There is only one Church Father that condemns the Globe Earth (Lacantius, Divine Institutes, Bk. III, Ch. 24). He does not however, condemn it from a Scriptural basis.
Of the writings on the subject that I have been able to find, there are as many, if not more, who held the personal belief in the globe/spherical/round Earth than the flat Earth. There are also two or three Fathers who condemn the idea that we should be interpreting Scripture so as to show that it holds definitive proof of the shape of things.
The Dogmatic Flatearthists are hypocrites. They claim the Fathers to be on their side but when Catholics cite the Fathers to prove them wrong, the FEers resort to undermining the credibility of the Fathers. It's quite remarkable.
Up until around the 5th century Christian thinkers are characterized as belonging to either the Alexandrian or Antiochian school of thought, named after the cities in which they were based. They had different perspectives on Scripture and theology. The Church Fathers were associated with these schools.
There is a pattern in views of the shape of the earth that tends to correspond to these schools. Antioch corresponds to belief in flat earth, Alexandria to belief in globe earth. (Lacantius is an exception in that he is against globe earth while being associated with the Alexandrian school.) So it is not surprising that you have been able to find many Fathers who believed in a globe earth.
It is quite clear that the Fathers were writing about their personal opinions when discussing the shape of the earth, other than the ones who were teaching that it should not be made a matter of faith. St. Basil is my favorite of these. I feel like he could be addressing this forum when he writes:
Those who have written about the nature of the universe have discussed at length the shape of the earth. If it be spherical or cylindrical, if it resemble a disc and is equally rounded in all parts, or if it has the forth of a winnowing basket and is hollow in the middle; all these conjectures have been suggested by cosmographers, each one upsetting that of his predecessor. 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. He has passed over in silence, as useless, all that is unimportant for us. Shall I then prefer foolish wisdom to the oracles of the Holy Spirit? Shall I not rather exalt Him who, not wishing to fill our minds with these vanities, has regulated all the economy of Scripture in view of the edification and the making perfect of our souls?It is this which those seem to me not to have understood, who, giving themselves up to the distorted meaning of allegory, have undertaken to give a majesty of their own invention to Scripture. It is to believe themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and to bring forth their own ideas under a pretext of exegesis. Let us hear Scripture as it has been written.”
Scripture is "silent as to shapes". The shape of the earth is "unimportant to us." Scripture is for "the edification and making perfect of our souls." He could be writing of the flat-earthers on this forum when he speaks of those who "giving themselves up to the distorted meaning of allegory have undertaken to give a majesty of their own invention to Scripture."
If these people really wanted to learn from the Church Fathers, this is what they would pay attention to, rather than searching for proof-verses to support a flat earth. They misuse the Fathers in the same way they misuse Scripture.
This teaching of Basil (unlike flat earth) has been repeated throughout the history of the Church by our Doctors and popes. This is what deserves to be called Church teaching.
Topic: Globe Earthers Worship 666 (Read 9388 times)