JCWL 3: Lutherans vs. Copernicanism! "Lindemann's List", part 3 of 8

      This continues from Part 2 (Table of Contents in Part 1), an 8-part series presenting an English translation of J. C. W. Lindemann's 1873 article "Copernicus and the Lutheran theologians." — Now we hear from the many orthodox Lutheran theologians after Luther on this question of Copernicanism.  But then, by way of one of these, an English "nonconformist" Puritan (Calvinist) theologian is quoted.  This reminds me of Franz Pieper's praise of B.B. Warfield for holding to an infallible Bible.  It reminds me of Walther's statement that "all Reformed sects... were first Lutheran".

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Excerpt from Evangelisch-Lutherisches Schulblatt, vol. 8 (1873) pp. 65-74, 107-116; translation by BackToLuther; all highlighting, red text in [] square brackets, images, and hyperlinks are mine, underlining in original.

Copernicus and the Lutheran theologians.

[by J. C. W. Lindemann, Part 3 of 8, pp. 70-73]

In the excellent Bible exposition which Dr. Lucas Osiander (the Elder, 1534-1604, court preacher, consistorial councilor and prelate at Stuttgart) published in 1573 (Latin), there is no other worldview than that of the Prophets and Apostles. Since M. David Förter translated it into German (Lüneburg 1650), it can be assumed that he, too, was not a Copernican. — In this Bible, for example, on Job 26:7 it is said: “The Earth hangs as it were in the middle between the heavens.” — On Ps. 19:5: “The heavens guide the Sun around the whole Earth.” On  v. 6 [Ps. 19:6]: “How the Sun runs so quickly as a strong hero that no one can stop, so Christ goes with the preaching of his Evangel” etc. And on verse 7 [Ps. 19:7]: “The Sun comes back up where it started, and bringeth such its course within 24 hours.” — On Ps 119:90: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth: “immobile, and therefore hangs on the water to the Last Day. Thy Word is so constant.” — On Hab. 3:11: “The Sun and Moon stood still in their habitation.” — On Sir. 43:5: “Circles fast so that it (the Sun) runs around the entire Earth in 24 hours and illuminates it.” etc., etc.

Johann Arndt, born 1555, died 1621 as General Superintendent of Celle, writes in his True Christianity” (Erfurt edition, 1745) [see here, here for English, here and here for similar quotes in English] when looking at the fourth day's work: “The Sun circles every day [page 71] around the heavens, from its rising to its setting.” (p. 719) [p. 319 here]. — And further down (p. 731) [p. 404 here, 1832]: 

“Now all people have to fairly wonder about the certain course of the Sun, from which the Gentiles have also recognized that there must be a God, an eternal mind, full of wisdom, that certain course of the Sun. For the Sun certainly keeps its course and does not go further or above the goal which God has set, not higher, not lower; it has its great path in the sky, which is called the Ecliptic or the Sun’s course. It will certainly stay on its way. It does not go on around noon, because in the first point of the heavenly ibex, it makes the winter, then it returns. It doesn't go on around midnight, because in the first point of cancer, it does the summer, then it returns. And that keeps it so certain that it is not missing for a minute. Once it has gone through the twelve heavenly signs, it is a solar year.”

The dear Valerius Herberger, born 1562, died in 1627 as a pastor at Fraustadt in Greater Poland [now Wschowa in Poland], wrote in his precious book Magnalia Dei, the Great Deeds of God (Halle 1854) this, among other things (p. 57 ff.): “Like the Sun in heaven around the Earth is led; so Jesus is carried around the world in the Evangel of the 12 apostles. — How the Sun cannot run; so no tyrant or heretic can prevent or stop the course of the Evangel. — My Lord and God, how fast the Sun is running! — The Sun stands still on Joshua's prayer (Josh. 10:13); it goes back at the prayer of Hezekiah (Isaiah 38:8).”

Konrad Dietrich, [or Dieterich; de.Wikipedia; chapter on Dieterich in 2016 CPH Lives and Writings… (🔗, 🔗)] born 1575, died in 1639 as superintendent and director of the grammar school in Ulm, the famous author of the two well-known catechisms, an equally well-trained theologian as a philologist, philosopher and historian, speaks in a sermon on Ecclesiastes 1:4-5. (printed in “Informatorium” IV, 45. ff.) [?] early and distinctly about Copernicus and his opinion.

Regarding the words “but the Earth remains forever” for example: 

“That the earth is immovable in its place and state, where it is ordered by God, namely in the center of the world, and that it remains forever, that is what Solomon teaches us in express words, since he says: the Earth remains forever, or as the Words from the Hebrew text read: the Earth stands forever, fixed as it stands. — It stays and stands as it is. That there is understood here such a consistency and state that is opposed to the movement. This is also confirmed by the fact that Scripture says: The Lord founded the Earth on the seas, Ps. 24:2; that the Earth was founded, its cornerstone laid and its feet sunk, Job 38:4-6; that he would lay the Earth on its foundations, and that at the end that it would remain forever and ever, Ps. 104:5. — Like a building now, founded on its cornerstone, and upon its pillars, [page 72] even as upon its feet, set, immovable: So also the building of the Earth, which God founded and placed on its pillars, stands immovable . That is why Scripture not only says that the Earth exists, as David says of the Lord: He has prepared the Earth that it will not be moved.”

Kepler — Lansberge — Gilbert

Dietrich then says further down: 

“Several years ago Nicolaus Copernicus, the famous mathematician, came forward and wanted to prove with different hypotheses or set reasons that it was not the heavens but the Earth that was moving, and that by such a fast circulation, that such was not to be felt. He was applauded at this time by Johann[es] Kepler, Ph. Landsperg [Philippe van Lansberge] and Dr. [William] Gilbert of London.

So J. [John] Owen [English “Nonconformist”, Puritan - Dieterich cites an English “nonconformist”; in Wikipedia under “Copernicus-Controversy–Theology”, Archive here] writes to him [? - which one?] in his Epigrammatis:

“You deny that the Earth stands, you tell us miracles – that you wrote such, you were probably in a boat!

Now we are happy to let everyone freely have their thoughts and delusions (!), and defend them as well as they can. But because our preacher [Ecclesiastes, Solomon] preaches to us otherwise, we fairly stay with him and give him applause from others for these reasons: 

(1.) Because he says in clear, lowly words: Terra stat, the Earth remains or stands; he does not say: the Earth is moved around its center, but stat, stat, the Earth stands! Since then he just needs the ghamad [Hebrew amad or way·ya·‘ă·mōḏ?] which in the book of Joshua 10:13 is used as reported on the Sun and Moon, as stood the Sun and the Moon still. Just as the Sun and the Moon there really stood still and did not move, so the Earth also stands really still and does not move. For just as one cannot in truth say of it that it stands still, which does not stand still, but moves, so one cannot in truth say of it that it is moved, which is not moved, but stands still.

(2.) Because Solomon, our preacher, therein Job, David, the prophet and man after the heart of God as he is called in Acts 13:22, and Peter the Apostle, agreeing with everything in clear, expressive terms, it must have been evidently proven and explained from their testimonies. Because they have spoken and written this, not out of human will, nor their own interpretation, but driven by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:2.); what Christian believer does not want to applaud him more and more than other worldly scholars?

(3.) Because the whole choir of the old holy church fathers and teachers hold to the Holy Scripture in this case, and from this unanimously affirm and confirm the Earth's everlasting immobility. And although one or the other of Thaletis [of Thales] and others disagreeably put forward one or the other, they finally conclude that there is more to the simplicity of faith than to that the [page 73] reasonable statements should see which simplicity of belief is far preferable to all other arguments.” — —

On the words: “the Sun rises and sets” etc. Dietrich further writes: 

“What is not to understand about the annual course, which it has all year round by crossing out the zodiac or animal circle in the heaven … but of its daily course alone, … since it rises in the morning in the East, hurries along the course of the evening, … and comes back to the place in the morning, from the previous day it rose that it would go there again. So that the Sun, as it were, runs around in a crooked circle, bypassing the entire world in 24 hours and is back in the place it was on the last day. And it should be noted here that the Hebrew word “Sigeph” (breathes gasping), to indicate her fast running, that otherwise she does not hurry, to her goal as a fast running with all seriousness and desire, and like a running with gasping and puffing.”

Thus, some sentences from Dietrich's sermon could be quoted which testify what he believed in the establishment of the world on the basis of the Scriptures; but it is not a question of giving this in its entirety, but rather it is our task to show that most, if not all, Lutheran theologians have rejected Copernicus’s opinion and have held to the Bible's evidence and testimony. — We are therefore letting others speak now.

= = = = = = = = =  continued in Part 4  = = = = = = = = = =
      Yes, an orthodox Lutheran theologian, Dieterich, quoted a "nonconformist", Puritan [Baptist] John Owen, approvingly as Owen defended the truth of Holy Scripture.  (One cannot find this from today's LC-MS theologians.) We may note that the article in Wikipedia under “Copernicus-Controversy–Theology”,  on the "Controversy" surrounding Copernicus's opinion also mentions John Owen's testimony against it (Archive here). — I want to repeat Lindemann's passion:

“It is our task to show that most… Lutheran theologians have rejected Copernicus’s opinion and have held to the Bible's evidence and testimony.” — J.C.W. Lindemann

The dear Lindemann isn't done yet. We continue with "Lindemann's List" in the next Part 4…

JCWL 2: “fear of being considered stupid”; Luther, Melanchthon, "Lindemann's List" begins; Part 2 of 8

      This continues from Part 1 (Table of Contents in Part 1), an 8-part series presenting an English translation of J. C. W. Lindemann's 1873 article "Copernicus and the Lutheran theologians." — In this segment, Lindemann continues presenting the background of the "scientific" forces against the Scriptural account of Joshua.  He then begins his passionate plea for the necessity of defending the truth of the Holy Scripture, and of course his star witness, after the Word of God, is THE Reformer…

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Excerpt from Evangelisch-Lutherisches Schulblatt, vol. 8 (1873) pp. 65-74, 107-116; translation by BackToLuther; all highlighting, red text in [] square brackets, images, and hyperlinks are mine, underlining in original.

Copernicus and the Lutheran theologians.

[by J. C. W. Lindemann, Part 2 of 8, pp. 68-70]

Church "History" or the Bible?

[Johann Matthias] Schröckh says in his “Church History since the Reformation" (III, 187): 

“And although the old delusion that the opinion of the Sun's course around the Earth is confirmed by the scriptures, deep into the 17th century, the general reception of the Copernican system; finally new astronomical observations finally forced everyone to applaud them.” 

Schröckh is very much in error! So he could only judge because he himself did not understand enough to make the understanding of Scripture obedient to faith. The most respected teachers of the Lutheran Church have never considered it “delusion” “that the view of the Sun's course around the Earth is confirmed by the Scriptures”, and there is a great lack that, according to the “new astronomical observations” “everyone” would have applauded the Copernican system, at least there have always been Lutheran theologians who contradicted it.

Brockhaus Enzyklopädie or the Bible?

But why contradicted? Well, because the Copernicans couldn't prove their claims! But then primarily because that opinion breaks a breach for thousands in the solid wall of the Word of God through which every enemy could later pull in! If the Bible strays in one place, then it is not the Word of the true God, then I cannot rely on it in any place! [compare Walther’s similar strong 1880 statement] Back then the enemies of Christ recognized that and triumphed, they still recognize it today. In the article “Movement of the Earth” in Brockhaus' Conversations-Lexikon (latest edition) [now the Brockhaus Enzyklopädie] it says: “It cannot be denied that the teaching of Copernicus does not just establish the new astronomy, it has also made man bold, to doubt any belief after seeing here that a fixed Earth has been erroneously taught and believed for 6000 years.” That is certainly a clear language!!

This danger of finally losing all of Scripture, the whole true Christian faith, through the Copernican system [compare Walther’s warning], for which no evidence had yet been brought about for its infallibility, prompted many of our Lutheran fathers to testify against it. And it is only for the same reason that we also work against this silly, completely unfounded system, which has crept into almost all school books in our over-wise time, in order to make children misunderstand what the Bible says from an early age — to plant a principle in their heart, [page 69] by virtue of which they can later ask of any divine teaching: is it true? The Bible indeed says that the Sun is moving, and “science” has proven the opposite! May the following testimonials serve to make every teacher aware of what this is actually about!

The statements of Lutheran theologians given do not all have the same value, for some have only been occasional and without intention about Copernicus; others, however, the most detailed, are directly against him. But it should also be noted that they are not insignificant pastors and ignorant “clerics” who testify here; they are mostly theology professors, court preachers, superintendents; and they mostly also studied philosophy and mathematics, as was almost customary at the time. So you can well trust them to make a judgment. In any case, it is worth the effort to check their words. Perhaps they judged more matter-of-factly and freely than many theologians and scholars of the present day who have been licked by modern science and are so caught up in their bonds that they do not first ask: what is truth? but: What is the truth of the scholars? Oh, the tiresome ambition, the fear of being considered stupid, seduces some without realizing that he accepts “scientific” claims that no one has yet proven. Our old theologians didn't! They are firm on the Scripture! So they may appear as witnesses against a generation that condemns a [Pastor Gustav] Knak because his worldview is that of the Bible; but a monument is erected to Copernicus, however, because his (unconfirmed) teaching gives them an alleged right to reject the Bible.

Dr. Luther only knows the worldview of Scripture. The Earth for him is fixed, the Sun is in motion. So he says for example: “So the Word drives the Sun today and always, from morning to evening. Because it goes around in the heavens once every day is not of its own nature or strength, but of the Word by which it is created.” — — — “and also teaches the year by the Sun’s course, because it comes around every year and with its course brings the seasons, summer and winter, with it.” (III, 53) [Müller; StL III, 40; not in AE] — — “it is a work of the Divine Majesty that the sun follows its course so exactly and in a most precise manner without deviating a fingerbreadth from the straightest possible line in any part of the heaven.” (I, 40) [Müller; StL III, 31, § 61; AE 1, 25]

What Luther thought of that astronomy that considered itself as if it had measured the heavenly bodies with a yardstick or weighed them on the scales can be seen from the following words: 

“Let that be enough. That is all you need to know of the Sun and the heavens. Whatever else you would like to  [page 70] know is unnecessary and nothing but curiosity; furthermore, it is uncertain at that, and for the greater part error; as, for example, when fools want to know the size of the sun, its distance from the Earth.” (XI. 421). [Müller; StL 11, 304-5 § 26; AE 52, 168]

Not entirely certain, but it is very likely that Luther also heard about Copernicus and his new claim. In the Table Talks it is said (XXII, 2260) [Müller; StL 22, 1546; similar version see AE 54, 358-359, see this blog post]: 

“It was thought that a new Astrology wanted to prove that the Earth would be moved and go around, not the heavens or the firmament, the Sun and Moon; just as if one sits on a cart or in a ship and is moved, meaning he was sitting quietly and at rest, but the Earth and the trees go about and are moving. But so it goes now, that whoever would be wise leaves nothing of what others brought, he must make something of his own which must be the very best, as he makes it.  The fool wants to turn around the whole art of astronomy. But as the Holy Scripture indicates, so Joshua called the Sun to stand still, not the Earth. Josh. 10:12-13.”

If that “new astrologer” is not Copernicus himself, it is his teaching about which Luther expresses his opinion clearly here.

Even Melanchthon held to only a stationary Earth and cycling stars. In his chronicle [see here, or here] he speaks repeatedly “of the heavenly body’s cycle”, of “the Sun’s cycle”, etc.

= = = = = = = = =  continued in Part 3  = = = = = = = = = =

      During Lindemann's narrative above, it seemed as though I was reading from Walther's writing, so passionate is he for the truth of Holy Scripture!  How refreshing it is to read from such a one when one compares him to today's modern theologians who love to throw out the misused term "biblicism" against those who want to believe their Bible! — In the next Part 3, we continue "Lindemann's List" of theologians after Luther.

Lindemann on Copernicus & the Lutheran Theologians: Lindemann (again), Part 1 of 8

      In my original series on Copernicanism, I published the English translation of the 1873 pamphlet An Astronomical Debate by Prof. J. C. W. Lindemann (🔗) of the Old Missouri Synod's teachers college in Addison, Illinois.  Recent research on Old Missouri publications turned up another writing of Lindemann of similar length (20 pages) that may be just as important, if not more so, and so was considered worthy of a complete translation for my blog.  Many hours and days were spent in translation, hyperlinking the many references to theologians and scientists, and adding their images.  Although the professor is modest about this work of his, this writing is a landmark in the 19th century on the topic of science and religion, and is superior in many respects to other historians, or to Wikipedia's reporting on the Copernicus "Controversy".  Wikipedia focuses mostly on Roman Catholic opposition to Copernicanism, but Lindemann's report is far more significant in that he reports on the judgment of orthodox, Scriptural, Christian teachers and pastors, almost all Lutheran, not papists.
This presentation follows in part the list of Lutheran theologians mentioned in my Copernicanism series, Part 19c. and is more detailed in this regard than that of Pastor F.E. Pasche in his great book. — I consider Lindemann one of the greatest historians on this subject, especially for his time and ours.  Even Cornell University's first president Andrew Dickson White had to take note of his writing! Why? Because he recognized the scholarly ability of Lindemann… of the OLD Missouri Synod. — The following is a presentation of the full article in an 8-part series.  Part 1 is an introduction to the primary scientists and theologians involved.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Excerpt from Evangelisch-Lutherisches Schulblatt, vol. 8 (1873) pp. 65-74, 107-116; translation by BackToLuther; all highlighting, red text in [] square brackets, images, and hyperlinks are mine, underlining in original.

Copernicus and the Lutheran theologians. *)

[by J. C. W. Lindemann]

*) This essay does not in the least claim completeness or an approximate exhaustion of this subject. There are too few tools available to me [long before the Internet!], and the time is too short to deal with this important and instructive topic in more detail. In any case, what is offered here gives some light; and perhaps it will cause others to do more, or at least collect individual contributions that could later be turned into a whole. At least I would be grateful for any information, like this or that of our truly Lutheran theologians, about Copernicus’ claim.

        —————————

Up until the time of the Reformation, the whole world believed that the Earth was in the middle of the universe, and that the Sun moved around it, similar to the way the Moon does. Aristarchus of Samos († around 270 BC) already had taught †): “The Earth revolves around its axis and at the same time in an oblique circle around the Sun”; but his opinion received little acclaim and it was soon forgotten. Anyone who thought about the establishment of the visible world judged by appearance and by daily experience. He saw the Sun, Moon and all the stars in motion; but the senses did not notice any movement of the Earth. And what the philosopher recognized from nature, the Christian found confirmed in his Bible. He also knows only a “firmly founded” earth and “circulating” heavenly bodies. 

Fibonacci, Cusa, Peurbach, Regiomontanus

And it was not just the Christian people who believed these statements in Scripture to be true and certain — not just the theologian who had not studied mathematics or astronomy; no, even the Christian astronomer found no reason to stray from examination and Scripture. Leonhard von Pisa [Fibonacci], Heinrich von Hessen (1370) [Henry of Langenstein  (1325–1397), Johann von Gmunden  (1400), [page 66] Nicolaus von Cusa (1430), Georg Peurbach (1450), Johann Müller (Regiomontanus, 1460), to name only those German men whose names still sound very good in the history of astronomy, those and many others built their teaching and observation on a fixed Earth. 

What they taught about the establishment of the world, the course of the stars, and so on, was mainly considered to be true after 5500 years. And two other men, the Landgrave Wilhelm IV of Hesse († 1592) and the Dane Tycho Brahe († 1610 in Prague), also confirmed this in the next period. A famous astronomer of our century calls him “a prince even among astronomers”, and even the “king of them”.

—————————

†) Pythagoras (about 500 BC) had also taught that the Earth turned around a central fire; but this was not the Sun for him. In general, his view bears no resemblance to that of Copernicus.

—————————

At the same time now that Dr. [Martin] Luther brought the Word of God back into honor, and reproduced it as the irrefutable certain basis of the faith of Christianity, at the same time that the “prophet of the Germans” testified that the infallible Word of God, and that alone, the sharp sword, the strong armor, the insurmountable castle in which a Christian could victoriously resist all attempts of the devil — 

at the same time Nicolaus Copernicus appeared and claimed that the arrangement of the world was quite different from what was previously thought: not the Earth but the Sun was fixed. He claimed that [the Earth] is a wandering star [Wandelstern] (planet, such as Venus, Jupiter, etc.) and not only revolves around its own axis every day, but also runs around the Sun once a year!

Copernicus (born 1473) had studied mathematics, medicine and theology and then lived as Canon [clergy] at Frauenburg in Prussia [now Frombork in Poland]. He is said to have been a much sought-after doctor, also a skilled builder and administrator. Since 1506 he had started to investigate the phenomena in the heavens. He laid down his thoughts on the results of his observations in his work “Six Books on the Orbits of the Celestial Bodies” [or De revolutionibus orbium coelestium], which he dedicated to the Pope at that time. It is said that he hadn't intended it for printing at all, but only wanted to tell some of his colleagues. But at the urgent request of several friends, he finally consented that it be printed in Nuremberg. When Copernicus received the first completed copy, he was already lying on his deathbed. He died on June 11, 1543, at the age of 71.

Copernicus, at any rate, determined and clearly knew that he was opposed to all of the old astronomy with his new claims; on the other hand, it is uncertain (at least to this writer) to what extent it became clear to him that he contradicted the Bible. [cp. this blog post reporting Copernicus was aware but it was “against his wishes”] He had also studied (Roman) theology; but at that time there were many “scholars of God” who had never seen a complete Bible, who knew very little about the content of it. [page 67] 

Now Copernicus may or may not have been aware of his antithesis to the Bible, this consciousness may have been dark or clear – it can be of little concern to us [but it was Walther’s concern and he corrected this in 1880.]. But this is certain, and this is what is important to us here: that others immediately recognized it for what it was actually about. Many scholars immediately fell in love with the new astronomy, either ignoring the contradiction to the Bible, if not rejoicing at it, or resorting to the most whimsical explanations in order to cover up the contradiction, if not to annul it. Others, however, firmly opposed Copernicus’s teaching and rejected it as untrue, false and godless. The latter especially because it questions, even denies, the credibility of the Holy Scripture.

Even in the philosophical and mathematical world, the view of Copernicus found many contradictions. Even then, doubts about the correctness of the same were expressed and questions were raised that have remained unsolved and unanswered to this day. But it would take us too far here if we wanted to take these struggles into account. So much is to be said how “science” has changed since then! If scholars within Christianity had not found any reason to contradict the Bible until then, things soon changed.  One cannot say it better than Dr. Johannes N. Richers in his Letters of Heaviness (Leipzig 1855), where it says p. 7-8: “The next or rather general meaning of the Copernican system obviously lies in the fact that it is the beginning of a completely new way of thinking, mechanical thinking, mechanical science in general; a way of thinking, according to which the whole of creation is only a great machine.” 

Man, too, now became more and more a great machine, especially since it had come through [Isaac] Newton that the “educated” had to accept and pass on the most groundless assertions, the greatest lack of understanding as irrefutable truth. [!]— But we turn to the theologians!

It is said — and the Copernicans like to tell it — that monks instigated the Nuremberg mob to destroy the printing press in which the book of Copernicus was printed. “They say a devilish work is under the press!” — 

It is also printed in many books, and it has long been believed by many people that the Inquisitors in Rome had forced Galileo [Galilei] to swear that it was a mistake that the Sun was fixed! The Romanists have disagreed with this report for a number of years, and it is also believed that it is based on error. The Roman Church, taken as a whole, has always been very tolerant of the Copernican system! What does she care if the Scripture is contradicted, if only that [page 68] the Pope's reputation remains undamaged. And that is held safer when the Bible is less respected.

But how did the Church, released from Babylonian captivity, stand against the teaching of Copernicus? What did the Lutheran theologians say about it?

= = = = = = = = = = =  continued in Part 2  = = = = = = = = = = = = =

“…a completely new way of thinking… creation is only a great machine”

     Yes indeed!… "What did the Lutheran theologians say about it?" Lindemann is a careful historian and does the "heavy lifting" of digging out the many actual references – a long list – beginning in the next Part 2.
= = = = = = =  Table of Contents  = = = = = = =
Part 1 – This Introduction, late medieval scientists, Luther, Copernicus-Newton-Galileo
Part 2 – Copernicanism; “fear of being considered stupid”, danger of loss of faith, Luther & Melanchthon
Part 3 – Lutherans vs. Copernicanism! "Lindemann's List", Osiander, Arndt, Herberger, Dietrich (& Owen)
Part 4 – Dillher; Weimar Bible: John Gerhard & company
Part 5 – David Hollaz: “these words are to be understood of Christ, the figurative Sun”
Part 6 – Stock, Scharff, Engelschall, J.J. Rambach – "Lindemann's List" grows against Copernicanism

Part 7 – Finale, +9: Rusmeyer, Schmidt, Geier, Carpzov, Hollmann, Rambach, Ströbel, Knak, Gruntvig

Part 8 – equivocators, accommodators, naysayers– "let history speak"; Pasche's praise
Postscript – J. C. W. Lindemann vs LC-MS: Fuerbringer, Harstad, Schaum & Collver, Harrison & Rast