Skeptical Faith

Galileo was a lifelong devout Christian, and scientist. He believed it was important to have faith about those things that are non-measurable or unobservable. But, at the same time, he also realized that faith wasn't necessary to guide us in all things, because there are other questions that can be answered by fact, by physically measurable and observable methods. He believed that logic, empiricism, and reason could answer many questions, and would always corroborate Truth rather than contradict it:

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with good sense, reason, and intellect, has intended us to forego their use." —Galileo

Subversive Intellectuals

In the early 1600s as a university professor at Padua (near Venice, Italy), Galileo had discovered a theory by an earlier scientist named Nicolaus Copernicus (died 1543). Copernicus's book De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium gave very convincing logical reasons to expect that the Earth is NOT stationary with the entire universe rotating around us, and that with improved instruments of observation, that this could eventually be verified empirically.

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church had for 1500 years taught the opposite theory proposed by Aristotle and rationalized by Ptolemy, namely

that the earth was stationary, and the sun and everything else out there revolves around the Earth. This was official Christian doctrine—gospel truth—as established by verses in the Bible (according to the inspired interpretation of the Church's Priesthood Authorities).

'Anti-Church' Literature

Because Copernicus' well-reasoned theories implied that the Church and the Bible were likely wrong, Copernicus was deemed an 'apostate', and his 'anti-Catholic' book was officially banned by the Catholic church. In Galileo's day, one could actually be excommunicated for reading certain 'anti-Catholic'books, or even for merely suggesting minimal support for their teachings!

Truth Welcomes All Challengers

But Galileo had faith that God would not attempt to confuse us, and that measurable objective facts could not contradict God's laws that govern reality. Galileo was confident that real Truth is strong enough to withstand any scrutiny, skepticism, and opposition; he believed that in an open 'competition' of ideas and counter-claims, with allsides heard from, that Truth would emerge triumphant. Galileo recognized that anyone who would promulgate a position, and demand that you avoid reading the opposing arguments &evidence, is likely trying to hide the vulnerabilities of a weak viewpoint or cover-up the errors of a false claim. Only falsehood needs to fear scrutiny and skeptical investigation.

"Prove All Things..." (Apostle Paul to the Thessalonians)

Galileo was aware of some recent innovations in the field of optics, and realized how he could construct an improved telescope that would allow him to empirically confirm OR disprove Copernicus's theory. As a result of these new data, which became available thanks to his innovations, Galileo was able to verify the factual superiority of Copernicus' heliocentric theory, and showed that the Catholic doctrine of stationary-geocentrism was false.

Unfortunately for Galileo, the facts he discovered conflicted with the faith of many Christians. And it was particularly vexing to Church authorities, who felt their priesthood legitimacy was personally challenged by the possibility of being proven wrong. They had reassured members that "God would not allow them to lead the church astray." So predictably, Galileo was denounced as a heretic, and tried by a Church court.

Apostates—or Whistle-Blowers?

In the meantime, other scientists and astrologers discovered that they too could independently confirm Galileo's claims withtheir new telescopes. They were surprised to find that their belief in that doctrine—and their reliance on the testimonies of their priesthood leaders—had been wrong all along. This painful realization came as a shock to many who had placed unquestioning trust in their leaders. But eventually, those with courage and integrity came to Galileo's defense, providing factual corroboration, braving the character assassinations voiced against them by a Church authorities.

Reconciling Cognitive Dissonance

But not all of those whose eyes were opened went public with their defense of the (Church-censored) facts. Some scholars chose to mentally 'compartmentalize' their faith separate from their scientific knowledge, convincing themselves to simultaneously hold two sets of beliefs that were incontradiction. There were even a few deluded scholars who were so determined to trust their Church leaders no matter what, that they were unable to accept reality; these 'apologists' remained in denial about the data they had observed, trying desperately to explain the evidenceaway with silly rationalizations, and rescue the disproven theory with convoluted ad hoc re-definitions. (Even today, many humans—even some scientists—have so much personal investment in a belief or worldview, andare so unwilling to admit to themselves that they were wrong, and that they will go to absurd lengths to try to rescue their faith by trying to ignore or rationalize away data that contradict it. Although this obstinate resistance to fact & logic may seem ridiculous, the 'outsider' should recognize—with pity—that this is a common human reaction to the discomfort of cognitive dissonance (especially among the insecure, simplistic, and those who have a high need for 'certainty' or 'closure', i.e., are not comfortable with experiencing ambiguity).

Unwilling to Look

Inassessing the truthfulness of Galileo's claims, Pope Urban VIII was unwilling to consult with other astrologers, relying instead on the arguments of theologians. Galileo, attempting to demonstrate the obvious truth of his statements, offered to let his accusers observe for themselves through his telescope. Yet they refused! Clearly (to them) the telescope was an instrument of deception, perhaps even a tool of the devil! Besides, what need had they for independently verifiable, objective evidence? A surer source of 'truth' was to trust blindly in the infallibility of the subjective viewpoint of another man. To the unquestioning believer, when the Vatican Brethren have spoken, the thinking is done, the debate ended.

"Eppur Si Muove!" Galileo was found guilty, and would have been burned to death for his 'apostasy.' At this sentencing, he was given a plea-bargain allowing a reduced punishment if he would recant his heresy and proclaim that the facts were wrong. He reluctantly recanted, and so was allowed to remain alive, but was henceforth imprisoned within his home until his death seven years later. But Galileo KNEW what he knew, and so even while recanting he reportedly muttered defiantly under his breath: "eppur si muove!" Some 365 years later, the Roman Catholic Church finally admitted it had been wrong, and acknowledged that Galileo's famously uttered postscript was indeed correct: "and yet, it does move!"

Faith In An Empirical God

A pithy quote by an unknown author winks: "An agnostic will believe no fact unless he sees it; a religious man will see no fact unless he believes it." But devoutly religious scientists, like Galileo, understand that there is a middle ground between foolish gullibility and cynical nihilism: Skeptical Faith. Galileo's experience illustrates the importance of trusting God more than we trust man. Trusting God includes trusting the intellectual capacities that He created (in His own image) in each of us; trusting our ability to discern truth individually and experientially, without having to rely blindly on the claim of a dogmatist who demands "ignore the evidence, and trust my testimony / your feelings!"

Two Trees In Eden

Galileo's offering Pope Urban VIII a view through the telescope was analogous to Eve offering Adam the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, as is Morpheus' offering Neo two pills in the movie 'The Matrix'. One person cannot force another 'to see' unless the other is first willing to look. Acceptance of any provable truth is inevitably voluntary: one must choose to take the Red Pill (a metaphorical allusion to the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden). Accepting the facts of an unexpected reality can be difficult, at least compared to the alternative: remaining in comfortable (and unknowing) bliss in the Garden. Mortality means pain; immortality means innocence—but also no growth. For some, like the 'Matrix' character Cypher, the secure, warm & fuzzy 'comfort zone' one has always known can be preferable to knowing some uncomfortable truths, and denial kicks in to overcome the cognitive dissonance. Some (like Pope Urban VIII) prefer not knowing, won't look through the telescope, won't take the Red Pill. Did Eve (and Adam) make the right choice? Or should they have stayed in the Garden in ignorance?

If unquestioning faith brings you happiness, I will not begrudge you your comfort. The 'telescopes' will be out there, should you decide someday to look for yourself. But until then, I'll just say: Eppur, si muove.