Yes. In fact, (as I’m sure you know) what I referred to as “Galileo’s correct observations” were made, in fact, by Father Copernicus. Now, the Church did take a dim view of Copernicus in light of Galileo’s belligerent, demeaning, illogical and counter-productive defense of it. But had it been combined with Cardinal Nicolas Di Cusa’s “Cosmologia,” the world’s knowledge of cosmology would have been 500 years ahead itself.
(I just read that secularists insist Copernicus was not a priest, despite the fact that not only was he canon and collegiate prelate, but the documents exist where he was proposed for the episcopacy of Warmia. Edward’s Rosen’s claim that Galileo’s [and later Polish] claims that Copernicus was not a priest only establish that Galileo felt no need to prove this point. Despite being taken as gospel, Rosen provides no evidence to believe he was not a priest, and fails to consider the very obvious evidence that he was one.)
Above all, It must be plainly stated that all within the Church of Rome were totally ignorant of the subjecet raised by Copernicus and Galileo.
The relied on the Bible that gave no clue of the cosmological reality
“Yes. In fact, (as I’m sure you know) what I referred to as “Galileo’s correct observations” were made, in fact, by Father Copernicus.”
Galileo’s observation could only be seen with a telescope which Copernicus did not have.