Cassini identified "the 1616 decree" as the one from the Index.
The index is, by its nature, reversible.
And there is this 1820 statement stating that "no obstacles exist".http://inters.org/approval-Settele-heliocentric

This thread should really be in the geocentrism subforum, no? Fr. Robinson's book has next to nothing to do with the topic.

Olivieri through much intrigue and dishonesty convinced the Congregation of the Index to grant an imprimatur to Canon Settele, but that did not mean the Church's condemnation of heliocentrism had been rescinded.  Robert Sungenis has astutely observed, "Imprimaturs given to private books have no authority in overturning Congregational decrees approved by supreme pontiffs and/or facilitated by a canonical trial, as was the case in 1616  and 1633.  In face of the fact that the permission initially given to Galileo's Dialogo was later rescinded by the 1633 magistrerium because it found the imprimatur was issued under false pretenses, makes the Settele imprimatur more an anomaly than a precedent.  IF it is found that the Settele imprimatur was granted under false pretenses, it can as easily be rescinded.  [There is substantial docuмentation showing that the Settele imprimatur was indeed granted under false pretenses.]  In addition, Copernicus Zuniga, Foscarini, Kepler and Galileo remained on the Index.  Hence the Settele affair proved only one thing, namely that a high-placed cleric could convince his peers with pretentious scientific claims what neither he nor they could prove since the science of cosmology was still in its infancy.  As we noted in the case of Bradley versus Airy, science would not mature nearly enough to shed sufficient light on Oliveieri's claims until long after he and his contemporaries had died.   And when it shed its light, it would should that Oliveieri's claims were entirely fallacious.  As for Pius Vii's role in the Settele affair, although there are various accounts that, after receiving Olivieri's report, he helped smooth the pathway for Settele to obtain the imprimatur, no docuмent exists containing a quote directly from Pius VII endorsing either Settele or heliocentrism.  And there is no docuмent concerning the Settele affair that has the signature of Pius VII.  As noted previously, the only thing Pius VII did was 'wave his hand in disdain.'"

First, following the 1820 events, anything about Copernicus was removed from the index by 1835. Kepler, at least, was also removed by 1835. Galileo's works had been published with permission sometime in the 1700s.

Second, I think the claim the imprimatur didn't change doctrine misses the point. Look at the part I bolded: "No obstacles exist". That's a general statement, not specific to one book, and with at least the authority of the 1616 statement of the Index.

If we were to step back and look at this from a bottom line  perspective so to speak I think it would be most wise to compare how the 1616 decree and the 1820 imprimatur compared by way of how they came about and what they stood for.

The 1616 decree came about in a fairly straight forward way; everything above board.  The 1820 imprimatur was achieved after much skullduggery and false pretenses.  Anyone familiar with the history could not deny this -- at least not honestly!

The 1616 decree stood for an affirmation of the Fathers and the Medievals, an affirmation of Sacred Scripture, and finally an affirmation of tradition.  The 1820 imprimatur, on the other hand, stood for a novelty and a completely unproven one at that.

Aside from the above, it is good to note that geocentrism was a clearly taught doctrine of the Catholic Church for many centuries.  Are we to believe that for all that time generations after generations after generations of Catholics were mislead by the teaching of the Church on this subject?

The Catholic Church does not err in matters of doctrine.  If you think otherwise please advise me and in doing so please advise me of one instance in 2,000 plus years of history that the Church has reversed herself on not praxis, but actual doctrine.

This thread should really be in the geocentrism subforum, no? Fr. Robinson's book has next to nothing to do with the topic.

Fr Robinson is a SSPX priest. Angelus Press that promote his book as orthodox is also SSPX. Finally on the SSPX website it promotes the idea that all can ignore the 1616 decree and infer Catholiocs are allowed to accept a heliocentric reading of Scripture. For me then, this subject is exactly where it belongs.

Interesting Stanley You present a decree from the Holy Office as papal and binding, yet you and history reject the 1616 decree as papal and binding. Surely if one is binding then also the other. Can we agree first on this? Now note also 'His Holiness had referred this request to the Supreme Sacred Congregation and concurrently to the consideration of the Most Eminent and Most Reverend General Cardinal Inquisitor.' On both occassions the two popes asked the Holy Office to investigate certain questions and they then approved their findings. In 1616 the Pope asked them to examine the two proposals and found the first as Formal heresy and the second as contrary to the faith. In 1820, the Pope asked the consultors to examine why the heliocentric books were put on the Index. A Fr Olivieri wrote up his report and the Holy Office approved of it. The Pope was then given it for approval. In this case however a Fr Anfossi also submitted a report that contradicted Fr Olivieri's. But Olivieri was the head man at the time and carrieed more weight. Pius VII accepted Olivieri's and decreed the findings as above.

Yes, OK, I know what you are going to say next, if we accept the above, then the 1820 binding decree eliminates the 1616 binding decree. But does it?

Read the 1820 decree again, and you will see it refers to heliocentric books. But note these books are conditional, they are heliocentric books that describe 'the earth’s movement in the manner in which it is affirmed today, even by Catholic authors.' Now why do you think this condition was mentioned in the decree? Was there a difference in Copernican books in 1820 to those of 1616? Was the heliocentrism of 1616 different to that of 1820?

As I said before, only recently have the reports of Fr Anfossi and Fr Olivieri been found, translated and made public in Finocchiaro's Retrying Galileo. His version, accepted by the Pope, was that the heliocentrism of 1616 had a violent Earth but in 1820 they knew a moving Earth was not prone to violence. He agreed the 1616 decree was papal and binding but that it was a violent heliocentrism. Now that science knew heliocentrism was not violent, Olivieri said, the new heliocentrism was no longer heretical and the pope could allow heliocentric books be read by Catholics and the last remaining books on the Index be removed. And that is why the 1820 decree qualified the kind of heliocentrism that was allowed, the one .in which it is affirmed today' be allowed.

So that is how Olivieri and Pope Pius VII avoided the problem of an infallible papal decree of 1616 which conceding to the heliocentrism promoted by nearly all philosophers since Newton's time. As far as they were concerned, they managed to save the Church's infallibility while at the same time allow the flock to believe in a non-heretical heliocentrism, one that the world had come to accept as scientifically proven.

Olivieri's brilliant tactics saved the dogma of infallibility but at a price. The fact that the 1616 records of the 1616 decree had been removed by Napoleon at the time, few could contradict Olivieri's version of the 1616 decree. What was defined as formal heresy contrary to Scripture was that the sun is fixed which has nothing to do with a violent earth. Moreover, if anyone read Copernicus's and Galileo's books they would find both denying their heliocentrism had a violent Earth. In other words, the 1820 decree was based on an an invention. But here again witness God protecting his 'infallibility' given to His Church. Pope Pius VII did not contradict the 1616 decree but actually abided by it. His decree concerned only allowing what he beliecved to be non-heretical  Heliocentric books to be read by the flock. Pope Paul VI in his time would remove the Index altogether allowing the flock to read any heretical book they liked. Meanwhile the heresies in them, including that of 1616, remained heresies.

In the outside world of course, few knew the details I have researched above. Accordingly they had to invent as many excuses as to why the 1820 decree allowed heliocentrism to be read. Attacks on the infallibility of the 1616 decree was essential, and the SSPX are continuing to prevent the truth to emerge.

Brilliant expose!  This can be confirmed in the thoroughly researched and docuмented writings of Robert Sungenis as well.

One committed to the truth and most importantly the Catholic truth should realize the importance of seeing and pointing out distinctions and clear distinctions since to a good degree they are what our Catholic Faith is built on. Modernists who would wish to destroy/denigrate/marginalize that Catholic Faith are experts in the art of ambiguity and sophistry which muddy the waters in a litany of ways, not least of which is by blurring and distorting distinctions, if not getting rid of them all together.

How many dumbed down conciliar Catholics, not to mention a good number of Trads as well, would really take the time to go behind the scenes as it were and study the ins and outs of how the modern world of cosmology and so much more has been foisted on the faithful so that they could properly defend the Church on the question of geocentrism and a whole lot more?

I'm not trying to point a finger of blame.  Many simply don't have that time.  We simply have to rely on others who have taken the time and effort to do all this.  What we should not do, however, is double down in defending a science which undermines and is subversive of some of the most core underpinnings of our Faith such as the total inerrancy of Sacred Scripture as interpreted in the Church's time honored traditional way of interpreting that Scripture.

Aside from the above, it is good to note that geocentrism was a clearly taught doctrine of the Catholic Church for many centuries. 

That it was commonly held science of the times, I'll grant. That the Fathers taught it as doctrine, I have not seen demonstrated.

Then study the words of the Fathers.  You shall be properly indoctrinated.

To make it easy for you: https://www.scripturecatholic.com/geocentrism/


Tradition / Church Fathers

In 1564, the Council of Trent (Session IV, April  8 infallibly declared that that no one could “in matters of faith and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine…interpret the sacred Scriptures…even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”
This infallible declaration was restated by the First Vatican Council: “In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers” (On Revelation, April 24, 1870, chapter 2, no. 9).
Pope Leo XIII explained why we are required to hold to the interpretation of the Fathers when they are unanimous: “the Holy Fathers, We say, are of supreme authority, whenever they all interpret in one and the same manner any text of the Bible, as pertaining to the doctrine of faith or morals; for their unanimity clearly evinces that such interpretation has come down from the Apostles as a matter of Catholic faith” (Providentissimus Deus, 1893, no. 14).

In other words, when the Fathers are unanimous about an interpretation of Scripture, their understanding comes from the Sacred Deposit of Faith handed down by Christ and the Apostles. The Fathers unanimously interpreted the Scriptures to support a geocentric cosmology. According to Trent and Vatican I (two dogmatic ecuмenical councils of the Catholic Church), we are not permitted to depart from their interpretation of the Scriptures, because their interpretation is deemed to have come from the Apostles. Those who reject geocentrism must explain why they do not submit to this rule of biblical interpretation set forth by two infallible councils.

With that, let us look at some of the quotes from the Fathers.

Things to consider when reading the Fathers regarding the earth and sun:

1) The Fathers never say the earth moves, except at the end of time.
2) The Fathers always say the earth is at rest at the center of the universe.
3) The Fathers never say the sun is the center of the universe.
4) The Fathers never say the sun does not move around the earth, even in their scientific analysis of the cosmos.
5) The Fathers always say the earth is the center of the universe.
6) The Fathers always say the sun moves as the moon moves.
7) The Fathers recognize that some of the Greeks held that the earth moves and rotates, but they do not accept that teaching.
8 ) The Fathers accept the Chaldean, Egyptian and Greek teaching that the earth is at the center of the universe and does not move.
9) The Fathers hold that the earth was created first, by itself, and only afterward the sun, moon and stars.
10) The Fathers hold that light was created after the earth, but that this light preceded the light of the sun and stars.

The following patristic commentaries were taken from the book Galileo Was Wrong by Robert Sungenis and Robert Bennett. Copying or distribution of this material is not permitted except by permission from both authors. Many of the hundreds of citations from the Fathers regarding the motion of the sun have not been included in this list, due to the redundancy it would create. Only those quotes which have the most logical and comparative relevance have been listed.


The Fathers on the Geocentric Cosmos

Ambrose: Worthy surely was he to stand forth as a man who might stay the course of the river, and who might say: “Sun, stand still,” and delay the night and lengthen the day, as though to witness his victory. Why? a blessing denied to Moses–he alone was chosen to lead the people into the promised land. A man he was, great in the wonders he wrought by faith, great in his triumphs. The works of Moses were of a higher type, his brought greater success. Either of these then aided by divine grace rose above all human standing. The one ruled the sea, the other heaven. (Duties of the Clergy, Bk II, Ch XX, 99)

Ambrose: But they say that the sun can be said to be alone, because there is no second sun. But the sun himself has many things in common with the stars, for he travels across the heavens, he is of that ethereal and heavenly substance, he is a creature, and is reckoned amongst all the works of God. He serves God in union with all, blesses Him with all, praises Him with all. Therefore he cannot accurately be said to be alone, for he is not set apart from the rest.(Exposition of the Christian Faith, Bk V, Ch II)

Anatolius of Alexandria: Eudemus relates in his Astrologies that Enopides found out the circle of the zodiac and the cycle “of the great year. And Thales discovered the eclipse of the sun and its period in the tropics in its constant inequality. And Anaximander discovered that the earth is poised in space, and moves round the axis of the universe. And Anaximenes discovered that the moon has her light from the sun, and found out also the way in which she suffers eclipse. And the rest of the mathematicians have also made additions to these discoveries. We may instance the facts–that the fixed stars move round the axis passing through the poles, while the planets remove from each other round the perpendicular axis of the zodiac; and that the axis of the fixed stars and the planets is the side of a pente-decagon with four-and-twenty parts. (XVII)

Aphrahat: For the sun in twelve hours circles round, from the east unto the west; and when he has accomplished his course, his light is hidden in the night-time, and the night is not disturbed by his power. And in the hours of the night the sun turns round in his rapid course, and turning round begins to run in his accustomed path. (Demonstrations, 24).

Archeleus: When the light had been diffused everywhere, God began to constitute the universe, and commenced with the heaven and the earth; in which process this issue appeared, to wit, that the midst, which is the locality of earth covered with shadow, as a consequence of the interpositions of the creatures which were called into being, was found to be obscure, in such wise that circuмstances required light to be introduced into that place, which was thus situated in the midst. (Disputation with Manes, 22).

Arnobius: The moon, the sun, the earth, the ether, the stars, are members and parts of the world; but if they are parts and members, they are certainly not themselves living creatures (Arnobius Against the Heathen, Book 3, 350)
Athanasius: but the earth is not supported upon itself, but is set upon the realm of the waters, while this again is kept in its place, being bound fast at the center of the universe. (Against the Heathen, Book I, Part I)

Athanasius: For who that sees the circle of heaven and the course of the sun and the moon, and the positions and movements of the other stars, as they take place in opposite and different directions, while yet in their difference all with one accord observe a consistent order, can resist the conclusion that these are not ordered by themselves, but have a maker distinct from themselves who orders them? or who that sees the sun rising by day and the moon shining by night, and waning and waxing without variation exactly according to the same number of days, and some of the stars running their courses and with orbits various and manifold, while others move without wandering, can fail to perceive that they certainly have a creator to guide them? (Against the Heathen, Bk 1, Part III, 35)

For by a nod and by the power of the Divine Word of the Father that governs and presides over all, the heaven revolves, the stars move, the sun shines, the moon goes her circuit, and the air receives the sun’s light and the aether his heat, and the winds blow: the mountains are reared on high, the sea is rough with waves, and the living things in it grow the earth abides fixed…” (Against the Heathen, Bk 1, Part III, 44)

Athenagoras: to Him is for us to know who stretched out and vaulted the heavens, and fixed the earth in its place like a center (Why the Christians do not Offer Sacrifices, Ch XIII)

Augustine: Let not the philosophers, then, think to upset our faith with arguments from the weight of bodies; for I don’t care to inquire why they cannot believe an earthly body can be in heaven, while the whole earth is suspended on nothing. For perhaps the world keeps its central place by the same law that attracts to its center all heavy bodies. (City of God, Bk XIII, Ch 1 8
Augustine: For an eclipse of the sun had also happened; and this was attributed to the divine power of Romulus by the ignorant multitude, who did not know that it was brought about by the fixed laws of the sun’s course (City of God, Bk III, Ch 15)
Augustine: This he said either of those things of which he had just been speaking–the succession of generations, the orbit of the sun, the course of rivers,–or else of all kinds of creatures. that are born and die. (City of God, Bk XII, Ch 13).
Augustine: What is there so arranged by the Author of the nature of heaven and earth as the exactly ordered course of the stars? What is there established by laws so sure and inflexible? And yet, when it pleased Him who with sovereignty and supreme power regulates all He has created, a star conspicuous among the rest by its size and splendor changed its color, size, form, and, most wonderful of all, the order and law of its course! Certainly that phenomenon disturbed the canons of the astronomers, if there were any then, by which they tabulate, as by unerring computation, the past and future movements of the stars, so as to take upon them to affirm that this which happened to the morning star (Venus) never happened before nor since. But we read in the divine books that even the sun itself stood still when a holy man, Joshua the son of Nun, had begged this from God until victory should finish the battle he had begun; and that it even went back, that the promise of fifteen years added to the life of king Hezekiah might be sealed by this additional prodigy. But these miracles, which were vouchsafed to the merits of holy men, even when our adversaries believe them, they attribute to magical arts; so Virgil, in the lines I quoted above, ascribes to magic the power to “Turn rivers backward to their source, And make the stars forget their course.” (City of God, Book XXI, Ch  8.
Augustine: Who else save Joshua the son of Nun divided the stream of the Jordan for the people to pass over, and by the utterance of a prayer to God bridled and stopped the revolving sun? Who save Samson ever quenched his thirst with water flowing forth from the jawbone of a dead ass? Who save Elias was carried aloft in a chariot of fire? (Tractates, XCI, Ch XV, 24-25, 2).
Augustine: I desire to know the power and nature of time, by which we measure the motions of bodies, and say (for example) that this motion is twice as long as that. For, I ask, since “day” declares not the stay only of the sun upon the earth, according to which day is one thing, night another, but also its entire circuit from east even to east, according to which we say, “So many days have passed” (the nights being included when we say “so many days,” and their spaces not counted apart), since, then, the day is finished by the motion of the sun, and by his circuit from east to east, I ask, whether the motion itself is the day, or the period in which that motion is completed, or both? For if the first be the day, then would there be a day although the sun should finish that course in so small a space of time as an hour. If the second, then that would not be a day if from one sunrise to another there were but so short a period as an hour, but the sun must go round four-and-twenty times to complete a day. If both, neither could that be called a day if the sun should run his entire round in the space of an hour; nor that, if, while the sun stood still, so much time should pass as the sun is accustomed to accomplish his whole course in from morning to morning. I shall not therefore now ask, what that is which is called day, but what time is, by which we, measuring the circuit of the sun, should say that it was accomplished in half the space of time it was wont, if it had been completed in so small a space as twelve hours; and comparing both times, we should call that single, this double time, although the sun should run his course from east to east sometimes in that single, sometimes in that double time. Let no man then tell me that the motions of the heavenly bodies are times, because, when at the prayer of one the sun stood still in order that he might achieve his victorious battle, the sun stood still, but time went on. For in such space of time as was sufficient was that battle fought and ended. I see that time, then, is a certain extension. But do I see it, or do I seem to see it? Thou, O Light and Truth, wilt show me. (Confessions, Bk XI, Ch XXIII, 30)

Basil: There are inquirers into nature who with a great display of words give reasons for the immobility of the earth…It is not, they go on, without reason or by chance that the earth occupies the center of the universe…Do not then be surprised that the world never falls: it occupies the center of the universe, its natural place. By necessity it is obliged to remain in its place, unless a movement contrary to nature should displace it. If there is anything in this system which might appear probable to you, keep your admiration for the source of such perfect order, for the wisdom of God. Grand phenomena do not strike us the less when we have discovered something of their wonderful mechanism. Is it otherwise here? At all events let us prefer the simplicity of faith to the demonstrations of reason. (Nine Homilies on the Hexameron, 10)
Basil: If the sun, subject to corruption, is so beautiful, so grand. so rapid in its move-meat, so invariable in its course; if its grandeur is in such perfect harmony with and due proportion to the universe: if, by the beauty of its nature, it shines like a brilliant eye in the middle of creation; if finally, one cannot tire of contemplating it, what will be the beauty of the Sun of Righteousness? (Homilies, 6)
Basil: From thence the sun, returning to the summer solstice, in the direction of the North, gives us the longest days. And, as it travels farther in the air, it burns that which is over our heads, dries up the earth, ripens the grains and hastens the maturity of the fruits of the trees. (Homilies, 6,  8.
Basil: It will not lead me to give less importance to the creation of the universe, that the servant of God, Moses, is silent as to shapes; he has not said that the earth is a hundred and eighty thousand furlongs in circuмference; he has not measured into what extent of air its shadow projects itself whilst the sun revolves around it, nor stated how this shadow, casting itself upon the moon, produces eclipses. (Homilies, IX).
Basil: In the midst of the covering and veil, where the priests were allowed to enter, was situated the altar of incense, the symbol of the earth placed in the middle of this universe; and from it came the fumes of incense. (The Mystic Meaning of the Tabernacle, Bk V, Ch VI; Clement of Rome, Stromata, Bk V)
Basil: Like tops, which after the first impulse, continue their evolutions, turning upon themselves when once fixed in their centre; thus nature, receiving the impulse of this first command, follows without interruption the course of ages, until the consummation of all things. (Homilies, V, 10)
John Cassian: He was a man who, after the close of his life had been decreed and the day of his death determined by the Lord’s sentence, prevailed by a single prayer to extend the limits set to his life by fifteen years, the sun returning by ten steps, on which it had already shone in its course towards its setting, and by its return dispersing those lines which the shadow that followed its course had already marked, and by this giving two days in one to the whole world, by a stupendous miracle contrary to the fixed laws of nature. Yet after signs so great and so incredible, after such immense proofs of his goodness, hear the Scripture tell how he was destroyed by his very successes. (Twelve Books on the Institutes, Bk XI, Ch X).

Chrysostom: Dost thou not see how God is daily blasphemed and mocked by believers and unbelievers, both in word and in deed? What then? Has He for this extinguished the sun? or stayed the course of the moon? Has He crushed the heavens and uprooted the earth? Has He dried up the sea? Has He shut up the fountains of waters? or confounded the air? Nay, on the contrary, He makes His sun to rise, His rain to descend, gives the fruits of the earth in their seasons, and thus supplies yearly nourishment to the blasphemers, to the insensible, to the polluted, to persecutors; not for one day or two, but for their whole life. Imitate Him then, emulate Him as far as human powers admit. Can thou not make the sun arise? (Homilies on First Timothy, Homily VI)
Chrysostom: And what took place at a later period were few and at intervals; for example, when the sun stood still in its course, and started back in the opposite direction. And this one may see to have occurred in our case also. For so even in our generation, in the instance of him who surpassed all in ungodliness, I mean Julian, many strange things happened. Thus when the Jєωs were attempting to raise up again the temple at Jerusalem, fire burst out from the foundations, and utterly hindered them all. (Homilies on Matthew, Homily IV)
Chrysostom: And again, David saith of the sun, that “he is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a giant to run his course.” Seest thou how he places before thee the beauty of this star, and its greatness? For even as a bridegroom when he appears from some stately chamber, so the sun sends forth his rays under the East; and adorning the heaven as it were with a saffron-colored veil, and making the clouds like roses, and running unimpeded all the day; he meets no obstacle to interrupt his course. Beholdest thou, then, his beauty? (Homilies to Antioch, Homily X)
Chrysostom: For He not only made it, but provided also that when it was made, it should carry on its operations; not permitting it to be all immoveable, nor commanding it to be all in a state of motion. The heaven, for instance, hath remained immoveable, according as the prophet says, “He placed the heaven as a vault, and stretched it out as a tent over the earth.” But, on the other hand, the sun with the rest of the stars, runs on his course through every day. And again, the earth is fixed, but the waters are continually in motion; and not the waters only, but the clouds, and the frequent and successive showers, which return at their proper season. (Homilies to Antioch, Homily XII)
Chrysostom: [Speaking of the end of the world]: For the heaven shall be disturbed and the earth shall be shaken from its foundations by reason of the fury of the wrath of the Lord of Sabaoth, in the day when His wrath shall come upon us.” And again “windows” he saith “shall be opened from the Heaven, and the foundations of the earth shall be shaken the earth shall be mightily confounded, the earth shall be bent low, it shall be perplexed with great perplexity, the earth shall stagger grievously like the drunkard and the reveller; the earth shall shake as a hut, it shall fall and not be able to rise up again: for iniquity has waxed mighty therein. And God shall set His hand upon the host of the Heaven in the height in that day, and upon the kingdoms of the earth, and He shall gather together the congregation thereof into a prison, and shall shut them up in a stronghold.” And Malachi speaking concordantly with these said” Behold the Lord almighty cometh, and who shall abide the day of His coming or who shall stand when He appeareth? for He cometh like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers soap: and He shall sit refining and purifying as it were silver, and as it were gold.” (Letters to Theodor, Letter I, 12)
Chrysostom: Consider of how great value is the righteous man. Joshua the son of Nun said, “Let the sun stand still at Gibeon, the moon at the valley of Elom” (Josh. x. 12), and it was so. Let then the whole world come, or rather two or three, or four, or ten, or twenty worlds, and let them say and do this; yet shall they not be able. But the friend of God commanded the creatures of his Friend, or rather he besought his Friend, and the servants yielded, and he below gave command to those above. Seest thou that these things are for service fulfilling their appointed course?
This was greater than the [miracles] of Moses. Why (I ask)? Because it is not a like thing to command the sea and the heavenly [bodies]. For that indeed was also a great thing, yea very great, nevertheless it was not at all equal [to the other]. Why was this? The name of Joshua [JESUS], was a type. For this reason then, and because of the very name, the creation reverenced him. What then! Was no other person called Jesus? [Yes]; but this man was on this account so called in type; for he used to be called Hoshea. Therefore the name was changed: for it was a prediction and a prophecy. He brought in the people into the promised land, as JESUS [does] into heaven; not the Law; since neither did Moses [bring them in], but remained without. (Homily on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily VIII)
Chrysostom: Therefore it was, that Joshua, the son of Nave, said, “Let the sun stand still in Gibeon, and the moon over against the valley of Ajalon.’ And again the prophet Isaiah made the sun to retrace his steps, under the reign of Hezekiah; and Moses gave orders to the air, and the sea, the earth, and the rocks. Elisha changed the nature of the waters; the Three Children triumphed over the fire. Thou seest how God hath provided for us on either hand; leading us by the beauty of the elements to the knowledge of His divinity; and, by their feebleness, not permitting us to lapse into the worship of them. (Homily to Antioch, Homily X)

Clement of Rome: The sun and moon, with the companies of the stars, roll on in harmony according to His command, within their prescribed limits, and without any deviation. (First Epistle to the Corinthians, Ch XX).
Clement of Rome: the Creator, long-suffering, merciful, the sustainer, the benefactor, ordaining love of men, counselling purity, immortal and making immortal, incomparable, dwelling in the souls of the good, that cannot be contained and yet is contained, who has fixed the great world as a centre in space, who has spread out the heavens and solidified the earth (Homily II, Ch XLV)
Clement of Rome: For it is manifest even to the unbelieving and unskilful, that the course of the sun, which is useful and necessary to the world, and which is assigned by providence, is always kept orderly; but the courses of the moon, in comparison of the course of the sun, seem to the unskilful to be inordinate and unsettled in her waxings and wanings. For the sun moves in fixed and orderly periods: for from him are hours, from him the day when he rises, from him also the night when he sets; from him months and years are reckoned, from him the variations of seasons are produced; while, rising to the higher regions, he tempers the spring; but when he reaches the top of the heaven, he kindles the summer’s heats: again, sinking, he produces the temper of autumn; and when he returns to his lowest circle, he bequeaths to us the rigour of winter’s cold from the icy binding of heaven. (Pseudo-Clementine, Bk VIII, Ch XLV)

Cyril of Jerusalem: And he, who could not hope to live because of the prophetic sentence, had fifteen years added to his life, and for the sign the sun ran backward in his course Well then, for Ezekias’ sake the sun turned back but for Christ the sun was eclipsed, not retracing his steps, but suffering eclipse, and therefore shewing the difference between them, I mean between Ezekias and Jesus. (Catechetical Lectures, II, 15)
Cyril of Jerusalem: the earth, which bears the same proportion to the heaven as the center to the whole circuмference of a wheel, for the earth is no more than this in comparison with the heaven: consider then that this first heaven which is seen is less than the second, and the second than the third, for so far Scripture has named them…” (Catechetical Lectures, VI, 3)

Ephraim the Syrian: The sun in his course teaches thee that thou rest from labour. (On Admonition and Repentance)


Eusebius: The vast expanse of heaven, like an azure veil is interposed between those without, and those who inhabit his royal mansions: while round this expanse the sun and moon, with the rest of the heavenly luminaries (like torch- bearers around the entrance of the imperial palace), perform, in honor of their sovereign, their appointed courses; holding forth, at the word of his command, an ever-burning light to those whose lot is cast in the darker regions without the pale of heaven. (Oration of Constantine, Ch 1).
Eusebius: to whom he has permitted the contemplation of celestial objects, and revealed the course and changes of the sun and moon, and the periods of the planets and fixed stars. (Oration of Constantine, Ch VI).
Eusebius: Even so one and the same impression of the solar rays illumines the air at once, gives light to the eyes, warmth to the touch, fertility to the earth, and growth to plants. The same luminary constitutes the course of time, governs the motions of the stars, performs the circuit of the heavens, imparts beauty to the earth, and displays the power of God to all: and all this he performs by the sole and unaided force of his own nature.(Oration of Constantine, Ch XII)

Gregory Nanzianzus: But who gave him motion at first? And what is it which ever moves him in his circuit, though in his nature stable and immovable, truly unwearied, and the giver and sustainer of life, and all the rest of the titles which the poets justly sing of him, and never resting in his course or his benefits? How comes he to be the creator of day when above the earth, and of night when below it? or whatever may be the right expression when one contemplates the sun? (Orations, Oration XXVIII, XXX)
Gregory Nanzianzus: The sun is extolled by David for its beauty, its greatness, its swift course, and its power, splendid as a bridegroom, majestic as a giant; while, from the extent of its circuit, it has such power that it equally sheds its light from one end of heaven to the other, and the heat thereof is in no wise lessened by distance. (Funeral Orations for St. Basil, 66).

Gregory of Nyssa: “This is the book of the generation of heaven and earth,” saith the Scripture, when all that is seen was finished, and each of the things that are betook itself to its own separate place, when the body of heaven compassed all things round, and those bodies which are heavy and of downward tendency, the earth and the water, holding each other in, took the middle place of the universe; while, as a sort of bond and stability for the things that were made, the Divine power and skill was implanted in the growth of things, guiding all things with the reins of a double operation (for it was by rest and motion that it devised the genesis of the things that were not, and the continuance of the things that are), driving around, about the heavy and changeless element contributed by the creation that does not move, as about some fixed path, the exceedingly rapid motion of the sphere, like a wheel, and preserving the indissolubility of both by their mutual action, as the circling substance by its rapid motion compresses the compact body of the earth round about, while that which is firm and unyielding, by reason of its unchanging fixedness, continually augments the whirling motion of those things which revolve round it, and intensity s is produced in equal measure in each of the natures which thus differ in their operation, in the stationary nature, I mean, and in the mobile revolution; for neither is the earth shifted from its own base, nor does the heaven ever relax in its vehemence, or slacken its motion. (On the Making of Man, 30, 1, 1)
Gregory of Nyssa: But, boasting as they do that they know these things, let them first tell us about the things of inferior nature; what they think of the body of the heavens, of the machinery which conveys the stars in their eternal courses, or of the sphere in which they move; for, however far speculation may proceed, when it comes to the uncertain and incomprehensible it must stop. For though any one say that another body, like in fashion (to that body of the heavens), fitting to its circular shape, checks its velocity, so that, ever turning in its course, it revolves conformably to that other upon itself, being retained by the force that embraces it from flying off at a tangent, yet how can he assert that these bodies will remain unspent by their constant friction with each other? And how, again, is motion produced in the case of two coeval bodies mutually conformed, when the one remains motionless (for the inner body, one would have thought, being held as in a vice by the motionlessness of that which embraces it, will be quite unable to act); and what is it that maintains the embracing body in its fixedness, so that it remains unshaken and unaffected by the motion of that which fits into it? (Answer to Eunomius’ Second Book)
Gregory of Nyssa: And how does earth below form the foundation of the whole, and what is it that keeps it firmly in its place? what is it that controls its downward tendency? If any one should interrogate us on these and such-like points, will any of us be found so presumptuous as to promise an explanation of them? No! the only reply that can be given by men of sense is this:–that He Who made all things in wisdom can alone furnish an account of His creation. For ourselves, “through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God,” as saith the Apostle. (Answer to Eunomius’ Second Book)
Gregory of Nyssa: “…the vault of heaven prolongs itself so uninterruptedly that it encircles all things with itself, and that the earth and its surroundings are poised in the middle, and that the motion of all the revolving bodies is round this fixed and solid center…” (On the Soul and Resurrection)
Gregory of Nyssa: “…on whatever side the sun’s rays may fall on some particular point of the globe, if we follow a straight diameter, we shall find shadow upon the opposite point, and so, continuously, at the opposite end of the direct line of the rays shadow moves round that globe, keeping pace with the sun, so that equally in their turn both the upper half and the under half of the earth are in light and darkness…” (On the Soul and Resurrection)
Gregory of Nyssa: And when you look at the waning and waxing moon you are taught other truths by the visible figure of that heavenly body, viz. that it is in itself devoid of light, and that it revolves in the circle nearest to the earth, and that it is lit by light from the sun; just as is the case with mirrors, which, receiving the sun upon them, do not reflect rays of their own, but those of the sun, whose light is given back from their smooth flashing surface. Those who see this, but do not examine it, think that the light comes from the moon herself. But that this is not the case is proved by this; that when she is diametrically facing the sun she has the whole of the disc that looks our way illuminated; but, as she traverses her own circle of revolution quicker from moving in a narrower space, she herself has completed this more than twelve times before the sun has once traveled round his; whence it happens that her substance is not always covered with light. (On the Soul and Resurrection).

Gregory Thaumaturgos: And the life of men weareth away, as day by day, and in the periods of hours and years, and the determinate courses of the sun, some are ever coming, and others passing away. And the matter is like the transit of torrents as they fall into the measureless deep of the sea with a mighty noise. And all things that have been constituted by God for the sake of men abide the same: as, for instance, I that man is born of earth, and departs to earth again; that the earth itself continues stable; that the sun accomplishes its circuit about it perfectly, and rolls round to the same mark again; and that the winds in like manner, and the mighty rivers which flow into the sea, and the breezes that beat upon it, all act without forcing it to pass beyond its limits, and without themselves also violating their appointed laws. (On Ecclesiastes, Ch 1, 2)

Hippolytus: When Hezekiah, king of Judah, was still sick and weeping, there came an angel, and said to him: “I have seen thy tears, and I have heard thy voice. Behold, I add unto thy time fifteen years. And this shall be a sign to thee from the Lord: Behold, I turn back the shadow of the degrees of the house of thy father, by which the sun has gone down, the ten degrees by which the shadow has gone down,” so that day be a day of thirty-two hours. For when the sun had run its course to the tenth hour, it returned again. And again, when Joshua the son of Nun was fighting against the Amorites, when the sun was now inclining to its setting, and the battle was being pressed closely, Joshua, being anxious lest the heathen host should escape on the descent of night, cried out, saying, “Sun, stand thou still in Gibeon; and thou moon, in the valley of Ajalon,” until I vanquish this people. And the sun stood still, and the moon, in their places, so that day was one of twenty-four hours. And in the time of Hezekiah the moon also turned back along with the sun, that there might be no collision between the two elemental bodies, by their bearing against each other in defiance of law. And Merodach the Chaldean, king of Babylon, being struck with amazement at that time–for he studied the science of astrology, and measured the courses of these bodies carefully – on learning the cause, sent a letter and gifts to Hezekiah, just as also the wise men from the east did to Christ. (Fragments, I, Discourse on Hezekiah).
Hippolytus: We find in the commentaries, written by our predecessors, that day had thirty-two hours. For when the sun had run its course, and reached the tenth hour, and the shadow had gone down by the ten degrees in the house of the temple, the sun turned back again by the ten degrees, according to the word of the Lord, and there were thus twenty hours. And again, the sun accomplished its own proper course, according to the common law, and reached its setting. And thus there were thirty-two hours. (Fragments, III, Discourse on Hezekiah).
Hippolytus: For what richer beauty can there be than that of the circle of heaven? And what form of more blooming fairness than that of earth’s surface? And what is there swifter in the course than the chariot of the sun? And what more graceful car than the lunar orb? And what work more wonderful than the compact mosaic of the stars? And what more productive of supplies than the seasonable winds? And what more spotless mirror than the light of day? And what creature more excellent than man?(Discourse on the Holy Theophany, 1)
Hippolytus: [Refuting the view of the Greek Ecphantus]: “And that the earth in the middle of the cosmical system is moved round its own center towards the east.” (The Prooemium, Ch XIII)

Irenaeus: The sun also, who runs through his orbit in twelve months, and then returns to the same point in the circle (Against Heresies, Bk I, Ch XVII, 1)

Jerome: In Exodus we read that the battle was fought against Amalek while Moses prayed, and the whole people fasted until the evening. Joshua, the son of Nun, bade sun and moon stand still, and the victorious army prolonged its fast for more than a day. (Against Jovinianus, Bk 2).
Jerome: The moon may dispute over her eclipses and ceaseless toil, and ask why she must traverse every month the yearly orbit of the sun. The sun may complain and want to know what he has done that he travels more slowly than the moon. (Against the Pelagians, Bk I, 19)
John Damascene: For it is night when the sun is under the earth, and the duration of night is the course of the sun under the earth from its rising till its setting. (The Orthodox Faith, Bk 2, Ch 7)

Justin Martyr: The former, after he had been named Jesus (Joshua), and after he had received strength from. His Spirit, caused the sun to stand still. (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch CXIII)
Justin Martyr: And again, when the land was given up to you with so great a display of power, that you witnessed the sun stand still in the heavens by the order of that man whose name was Jesus (Joshua), and not go down for thirty-six hours, as well as all the other miracles which were wrought for you as time served; and of these it seems good to me now to speak of another, for it conduces to your hereby knowing Jesus, whom we also know to have been Christ the Son of God, who was crucified, and rose again, and ascended to heaven, and will come again to judge all men, even up to Adam himself. (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch CXXXII)

Mathetes: by whom He made the heavens – by whom he enclosed the sea within its proper bounds–whose ordinances all the stars faithfully observe–from whom the sun has received the measure of his daily course to be observed – whom the moon obeys, being commanded to shine in the night, and whom the stars also obey, following the moon in her course; by whom all things have been arranged, and placed within their proper limits (To Diognetes, Ch 7).

Methodius: And, of a truth, it seemed worth while to inquire also about the sun,–what is the manner of his being set in the heaven; also what is the orbit he traverses; also whither it is that, after a short time, he retires; and why it is that even he does not go out of his proper course: but he, too, as one may say, is observing a commandment of a higher power, and appears with us just when he is allowed to do so, and departs as if he were called away. (Concerning Free Will)

Methodius: Resuming then, let us first lay bare, in speaking of those things according to our power, the imposture of those who boast as though they alone had comprehended from what forms the heaven is arranged, in accordance with the hypothesis of the Chaldeans and Egyptians. For they say that the circuмference of the world is likened to the turnings of a well-rounded globe, the earth having a central point. For its outline being spherical, it is necessary, they say, since there are the same distances of the parts, that the earth should be the center of the universe, around which, as being older, the heaven is whirling. For if a circuмference is described from the central point, which seems to be a circle, for it is impossible for a circle to be described without a point, and it is impossible for a circle to be without a point,–surely the earth consisted before all, they say, in a state of chaos and disorganization. (Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse VIII, Ch XIV)

Tertullian: In Exodus, was not that position of Moses, battling against Amalek by prayers, maintained as it was perseveringly even till “sunset,” a “late Station?” Think we that Joshua the son of Nun, when warring down the Amorites, had breakfasted on that day on which he ordered the very elements to keep a Station? The sun “stood” in Gibeon, and the moon in Ajalon; the sun and the moon “stood in station until the People was avenged of his enemies, and the sun stood in the mid heaven.” When, moreover, (the sun) did draw toward his setting and the end of the one day, there was no such day beforetime and in the latest time (of course, (no day) so long), “that God,” says (the writer), “should hear a man” – (a man,) to be sure, the sun’s peer, so long persistent in his duty – a Station longer even than late. (On Fasting, Ch X)
Memoirs of Edessa: For look at the sun, and the moon, and the signs of the zodiac,(4) and all the other creatures which are greater than we in some points, and see how individual freedom has been denied them, and how they are all fixed in their course by decree, so that they may do that only which is decreed for them, and nothing else. For the sun never says, I will not rise at my appointed time; nor the moon, I will not change, nor wane, nor wax; nor does any one of the stars say, I will not rise nor set. (Book of the Laws)

Thank you for providing what I have to assume is what you consider the best quotes you can find.
I see a few Fathers that mention geocentrism, but of those only 1 that says it is doctrine.
So the Fathers do not teach geocentrism as doctrine.

A person who indoctrinates/teaches  including a Father of the Church no more usually asserts that he is indoctrinating/teaching than the recipient asserts that he is being indoctrinated.  It just happens.  They just do it!

There are several explanations. A normal, non-geocentrist Catholic has any number of approaches to understand the history.

However, if you claim the 1820 statement is just about books, so that you may dismiss it, then you must also dismiss your beloved 1616 statement of the Index. The Index is about books.

And if behind the scenes actions undermine the 1820 statement, then you must also hold they undermine the 1616 statement.

A few others:
1. Is the Index a competent authority for doctrine? You have to say it is.
2. Is the 1616 decision more than disciplinary? You have to say it is more.
3. Is the 1616 decision still in force? You have to say it is.
4. Does the 1616 decision apply to modern cosmology? You have to say it does.
5. Is the 1820 statement not binding? You have to say it isn't.

These are just 5 points which you must hold in order to maintain geocentrism as a doctrine. If you fail to defend any one of these, your position collapses.

In general, you also need to hold that the Catholic Church can state that "no obstacles exist" for Catholics to hold heresy for 200 years - or more if we look at events from the 1700s. And no pope during that time, not even St. Pius X, did anything about it.

Excellent post Stanley, for you have summarised a contradiction that has very serious consequences for our understanding of the Catholic faith and papal infallibility.

In his book, Fr W.W. Roberts makes the greatest case for the infallibility of the 1616 decree. He wrote his book in 1870 and added further evidence for infallibility in 1885. What he said in his book was that 'the judgement of Rome far outweighs the judgement of individual theologians.' The first judgement of the 1616 decree came from Pope Urban III when at Galileo's trial he presided over Galileo's sentence like so:

Invoking, then, the most holy Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that of His most glorious Mother Mary ever Virgin, by this our definitive sentence we say, pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo, on account of these things proved against you by docuмentary evidence, and which have been confessed by you as aforesaid, have rendered yourself to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, that is, of having believed and held a doctrine which is false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures -to wit, that the sun is in the centre of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the Earth moves, and is not the centre of the universe; and that an opinion can be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture.

Fr Roberts, who was a convinced heliocentrist, as all were from 1835, believing it was proven by science, rejected the Vatican I dogma of infallibility because of his conviction that it was infallible and that the dogma at Vatican I confirmed it was infallible. What he did not have was access to the docuмents of 1820 when the Holy Office, all under the same belief that heliocentrism was proven, so he did not refer to it in any way. But as it turned out The Holy Office in 1820 acknowledged the 1616 decree was non-reformable. So, twice Rome confirmed the 1616 decree was absolute. Now in any sense of the word that had to mean infallible, unless you can have an irreformable decree that is not infallible?

1. The Index in 1616 was the vehicle Pope Paul V used to make the heresy known to all. Vatican I had allowed the means of communication.
‘The Roman Pontiffs, moreover, according to the condition of the times and affairs advised, sometimes by calling ecuмenical councils… sometimes by particular synods, sometimes by employing other helps which divine providence supplied, have defined that those matters must be held which with God’s help they have recognised as in agreement with Sacred Scripture and apostolic tradition. For, the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might forcefully set it out…’ --- Vatican I (1869-1870) (Denz. 1836.)

2. Of course it was more than a disciplinary decree. That is like asking someone if Pope Urban VIII got it all wrong when finding Galileo guilty of suspicion of heresy. Heresy is not a tempory thing, heresy one day, not heresy another. Of course it was absolute as Pope Urban VIII ruled.  

3. Yes, it was never abrogated, nor challenged by Rome, not even in 1820.

4. Ah, here we have a problem. You cannot make cosmology formal heresy, that is absurd. What was found formal heresy was to contradict the Scriptures, God's words. It matters not what the subject matter is. Bellarmine said:

5. 'For, the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine.' (Vatican I.) With the lot of them believing heliocentrism was proven, Olivieri conjured up a solution to get over the infallible hurdle and have the now proven heliocentrism. He gave this to Pope Pius VII who then decreed this new heliocentrism was not against the Faith.

As I said Stanley, here is a dilemma the Church doesn't need. Pope Gregory XIV couldn't cope with this contradiction so 'made no comment' when he got rid of the four books from the Index.

Infallibility means truth. Now that it is known that the 1616 decree has never been falsified, its infallibility has not been proven wrong. The decree by Pope Pius VII is therefore a new doctrine and has no backing of the Holy Spirit so cannot be called infallible.

As for the popes after that, like Pius X, well the heliocentric lie fooled 'even the elect' as the Bible warned. I have many times wondered why the Church never clarified the situation after 1835 over the last century but I think we now know. Please excuse the different sizes, it happens any time you post something, you just dont know what size it will come out.