The right of the Congregation to take up the matter can hardly be denied, for although the matter was one of natural sciences, yet, by introducing theology and Scripture, it had assumed the character of theology and exegesis. _Galileo_ personally was dealt with very leniently. During the discussions of 1616 he was never cited before the bar of the Inquisition, nor was his exterior freedom in any way restricted. Only one thing was done: he was cautioned by Cardinal _Bellarmin_, “by order of the Holy Congregation,” not to adhere to, nor teach any longer, the Copernican theory. The documents of the case say that “_Galileo_ submitted to this order and promised to obey.” The Congregation of the Index prohibited, March 5, 1616, all books defending the Copernican theory, declaring the doctrine to be against Holy Scripture. Even the work of _Copernicus_ was prohibited _donec corrigatur_—until it be corrected. A decision of the year 1620 declared which passages should be corrected. They are those in which the author speaks of his theory not as an hypothesis but as of an established truth: _non ex hypothesi, sed asserando_. The Protestant _Kepler_, upon hearing this, wrote: “By their imprudent acts some have caused the work of _Copernicus_ to be condemned, after it had been left unmolested for nearly eighty years; and the prohibition will last at least till the corrections are made. I have been assured, however, by competent authority, both ecclesiastical and civil, that the decree was not intended to put any hindrance in the way of astronomical research” (_A. Mueller_, J. Kepler, 1903, 105). The reproach of imprudence was intended for _Galileo_. To teach the doctrine as an hypothesis was permitted even to _Galileo_, and this left the way clear for the development of the hypothesis, because whatever showed the usefulness of the hypothesis was sure to increase its value as a truth, but _Galileo_ would not keep within these limits. Instead of showing in a Christian spirit a submission to Providence, which even an erring authority may demand, he openly violated his promise and disobeyed the command he had received. In the spring of 1632 there appeared at Florence his “_Dialogue on the two most important systems of the world_.” It contained an open, though by no means victorious, defence of the Copernican system—seeking to hide under a confidence-inspiring mask. It contained many passages of caustic sarcasm, with the evident intention of arousing public opinion against the attitude of the Roman Congregations. It was a flagrant _violation of the command given him personally_. The Pope under whom the proceedings against _Galileo_ took place was _Urban VIII._, who, when a Cardinal, had followed _Galileo’s_ discoveries with enthusiasm, though never partial to the system of _Copernicus_, and, in accord with the custom of the age, he had written an ode to _Galileo_.