CathInfo.com

Nevertheless, the fact remains that the 1616 decree has never been officially reversed.  

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".

The Assessor of the Holy Office has referred the request of Giuseppe Settele, Professor of Optics and Astronomy at La Sapienza University, regarding permission to publish his work Elements of Astronomy in which he espouses the common opinion of the astronomers of our time regarding the earth’s daily and yearly motions, to His Holiness through Divine Providence, Pope Pius VII. Previously, 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. His Holiness has decreed that no obstacles exist for those who sustain Copernicus’ affirmation regarding the earth’s movement in the manner in which it is affirmed today, even by Catholic authors. He has, moreover, suggested the insertion of several notations into this work, aimed at demonstrating that the above mentioned affirmation [of Copernicus], as it is has come to be understood, does not present any difficulties; difficulties that existed in times past, prior to the subsequent astronomical observations that have now occurred. [Pope Pius VII] has also recommended that the implementation [of these decisions] be given to the Cardinal Secretary of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace. He is now appointed the task of bringing to an end any concerns and criticisms regarding the printing of this book, and, at the same time, ensuring that in the future, regarding the publication of such works, permission is sought from the Cardinal Vicar whose signature will not be given without the authorization of the Superior of his Order.

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.

In addition, Copernicus Zuniga, Foscarini, Kepler and Galileo remained on the Index.  

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.

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".

Quote

Quote

The Assessor of the Holy Office has referred the request of Giuseppe Settele, Professor of Optics and Astronomy at La Sapienza University, regarding permission to publish his work Elements of Astronomy in which he espouses the common opinion of the astronomers of our time regarding the earth’s daily and yearly motions, to His Holiness through Divine Providence, Pope Pius VII. Previously, 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. His Holiness has decreed that no obstacles exist for those who sustain Copernicus’ affirmation regarding the earth’s movement in the manner in which it is affirmed today, even by Catholic authors. He has, moreover, suggested the insertion of several notations into this work, aimed at demonstrating that the above mentioned affirmation [of Copernicus], as it is has come to be understood, does not present any difficulties; difficulties that existed in times past, prior to the subsequent astronomical observations that have now occurred. [Pope Pius VII] has also recommended that the implementation [of these decisions] be given to the Cardinal Secretary of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace. He is now appointed the task of bringing to an end any concerns and criticisms regarding the printing of this book, and, at the same time, ensuring that in the future, regarding the publication of such works, permission is sought from the Cardinal Vicar whose signature will not be given without the authorization of the Superior of his Order.

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.