In 1616,
Cardinal Bellarmine courteously, as far as we have uncovered, advised Galileo that he needed to come up with the scientific goods to get people to buy his ideas.
Graney's observation about
Cardinal Bellarmine's doubt, for instance, is particularly astute.
Cardinal Bellarmine had heard of Galileo's observations and wished to know if they were true and what implications they held.
Robert
Cardinal Bellarmine, acting on behalf of the Holy Office, privately warned Galileo not to teach the Copernican view as having been established, and Galileo apparently agreed to comply.
I also naively assume that there is a Catholic consensus over the fact that Galileo had reneged on a deal he had struck with
Cardinal Bellarmine regarding a theory that would not be taught as fact until more evidence had been collected.
In 1615 Robert
Cardinal Bellarmine demanded a "true demonstration"
Moreover
Cardinal Bellarmine conceded that scientific evidence might eventually prove that holding to a literal interpretation of the Bible could prove to be difficult in certain situations.
It was meant to represent
Cardinal Bellarmine, one of the Roman Catholic leaders of the counter-Reformation who may have been seen as a bogeyman in Protestant England and Germany.
(7) The first trial in 1615 focused primarily on the scientific, philosophical, and theological issues concerning Copernicanism while the second trial was concerned primarily with whether Galileo had violated the terms of the agreement negotiated by
Cardinal Bellarmine, who unfortunately died years before the second trial.
One such Huguenot, Pierre de Moulin, James wished to conscript in his pamphleteering against the likes of
Cardinal Bellarmine. Another, Jean de Thou, James envisaged as court historian.