In this trial, The Liberal Judge argues in favor of the importance of embracing and reconciling new discoveries. When new discoveries are in conflict with established authority, The Liberal Judge is unafraid of modifying functioning systems to more accurately reflect objective truth. He or she is an advocate for informed faith and believes in courageously seeking truth even when accompanied by personal or societal peril. 

Historical Example

Cardinal Francesco Barberini is a good example of the character of The Liberal Judge during Galileo's trial. As a member of the powerful Barberini family, he held a senior position in the Catholic Church and was a close advisor to Pope Urban VIII. In addition, he was the Grand Inquisitor who presided over the sentencing of Galileo. 

Recognizing the need to reconcile the progression of human knowledge while maintaining the Church's authority, Barberini was known for his lenient stance towards Galileo. He led a faction of cardinals that sought to temper but definitively support Galileo's scientific explorations. He was one of the three tribunal members who refused to condemn Galileo, a significant act in light of the fact that the majority verdict found Galileo “vehemently suspect of heresy.” 

Special Powers

As a member of the clergy, you have a right to participate in the Ecumenical Council concerning Galileo's treatise. During this Council, you may offer arguments or refute arguments presented by opponents. 

As a judge, you will call for a hearing to evaluate Galileo's culpability. You must obtain general consent from all the Conservative and Liberal Judges. During the hearing, these judges will preside. As a judge, it will be your responsibility to hear, accept, or reject arguments from the various participants of the hearing, but you may not introduce arguments for consideration. As a judge, you can accept any arguments suggested, but these can later be refuted. As a believer in unbiased law, you cannot reject sound arguments.