You were the first one to go off on that tangent, bub. And you've proven exactly nothing. I've given examples of Popes that believed in a glob earth, I've verified that all Catholic universities and educated Catholics in the middle ages believed in the globe earth, and I've also shown you how St. Bellarmine's condemnation of Galileo NEVER mentioned Galileo's belief in a globe earth, AND I've shown you that Bellarmine believed in the Ptolemaic globe earth model as shown by his mentions of epicycles which only existed in that model.
Indeed no Pope ever issued a docuмent stating "one must believe in a globe earth" but they never did that for a flat earth either, so the point is entirely moot.

It does matter, because one is the truth and one is a lie.  You can't have it both ways. 

It does matter, because one is the truth and one is a lie.  You can't have it both ways.

What is a lie? I'm not trying to have anything both ways you dunce. You can't prove the earth is flat by a lack of a Pope teaching it being a globe, when no Pope has ever taught it was flat either. 

Yet more pernicious lies of the flat earthers.
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)

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 18 )

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)
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)

Eusebius: “The sun and the moon have their settled course. The stars move in no uncertain orbits round this terrestrial globe. The revolution of the seasons recurs according to unerring laws. The solid fabric of the earth was established by the word: the winds receive their impulse at appointed times; and the course of the waters continues with ceaseless flow, the ocean is circuмscribed by an immovable barrier, and whatever is comprehended within the compass of earth and sea, is all contrived for wondrous and important ends.”

The first paragraph is about pagans and does not qualify for Fathers of the Church.
The second does not say earth is a globe, but that it is suspended on nothing and is at the bottom of creation, according to Catholic Fathers.
The third shows Gregory of Nyssa was a flat earther, speaking of the armillary sphere.   This is evidenced by "and then it returns to the same point in the CIRCLE."
Eusebius was also a flat earther.  This is evidenced elsewhere, but also here in the sentence when he says "the ocean is circuмscribed by an immovable barrier..."
Again, if you are unfamiliar with the subject and attempt to prove a point in ignorance, you will be proven wrong publicly.  Go study and come back when you know more. 

Ummm.... we've been over this before. I never said that any pope has taught that the earth is flat. There wasn't really a need to, until after the Reformation, when the pagan global model really took off. And now NASA would have us believe that there is no God, and that the earth doesn't hold a privileged place in the universe (God's creation). The Church hasn't really been interested in countering the pagan science model, unfortunately. Although Pope St. Pius X did try, but I'm not sure that anyone really paid attention.

Pope St. Pius X was also a globe earther. 

What does that have to do with what I wrote? Do you have any ability at all to stay on topic? I don't suppose you have ADD, do you?

You brought him up, not me, silly woman. 

OK, then tell me what keeps the Sun in orbit around the Earth.
It's going over 24,000,000 miles per hour.  
I'll bet you $10,000 that the Earth orbits the Sun.  
Why do we have keep talking about the Church Fathers?
Why can't we just do some simple calculations?  Or is that
too difficult for Catholics?
The Church Fathers' OPINIONS do NOT determine doctrines.
End of the debate.

The sun is a light, of a celestial nature, and Enoch says the angels push the celestial objects around.  Beyond that, we do not know.  But neither does modern science.
The sun is provably not going 24,000,000 mph.  The estimate by empirical evidence is about 1000 mph.  How else could an airplane follow it and stay within sight of it for hours?
The Church Fathers talked about this having sourced evidence from Scripture.
The Church's Father's opinions do not determine the doctrines, but when they are in agreement with each other and Scripture, we can be pretty darn sure they are right.  Further, false modern science (represented today by NASA) has promoted a completely godless heliocentric model for centuries, which is now accepted by the majority of people.  This is just one sign of the great apostasy.  St. Nilus predicted science would go off the rails when planes can fly.  Scripture predicted it too, and also warned us not to be taken by science falsely so-called.  Yet, you treat the Father's opinions as nothing.  Go believe your pagan science, but don't attempt to pass it off here without opposition.   

100% of the Fathers of the Church who taught about the shape of the earth taught flat geocentric earth.

Not true.

He uses it as an example but never says what he believes. Also, that is a passage I have yet to examine in the original Latin.

That was my point about Latin grammar.  The verb is written in the indicative mood which shows that the example is something he believes to be true.  If he did not believe it, the verb would have been in the subjunctive.

Examine the passage in the original Latin and you will see that I am right.