Not true. They were both ;). The first theologian to shine favorable light toward the heliocentric view was Melanchthon. He was exceedingly fond of Rheticus, did not scold him when he left his position, and after On the Revolutions was published, after the world knew of the Copernican theory and the hand Rheticus played in its propagation, Melanchthon welcomed Rheticus back with open arms to the faculty at Wittenburg. Some of the first to accept it were the post-Reformation names listed above.
It was not “bad” theology that kept Calov in his camp. It was well grounded concern worthy of investigation. If there is a lesson to be learned from the Lutheran side, it is to not remain apathetic to the happenings of science (as the majority of post-Ref. Luth. theologians were). Their apathy is part of what lead to a major faux pas in the 1920’s by one of the more excellent Lutheran theologians of the time: Francis Pieper. The relationship of theology to astronomy (and really any academic subject) is, in a way, much like the common relationship between two individuals: a more likely reason for the dissolving of conversation and fruitful dialogue/friendship is the presence of apathy (e.g. the silent majority), not conflict (e.g. Calov).