming mass, priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and even the future Pope Urban VIii. himself. It is most suggestive to see in this crisis of the Church, on the eve of the greatest errors in churchl policy the world has known, ill all the efforts and deliberations of these consecrated leaders of the Church, at the tomb of the Prince of the Apostles, no more sign of the guidance ol presence of the IIoly Spirit than i: a caucus of New York politicians. 3ut the opposing powers were too strong. In 1.615 Galileo is summoned by the Inquisition to Rome, and the minle, which had been so long preparing, was sprung. Pope Paul V. and the cardinal inquisitors order eleven theologians of the Inquisition to examine these two propositions whilch had been extracted from Galileo's letters on the solar spots: Fis't, that the sun does not nove about the earth; secondly, that the earth does move about the sun. The eleven theologians solemnlyv considered these points, and in about a month rendered a solemn decision that "the first proposition, that the sun is the centre, and does not revolve ibo.t the earth, is foolish, absutrd, false ig theology, a(lid heretical, beccause expressly conztrary to Iold/ ^ jz)A/:tf'e; (land that the second proposition, t/h:tt the earth is not the eent2e), but revolves about the stm, is absurd, false in philosoih)y, and, ASTRONOMXY. frost a theoloygical p)oint of view, at least opp)osed to the trute faith." I The pope himself, Paul V., now intervenes; hlie orders that Galileo be brought before the Inquisition. Then the great man of science in that age i; brought face t o face with the greatest theologiin: Galileo is confronted by Cnardiill Bellarimin. Bellarmin shows Galileo the erlior of his opinion, and orders him to renounce it. De Landa, fortified by a letter from the pope, ordering the astronomer to be placed in the dungeon of the Inquisition should he refuse to yield, commanlds him to " abandon entipely the opinion that the su8i is the centre of the iniverse, and that the earth moves, and to abstain from sustaining, teaching, or defending that opinion in any manner whatever, orally or by writing." a Galileo bowed to this order, was allowed to retire, and the whole proceeding was kept secret. About ten days later, on Marchl 5, 1616, the Congregation of the Index, moved thereto, as we have seen, and as the letters and documents now brought to light show, by Pope Paul V., solemnly rendered their decree: that the doctrine of the double movement of the earth about its axis and about the sun is false aird entirely oQt?ictry 1 See the original documents in Epinois, pp. 34-36. Martin's translation does not seem exactly correct. See full official text in Epinois. 4:5 46 THE WARFARE OF SCIEXCE. to IJoly Sc/ijtuee; that this opinion must neither be taught nor defended. The same decree colndemned the writings of Kopernik, and all writ?,gs ctih afirm, t motion of the earth. The great workl of Kopernik was interdicted until corrected in accordance with the views of the Inquisition; and the works of Galileo and Kepler, though not mentioned by name, were included among those implicitly condemned as "affirming the motion of the earth." The condemnations were inscribed upon the lendex, and to the Index was prefixed the usual papal bull giving its monitions the papal sanction. To teach or even read the works denounced or passages condemned, was to risk persecution in this world and damnation in the next. Human science had apparently lost the great decisive battle. For some time Galileo remained at Riome perfectly submissive.' Pope Paul V. petted him, and al seemed happy in the ending of the long war. BIBut, returning to Florence, something of his old scientific ardor stirred within him; and at last Cardinal Barberini, who had seemed liberal and friendly, having been made pope under the name 1 See proofs of this in Jiartin. The reader should be reminded that the archives exposed within the past few years have made the statements of early writers untrustworthy on very manlly of the nicer points. iSTrONOJ[Y. 47 of Urban VIII., Galileo conceived new hopes, and ag,ain in a published w-ork alluded favorably to the Copernican system. New troublles ensued. Galileo was induced to visit Romie agrain, and Pope Urban tried to cajole him into silence, and personally took the trouble to try to shlow the astronomer his errors by argument. Othier opponents were less considerate. Workls appeared attacking, his ideas-works all the more unmanly, since their authors knew how Galileo wvas restrained by force from defending himself; and, as if to accumulate proofs of the fitness of the Church to take charge of advanced instruction, his salary as professor at the University of Pisa was taken from him. Sapping, and miining began. Just as the Arcll)isliop of Pisa some years before had tried to betray Galileo with hloneyed words to the iLn(qisition, so now Father Grassi tried it iand after various attempts to draw- him out by flattery, suddenly denounced his scientific ideas as "leading to a denial of the real presence in thlle Eucharist." And here science again loses ground. Galileo had announced his intention of writing upon the tleory of the tides, but he retreated, and tlins was lost a great treatise to the world. For the final assault, the park of lheavy artillery was at last wheeled into place. You see it on all the scientific battle-fields. It consists of gen 47 48 THE TiWARFARE OF SCI~EVCE. eral denunciation; and Father Alelchior Inchlofer, of the Jesuits, brought his artillery to bear well on Galileo with this declaration: that the opinion of the earth's motion is, of all heresies, the most abominable, the most pernicious, the most scandaloius; tloat tlhe iimm)obility- of the earth is thrice sacire(: tlL.t alrgumient against the iniiniortality of the soul,l tlhe Crealtor, the incarnation, etc., should l)e tolerated sooner than an argumient to prove that the earth moves.' But this state of things could not be endured ~orever. Urged beyond forbearance, Galileo prepares a careful treatise in the forin of a dialogue, exhibiting the arguments for and against the Copernican and Ptolemlaic systems. He then offers to sul)lmit to any conditions the Church tribunals may impose, if they will but allow it to be printed. At last they consent, imposing the mnost humniliating condition of all, which was a preface written by Father Ricciardi and signed by GalJileo, in wvhich the whole worlk w-as virtually exhibited as a play of the imagination, and not at all as opposed to the trltlth laid down in 1616 by the Inquisition. The new work met with prodigious success; it put new weapons into the hands of the supporters of the Copernican theory. The preface only eimbittered the contest; it was laughed at from one 1 See Inchfofer's Tractatus SUllcpicus cited in Galileo's letter to Deodati, July 28, 1634. I ASTRONOOMY. end of Europe to the other as ironical. This aroused the enemy. The Jesuits, Dominicans, and the great majority of the clergy, returned to the attack niore violent than ever; and Pope Urbani ~III., his personal pride being touched, after some hlalting, joined the clerical forces. The first important piece of strategy was to forbid the sale of the work; but the first edition had already been exhausted and spread throughlout Europe. Urban now became angry, and both Galileo and his works were placed in the hands of the Inquisition. In vain did the good Benedictine Castelli urge that Galileo was entirely respectful to the Church; in vain did he say that " nothilig that could be done could now hinder the earth from revolving." He was dismissed, and Galileo was forced to appear in the presence of the dread tribunal without defender or adviser. There, as was so long concealed but as is now fully revealed, he was menaced with torture by express order of Pope Urban, and, as is now thoroug,lly estal)blished by documentary evidence, forced to abjuire under threats, and subjected to imlprisonment by command of Urban, the Inquisition deferring in the most servile manner to the papal authority. The rest of the story the world knows by heart; none of the recent attempts have succeeded in mystifying it. The whole world will remenmber forever how Galileo was subjected certainly to 5 49 50 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. incdig,nity and imprisonment equivalent to physical torture; 1 how he was at last forced to pronounce publicly, and on his knees, his recantation as follows: "I, Galileo, being in my seventieth year, being a prisoner and on mily knees, and before your eminences, having before miy eyes the Hloly Gospel, which I touch with my lhands, abjure, curse, and detest the error andl thle heresy of the movement of the earth." I-e was vanquished indeed, for he had been forced, in the face-of all coming ag,es, to perjure himself; and, to complete his dislhonor, he was obliged to swear to denounce to the Inquisition. any other man of science whomi hlie should discover to be supporting heresy-the "heresy of the movement of the earth.' Nor was this all. To the end of his life, nay, after his life was ended, this bitter persecution was continued, on the supposition that the ,great truths hlie revealed were hurtful to religion. After a brief stay in the dungeons of the Inquisition, he was kept in exile from family, friends, all his noble employments, and held rigidly to his promnise not even to speak of his theory. When, It is not probable that torture in the ordinary sense was administered to Galileo, though it was threatened. See Tl. lfartin, TKe de GClilie, for a fair summing up of the case. For text of the abjuration, see E~)iiois; also, Pivdeate Life of Gealilo, Aplpendix. ASTRONOM[Y. in the midst of intense bodily sufferings from disease and mental sufferings from calamities in his famiily, ihe besought some little liberty, hlie was met with threats of a recommittal to his dungeon. When, at last, a special commnissioiier had reported to the ecclesiastical authorities that Galileo had become blind and wasted away with disease and sorrowv, lie was allowed but little more liberty, and that little tempered by the close surveillance of the ecclesiastical authorities. Hle was forced to bear contemptible attacks on himself and onI his worlds in silence; he lived to see his ideas care fully weeded out ~rom all the church colleges and universities in Europe; and when, in a scientific world, he happened to be spoken of as "renowned," the Inquisition ordered the substitution of the word "notorious." 1 Nor did the persecution cease with his death. Galileo had begged to be buried in his family tomb in Santa Croce; the request was denied: his friends wished to erect a monument over him; thlis, too, was refused. Pope Urban said to the emnbassador Niccolini that "it would be an evil example for the world if such honors were rendered to a mian who had been brought before the Roman Inquisition for an opinion so false and erroneous, swho had conmmunicated it to many I.~artiz, p. 227. 51 THE WAR~ARE OF SCIENCE. othlers, and whlo had given so great a scandal to Christendom." 1 In accordance, therefore, with the wish of the pope and the orders of the Inquisition, Galileo was buried ignobly, apart from his family, without fitting ceremony, without monument, without epitaph. Not until forty years after did Pierozzi dare to write his epitaph. Not until a hunIch'ed years after did Nelli dare transfer his remains to t Santa Croee and erect above them a suitable monument. Even then the old conscientious hostility lburst out: the Inquisition was besought to prevent such honors to "a man condemned for notorious errors;" and that tribunal refused to allow any epitaph to be placed above him which had not first been submitted to its censorship. Nor has that old conscientious consistency in hatred yet fully relented; hardly a generation since has not seen some Alarini, or De Bonald, or rallaye, or De Gabriae, suppressing evidence, or torturing expressions, or inventing theories, to blacken the memory of Galileo and save the reputation of the Church.2 1 Jftrtin, p. 243. 2 For the persecution of Galileo's memory, see TlA. Mfartin, chaps. ix. and x. For documentary proofs, see De I'Epinois. For a collection of the slanderous theories invented against Galileo, see Ifartiz, final chapters and appendix. Both these authors are devoted to the Church, but, unlike Monsignor Marini, are too upright to resort to the pious fraud of suppressing documents or interpolating pretended facts. ASTRONOMf'Y. The action of tile Church authorities corresponded( well to the spirit thus exhibited; not until 1r, over one hbundred years after his condemnation, was it removed, and then secretly; not until 1S35, over two hundred years after his condemnation, was the record of it expunged from the ictlex. But this is by no mneans the only imiportant part of this history. Hardly less important, for one who wishes to uniderstand the character of the warfare of science, is it to go back over those two hundred years between that fearful crime and its acknowlecl,gment, and study the great retreat of the army of the Church after its disastrous victory over Galileo. IHaving gained this victory, the conscientious believers in the Bible as a compendium of history and text-book of science exulted greatly. Loud was the rejoicing that the "heresy," the' infidelity," the " atheism," involved in believing that the earth revolves about its axis and moves around the sun, had been crushed by the great tribunal of the Chlurch, acting in strict obedience to the expressed will of one pope and the written order of another. But soon clear-sighted men saw that this victory was a disaster. From all sides caine proofs that JKopernik and Galileo were right; and although Pope Urban and the Inquisition held Galileo in 53 54 TTiE TVAI-FARE OF SCIEXCE. strict seclutsionl, not allowing him even to,I)eak regarding the double motion of the earth; and althoughi the condemnation of "all books which affirmI the motion of the earth" was kept on the Index; and although the colleges anid universities under Churchl control were compelled to teach the opposite doctrine, it was seen that the position gained by the victory over Galileo could tnot be miaintained for ever. So began the great retreat -the retreat of the army of Chlurch apologists through two centuries of sophistry, trickery, and falsehood. The first important move in the retreat was a falling back upon the statement that Galileo was condemned, not because he affilmled the motion of the earth, but because he supported it fromin Scripture. For a considerable time this falsehood zserved its purpose; even a hundred and fifty -ears after Galileo's condemnation it was renewed hy the Protestant Bfallet du Pan,' in his wish to gain favor from the older Church; but the slightest critical examination of the original documents, recently revealed, show this position utterly untenable. The letters of Galileo to Castelli and the Grand-duchess Christine, in which he spoke of the Copernican theory as reconcilable with Scripture, were not published until after the condemnation; and although the Archbishop of Pisa had 1 See Jfartin, pp. 401, 402. ASTRONOMY. endeavored to use them against him, they were but casually mentioned in 1616, and entirely left out of view in 1633. What was condemned in 1(116 as "'absurd, false in theology, and heretical, becaulse absolutely contrary to Holy Scripture," wavs the proposition that " the s8tn is the cent,re abouz which the earth erevolve8;" and what was coindeinned as " absurd, false in philosophy, and, from a theologic point of view at least, opposed to the true faith," was the proposition that " he eacrtl is ,ot tle ceintre of the universe arcl immovable, but acts a dietrnaal motion."' What Galileo was made, by express order of Pope Urban and by the action of the Inquisition under threat of torture, to abjure, was " the error acl heres2y of the m-ovement of the earth." 2 Whlat the Index, prefaced by papal bulls binding its contents upon the consciences of the faithful, for two hundred years steadily condemned, were " all books which aqffr the motion of the earth." Not one of these condemnations was directed against Galileo's private letters to Castelli and Christine affirming the possibility of reconciling his ideas to Scripture. Having been dislodged from this point, the 1 See -)e l'Epinois, p. 35, where the document is given in its original Latin. 2 See translation of the abjuration in appendix to Private Life of Galileo, London, 1870. 55 56 THIE WTARFARE OF SCIE.YCE. Church apologists sought cover Lraider the statement that "Galileo was condemned not for heresy, but for contumacy," and for "wanting, ill respect for the pope." 1 As to the first point, the very language of the various sentences shows the falsehood of the assertion; they speak of "heresy," and never of " contuinacy." As to the last point, the display of the original documents settled that forever. It was proved by them that from first to last he had been toward the pope most patient and submissive. IHe had indeed expressed his anger at times against his traducers; but to hold this the cause of the judgment against him, is to degrade the whole proceeding, and to convict the pope, Bellarmnin, the theologians, and the InquLisition, of direct falsehood, since they assigned entirely different reasons for their conduct. From this, therefore, the apologists hastily retreated. The next rally was made about the statement that the persecution of Galileo w-as the result of a quarrel between Aristotelian proessors on one side and professors favoring the experimental method on-tile other, and that at first Cope Urban favored l See zl]ariIi, who manipulated the original documents to prove this. Even Whewell appears to have been somewhat misled by him; but Whewell wrote before De l'Epinois had shown all the documents, and under the supposition that Marini was an honest man. ASTROO[OMY. Galileo. But this position was attacked and carried by a very simple statement. If the Divine guidance of the Church is such a sham that it can be dragged into a professional squabble, and the pope made the tool of a faction in bringing about a most disastrous eondemnatior of a proven truth, how does the Church differ fromn any human olganization sunk into decrepitude, managed by simipletonls and controlled by schemners? If the argument be true, the condition of the ClLhurch is worse than its enemies have declared it. Amid the jeers of an unfeeling world the apologists sought new shelter. The next point at which a stand was made was the assertion that the condemnation of Galileo was "' provisory;" but this proved a more treachlierous shelter than the other. When doctrines have been solemnly declared, as those of Galileo were solemnly declared, "contrary to the sacred Scriptures," " opposed to the true faith," and "false and absurd in thieology and philosophy," to say that such declarations are " provisory," 1 is to say that the truth held by the Church is not immutable; from this, then, the apologists retreated. While this retreat was going on, there was a constant discharge of small-arms in the shape of innuendoes, hints, and small sophistries, by small I See Marini. 57 58 THE WARFARE OF SCIE~-CE. writers; every effort was made to blacken Galileo's private character; the irregularities of his early life vwere dragged forth, and stress was laid on breaches of etiquette; but this succeeded so poorly, that in 1850 it was thought necessary by the Romnan court to cover their retreat by some more careful strategy. The original documents of the trial of Galileo hlad, during the storms of the early part of the century, been transferred to Paris; but after several years, in 1846, they were returned to Rome by the French government, on the express promnise b)y the papal authorities that the decisions should be published. After various delays, on various pretexts, in 1850 the long-expected publication appeared. The ecclesiastic charged with presenting them to the world was Monlsignlor M1arini. This ecclesiastic was of a kind which has too often afflicted the weary earth —fox-like in cunning, eat-like in treachery. Despite the solemn promise of the papal court, the wily MIarini became the instrument of the Romlan authority in evading the promise; by suppressing, a document hlere, and interpolating a statement thlere, he managed to give plausible standing-ground for nearly every important sophistry ever broachled to save the reputation of the Church and destroy the reputation of Galileo. Hie it was who supported the idea that "Galileo was condemned not for heresy, ASTPO NVO [I Y. but for contnumacy," and varions othler assertions as grondclless. The first effect of A~onsignor 3[arini's book seemed favorable in covering the retreat of the Churchl; aided by him, such vigorous writers as Ward w-ere ablle to thlrow Up temiporary ijtrenchments between the Churchl and the iindignation of the world. But some time later camie an investigator very different froim wily 3fonsignor AIarini. This man was a Frienlichmanl, 31. de l'Epinois. Like alarini, De l'Epinois was devoted to the Chutrch, but, unlike 3liarini, he could not lie. IHaving obtained access, in 1SC7, to the Galileo docnments at the Vatican, lie publlisled fullv all those of importance, wvithout suppression or piously-fraudulent manipulation. Tlhis miale all thle intrencllments based u1poIl 3Iarini's statements untenable. Another retreat had to be made. And now was made the most desperate effort of all. The apolocistic army, reviving all idea whichl popes and Church had spurned, declared that thle pope, (ts )o0ie, had never condemned the doctrines of 1Topernik and Galileo; thlat hle had condemned themn as a iuan siiiply; tl-hat tlherefore the Church hladcl never been committed to them; that the- wvere condlemned by the cardinals of the Iinquisitioii a,nd Index, and that the pope had evidentlv b)ee restrainecfl from signing, their condein 59 60 THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. nation I)y Providence.' Nothing could show the desperation of the retreating party better than ju,gglery like thlis. The facts are, that from Pope Urban downward, amonlg the Church authorities of the seventeenth century, the decision was spoken of as miade by the pope and the Churchl. Urban VIII. spoke of that of 1616 as made by Pope Paul V. and the Church, and of that of 1633 as made by himself and the Church.2 When Gassendi attempted to raise the point that the decision w-as not sanctioned by the Church as such, a great theological authority, Father Lecazre,2 rector of the College of Dijon, publicly contradicted him, and declared that it " was not certain cardinals, but the supreme authority of the Churelc," that bad condemned Galileo; and to this statement the pope and the Churlch gave consent, either openly or by silence.3 The suspected thinkers, like Descartes and others, who attempted to raise the same point, were treated with contempt. Father Castelli, who had devoted himself to Galileo, and knew to his cost just what the condeinnation meant and who made it, takes it for granted, in his letter to the papal authorities, that it was made by the Church. Cardinal Querenghi I See Epiiois and T7h. lfaortin, passinm. 2 See pages 136, 144, and elsewhere in _leartin, who, much against his will, is forced to allow this. 3~ artin pp. 146, 147. ASTPR O-0J[I". ill hlis letters, the emlbassador Gticceiardini in' his dispatchlles, tlhe historian Viviani it' his biograplhy of Galileo-all writinog ilinder Church inspection at the time-take the view that the ChliLrell' condemnted Galileo. The Inquisition itself, baecked by the,greatest theologian of the time, Bellarmiin, tookl tlhe same vien w 1 and if this were not enough,l Vwe have the R)omian Index, conltaining the coildeiIiationI for nearly two hlntildred years, prefaced )by a solemiin bull of the reigning pope, binding the condemnation onl the consciences of the whole Churchl, and reiterating year after year the condetination of "all books whichl affilrm the llmotionl of the eartli' as daimnable.2 To attenmpt to face ill this, added to the fact that the Inquisitionl condeiiiie(d Galileo, and required his al)jirationl of ' the heresy of the ioveinmeit of the eartl-l " by written order of thlle pope, was soon seen to be impossible. Iii spite, thenl, of all the casuistlry of DI)e l'EpiilOiS and all the special pleadings of 31. Alartin, the sturdv coiilluoin-senlse of the world proved too stirong; and now comes to view the most astoundimg defense of all-thlat hinited at by Viscounlt (le loniald and developed in tle _D,t4i(t Pievvie. This was nothing less than an attemplt to retreat raider a clhargle of deception against t!le hlmighity 1 See Malrtiii, p. 145. 2 See note on condemnation of Kopen.ilk. 6 61 62 TIE VAP~1PE OF SCIEiVCE. iiiimiself. The arigiment is as follows " s ut it .nay well be doubted whethlier the Chiir-eli did :t'tard thte progress of scientific tritlh. AVlmat re.lr(led (it, was the v catt-ts,e tlst o A tlb,h 1t ;it t, p es at' ti,,t i,ln l'. ( i,rs l-t;,-l. uttt it'. (',(l \!4.i,[ +1 1t C]it,.'ud.nd, miorcover', since li tlt~l-l Tt fit S,, tV act as to retard the progress of scientific trnth, it -vould be little to hler discredit even if it were true tlat slie bad followed lis exam,n1ple,." With this, the retreat of tlle army of a)(lo,gists is cou1plete; firther thltan this, througlh - mazes of soplhistry and into depthls of contempt, tliey could not go.t For the attempt to make the crime of Galileo a l)reach of etiquette, se DI)?t6liit aes'ie', as above. T'itcu,cll, vol. i., 393. Citation from "a?'ini: " Galileo was punished for trifling with the authorities to which he refused to sulbinit, and was piutished for ol)bstinate contumacy, Inot heresy." The sufficient answer to all this is, that the words of the iniflexible sentence designating the condemnned books are: "Lilri oiflnes qui affirlnant telluris 111otum." See Bertreti!, p. 9. As to the idea that "( Glileo was punished not for his opinion, but for )asing it on Srip)tule," the answer may be found in the Rolian Index of 1701-. in which are noted for condemnation " Lilri omnes docenites miobilitatemi terrm ct iinmolilitatemi solis." For the way in whichl, when it was found con-eniient in argument, Church apologists insisted that it was "the Supreme Chief of the Church, by a ponitifical decree, and lnot certain cardinals," who condecmied Galileo and his doctrine, see Father Leeazrc's letter to Gassendi in Flari.ito,, ip'a. f itb d.s 3f)o).,4d p. 427, andl tran VIII.'s own declarations as given AST-ROVO3~Y. Do) noOt nd(lerstandl mie here as casting blameie on the )olllnaii Clhu'elh at larg,e. It inmust in fairness ])e sai(l, that somie of its best meii tried to stop this reat mistake. Ev-en Pope ULrban liimiself w0nould la-e been gladl at one time to stopl) it; but t]e ceurenit was too strong, anld lie weakly yieldeld, l,ec,,~,/ing a )itter perseector.' Thlle whole of the eivilize — world w-as at fautlt, Protestant as'Well as Cathlolic, aiid not any particular part of it. It was iiot the fault of relig,ion; it was the fault ocf tlle sholrt-siglitedl viewvs which narrovw-miinded, loudvoiced miien are ever pirone to miix in witlh religion, aid to iisist are religion.' b)v Maritin. For the wav in whllichl, when necessary, Clhurch apologists asserted the very contrary of this, declaring that " it was isstied in a doctrinal decree of the Congregation of the Index, and hot as the lIolv Father's teaching," see.lDblin Retiew, Septeml)er, 1855. iAnd for the most astounding attempt of all, to take the )blame off the shoulders of )both pope and cardinals, anld place it upoi the Almnighty, see the article abl)ove cited, in the )Dttblin iJ6riee, Septembler, 1865, p. 419. For a good summary of the valiots attempts, and for replies to tlhemi in a spirit of judicial fairness, see /'h. I itit i, J5e de Galilee, thlough there is some special pleading to save the infalliblilitv of pope and Church. The l)ilbliolgaphy at the close is very valuable. F or Blaronius's remark, see D)e Jforgyctn, p. 26. Also, 117ci-cil, vol. i., p. 394. 2 For an exceedingly striking statement, by a Romian Catholic historian of genius, as to popular demanad for persecution, and( the pressure of the lower strata, in ecclesiastical organizations, for cruel measures, see Btlin,,s, Le Ptotestatttiste coipar~ au Calliolieis,iie, etc., 4th el., Paris, 1855, vol. ii. Archbishlop Spauldling 63 64 THE TAPEARE OF SCIENCE. nBLt the losses to the earth in the long war against Galileo were followed by losses not less unfortunate in other quarters. There was thlien in Europe one of the greatest thinkers ever given to mankind-e-Rne' Descartes. -Iistaken thoLgh many of his theories were, they were fruitful in truths. The scientific warriors had stirred new life in him, and he was working over and summingig up in his mighty mind all the researches of his time; the result must make an epoch in history. Iis aim was to combine all knowledge and tliought into a " Treatise on the World." tIis earnestness hle proved by the eleven years wlhich lie gave to the study of anatomy alone. Petty persecution he had met often, but the fate of Galileo robbed him of all hope, of all energy; the battle seelmed lost; lie gave up his great plan forever.' But chlampiols pressed on. Campanella, full of vagaries as hlie was, wrote his Al)ologi(a -)ro G7alileo, thioughl for that and other heresics, reli has something of the same sort in his 3iscellanies. L'Epinois, Galilee, pp. 22, ct seq., stretches this as far as possible, to save the reputation of the Church in the Galileo matter. HI nboldt, Cosmos, London, 1851, vol. iii., p. 21. Also, Loange, Geschichte des Jfaterialismnus, vol. i., p. 22, where the letters of Descartes are given, showing his despair, and the giving up of his best thoughts and works to preserve peace with the Church. Also, Saisset, Descaetes et ses precurse?rs, pp. 100, et seq. Also, Jolly, Hist. d? io,t verneft Intellectual au XVI[e Siecle, vol. i., p. 390 ASTRONOMY. gious anid political, he seven times underwent tor — ture.1 An} lTel)ler comes. IHe leads science on to grleater "ietoi'icse. Toparnik, great as lie was, coul( lh,t dli.cep.taln:e ~Iis s(ieittific reasoling enitirel-y t'',,I tlle tlee,logical bias. Tlte doctrines of Ais ttt Iii(] Tlio-,ii,i AN(uiiinias as to tlle iecessarv su },,'i,jity,f tie circle, hl9d vitiated tlhe miltc,I feat,f I is sy-stem, and left!),,eaclies in it throuLgli x;lui,:lt t-ltc Cl (:'~ vts n,.t sJ:xIV tv) enter. IKepler ;,Cos t]lt