CathInfo.com

I'll start a new thread.  I have been sitting on some quotes from Saint and Doctor, St. John Damascene.  It's fairly relevant to your assertion above.

As of yesterday ca. noon (EDT), there were already 205 topics here in this flattist ghetto.

I beg you to please consider whether this flattist ghetto needs yet another topic.  Yet another topic here which, no matter how carefully you attempt to focus its discussion/debates by creating it with a clearly phrased Subject [^†], will most likely collapse into yet another free-for-all ignoring that Subject, and shovelling in so much of the flattist [expletives deleted] that've caused readers' eyes to glaze over, again & again.  Meanwhile, new discussion/debates that are dead-center on-topic will be posted into other practically random topic.  Which will stimulate spherist responses that were already adequate rebuttals in whatever topics they were initially posted, but where they were of course rejected on axiomatic grounds a priori by the flattists [^×].

I don't intend herein to pick on any CathInfo member in particular, but I can't overlook such a well-timed hook for my protest.  It does apply to all members.  So yes, I was already exasperated with 'Neil Obstat' when he started this very topic earlier this week.

-------
Note †: E.g., The highly relevant topic on the 1893 encyclical letter by Pope Leo XIII: Proventissimus Deus.  An encyclical whose meaning is still being debated late this week, but the tightly-focused topic has fallen thro' lack of use (i.e., not since "February 11, 2018, 23:52:36 (CDT)") to near the bottom of this subforum's index-page 4.

Note ×: E.g., "Why can't you globists show me even 1 convincing photo of your 'blue-marble' globe?  Oh!  But of course, I refuse (a priori) to accept any images from any national or supranational space agencies, because they are all demonic."

So genuine Catholic opinion still exists in the church as it is today?

Has it really persisted through today? You don't believe that Truth has been eclipsed or distorted by modernism?

The belief that underlies pretty much every variation of traditional Catholicism that appears on this forum is that we are able to identify when Truth has been distorted my modernism by looking at the Tradition (and tradition) of the Church as it has persisted through time.  Genuine Catholic opinion still exists among those of us who seek it out.

The people who try to introduce new ideas and practices into Catholicism on the basis that they existed in the early Church are guilty of archeologism. 

Archaeologism is not so much a heresy as a trend, a certain approach to Catholic liturgy and practice. Its distinguishing characteristic is an excessive value placed on those Catholic practices which came earlier in historical-chronological succession. For the archaeologist, first is always best. A practice or prayer of the patristic Church is "better" or "purer" than a practice of the medieval Church. 

http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/theology/81-theology/364-archaeologism.html
I think that everyone here is aware of how destructive this trend has been to the Church in recent centuries.  If not, read the article which is the source of the quote.  tl;dr It was a major influence on Vatican II.

To rely on a patristic interpretation of Scripture (that did not even have acceptance from all of the Fathers) while ignoring that it disappeared from Catholicism for over a thousand years is an example of archeologism.   

There is a reason that the belief in flat earth disappeared and it wasn't pagans, Copernicus or Freemasons.  It is because our ancestors in the Faith discerned that spherical earth was true.

There is a reason that the belief in flat earth disappeared and it wasn't pagans, Copernicus or Freemasons.  It is because our ancestors in the Faith discerned that spherical earth was true.

Prove it.  You continue to make assertions that you cannot prove.  Until you do, this (above), and the rest of your assertions are dismissed and your persistent contradiction of the Fathers and Scripture have been duly noted.