It is true that Galileo could be described as a helio-centrist because he demands-- in 1616-- this be accepted as dogma with only scant evidence( discovery of the moons revolving around Jupiter). The word could is used because neither he or Copernicus ever uses the specific term as far as i can tell.
I don't refer to Copernicus in this way because he spoke hypothetically and never publishes his book.
Look at it this way Cassini-- while we disagree with the type of motion, we both agree that S IS in motion and that it is not the center of U.
What you believe is your choice as well because there is no dogma that requires Catholics to believe in geo-centrism. :cheers:
Copernicus’s heliocentrism in fact, first emerged in 1524 when he distributed an unsigned and untitled manuscript later named Commentariolus or ‘Little Commentary.’ These proposals were intended to see what reaction heliocentrism would have among philosophers of his time. The Commentary argued that a sun-centered planetary system, one of these being the earth, could better explain the mechanics of cosmic movements and indeed gravity, understood then as ‘heaviness.’ As it turned out, his thesis failed to make any impact or receive any serious response from astronomers and philosophers, leaving him disappointed and disheartened. This is why he never published de Rev.
‘In The Revolutions one of Copernicus’s deepest motivations for developing his sun-centred model was his belief that earlier interpreters of nature had produced a “translation” that was incoherent and aesthetically unappealing – one that did not do justice to the skill of the original Author Creator.’ --- Dennis Danielson: The First Copernican, p.53.
Here then, for any who wish to see, is another who had fallen hook, line and sinker for the magic of Hermēs Trismegistus. This church-keeper was likely to be well aware that the Scriptures depict geocentrism, an interpretation held by all the Fathers and that the Council of Trent had forbidden contrary personal interpretations. Nevertheless, driven by the spreading influence of Hermēs he still introduced his prepared equilibrium into astronomy, philosophy, theology and metaphysics – heliocentrism. Here then, in De revolutionibus, the most famous book on the cosmos ever written, a book that was read by many throughout Europe, by those who shaped world history, astronomy and science, Hermēs himself is named as an inspiration. Copernicus places the central religious and mystical role of the sun as the Sermo Perfectus dictates, as an intermediary between the divine light and the world, indeed as a second god, placing it where that already occupied Holy Throne had stood firm. Hints to this effect can be found in any proper study of Copernicus’s life and work.
‘Copernicus’s published works gave unmistakable, if indirect, indications of his reasons for devoting himself to astronomy. Judging by these, his intellectual and religious interests were dominant. He valued his theory of planetary motion, not because it improved navigational procedures, but because it revealed the true harmony, symmetry, and design in the divine workshop. It was wonderful and overpowering evidence of God’s presence. Writing of his achievements, which was thirty years in the making, Copernicus could not restrain his gratification: “We find, therefore, under this orderly arrangement a wonderful symmetry in the universe, and a definite relation of harmony in the motion and magnitude of the orbs, of a kind not possible to obtain in any other way.”’ --- M. Kline: Mathematics and the search for Knowledge, p.70.
Georg Joachim Rheticus (1514-1574) was a student and later mathematics professor at Martin Luther’s University of Wittenberg. An informing new book however by Professor Dennis Danielson reveals to us that were it not for Rheticus and others, Copernicus’s De revolutionibus most probably would never have seen the light of day. Accordingly, his relationship with Copernicus is vital to the story of the Copernican revolution.
Rheticus became Copernicus's right-hand man, and used the Protestant printing press to bring out de revolutionibus.
Danielson goes on to say this was Martin Luther’s best-known doctrine:
‘If someone equipped with the tools of reading could reinterpret the text of either the Bible or the Book of Nature – independent of intervening layers of authority – whole new possibilities of understanding could emerge in the natural sciences as well as in theology.’ --- D. Danielson: The First Copernican, p.21.
And that is how the heliocentric heresy began the assault on Catholic biblical exegesis and hermeneutics, PROTESTANTISM.
Finally there is an irreversible papal decree that states the Scriptures reveal geocentrism and the secret archives at the Vatican reveal this was acknowledged as dogma twice by the Holy Office in 1633 and 1820. This dogma has been ignored, especially by popes, to accommodate everyone's belief that science proven the earth rotates and orbits the sun. The history of this SCAM at a time when 'tradition' ruled is worse than anything that came out of Vatican Ii when the heliocentric modernists had taken over.