1 The Beginning of the Galileo Affair 1615 Letter from Father Lorini to Cardinal Sgondrati February 7 1615 All our fathers of this devout convent of St Mark are of the opinion that the letter contains many propositions which appear to be suspicious or presumptuous as when it asserts that the language of Holy Scripture does not mean what it seems to mean that in discussions about natural phenomena the last and lowest place ought to be given to the authority of the sacred text that its commentators have very often erred in their interpretation that the Holy Scriptures should not be mixed up with anything except matters of religion Ever mindful of our vow to be the black and white of the Holy Office when I saw that they the Galileists expounded the Holy Scriptures according to their private lights and in a manner different from that of the common interpretation of the Fathers of the Church that they strove to defend an opinion which appeared to be quite contrary to the sacred text that they spoke in slighting terms of the ancient Fathers and of St Thomas Aquinas that they were treading underfoot the entire philosophy of Aristotle which has been of such service to Scholastic theology and in fine that to show their cleverness they were airing and scattering broadcast in our steadfast Catholic city a thousand saucy and irreverent surmises when I say I because aware of all this I made up my mind to acquaint your Lordship with the state of affairs that you in our holy zeal for the Faith may in conjunction with your most illustrious colleagues provide such remedies as will appear advisable I who hold that those who call themselves Galileists are orderly men and good Christians all but a little overwise and conceited in their opinions declare that I am actuated by nothing in this business but zeal for the sacred cause Source Arthur Koestler Sleepwalkers 1959 Letter from Monsignor Piero Dini to Galileo March 3 1615 With Bellarmine I spoke at length of the things you had written And he said that as to Copernicus there is no question of his book being prohibited the worst that might happen according to him would be the addition of some material in the margins of that book to the effect that Copernicus had introduced his theory in order to save the appearances or some such thing just as others had introduced epicycles without thereafter believing in their existence And with a similar precaution you may at any time deal with these matters If things are fixed according to the Copernican system it does not appear presently that they would have any greater obstacle in the Bible than the passage the sun exults as a strong man to run his course etc which all expositors up to now have understood by attributions motion to the sun And although I replied that this also could be explained as a concession or our ordinary forms of expression I was told in answer that this was not a thing to be done in haste just a s the 2 condemnation of any of these opinions was not to be passionately hurried I can only rejoice for you Source Arthur Koestler Sleepwalkers 1959 Letter from Cardinal Bellarmine to Cardinal Foscarini April 12 1615 My Very Reverend Father It has been a pleasure to me to read the Italian letter and the Latin paper you sent me I thank you for both the one and the other and I may tell you that I found them replete with skill and learning As you ask for my opinion I will give it as briefly as possible because at the moment you have very little time for reading and I have very little time for writing 1 It seems to me that your Reverence and Signor Galileo act prudently when you content yourselves with speaking hypothetically and not absolutely as I have always understood that Copernicus spoke To say that on the supposition of the Earth s movement and the Sun s quiescence all the celestial appearances are explained better than by the theory of eccentrics and epicycles is to speak with excellent good sense and to run no risk whatever Such a manner of speaking is enough for a mathematician But to want to affirm that the Sun in very truth is at the center of the universe and only rotates on its axis without going from east to west is a very dangerous attitude and one calculated not only to arouse all Scholastic philosophers and theologians but also to injure our holy faith by contradicting the Scriptures Your Reverence has clearly shown that there are several ways of interpreting the Work of God but you have not applied these methods to any particular passage and had you wished to expound by the method of your choice all the texts which you have cited I feel certain that you would have met with the very greatest difficulties 2 As you are aware the Council of Trent forbids the interpretation of the Scriptures in a way contrary to the common opinion of the holy Fathers Now if your Reverence will read not merely the Fathers but modern commentators on Genesis the Psalms Ecclesiastes and Joshua you will discover that all agree in interpreting them literally as teaching that the Sun is in the heavens and revolves round the Earth with immense speed and that the Earth is very distant from the heavens at the center of the universe and motionless Consider then in your prudence whether the Church can tolerate that the Scriptures should be interpreted in a manner contrary to that of the holy Fathers and of all modern commentators both Latin and Greek It will not do to say that this is not a matter of faith because though it may not be a matter of faith ex parte objecti or as regards the subject treated yet it is a matter of faith ex parte dicentis or as regards him who enounces it Thus he who should deny that Abraham had two sons and Jacob twelve would be just as much a heretic as a man who should deny the Virgin Birth of Christ because it is the Holy Spirit who makes known both truths by the mouth of the Prophets and Apostles 3 3 If there were a real proof that the Sun is in the center of the universe that the Earth is in the third heaven and that the Sun does not go round the Earth the Earth round the Sun then we should have to proceed with great circumspection in explaining passages of Scripture which appear to teach the contrary and rather admit that we did not understand them than declare an opinion to be false which is proved to be true But as for myself I shall not believe that there are such proofs until they are shown to me Nor is it a proof that if the Sun be supposed at the center of the universe and
View Full Document
Unlocking...