Flat Earth doesn't have to be true to blow the lid off this though, all you have to do is prove we haven't been to the Moon or Mars and everything else falls apart. 

I'm not so sure.  Those things don't shock people the same way an FE would.  Those things discredit the space agencies as liar, but FE discredits the ENTIRE scientific establishment.  That's probably why some people are so hostile to the idea.

FE is a lame try to discredit the Church, Saints, Doctors, and Popes.

Flat earth is beautiful, simple, provable, reasonable,  scripturally based, non contradictory and counter-pagan. Discredit belongs to the globe. Catholics are not ashamed of Truth even when inconvenient.      

Flat earth is beautiful, simple, provable, reasonable,  scripturally based, non contradictory and counter-pagan. Discredit belongs to the globe. Catholics are not ashamed of Truth even when inconvenient.     

FE is a lame stubborn attitude, worse than heliocentrism 500 years ago. Heliocentrists tried to make a fool of the Church, and lead many to doubt the Church. It was overcome when scientists admitted to have no proof. 

FE is starting the drama all over. This time attacking less educated people.

Uhm, no.

Your baseless and ignorant view of the matter has been duly noted.

This thread isn't about the merits or demerits of FE, but about whether it's important what the shape of the earth is.

You started this "subtopic", I didn't, Mr. "baseful" and "less ignorant" know it all better!

Let's talk about the most important implications of the 2nd "Vatican Council" and some interesting wording at the end. IMO nobody can deny that antipope Paul VI exercised his full teaching ability after reading these words:

https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/docuмents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html at the end of the docuмent states...

Each and all these matters which are set forth in this Decree have been favorably voted on by the Fathers of the Council. And We, by the apostolic authority given Us by Christ and in union with the Fathers, approve, decree and establish them in the Holy Spirit and command that they be promulgated for the glory of God.

Many other VII docuмents are similarly stated. He is trying to promulgate fake doctrine ex cathedra here, I don't think there is a way around this. This docuмent, with this at the end, is why I am a Vacantist leaning Privationist. I would be an Indulter if it weren't for the wording in these docuмents, particularly this one. The issue is binary enough that there is either Indult or sede-something, I don't even think you can be RnR with wording like this. I have never heard a good defense of this wording from ANYONE.

This is the most obvious deception ever in the history of the Church, but 99+% of the world is duped on this. I imagine not too many will read this topic but if I could scream at the top of my lungs about how essential this is to understanding The Crisis... The RnR position doesn't actually exist IMO because of these docuмents. It's mindblowing.

Orestes Brownson 1874:

"There can be no more fatal mistake than to soften, liberalize or latitudinize this terrible dogma, "Out of the Church there is no salvation... If we wish to convert Protestants and infidels we must preach in all its rigor the naked dogma.  Give them the smallest peg or what appears so, not to you, but to them;--- the smallest peg on which to hang a hope of salvation without being in or actually reconciled to the Church by the sacrament of Penance, and all the arguments you can address to them to prove the necessity of being in the Church in order to be saved will have no more effect on them than rain on a duck's back."

Incredible quote LT, it's a black and white issue and nobody wants to see it this way.

IMO nobody can deny that antipope Paul VI exercised his full teaching ability after reading these words:

Doesn't sound like his intentions were purely "pastoral," does it?

Doesn't sound like his intentions were purely "pastoral," does it?

Yes, that's the biggest RnR cope ever. Xavier is more consistent and intellectually honest than any hardcore RnR (except for some in the Resistance which isn't actually RnR but thinks it is). 

What can anyone say?  If the divinely-established authority can be so thoroughly ab/used to spread error and incomprehensible destruction, what good is it?

Papa Paul is their man, I understand trads weren't on usenet in the 80s/90s as much as people are online now and can disseminate this information... Now there is no excuse, you can go over to vatican.va and look at the docuмents.

In the quote, he is not using his infallibility to bind anyone, instead, he is only using his authority to promulgate decrees.

What a relief!  I'm sure everyone rotting in Hell as a result of V2 will be so happy to discover it was all just a big mistake!

If the apostolic authority granted to and exercised by the Supreme Pontiff, in union with the Fathers, can "approve, decree and establish" that which is erroneous, contrary to faith and morals, to souls, etc., WHAT GOOD IS IT???!?!?! 

If Papal Infallibility ONLY means the Supreme Pontiff cannot say -- in a docuмent whose supposedly-binding nature cannot possibly be mistaken -- the Holy Trinity is really just TWO Persons, for example, that ain't much of a promise and protection.