Dear Dean,

Thank you for your post, I will first introduce some historical background in order to shed some light on these common misconceptions.

To better understand the case of Galileo, we must first study the work of Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543), a respected scientist and canon of the church. As early as 1531 he introduced the idea of a heliocentric universe (the planets orbiting the sun) to Pope Clement VII, and later in 1543 published his theories on the "Revolution of the Celestial Orbits", which he dedicated to Pope Paul III. At the time the church had no official position on whether the sun goes around the earth or vice versa and welcomed this new hypothesis, which seemed to improve some of the theories of Aristotle and Ptolemy.

Galileo, already a renowned scientist in the field of physics, made new and important observations with his telescope around 1610, which strongly supported the Copernican theory over the greek geocentric model. The church, always supportive of science invited Galileo to Rome, where in 1611 he was honored by Pope Paul V and the Jesuits of the Roman College. Maffeo Cardinal Barberini, who would later become Pope Urban VIII became one of his biggest admirers.

At this point the situation begins to change. The church still had no objections to the use of the Copernican system as an elegant theoretical model whose literal truth was far from established, but which accounted for celestial phenomena more reliably than any other system. But other pressures, such as the increasingly frequent attacks by Protestants claiming that the church was allowing science to teach as fact, a theory contrary to scripture, Galileo was encouraged to continue his research, but instructed to teach his theories as as a hypothesis rather than fact, until proof could be obtained. Robert Cardinal Bellarmine pointed out in a letter, dated April 1615:

1. It is acceptable to maintain Copernicanism as a working hypothesis; and

2. if there were real proof that the earth circles the sun, "then we should have to proceed with great circumspection in explaining passages of Scripture which appear to teach the contrary..."

Galileo refused this middle ground, and convinced of the truth of his theory, began a campaign of beligerence and aggression against the church hierarchy, which had previously been well disposed toward him. His downfall came when he attempted to argue theology and exegesis with the curia. In the well known letter to Castelli, Galileo accepted the inerrancy of Scripture, but pointed out (correctly) the teachings of St Augustine who wrote:

One does not read in the gospel that the Lord said: I will send you the Paraclete who will teach you about the course of the sun and moon. For He willed to make them Christians, not mathematicians.

Galileo's timing could not have been worse. The church had just been through the bruising battles of the Reformation. One of the biggest quarrels with the protestants was over the private interpretation of Scripture. In 1616, the year of his first trial, Catholic theologians were in no mood to be instructed by a layman like Galileo. On February 26, 1616 a decree was issued instructing Galileo to relinquish Copernicanism and to "abstain altogether from teaching or defending this doctrine, and even from discussing it." The controversy seemed to have run its course until in 1633 Galileo wrote a play depicting the Pope as a simpleton. The writing was on the wall, the magisterium had lost its patience, and convicted Galileo of suspected heresy and sentenced him to house arrest.

Not a happy ending by any means, but certainly not the version portrayed by the "sound-bite" secular media. It's important to remember that the primary mission of holy mother church is to evangelize. While it has always championed science, the early church fathers took these things for granted. As St Ambrose wrote, "To discuss the nature and position of the earth does not help us in our hope of the life to come." Galileo had was given a multitude of opportunities to reconcile with the church, but he persisted with his program, which at the time, was simply politically unacceptable for the greater good of the faithful.

As to your further statements, generating a comprehensive answer to a rather broad area of inquiry is difficult at best. In general the church supported all types of scientific research, particularly in the medical field. It taught many subjects based on the findings of ancient greek science, but always had in mind the sanctity of life and the dignity of the human person. We believe in bodily resurrection, and as such research on human cadavers was at certain times restricted or prohibited to preserve the sanctity of the person. God works with imperfect tools and the decisions of church leaders must be seen in the light of the historical understandings of their time. We are protected from error in the teaching of the magisterium only in matters of faith and morals, not in the totality of everything the church does. 

Mistakes have happened and probably will continue to happen, after all we are sinners. The church is always first at admitting and attempting to rectify past errors. It might be encouraging for you to know that in 1822 Galileo's works were removed from the index of suspected heresies at the behest of Pope Pius VII and Copernicanism was presented as a physical fact and no longer a hypothesis.

Blessings
Brian