Job 37:18 -- Thou perhaps hast made the heavens with him, which are most strong, as if they were of molten brass.

Pffft.  You spent untold amounts of time explaining that we needn't take the Church Father's scientific observations as theological (per Leo XIII) and now you're claiming that there's a "Catholic understanding" that the earth is a sphere.

Hogwash.

Sacred Scripture is very clear about its description of the earth, the firmament, etc.  Church Fathers all believed in the firmament, but you dismiss that ... yet now you're promoting some other Catholic standard.

Yes, the "earth" is a sphere.  But it's a sphere the same way that a snow globe is a sphere, with a domed firmament on top.

I have been very clear that I am talking about the historical but not dogmatic understanding of Catholics from the time of St. Bede on.  You are educated enough to know that I am right about this.  It needs to be said due to the widespread misconception that Catholics historically believed the earth was flat.

The Church Fathers disagreed on the shape of the earth.  St. John Damascene, himself a later Church Father, said as much in his summary of the Catholic faith.  There were a handful who made statements that could interpreted as supporting flat earth in the earliest centuries.  However, St. Augustine and the Cappadocian Fathers taught that Scripture is silent about the shape of the earth and that is the view that ultimately was accepted.  (And even echoed in magisterial teaching.)

Once this was established, Catholics began to look to science rather than Scripture to determine the shape of the earth.  St. Bede, although more famous as a historian, was also a scientist whose argument for spherical earth was highly influential.  This was what Catholics believed, as science, not dogma, from that point on.

It is not dogma and you are not obliged to accept it.  You may believe that earth is flat if you like.  Personally, I am convinced by St. Bede and think that it is a sphere.

I have been very clear that I am talking about the historical but not dogmatic understanding of Catholics from the time of St. Bede on. 

Ok, so St Bede died in the mid 700s.

In the De Sphaera passage i quoted there are a couple of references to the "bulge of the earth".

This book was written in the 1200s. 

1.  Why was this so influential, if it said the same thing that St Bede said, 500 years earlier? 
2.  Why is this book said to have been influenced by Ptolemy and not St Bede?

Either St Bede and the "De Sphaera" taught the same thing or they didn't.  You say they are part of the same, consistent "teaching" but the facts don't seem to prove this.

Ok, so St Bede died in the mid 700s.

This book was written in the 1200s. 

1.  Why was this so influential, if it said the same thing that St Bede said, 500 years earlier? 
2.  Why is this book said to have been influenced by Ptolemy and not St Bede?

Either St Bede and the "De Sphaera" taught the same thing or they didn't.  You say they are part of the same, consistent "teaching" but the facts don't seem to prove this.

St. Bede's writing was copied and widely dispersed because it had practical applications for things like determining the date of Easter. This is what put it in a position of influence.   The Catholic university system had not been established yet, so monasteries were the main centers of learning.

Once there were universities, books were written specifically for teaching astronomy in that setting.  De Sphaera was one of these.  In an academic setting, it would have been more desirable to work from Ptolemy because of the respect given to ancient authorities.  This was the main university astronomy textbook for centuries, hence my claim that it was influential.

Off hand, I cannot think of any significant differences between their understandings of spherical earth or what sort of arguments proved it.  They just had their major influence at different periods of history.

It just seems odd for "De Sphaera" to ignore St Bede and to be influenced by Ptolemy.  If St Bede's views were the same, we would assume St Bede was also influenced by Ptolemy, so "De Sphaera" could ignore Ptolemy and simply quote St Bede.  That didn't happen. 

It is not odd at all.  At the time, Ptolemy was considered a greater science authority than St. Bede.  By our standards, most of us would probably prefer a Christian source to a pagan one, but that is not they thought of it.

But you said that St Bede had the same views as "De Sphaera", no?  You said there was a consistent teaching since St Bede?

I do not understand what point you are making.  Yes, St. Bede and Sacrobosco and Ptolemy all wrote that the earth is sphere.  

Here is an excerpt from a Wikipedia article that  describes what St. Bede was writing:

The monk Bede (c. 672–735) wrote in his influential treatise on computus, The Reckoning of Time, that Earth was round. He explained the unequal length of daylight from "the roundness of the Earth, for not without reason is it called 'the orb of the world' on the pages of Holy Scripture and of ordinary literature. It is, in fact, set like a sphere in the middle of the whole universe." (De temporum ratione, 32). The large number of surviving manuscripts of The Reckoning of Time, copied to meet the Carolingian requirement that all priests should study the computus, indicates that many, if not most, priests were exposed to the idea of the sphericity of Earth.^[77] Ælfric of Eynsham paraphrased Bede into Old English, saying, "Now the Earth's roundness and the Sun's orbit constitute the obstacle to the day's being equally long in every land."^[78]

Bede was lucid about Earth's sphericity, writing "We call the earth a globe, not as if the shape of a sphere were expressed in the diversity of plains and mountains, but because, if all things are included in the outline, the earth's circuмference will represent the figure of a perfect globe... For truly it is an orb placed in the centre of the universe; in its width it is like a circle, and not circular like a shield but rather like a ball, and it extends from its centre with perfect roundness on all sides."^[7

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth

Is this the only thing they agreed on?  Is this the only detail which you base you "consistent teaching" comment on?

St. Bede wrote a practical treatise on calculating the date of Easter in which he mentioned, almost in passing, that the earth is a sphere.  De Sphaera is a detailed account of the principles of astronomy for academics, in which the sphericity of the earth is one of the main points. They are different kinds of writing, but using the same basic assumption - geocentric spherical earth.

Ok, that's what I thought.

1.  For St Bede to mention something "in passing" is not a detailed explanation, thus it cannot be considered a teaching because he didn't explain anything. 
2.  "De Sphaera" is based on Ptolemy but St Bede did not base his comment on Ptolemy, so again, no consistency. 

3.  A "consistent teaching" presupposes that both teachers believe the same for the same reasons.
4.  Since St Bede didn't explain his reasons, all we know is his conclusion.
5.  2 people having the same conclusion does not mean they agree on "why the conclusion is correct".

6.  Since St Bede wasn't influenced by Judaic-islam, then his reasons cannot be the same as in "De Sphaera".
7.  Since "De Sphaera" didn't reference St Bede, then their reasons aren't proven to be similar.
8.  Thus, you should stop saying there is a "consistent teaching" but must treat St Bede as having an isolated opinion, from which we don't know the origin.

Since you present yourself as a semi-expert on this issue, you should know all of the above.  If you don't know the above, then you should stop posting about the topic.

My exact words were "almost in passing".  He was talking about spherical earth in the context of how it relates to calculating dates.  St. Bede did, however, give proofs of the earth being a sphere and they are similar to those used by Sacrobosco.

I am not an expert or semi-expert.  I just know more about the subject than a person who claims that most Catholics of the past believed that the earth is flat.  From the time of St. Bede onwards, virtually all educated Catholics believed the earth is a sphere.  This is true whether they believed exactly the same things or if there were slight variations in their understanding.

You are grasping at straws to have an excuse to disregard this truth.