We agree on some facts, but I don't know about the rest. I'm sure the churchmen who forced Galileo to renounce the solar system and confess heresy had what they felt were sufficient reasons for their actions. But it doesn't matter if he had dropped trou and mooned the entire College of Cardinals; I don't believe what they did to him can ever be justified. I have no interest in any attempt to whitewash the affair. Whatever their motivations -- the result speaks for itself: The Crime of Galileo: Indictment and Abjuration of 1633.
You're conflating two seperate issues, I think.
The frist is whether what they did to him was wrong. On this, I don't think it's possible to argue otherwise. What was done was wrong, period, and there's no whitewashing. In this regard, their motives are irrelevent.
The second is whether they were dogmatically comitted to geocentrism. This is a seperate question with a more nuanced answer. The facts, I think, indicate the following: they were not dogmatically committed to it, but they were reluctant to abandon it and would not do it without more evidence.
I know we are in full agreement on the first issue. To what extent do you agree with me about the second?