GALILEO AND HIS JUDGES. 25 



three theological treatises, presumes to discuss the 

 sacred science, himself an amateur, with men whose 

 profession it is to teach theology ; for, to use a 

 familiar expression, I hope I know my place better. 

 I employ the word in the sense of a man who seeks 

 to know what the Church teaches as requisite for 

 a layman, that is an educated layman, to understand : 

 thus the lay theologian, as I consider him, ought 

 to be able to discriminate between what the Church 

 teaches him as matter of faith and what she enjoins 

 or encourages him to hold under a less solemn 

 sanction. He ought also to distinguish clearly 

 between matters laid down by the Church as parts 

 of her definitive teaching both on faith and morals 

 points, that is to say, laid down as of principle, 

 and therefore irrevocable and on the other hand 

 matters of discipline which, whether intrinsically 

 important or not, may and do vary from age to age. 

 He may of course make mistakes, as even theologians 

 may do, in applying his principles to particular cases ; 

 but he ought to understand what the principles 

 are. 



Now applying such plain principles to the Galileo 

 case, I do not understand how any one can come 

 to any other conclusions than these : first, that the 

 decree of the Index and the other proceedings in 

 1616, though founded on reasons of doctrine, that 

 is of the correct interpretation of Scripture, were 

 purely disciplinary in their nature ; secondly, that 

 this being so, they were not infallible or irreform- 



