[63] See pages 136, 144, and elsewhere in _Martin_, who, much against his will, is forced to allow this. [64] _Martin_, pp. 146, 147. [65] See Martin, p. 145. [66] See note on condemnation of Kopernik. [67] For the attempt to make the crime of Galileo a breach of etiquette, see _Dublin Review_, as above. _Whewell_, vol. i., 393. Citation from _Marini_: "Galileo was punished for trifling with the authorities to which he refused to submit, and was punished for obstinate contumacy, not heresy." The sufficient answer to all this is, that the words of the inflexible sentence designating the condemned books are: "Libri omnes qui affirmant telluris motum." See _Bertrand_, p. 59. As to the idea that "Galileo was punished not for his opinion, but for basing it on Scripture," the answer may be found in the Roman Index of 1704, in which are noted for condemnation "Libri omnes docentes mobilitatem terræ et inmobilitatem solis." For the way in which, when it was found convenient in argument, Church apologists insisted that it _was_ "the Supreme Chief of the Church, by a pontifical decree, and not certain cardinals," who condemned Galileo and his doctrine, see Father Lecazre's letter to Gassendi in _Flammarion_, _Pluralité des Mondes_, p. 427, and Urban VIII.'s own declarations as given by Martin. For the way in which, when necessary, Church apologists asserted the very contrary of this, declaring that "it was issued in a doctrinal decree of the Congregation of the Index, and _not_ as the Holy Father's teaching," see _Dublin Review_, September, 1865. And for the most astounding attempt of all, to take the blame off the shoulders of both pope and cardinals, and place it upon the Almighty, see the article above cited, in the _Dublin Review_, September, 1865, p. 419. For a good summary of the various attempts, and for replies to them in a spirit of judicial fairness, see _Th. Martin_, _Vie de Galilée_, though there is some special pleading to save the infallibility of pope and Church. The bibliography at the close is very valuable. [68] For Baronius's remark, see _De Morgan_, p. 26. Also, _Whewell_, vol. i., p. 394. [69] For an exceedingly striking statement, by a Roman Catholic historian of genius, as to popular demand for persecution, and the pressure of the lower strata, in ecclesiastical organizations, for cruel measures, see _Balmès_, _Le Protestantisme comparé au Catholicisme_, etc., 4th ed., Paris, 1855, vol. ii. Archbishop Spaulding has something of the same sort in his Miscellanies. _L'Epinois_, _Galilée_, pp. 22, _et seq._, stretches this as far as possible, to save the reputation of the Church in the Galileo matter.