The Galileo Effect

When conviction collides with institutional fear

By Noah Alsamman

One hundred sixteen years after Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to the door of the Wittenberg church, the Catholic church found its influence waning as Protestant-Catholic tensions reached an all-time high across Europe. Faced with theological fracture, the church was resigned to two choices: adapt to a divided Christian landscape, or defend its authority more aggressively.

Though the church’s direct political power had diminished across much of the continent, it still exercised decisive control within its own institutional boundaries—particularly over matters of doctrine and interpretation. Within this climate of post-Reformation rivalry, and amid the Thirty Years’ War, Galileo Galilei stood trial in what would become one of the most famous legal cases in ecclesiastical history.

His accuser was not a hostile adversary, but close friend and former patron Pope Urban VIII. Galileo’s heresy: the claim that the earth moves around the sun. The trial concluded with Galileo convicted of “vehement suspicion of heresy” and sentenced to house arrest for the remainder of his life.

Galileo died in 1642 with his defense of heliocentrism still fiercely criticized. His theory would not be widely accepted by the scientific community until the last years of the 17th century. Still, through his refinements of the telescope and his research, Galileo helped ignite one of the most transformative periods of intellectual progress in human history—the scientific revolution and, eventually, the Enlightenment.

Since his trial, Galileo has been used as a symbol for countless cultural and social movements. He represents the fight for intellectual freedom and resistance to dogmatic systems. Today, he is championed as the father of modern science and an early proponent of the scientific method.

I see something missing from this discussion, something beyond intellectual integrity and the pursuit of truth. A devout Catholic, Galileo could not stand to see the church he loved operate behind a façade. For him, the language of faith included science; the study of the natural world echoed the beauty of creation. If Scripture was the map, the natural world was the key. The greatest resistance to his pursuit of truth was not lack of belief, but fear from the church itself.

Galileo was not only a scientific hero, he was a spiritual and religious one. As a devout Christian, he questioned religious authorities in pursuit of a vision of the kingdom that others could not yet see. In that way, his story reminds me of a certain Jewish Nazarene. I call this pattern—faithful conviction colliding with institutional resistance—and its resulting movement of change, the Galileo Effect.

First-century Judea was hectic, to say the least. Four hundred years post-exile, only to find a homecoming under imperial Roman captivity, the culture stood at a tipping point. Jewish prophecy had grown increasingly apocalyptic, and talk of a Messiah was everywhere. Being a faithful Jew was no longer as clear-cut as it had been in the days of the Davidic kingship. Leadership was fractured, and the path forward was clouded.

Some Jews found deeper devotion to the Mosaic Law, looking to groups like the Pharisees and Sadducees as authoritative guides. Others—like the Zealots—believed that reclaiming the promised land was the truest expression of faithfulness, often organizing resistance movements aimed at overthrowing Roman rule and living by the conviction, “No king but God.”

Both paths were flawed. Religious authorities, all too human, were susceptible to corruption, turning the sacred temple into a marketplace and faith into a system of control. Alongside them, the Zealots turned to violence as a means of liberation. By every metric, it was a lose-lose situation. Israel lived in fear, desperate for guidance and searching for deliverance wherever it might appear.

This was the climate Jesus stepped into, and it wasn’t long before he caught the attention of the entire region. He confronted Zealots with his radical vision of peace and countered religious authorities through his reinterpretation of tradition. Jesus was an anomaly, refusing both violence and institutional control. His positions stood directly against the status quo. It didn’t matter whose side you were on; Jesus challenged them all.

We see His challenging words and actions throughout the Gospels. In Matthew, Jesus began his ministry by casting out demons, healing the sick and calling His disciples. Just seven chapters in, He made a bold statement by healing a centurion’s servant. Beyond the act itself, His response to the centurion’s faith was powerful: “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith” (Matthew 8:10). Jesus’ message was unmistakable: grace is not exclusive to the oppressed.

His aversion to the status quo is most evident in His repeated conflicts with the Pharisees and Sadducees. In Luke, they watched closely to see whether He would heal on the Sabbath. By this point, Jesus had drawn the attention of Galilee; crowds gathered eagerly to see what He would do next. The narrative was clear: the Pharisees felt threatened. Who was this Nazarene, not formally trained among the scribes, who dared to question the Law of Moses?

By their interpretation, the Mosaic rules were simple. Working on the Sabbath was forbidden, and by definition they were acting justly. The moment is easy to picture: Jesus in the synagogue teaching; a man with a withered hand, desperate for healing; a crowd holding its breath; religious authorities gritting their teeth.

The tension was tangible. Jesus knew the environment, and He knew this moment would have consequences. He could have healed in secret, as He had many times before. Instead, He called the man into the center of the crowd. He looked around at faces filled with fear and confusion and asked, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?” (Luke 6:9). He told the man to stretch out his hand—and before them all, he was healed.

One might have expected awe, relief, even celebration. Surely this was the Messiah, that much should be clear to the crowd. No more fear, no more oppression, no more suffering. The response from the Pharisees was the opposite: “But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law were furious and began to discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus” (Luke 6:11).

When leaders trade curiosity and hope for rules and control, the result is stagnation—not faithfulness. Authority comes in many forms, embodied not only by religious leaders, but also by unyielding ideologies that refuse to relinquish violence as a means of revolution.

Organizations and institutions themselves were never the issue; but rather a fear of change and an absence of curiosity. A fellowship led by fear of consequence is no longer concerned with growth. A community that lives to avoid failure misses the course of progress. The failure of the Pharisees was not their theology, but their stubbornness and refusal to see beyond their own limited vision.

Jesus lived for a future that others could not imagine at the time, and He was punished as a result. I hear the cries of Jesus’ accusers shouting, “Crucify him,” and imagine the heartbreak He must have felt. It was not the act alone that shattered Him, but the identity of the accusers: His own people. As He hung on the cross and drew His final breath, He cried out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46). To be the first to speak, has consequences.

Sixteen hundred years later, Galileo found himself in a similar position. I imagine Galileo reflecting on that same scene as he stood trial for his faith, and I like to believe it was Christ’s courage that sustained him. Jesus questioned tradition and subverted expectations of a first-century Jewish leader. Similarly, Galileo introduced ideas that opposed the prevailing understanding of the natural world.

When a community becomes corporatized and overly systematic, it develops mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion. Rules are drawn, and the new guidelines are often a natural response to real problems. This process occurs over and over; new problems arise, new solutions are introduced and layers of restriction accumulate.

Eventually, these restrictions slow the momentum of progress and, if left unexamined, begin to produce regression. When solutions remain in place for disagreements that no longer exist, they function like unpruned weeds and drain life from the ecosystem they inhabit. This process is gradual and takes place beneath the surface and beyond the vision of those within the community.

Typically, it takes a new set of eyes to recognize what has gone wrong—but to those within the system, everything appears to be working as intended. After all, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. In this way, comfort becomes the real adversary.

Here, the true conflict takes place. One side sees flourishing, a history of overcoming obstacles and proven growth—while the other sees cracks in the foundation, outdated motives and dangerous blind spots. Naturally, authorities interpret questions of concern as attacks on their competence and misunderstand the critique. This cycle is self-sustaining, and, unless it is interrupted, meaningful change is impossible.

One of my favorite characters in the New Testament is the disciple Thomas. He plays a relatively minor role in the Synoptic Gospels, but in the Gospel of John, Thomas has his defining moment. Unfortunately, his story has been reduced to countless sermons on doubt and lack of faith, earning him the label “Doubting Thomas.”

After Jesus’ resurrection, the disciples were gathered together in disarray. When Jesus appeared among them, they were overwhelmed with joy. The narrative notes that Thomas was not present at this moment. When he later reunites with the others, they excitedly tell him, “We have seen the Lord!” (John 20:25). Thomas responds cautiously, saying that unless he sees the wounds in Jesus’ hands for himself, he cannot believe.

A week later, Jesus returns—this time with Thomas present. He holds out His hands and says, “Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas responds immediately, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28).

After this encounter, the historical narrative becomes less precise about the disciples’ individual journeys, but one tradition has endured: Thomas is believed to have traveled as far as India—over 2,500 miles—to share the message of Christ. The one remembered as the doubting disciple may have carried the message of Jesus farther than any other.

Thomas stands as a reminder that doubt is not disqualifying. Questioning is often a path to truth, and depth of character is forged not through certainty, but through the willingness to walk difficult terrain.

Leaders often recognize that growth requires outside perspectives but forget to acknowledge the unspoken reality: there is fear in what lies beyond familiarity. So, what is the solution to faithful conviction colliding with institutional resistance? How do we avoid damaging the vision of growth first sparked by a glimpse of the kingdom? Truthfully, I believe there is no solution. This cycle is inevitable, destined to repeat itself throughout history.

In October of 2024, I found myself feeling stuck. I was in between life chapters, flipping pages that never seemed to conclude and walking through a spiritual limbo. I knew what diagnosis would be assigned to me if I approached my pastor: I was the dreaded “lukewarm Christian.” The prescription: church twice a week, Bible studies, prayer groups. Simple enough.

It felt like trying to cure a cold by wearing a neck brace. I wasn’t resistant to faith; I was exhausted by the repetition and rigidity that had come to define it. Later that month, I flew to England to record a video series for a prominent pastor in London. For the sake of this discussion, I’ll call him James.

James was well-known in the British pastoral sphere, though not always for agreeable reasons. He pushed boundaries, entertained controversial ideas and fit poorly within traditional church molds. My expectations were surface-level. I was there to record, not to engage, and I certainly wasn’t anticipating any life-altering revelations.

On the day I met James to film, I was immediately struck by his gentle and soft-spoken nature. The video series was structured as a set of conversations—each session featuring a new guest, with James acting as an interviewer exploring their sphere of work. The guests included musicians, professors, government officials and schoolteachers, among others. In many of these conversations, God was not explicitly mentioned—but He didn’t need to be. The conversations themselves were evidence of His presence.

I sat, I recorded, I watched. Something shifted in me. I caught a glimpse of the kingdom. I witnessed people sharing truths they had learned and visions they had seen, all from wildly different backgrounds, all carrying different stories and convictions, all oriented toward helping those in need.

When asked by the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God would come, Jesus answered: “The Kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the Kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:20-21).

I see each of those guests as Galileos in their own right. They spoke of moments when they didn’t quite fit within the systems around them—when conviction pressed against comfort. Even in the discomfort, the vision of the kingdom within them was too compelling to ignore.

Though the cycle of authoritative friction may be inevitable, this does not mean institutions must be abandoned. Communities and organizations exist to create unity. They offer collaboration, belonging and hope to those who might otherwise live in isolation. The church stands among the most beautiful of these—a collective pursuance of a cause that exists beyond any single individual.

The key to building communities that remain alive and fruitful is not tighter control, but maintaining a posture of fervent curiosity. We must be willing to hear questions that unsettle our perspectives, and we cannot be afraid to live like Thomas. Our conversations are not ultimately about right and wrong, but about exchange, imagination and the gaze of possibility.

When Galileo first peered into the heavens, I imagine an awe beyond words, his childlike wonder in being the first human to see the craters of the moon in detail, the phases of Venus, the sunspots marking the life force of our universe. And yet, that wonder was eventually dragged into a courtroom, stripped of beauty and reduced to a pedantic debate. Inadvertently, his trial showed a lack of reverence for creation. The church sought to judge a man who had tried to look more closely at the heavens.

Sometimes our curiosity is silenced by others, and sometimes we silence it ourselves. But I believe it blooms from the Kingdom of God within each of us. As I reflect on these histories, I cannot help but wonder if there is a Galileo on trial somewhere right now. And I hope, when the moment comes, I am standing on the right side of the verdict.

—

Noah Alsamman is the audio and video editor for the AVAIL team and is based in Orlando, Florida. He is currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree in philosophy at the University of Central Florida. Noah has worked in music, film and storytelling as mediums of expression and communication