Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

I would caution anyone who would too quickly make geocentrism an inherent part of their Resistance to modern errors.  

It has taken since 1741 for science to start to catch up to where the Church stumbled, and that has been 273 years already.  

Two hundred seventy three years ago, Pope Benedict XIV gave the Galileo sympathizers a pass, and that went on all during the American Revolution, and was no small part of the French Revolution, as well.  How much blood was spilt, and how many heads rolled as a consequence of the folly of one pope?  And that doesn't mean he therefore was not pope. But what it DOES mean is that popes are not infallible in everything they do, even when the subject matter is in regards to faith or morals, or when they are acting authoritatively.  Pope Benedict was not binding the Church.  He was not defining doctrine.  But he was teaching, and what he taught was wrong.  

Sedes obviously will have apoplectic fits over this.

Still we should not be too hasty.  It has taken 273 years for science to catch up to where the Church went weak in the knees under Benedict XIV in 1741. ("In 1741, Pope Benedict XIV authorized publication of Galileo's complete works. Heliocentrism was formally rescended [sic] as heresy in 1758" -- from a secular website.)

It would seem someone likes to think the Church is in the habit of releasing damned lies from being "heresy" from time to time, but such is the confusion of those who just don't "get it."  When the Church defines a heresy, it is not reformable, any more than the wetness of water can be changed to dryness.  Heliocentrism has never been rescinded, nor can it ever be rescinded, but not even scientists today would hope it would because credible scientists don't subscribe to heliocentrism today.


.

That's pretty amazing.  It seems like this probably is wrapped up within protestanism too.  Take the doctrine of transubstantiation, for example.  It wouldn't be that hard to believe transubstantion was an erroneous teaching, if the church could be so wrong about the physical world!  If on the the other hand, the church had always been right about geocentrism, then the church would appear to have authority, not just in the spiritual realm, but also in the physical!  

With that understood and accepted, it would be easy to understand how revolutionary forces in the west could have stripped the church of her property and temporal power, and lauded that as a "good;"  forever chiming about the seperation of church and state!  

It seems very important that our view of the physical world, be consistent with our view of the spiritual world or perhaps, rather that they be thought of as something very much a part of each other, like the brain and thought.  

Yes, yes, yes and yes again. Now we are beginning to see the importance to the Catholic faith (as the title of this thread asks) to resolve once and for all the truth about the Church's 1616 decree and the 1633 trial of Galileo. As the EARTHMOVERS said Copernicanism affected the Catholic Faith like DRY-ROT in a cathedral, the flock in its pews unaware of what was happening. First the Bible came under attack, the very book that determined so much of the Catholic faith. If the Fathers got it wrong in this case, what other false interpretations could there be over the first 17 centuries? Then there was the new Copernican exegesis and hermeneutics that became the NORM after the 1741-1835 heresy to orthodoxy by way of the Holy Office. Then the 'rising of the Son' was put in doubt for the same reason the 'rising of the sun' was misinterpreted.

And all that because men, in both Church and State accepted human reasoning as SCIENCE. All that needs to be done is NOT prove geocentrism, but PROVE heliocentrism has never been proven, that the matter is one of FAITH not science.

Please do not fall again into the trap that occurred after the 1633 trial, when men insisted geocentrism could be proven by the scientific method. It cannot. God in His wisdom created a METAPHYSICAL universe, beyond the human mind to comprehend in many ways, from geo or helio, or the structure of circuмference that has to end somewhere it being finite and capable of revolving as we see it do. It is then back to the idea that heaven lies beyond the physical cosmos, illustrated by Jesus assent into heaven, actually doing so as moving upwards into the sky, in the same manner as He will descend back to earth on the last day from heaven above.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

I would caution anyone who would too quickly make geocentrism an inherent part of their Resistance to modern errors.  

It has taken since 1741 for science to start to catch up to where the Church stumbled, and that has been 273 years already.  

Two hundred seventy three years ago, Pope Benedict XIV gave the Galileo sympathizers a pass, and that went on all during the American Revolution, and was no small part of the French Revolution, as well.  How much blood was spilt, and how many heads rolled as a consequence of the folly of one pope?  And that doesn't mean he therefore was not pope. But what it DOES mean is that popes are not infallible in everything they do, even when the subject matter is in regards to faith or morals, or when they are acting authoritatively.  Pope Benedict was not binding the Church.  He was not defining doctrine.  But he was teaching, and what he taught was wrong.  

Sedes obviously will have apoplectic fits over this.

Still we should not be too hasty.  It has taken 273 years for science to catch up to where the Church went weak in the knees under Benedict XIV in 1741. ("In 1741, Pope Benedict XIV authorized publication of Galileo's complete works. Heliocentrism was formally rescended [sic] as heresy in 1758" -- from a secular website.)

It would seem someone likes to think the Church is in the habit of releasing damned lies from being "heresy" from time to time, but such is the confusion of those who just don't "get it."  When the Church defines a heresy, it is not reformable, any more than the wetness of water can be changed to dryness.  Heliocentrism has never been rescinded, nor can it ever be rescinded, but not even scientists today would hope it would because credible scientists don't subscribe to heliocentrism today.


.

That's pretty amazing.  It seems like this probably is wrapped up within protestanism too.  Take the doctrine of transubstantiation, for example.  It wouldn't be that hard to believe transubstantion was an erroneous teaching, if the church could be so wrong about the physical world!  If on the the other hand, the church had always been right about geocentrism, then the church would appear to have authority, not just in the spiritual realm, but also in the physical!  

Yes.

With that understood and accepted, it would be easy to understand how revolutionary forces in the west could have stripped the church of her property and temporal power, and lauded that as a "good;"  forever chiming about the seperation of church and state!  

I think the chiming of separation of church and state came later, like the mid-20th cent.  It's mostly a Freemasonic principle.

It seems very important that our view of the physical world, be consistent with our view of the spiritual world or perhaps, rather that they be thought of as something very much a part of each other, like the brain and thought.  

Again, be careful.  The brain and thought are not that much related.  

We don't think with our brain.  That one sentence drives atheists up the wall.  There are neurosurgeons equally divided on the question, with faithful Christians (that means Catholics) saying thought is reflected by the brain but it is not inherent.  How could a soul suffer in Purgatory without a body is he needs his brain to think or to feel?  So you see, the protestants won't be very clear-headed on this because of their denial of Purgatory.

But as for atheist brain surgeons, they like to announce how essential the brain is for thought but they can't prove it.  Thought isn't to the human person what an electrical system is to a car or a computer.  

.

Quote Cassini:
And all that because men, in both Church and State accepted human reasoning as SCIENCE. All that needs to be done is NOT prove geocentrism, but PROVE heliocentrism has never been proven, that the matter is one of FAITH not science.  


Quote Neil:
If you're waiting for proof of heliocentrism never having been proved, you'll be waiting forever because you will never prove something like that did NOT happen.  How can you prove that a rock did not fall from the sky on June 22nd, 1993, or any other day, for that matter?  How can you prove that?

You are correct again Neil, so let me rephrase above quote:
'All that needs to be done is to SHOW heliocentrism has never been proven....'
There that's better. But showing it is not proven is proving it is not proven isn't it.
Oh this relativity...