lSi6.] in Joshua, respecting the 



are not e\eu nnmbcred. But, if the 

 primitive sacred writers had entertained 

 the thought of persnadiiig the people of 

 the dispositions of the movements of the 

 celestial bodies, they would not have 

 riaid so little, which is like a nothing in 

 comparison to the infinite lofty and ad- 

 mirable conclusions contained in that 

 science. 



Your paternity will therefore see, un- 

 less I am mistaken, how disordinately 

 thos» proceed, who, in natural disputes, 

 and which do not immediately belong to 

 the faith, establish prima Jacie, and 

 agreeably to the literal sense, passages of 

 Scripture frequently misunderstood by 

 th6m. But if such truly believe that 

 they have the right sense of any par- 

 ticular passage of Scripture, and conse- 

 qnently think themselves securely in 

 possession of the real truth of the (]ues- 

 tion they mean to dispute, I fully con- 

 cur with them in opinion, that he has a 

 great advantage who, in a natural dispu- 

 tation, undertakes to maintain the truth; 

 an advantage, I say, above all otiiers, 

 over him who engages to maintain that 

 which is false. I know that the answer 

 will be Yes; and that he who sustains the 

 true side may have a thousand proofs 

 aud a thousand demonstrations in his 

 favour, while the other can have notSiin^ 

 beside sophisms, subtilities, and fallacies. 

 But if, keeping within natural bounds, 

 and producing no other weapon beside 

 philcsojjhy, they know themselves fo be 

 superior to the adversary, why not enter 

 at once into the conflict with an infallible 

 •aUd tremendous weapon, the sight of 

 which alone, according to them, is ca- 

 jrablc of terrifying tlie most dexterous 

 and expert champion? If I must speak 

 the truth, however, I think they would 

 be the first to be terrified, aud that feel- 

 ing themselves unable to resist the as- 

 saults of the adversary, they endeavour 

 10 find tiie means of shunning him. But 

 because, aslha\esaid above, he who 

 has the truth on his side, has a great, nay, 

 a very great, advantage over the adver- 

 .sary ; and because it is impossible that 

 tWo truths should contradict each other; 

 wc ought not fo dread any assaults, from 

 whatever quartc- they may come, pro- 

 vided we may be allowed also to speak, 

 and to be heard by intelligent persons, 

 Bucli as are not under the entire govern- 

 ment of preposterous passions aud ia- 

 tfercofs. 



In confirmation of this, I proceed now 

 to the particular passage of Joshua, on 

 t<ie Ruhjcct of which you made three 

 ^cclaratiuxis to tfatir Scrcnv ilighae^cs ; 



Staniing-stitl of the Sun. 109 



and I lake the third, which you brought 

 forward as mine, as in reality it is, but 

 shall add some further considerations, 

 which I do not recollect to have com<> 

 muuicatcd to you before. 



I admit, therefore, and concede to the 

 adversary for the present, that the word* 

 of the Sacred Text are to be taken in tho 

 express sense in which they are couclied, 

 namely, that God, at the intercession of 

 Joshua, caused the sun to stend still, and 

 prolonged the day, so as to enable him 

 to gain the victory ; but, requiring alsA 

 for myself, that the same determination 

 shall be valid for me, as if the adversary 

 had not presumed to bind, but to leave 

 free, as to the ixr.ver of changing, the 

 significations of llie words, I say, that 

 this passage maiiileslly shews us the is^ 

 sity and impossibility of the mundane 

 system of Aristotle and Ptolemy, and^ 

 on the other hand, is fitly adapted to iht 

 Copernican. 



1st. I demand of the adversary if he 

 knows how many motions the sun has.* 

 If he knows this, he is forced to reply 

 that it has two motions, namely, thtf 

 annual motion from the west to the cast, 

 and the diurnal Irom the east to iHvt 

 west. Hence, 



2ndly. I ask him if tbeye two motiont, 

 thus diverse, aud, as it were, contrary to 

 each other, belong to the sun, aud are 

 equally proper to it. He is forced to 

 reply negatively, and to confess that one 

 alone is true, proper, and particular; to 

 wit, the annual ; t!ie other belonging to 

 i\\eprimuni mobile in twenty-four hour^ 

 &c. contrary, as it were, to the Jiiotioiis 

 of the planets it impels. 



3dly. I ask him which of the motions 

 produces the day and inght. He is 

 forced to reply that oHhb pri»mim tnolile; 

 and that on the sun depend the diS^ 

 ferent seasons, and the entire year. 



Now, if the day depends, not on the 

 motion of the sun, but on this primirm 

 mobile, who does not see that, to prolong 

 the day, it is necessary to stop the yri- 

 mum mobile, and not the suji? Wlio, 

 therefore, with a knowledge of these sim- 

 ple elements of astronomy, does not also 

 know that if God had stopped tlie mo- 

 tion of the sun, instead of prolonging^ 

 the day, He would have contracted it, 

 and made it shorter? For this reason — 

 that the motion of the sun being con- 

 trary to the diurnal conversion, the more 

 the sun should move towards the east, 



• In the original — " di tjuanti viuvimenti 

 si muove il sole :" With how insDy niotioat 

 tlM sua BioveCk 



