How Galileo’s 17th-Century Theology Can Help the Church Better Understand Gender Today

Today’s post is from guest contributor Craig A. Ford (he/him), an Assistant Professor of Theology and Religious Studies at St. Norbert College in De Pere, Wisconsin. He also serves on the faculty of the Institute of Black Catholic Studies at Xavier University of Louisiana, the nation’s only Catholic Historically Black College or University (HBCU). He writes on topics at the intersection of gender, race, sexuality, and the Catholic moral tradition. Craig recently spoke as part of New Ways Ministry’s panel, “What Dignitas Infinita Ignored: Perspectives on LGBTQ+ Dignity,” which is available here.

Just about four months ago, I wrote an article titled “Our New Galileo Affair” that was published in the theology journal Horizons. The core of its argument was this: the actions taken on the part of the Vatican today related to sexual orientation and gender identity resemble, in uncomfortably analogous ways, the official statements and actions taken by the Vatican in the 17th century against astronomer Galileo Galilei. The actions taken against Galileo number among the most embarrassing in the Church’s history. Galileo was condemned as a heretic because he believed—rightly, as we know now—that the sun rests at the center of our planetary system, while the earth and all the other planets revolve around it. The Vatican shouldn’t make the same mistakes it did in the 17th century again in the 21st.

Many of us are familiar with Galileo’s wrongful condemnation, but perhaps less familiar is Galileo’s extremely insightful theological argument. This theological argument was needed while the science was still in development in order to convince others why it would be unwise for the Vatican to issue a condemnation of heliocentrism prematurely. This would be no easy feat, since (1) the dominant model at the time, Ptolemy’s geocentric system, with the earth at the center of the planetary system, was widely accepted as as a scientific model, and since (2) many people believed that geocentrism was supported by scripture (e.g., Ecclesiastes 1:5 and Joshua 10:12-13). Galileo had to marshal his theological argument both against the accepted science of the day, as well as against what was taken to be God’s revelation in Holy Scripture.

Drawing on the authority of St. Augustine, the most influential theologian in the Western Christian world, Galileo essentially argued two things. First, that science and revelation are two pathways to one singular truth about the world that God created. So, at the end of the day, they can’t contradict each other. And second, in cases where the science is underdeveloped and may seem to contradict historically-established Church teaching, the prudential path directs one not to preemptively disparage the scientific process. Instead, prudence counsels patience. Augustine said it this way:

“In matters that are obscure and far beyond our vision…different interpretations are sometimes possible without prejudice to the faith we have received. In such a case, we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search of truth justly undermines this position, we too fall with it.” (Augustine, The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 1.18.37)

And Galileo, applying Augustine’s reasoning to his own situation, echoed Augustine in the following way:

“I should think that it would be proper to ascertain the facts first, so that they could guide us in finding the true meaning of Scripture; this would be found to agree absolutely with demonstrated facts, even though prima facie the words would sound otherwise, since two truths cannot contradict each other.” (Galileo, “Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina”)

Because of the Vatican’s resistance, we know that Galileo was not persuasive. Today, on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, we are again witnessing Vatican resistance. One need only turn to recent documents like Dignitas Infinita and Fiducia Supplicans to see that this is the case. But given how many theologians and philosophers affirm the givenness and goodness of homosexuality and trans identities—and furthermore, given how many scientists are doing the same—I believe those of us calling for a full embrace of our LGBTQ+ siblings are going to turn out to be right as well. The lives and loves of LGBTQ+ people magnify the divine light in this world; they do not diminish it.

In addressing homosexuality and trans identity, the Church must take a lesson from its own past—and not a drastic one, either. The lesson, as Augustine and Galileo counsel, is to take a posture of listening. The Church should embrace the “grace of self-doubt,” as Margaret Farley offers in her essay, “Ethics, Ecclesiology, and the Grace of Self Doubt.” It should embrace the wisdom offered by the late Richard Gaillardetz in his essay “Power and Authority in the Church: For “if the Church is a pilgrim Church,” as we see it described in Lumen Gentium no. 46, then “its official teachers must share in that pilgrim status.”

The lesson, in other words, is to let the process of listening and learning continue, and to put the condemnations to rest. In his 1992 speech on the Galileo Affair, John Paul II acknowledged Galileo as having “showed himself to be more perceptive in this regard than the theologians who opposed him.” Nothing less is owed to the memory of Galileo, and nothing less is owed to LGBTQ+ people whose lives and loves testify to the goodness of the God who created the sun, moon, and stars to which Galileo dedicated his life.

—Craig A. Ford, May 15, 2024