Of the Belation of Tradition to Paloitiology. 267 



unsettled. While, on the other hand, a too protracted and 

 obstinate resistance to the innovation, on the part of the scrip- 

 tural expositors, would tend to identify, at least in the minds 

 of many, the authority of the Scripture with the truth of the 

 exposition ; and therefore would bring discredit upon the re- 

 vealed word, when the established interpretation was finally 

 proved to be untenable. 



A rule on this subject, propounded by some of the most en- 

 lightened dignitaries of the Roman Catholic church, on the 

 occasion of the great Copernican controversy begun by Galileo, 

 seems well worthy of our attention. The following was the 

 opinion given by Cardinal Bellarmine at the time : — " When 

 a demonstration shall be found to establish the earth's motion, 

 it will be proper to interpret the sacred Scriptures otherwise 

 than they have hitherto been interpreted in those passages 

 where mention is made of the stability of the earth and move- 

 ment of the heavens." This appears to be a judicious and 

 reasonable maxim f?)r such cases in general. So long as the 

 supposed scientific discovery is doubtful, the exposition of the 

 meaning of Scripture given by commentators of established 

 credit is not wantonly to be disturbed : but when a scientific 

 theory, irreconcilable with this ancient interpretation, is 

 clearly proved, we must give up the interpretation, and seek 

 some new mode of understanding the passage in question, by 

 means of which it may be consistent with what we know ; for 

 if it be not, our conception of the things so described is no 

 longer consistent with itself. 



It may be said that this rule is indefinite, for who shall de- 

 cide when a new theory is completely demonstrated, and the 

 old interpretation become untenable \ But to this we may 

 reply, that if the rule be assented to, its application will not 

 be very difficult. For when men have admitted as a general, 

 rule, that the current interpretations of scriptural expression.' j 

 respecting natural objects and events may possibly require, 

 and in some cases certainly will require, to be abandoned, a nd 

 new ones admitted, they will hardly allow themselves to CK)n- 

 tend for such interpretations as if they were essential parte of 

 revelation ; and will look upon the change of exposition, whe- 

 ther it come sooner or later, without alarm or anger. And 

 when men lend themselves to the progress of truth in this 



