Our teachers in scholastic theology are to follow the doctrine
of St Thomas. Only those who are well disposed toward St
Thomas are to be promoted to chairs of theology. Those who
poorly understand him, or who are not in sympathy with
him, are to be relieved of the office of teaching.
Their rules also warned that professors of theology ‘should not
commit themselves or their students to any philosophical sect’.18
So what did Thomas say about Pythagorean beliefs?
20
The Crimes of Giordano Bruno
From 1265 to 1274 Thomas Aquinas worked on his Summa
Theologica. Among many topics he mentioned Pythagoras. Thomas
complained that Pythagoras construed the number ‘one’ as a kind
of undivided being, and since numbers are composed of units,
Pythagoras believed that numbers were the substance underlying
all things. 19 It seems that Thomas was echoing Aristotle, who had argued that the Pythagoreans construed numbers as the origin of
all things. Yet Thomas attributed this notion to Pythagoras himself.
Thomas also denied the notion that there exist multiple worlds.
Like Hippolytus, he attributed this false claim to those who did not
acknowledge the ordering wisdom of God. Thomas declared: ‘Those
who posit many worlds do not believe in any ordaining wisdom, but
in chance, as Democritus, who said that this world and infinitely
many others came from a concourse of atoms. ’20
Citing Aristotle’s On the Soul, Thomas denied the claim that
the human soul can pass from body to body. Aristotle had said that
the Pythagoreans were wrong about the transmigration of souls, yet
Thomas attributed this doctrine to Pythagoras himself. In an article on ‘Whether the Fire of Hell is Underground’, Thomas noted: Pythagoras truly posited the place of punishment in the
sphere of fire, which he said is in the middle of the whole
world: and he called it the prison of Jupiter, as Aristotle
relates ( On the Heavens and World ii). However, it is more in
keeping with Scripture to say that it is beneath the earth.21
Again, Aquinas repeated the habit of attributing to Pythagoras
beliefs of some socalled Pythagoreans.
Despite the great fame of the wise men of ancient Greece, for
many Christians they could never compare to the Church Fathers,
the saints, or the most pious clergymen. This was because the
Greek philosophers seemed to be essentially ignorant of the most
important theological truths and had indulged their misguided
imaginations. For example, in Dante’s Inferno, completed after about
1315, he named Orpheus, Democritus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras,
Plato, Ovid and Virgil among the inhabitants of ‘the first circle of
Hell’. Dante did not mention the mystic Pythagoras, although he
fits well in such company. In a separate work, which was published
posthumously, Dante wrote: ‘Pythagoras and his followers said that
21
burned alive
this world was one of the stars.’ But Dante insisted that the ‘glorious’
Aristotle had refuted this opinion as false.22
Over the centuries Christian critiques against Pythagoras
were supplemented by critiques against his advocates. Apollonius
of Tyana, the reputed prognosticator and exorcist, was repeatedly
denounced for allegedly performing exorcisms and resurrecting a
man and a dead bride. Niceforo Callistos and Pico della Mirandola
argued against divination and denounced Apollonius for practising demonic magic to imitate Christ’s miracles. Porphyry, who advocated for belief in many gods, had celebrated Pythagoras as a
moral and divine superhuman, more eminent than anyone. In one
of his earliest works Porphyry had claimed that the Sun god Apollo
‘exposed the incurable corruption of the Christians, saying that the
Jews, rather than the Christians, recognized God’.23
But the Catholic Church did not always oppose pagan culture.
In the 1330s the Italian poet Petrarch initiated a revival of interest
in the ancient classical cultures of Greece and Rome. He realized
that instead of studying only heavenly or worldly things, one should
thoughtfully contemplate humans themselves. He argued, compellingly, that the secular study of human nature was compatible with an authentic Christian relationship with God. Petrarch’s works inspired
many Christian intellectuals to participate in what became known as
Renaissance humanism. Hence the Church and its adherents sought
ways to incorporate certain aspects of ancient Greek philoso phy into
Christian culture, and even into theology. It was not easy, because
often the ancient pagan ideas were clearly in conflict with Christian
dogma as traditionally construed.
Eventual y humanist culture came to dominate the stil fundamentally Christian countries and kingdoms of Europe. In this new intellectual climate, trials of heresy became progressively milder,
and discussion and debate on religious and philosophical topics
became more tolerated. By the 1480s the works by the Catholic
priest Marsilio Ficino, especially his translations and commentaries
of works by Plato and the legendary ‘Hermes Trismegistus’, greatly
influenced humanists and the Catholic Church. Ficino even used
the philosophy of the Pythagoreans and Plato to try to elucidate and
refine biblical doctrines and Christian theology.
However, the situation changed dramatically by the 1520s.
Following the efforts of Luther and Calvin to reform Christianity
22
The Crimes of Giordano Bruno
in northern Europe, the Roman Catholic Church became increasingly intolerant of unorthodox beliefs. In 1520 Pope Leo x issued his papal bull against Martin Luther. The Pope condemned the heret ical
writings of Luther as ‘blinded in mind by the father of lies’ – the
Devil. The Pope denounced Luther by saying ‘a new Porphyry has
arisen.’ This shows Porphyry’s extremely inimical role for Christians
at the start of the Protestant Reformation.
Meanwhile, in 1510 a 37yearold Nicolaus Copernik became
a canon of the cathedral chapter of Frombork (Frauenburg) in
Poland. Privately, he drafted a manuscript, Commentariolus, on
the theory that the Sun, planets and stars do not circle the Earth.
Instead, Copernicus argued that the Sun is at the centre of planetary
motions, that the Earth is a planet. Some of his friends, including
the Cardinal of Capua and the Bishop of Culm, encouraged him
to publish, but he resisted. Why? He did not publish his theory
until more than three decades later, when he prepared to print De
Revolutionibus. He dedicated the book to Pope Paul iii, telling the
Pope that it was good to ‘follow the example of the Pythagoreans
and certain others, who used to transmit philosophy’s secrets only
to kinsmen and friends, not in writing but by word of mouth, as is
shown by Lysis’ letter to Hipparchus’. In this preface, Copernicus
also took the opportunity to criticize those who stupidly argued
about mathematical topics without understanding them. In this
connection, he briefly criticized Lactantius, an ancient Christian
authority, noting that although he was a celebrated writer, h
e was
not a mathematician. Copernicus complained that Lactantius spoke
in a childish way about the shape of the Earth, in saying that it is
‘ridiculous’ that its shape is spherical. 24
In the ancient works of Cicero and ‘Plutarch’ (the Placita philosophorum), Copernicus found reference to various Pythagoreans, including Philolaus, who claimed that the Earth spins or moves. 25
The Placita stated: ‘Some insist that the Earth is immovable; but
Philolaus the Pythagorean says that it moves circularly around the
central fire, in an oblique circle like the Sun.’
Copernicus also discussed the allegedly divine significance of the
Sun. He noted that Plato had argued that to become godlike one
must know the Sun, the Moon and the heavenly bodies. Copernicus
added that some people called the Sun the ruler of the universe,
that ‘Trismegistus called it a visible god, and Sophocles’ Electra, the
23
burned alive
allseeing. Thus indeed, as though seated on a royal throne, the Sun
governs the family of planets revolving around it. ’26
Copernicus was so impressed by the Pythagoreans that he had
planned to include the ancient Pythagorean letter from Lysis to
Hipparchus in De Revolutionibus. Copernicus translated it from the
Greek and included it in a draft, but for some reason he deleted
it before the book was printed, though it was later found in his
manuscripts. There, Lysis allegedly wrote:
I would never have believed that after Pythagoras’ death his
followers’ brotherhood would be dissolved. But now that
we have unexpectedly been scattered hither and yon, as if
our ship had been wrecked, it is still an act of piety to recall
his godlike teachings and refrain from communicating the
treasures of Philosophy to those who have not even dreamed
about the purification of the soul. For it is indecent to divulge
to everybody what we achieved with such great effort, just
as the Eleusinian goddesses’ secrets27 may not be revealed to the uninitiated. The perpetrators of either of these misdeeds
would be condemned as equally wicked and impious . . . That
godlike man prepared the lovers of philosophy . . . divine and
human doctrines were promulgated by him.
This letter would have ended Book 1 of his De Revolutionibus. The
life of Copernicus concluded with the end of his secrecy: he died in
1543 just hours after he received a copy of his printed book.
To understand originality it is common to compare innovators
to their predecessors. Long before Copernicus some astronomers
such as Aristarchus had argued that the Earth circles the Sun. But
Copernicus hardly knew about the theory of Aristarchus, since its
main account came to light in 1544, months after Copernicus died,
when The Sandreckoner by Archimedes was first printed in Europe.
Copernicus had vaguely heard about it, since he mentioned it very
briefly in a manuscript: ‘Philolaus believed in the mobility of the
Earth and some say that Aristarchus of Samos was of that opinion. ’28 But Copernicus did not specify this in his book; he omitted the sentence along with his translation of the ‘Letter from Lysis’.
Another account had appeared in 1440 when the German theologian Nicholas of Cusa had argued that the Earth moves and ‘is 24
The Crimes of Giordano Bruno
not the centre of the world’. But he did not say that the Earth orbits
the Sun, just that the Earth is a star and moves the least of all the
heavenly bodies, as it orbits a centre that is essentially God. He also
spoke of the inhabitants of Earth and the stars:
It cannot be said that this place of the world is inhabited by
men & animals and vegetables that in degree are more ignoble
than the inhabitants of the region of the Sun & other stars.
For although God is the centre & the circumference of all
the stellar regions, & although from Him there arise in each
region inhabitants of diverse natural nobility, so that not all
the celestial & stellar places are empty, & that perhaps lesser
beings do not inhabit this Earth alone; still, given the intellectual nature that inhabits this Earth & its region, it does not seem that, according to the order of nature, there could be
a more noble or more perfect nature, even if there are other
kinds of inhabitants in the other stars: man does not desire
another nature, except only perfection in his own [nature]. 29
In contradistinction, Copernicus voiced no such discussions about
the inhabitants of other stars or planets. In 1484 Nicholas of Cusa
became a cardinal, yet his arguments about the Earth’s subtle motion
did not convince or grab the attention of astronomers. The substantive, mathematical work of Copernicus, however, generated plenty of attention. More than Nicholas of Cusa’s theory, that of Copernicus
seemed to resemble the ancient Pythagorean claim that the Earth
orbits a central fire, if at least one misconstrued that central fire as
the Sun. Indeed, what educated readers widely knew, thanks to the
famous Aristotle, was that some Pythagoreans wrongly said that
the Earth moves. Hence Copernicus seemed to revive or refine the
theory of the Pythagoreans.
Still, it is inappropriate to call Copernicus a Pythagorean because
the beliefs that he explicitly shared with them, at least overtly, were
few. 30 Yet it seems that he practised their secrecy as he painstakingly developed the theory that he attributed to them. And in writing,
by explicitly referring to the Pythagoreans, he effectively connected
the new and radical astronomy to the legendary pagan cult. In turn,
the critics and admirers of Copernicus both linked his theory to the
Pythagoreans.
25
burned alive
In 1542 Pope Paul iii established the Supreme Sacred Congregation
of the Roman and Universal Inquisition. Its official function was ‘to
maintain and defend the integrity of the faith and to examine and
proscribe errors and false doctrines’. It served as the final court of
appeal in trials of heresy.
Soon after Copernicus died – that is, promptly after his book
was printed – the main censor in Rome decided to condemn the
book. His name was Bartolomeo Spina and as Master of the Sacred
Palace, chief theologian for the Pope, it was among his duties to
sanction the printing of all religious books, and to censure heretical
publications.
We know about his objections only because, at the time, the
Dominican friar Giovanni Maria Tolosani specified in a manuscript
that Master Spina had intended to condemn the work of Copernicus
but was impeded by illness. Tolosani criticized Copernicus’s book
at length, for idiotically disregarding Aristotle’s critiques of the
Pythagoreans and for contradicting the Bible. Tolosani rejected
‘the false imagination’ of the Pythagoreans for having said that ‘the
Earth, existing as one of the stars’, circles around a central fire. Friar
Tolosani warned:
the contrived Pythagorean opinion has long deserved to be
extinct yet once again it rises though directly contrary to
human reason and against the sacred writings, from w
hich
easily there can arise quarrels between the Catholic expositors of divine Scripture and those whose obstinate mind adheres to false opinions. This small work of ours has been
written to prevent such a scandal from happening.31
But Tolosani’s manuscript, dated 1546, remained unpublished, and his
friend Spina died that year. Other important deliberations occupied
the clergy, especially the Council of Trent, which transpired from
1545 to 1563. With it, the Catholic Church reintroduced the medieval
persecution of heresies in a severe but highly bureaucratic way.
In the late 1550s the Roman Catholic Church also established
the Index of Forbidden Books, to either prohibit or censure offensive
works in order to prevent the spread of heresies, including Protestant
beliefs. The precise definition of heresy became a subject of debate
after the Council of Trent had led to the systematic establishment
26
The Crimes of Giordano Bruno
of the Inquisitional courts and the Index of Forbidden Books.
Officially proclaimed heresies justified the death penalty; erroneous or distasteful opinions instead usually concluded by requiring that the culprit voice an abjuration. Nevertheless, there was an initial
period in which the Inquisitors themselves tried to carry out a policy
that favoured toleration and peaceful persuasion. However, as ever
more Protestants abandoned Catholicism, the Popes at the Vatican
enacted increasingly severe measures of punishment, including the
death penalty.
By the 1590s and early 1600s various officials of the Catholic
Church became increasingly hostile to pagan beliefs, just as they
rejected Protestant beliefs. In that period cardinals and consultors
of the Roman Inquisition as well as members of the Congregation
of the Index of Forbidden Books examined and denounced various Pythagorean beliefs. Such developments echoed the previous conflict in which early Church Fathers, from roughly 150 to 550 ce,
criticized and denounced Pythagorean beliefs as false and heretical.
Once again, prominent Christians criticized the infectious speculations of philosophers. Pythagoras appeared in books on astrology, divination and demonology. But soon Galileo’s telescopic discoveries seemed to suggest that maybe, just maybe, Pythagoras was right: there were landscapes on the Moon; it was another world.
The trials of Giordano Bruno and Galileo Galilei were caused
Burned Alive: Bruno, Galileo and the Inquisition Page 3