CHAPTER II.

Arguments in favor of Galileo.

But on the other hand, arguments are raised in favor of Galileo based on the authority of theologians who decreed that the books of Nicolaus Copernicus The Polish astronomer (1473–1543) who first formulated a comprehensive heliocentric cosmology, displacing the Earth from the center of the universe. regarding the revolutions of the celestial spheres—based on his observations made from the year 1525—should be committed to print, on the grounds that they contained nothing contrary to the Catholic faith. In those books, the motion of the earth and the fixed nature of the firmament (that is, the starry heaven) are discussed, as well as the sun’s residence in the center of our world. Nor does Galileo reveal anything fundamentally new beyond these other systems which were previously unknown. Therefore, if the books of Copernicus do not inconvenience the Catholic faith, neither will Galileo.

2. Likewise, Pope Paul III born Alessandro Farnese, Pope from 1534 to 1549., to whom Copernicus dedicated those books, and certain Cardinals (who, before the books were even published, busied themselves with having them transcribed at their own expense, as appears in the introductory letters), approved these same books. In the time of Paul III, the most brilliant minds flourished in the Church; for that Pope, most noble in spirit, virtue, and blood, decorated men summoned from everywhere with high dignities. Thus, it would be a wonder if those men were "moles" A metaphor for being blind to the truth or unable to see the light. regarding Copernicus, while our contemporaries, who are not of such great name, should be far more "sharp-eyed like Argus" In Greek mythology, Argus Panoptes was a giant with a hundred eyes; the author suggests modern critics are being overly scrutinizing compared to the wise leaders of the past. against Galileo, who relies on even more certain observations.

3. Likewise, after Copernicus, many others wrote in defense of the same opinion, including Erasmus Reinhold, Johannes Stadius, Michael Maestlin, Christopher Rothmann, and many others. Indeed, more recent mathematicians doubt they can construct accurate ephemerides Tables providing the positions of celestial bodies at specific intervals of time, essential for navigation and calendar-making. without Copernican calculations, or speak correctly about celestial motions without the ruin of the most certain mathematical principles and the testimony of the senses and all nations, unless they use the theses of Copernicus. These ideas are not even recent; for Domenico Maria Novara of Ferrara original: "Franciscus Maria Ferrariensis." The text likely refers to Domenico Maria de Novara, who was Copernicus's teacher and an early critic of the Ptolemaic system. taught before him that a new astronomy had to be forged from the observation of new appearances, which his disciple Copernicus then created.

4. Likewise, the most learned Cardinal Cusanus Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464), a German philosopher and cardinal who speculated that the Earth was in motion and that the universe was infinite. embraced this opinion and recognized other suns and other planets revolving in the starry firmament. And a certain "Nolan" A reference to Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), born in Nola, who was burned at the stake for heresy. His name was often omitted or whispered because of his execution., and others whom heresy does not permit me to name, defend this opinion. But they were not condemned for this specifically, as—