> Should we rely on the Inquisition's records as reference to judge Giordano Bruno Internal records of an organization with little opposition and little reason

> Should we rely on the Inquisition's records as reference to judge Giordano Bruno Internal records of an organization with little opposition and little reason to falsify them at the time? Do you have other sources that paint a different picture? The church certainly did not have a monopoly on paper. > you know, the very similar arguments for which Galileo was persecuted by the Inquisition during 20 years. So arguments for which Galileo was never executed? Arguments for which Galileo was merely put under house arrest after years of disputes and insults exchanged between him an the highest offices of the church? Your example doesn't help to prove your point. > Bruno relentlessly argued that thinkers should be free to inquire, reason, and speak From which you get such things like "vaccines cause autism", there is a need for someone to keep an eye on self proclaimed "thinkers", especially the ones spouting nonsense. It doesn't help that (afaik) the Copernican model was too simple to account for various observations and could be shown to be worse than the complex models used for the geocentric model, which caused even Galileo some trouble.