CathInfo.com

Ok, what about 'perspective' do you think proves the globe? Sorry but no rando personal beliefs will do. If you're going to use science or math, it really has to hold up on its own. Science and math work with the description provided in Scripture and the form of the Earth described isn't a globe. Saints also support the flat earth along with the Fathers of the Church because Scripture is the basis of their teachings.  If you think you're going to fly some theory in contradiction with Scripture, history, the Fathers of the Church, saints, etc. because you favor a modern view of a pagan globe, you have the greater burden of proof. The Pythagorean doctrine and Copernican globe theory were consistently condemned by the Church multiple times. If you don't realize this, or accept the Cecco/Bruno/Galileo condemnations by the authorities of the Catholic church, as well as the definitive statements by the popes condemning heliocentrism/Copernicanism/Pythagorean Doctrine, please provide proof to show that these saints and popes were wrong.

What I don't understand is if all this was condemned by the Catholic Church, then why did they teach a globe earth in their parochial schools? 
 

Great response. I don't have a unargumentative answer. But I do have a question I think will addresses the problem. Why does the Church allow the modernist bishops to blather nonsense? My suggestion is that the Church is slow to respond to all the trash flung at Her. I believe the Church and Our Lord expect the faithful to reflect on the situation and make a stand to defend what the Church already declared, especially against pagan or heretical teachings. Some pope or bishop or cardinal will come forward to clarify, but we have the information, and apparently, we have to wait until they do. 

we dont have a pope or cardinals to come forward 

What I don't understand is if all this was condemned by the Catholic Church, then why did they teach a globe earth in their parochial schools? 

The simple answer is, there are many varieties of globe earth theories.  Those theories proposed by Copernicus and Galileo were heretical and condemned, not because they were globe per se, but because their theories violated Scripture and previous Church decisions on the matter.


Yes, the Church is often very slow to decide in matters of science.  Because Her goal is to save souls, not teach science. 

Case in point:  The evolution proposed by Charles Darwin was condemned in the late 1800s.  But in the early 1900s, the Church allowed discussion on "theistic evolution" (i.e. a very SPECIFIC variation on evolution where God was the author and which lined up with Scripture/Church Fathers.)  Such a theory was not "approved" but only allowed for discussion, debate and scientific work.

In the same way, the Copernican/Galilean/Greek models of the universe are condemned.  But the Church has not condemned GLOBEISM altogether (as She is not in the business of being a science teacher).  So the globe theory (as long as it does not contradict Scripture/Church Fathers/Tradition) is ALLOWED TO BE TAUGHT, though that doesn't mean:

a.  The Church approves of it
b.  endorses it
c.  agrees with it.

It simply means that the Church realizes that it's a THEORY, which does NOT POSE RELIGIOUS/SCRIPTURAL contradictions and does NOT POSE DANGERS TO THE FAITH or salvation.

It's much like an "imprimatur" at the beginning of a book.  Most people (wrongly) assume this means that the Church endorses/approves of the book.  No, it only means the Church DOESN'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG with the book.  It's not an endorsement, but only a NEUTRAL APPROVAL.  A big difference.