i28 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



nection with that history. Something, however, may be said of them 

 here. It is to be observed that the first proposition is condemned be- 

 cause it is contrary to scripture, heretical, false in theology, absurd 

 and foolish; and the second because, from a theological point of view 

 it is opposed to the true faith, false in philosophy and absurd. The 

 words not in italics relate to judgments upon points of doctrine. The 

 words in italics relate to judgments upon matters of philosophy or of 

 science. 



It was entirely competent for the Congregation of the Index to 

 render decisions upon matters of theology which were binding upon all 

 catholics. The committee was organized and existed for that purpose. 

 Every institution, religious or secular, must decide for itself on matters 

 of the sort. Not to do so is sheer suicide. The competence of the 

 Koman church and of the Congregation of the Index to decide for 

 itself questions of what is opposed to its faith, contrary to scripture, 

 false in theology, is not to be denied. This was a conflict of theology 

 with an alleged heresy. Copernicus was a member of the Eoman 

 Church. The soundness of his theological opinion was a matter for 

 doctors of theology to settle in their own church in their own way. 

 They did not decide it, however, until they had taken the advice of 

 astronomers who pronounced the heliocentric theory to be baseless. 

 (Delambre, 'Astronomie moderne,' i., p. 681.) Tycho Brahe, also — 

 a great authority — had declared it to be 'absurd and contrary to the 

 scriptures/ These two points are often forgotten by writers of the 

 Martyr-of-Science School. 



On the other hand, no one can admit for a moment the right or the 

 competence of the Congregation or of the Church to pronounce final 

 judgment upon a question of philosophy or of science. The whole 

 world is now agreed that it is an impertinence for a body of theologians 

 to pronounce upon a question of science, precisely as it would be for a 

 congress of scientific men to pronounce upon a point of theology. 



The reasons that led the Congregation of the Index to take this 

 fatal step must be considered in connection with the history of Galileo. 

 It will not be out of place here, however, to attempt to understand the ■ 

 mistaken point of view of the churchmen responsible for the decision. 



For fourteen hundred years the theory of Ptolemy had ruled. In 

 1543 Copernicus proposed a new and revolutionary system. In its 

 essential point the system was true, as we know now; we also know 

 that it was false in asserting that the planets moved in circular orbits 

 (they really move in ellipses), in accepting trepidation as an incident 

 to precession, and in other matters of the sort. It even asserted, 

 falsely, that the center of the orbit of the earth and not the sun 

 was the center of planetary motion, so that in a strict sense it was 

 not even a heliocentric theory. The theory of Copernicus was not 



