It does Not Say science.....

Science falls under the faith part of "in matters of Faith and Morals"

an excerpt from my previous post:

Unapologetically, we state that by faith we have certitude in God’s self-revelation, which grants us the truths that are above human reason. These truths, e.g., the Trinity and the Incarnation, are the pillars of divine science, which not only reveals to us those truths that we could not discern from our natural world, but also purifies the natural wisdom humanity did and does discern.

5. Is faith necessary?

Faith is necessary to accept God’s revelation, because those truths exceed the grasp of man’s reason. Moreover, all humanity is orientated toward God; thus the entire divine science is necessary for the salvation of man, as it illuminates those truths about God we would not otherwise know. Man can look at Creation and discern there is a God, but he cannot discern the Trinity or the Incarnation without revelation. However, once those truths are revealed, they are rational, even if they are ultimately mysterious, like the Trinity. For example, on one level we can rationally speak of the Trinity as three persons with one substance, but truly grasping that reality is beyond human comprehension. The very heart of Catholicism’s insistence that faith and reason are harmonious lies in this discussion.

Is English your first language?  :confused1:

Quote from: clare

Whiich means, of course, it doesn't have to be taken literally absolutely all the time.

Except that the Church and the Church Fathers have always taken Genesis to be historically and scientifically accurate.

I didn't say otherwise. Just that there are bits of Scripture which don't have to be taken literally. It is usually obvious from the context, e.g. the name of the book (Proverbs, Psalms), or an introduction like, "Jesus spoke this parable..."

Quote from: roscoe

The Bible is wrong when claiming that E is fixed in position.  The Bible was written by a man( or men) who are capable of being mistaken.

Roman Catholic Bible is not infallible like the book of Mormon claims to be.

It is the Sola Scriptura Lunatics  such as  Luther, Calvin, James, Bacon, DeVere etc who demand a dogmatic geo-eccenticism  

How can anyone waste their time debating this subject with a heretic who posts the like of this above?

I've come to this sad conclusion. I was trying to give the benefit of the doubt, but the doubt is removed with pertinacity.  

Quote from: roscoe

Sola Scriptura again.... :roll-laugh1:

It's not sola scriptura to follow the Church's traditional understanding of the Bible. Correct

(I have an open mind on geocentrism/heliocentrism.)

Hi Clare, your last remark here is something I have pondered on, how should one answer someone who has 'an open mind on geocentrism/heliocentrism.'

Of all the reasons for an 'open mind' on the matter is the fact that science now admits that there are two possible orders for the movements of the heavens that we can observe every day, month, year, or 600 years, a geocentric order or a heliocentric order.

This is like saying there are two truths, or two possible truths so one can keep an open mind.

If however, one is a Catholic, one who believes Jesus when he said 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life..' (John 14:6), then there cannot be two truths for a Catholic, nor two possible truths. There is only ONE truth.    

God in His Providence allowed His Church to rule on this matter. Why then can a Catholic believe he can ignore this definition and consider heliocentrism is or could be THAT truth? Why chose the heretical 'truth' over the truth held by every Catholic until the sixteenth century, the order defined by the Church as the truth?

“If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not,
how shall ye believe if I tell you of heavenly things?” (John 3:12)

Have a little faith and get off the fence.