The Congregation of the Holy Office does not have the authority to make de fide teachings.  If it had been de fide, a later pope would not have been able to remove the condemnation.

With regard to the doctrinal teaching of the Church it must be well noted that not all the assertions of the Teaching Authority of the Church on questions of Faith and morals are infallible and consequently irrevocable. Only those are infallible which emanate from General Councils representing the whole episcopate, and the Papal Decisions Ex Cathedra (cf. D 1839). The ordinary and usual form of the Papal teaching activity is not infallible. Further, the decisions of the Roman Congregations (Holy Office, Bible Commission) are not infallible. Nevertheless normally they are to be accepted with an inner assent which is based on the high supernatural authority of the Holy See (assensus internus supernaturalis, assensus religiosus). The so-called "silentium obsequiosum." that is "reverent silence," does not generally suffice. By way of exception, the obligation of inner agreement may cease if a competent expert, after a renewed scientific investigation of all grounds, arrives at the positive conviction that the decision rests on an error. 

Cardinal Bellarmine assures us that the consent of the Fathers and their commentators is unanimous in holding a geocentric and geostatic view of the universe based on Holy Scripture (#6). Just how far the contemporary Church has departed from Catholic tradition is emphasized by this as well as by the other points of Cardinal Bellarmine's Letter, for he refuses to recognize the distinction, rejected also in our times by Benedict XV and Leo XIII, between references to physical things and supernatural facts (#7) as dividing truth from possible error in Holy Scripture. Fr. Jerome Langford is of the modernist mentality and reads the Decree of Trentaccording to Galileo: "... the Fathers had to affirm, explicitly or implicitly, that the text under consideration pertained to a matter of faith or morals."(20) But as we have already shown, this is not what Trent said nor could have so said because both Benedict XV and Leo XIII have emphatically reaffirmed the integrity of Holy Scripture in all its parts and all its meanings, both physical and spiritual, both natural and supernatural.
 Galileo and the heliocentrists or Copernicans attacked a truth of faith, namely, that Holy Scripture is inspired and inerrant in all its parts and that we may not depart from the common agreement of the Fathers in our interpretations.
 Besides these distinctions, there is the authority of the Church as the one guardian and only true interpreter of Holy Scripture. Vatican I,Canons and Decrees, Chapter III: Of Faith, says:
 ... all those things are to be believed with divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the Word of God,, written or handed down, and which the Church, either by a solemn judgment or by her ordinary teaching (magisterium),proposes for belief as having been divinely revealed. ... ... although faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason; since the same God Who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, and God cannot deny Himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth. The false appearance of such a contradiction is mainly due, either to the dogmas of faith not having been understood and expounded according to the mind of the Church, or to the inventions of opinion having been taken for the verdicts of reason. We define, therefore, that every assertion contrary to a truth of enlightened faith is utterly false. Further, the Church, which together with the apostolic office of teaching, has received a charge to guard the deposit of faith, derives from God the right and the duty of proscribing false science, lest any should be deceived by philosophy and vain deceit (can.ii) Therefore all faithful Christians are not only forbidden to defend as legitimate conclusions of science such opinions as are known to be contrary to the doctrines of faith, especially if they have been condemned by the Church, but are altogether bound to account them as errors which put on the fallacious appearance of truth. (D1797-8)


So much for your ridiculous notion that some heliocentrism is perfectly fine.  The Church condemns that too.

I suppose the globers think that condemnations may only be temporary, like an excommunication. Or like the conciliar church, and how it no longer condemns anything - except reason.

The modernists use Vll to justify the Church changing her stance on quite a few things. Do you deny this?

You have the same mindset of modernists who believe that truth evolves and changes.

You do not seem to understand what the papal Bull is stating.  Pope Alexander republished the Index of condemned books and is telling people to obey it.  The Bull is not specifically about heliocentrism but about the authority of the Index. Because the Index is disciplinary rather than doctrinal, it can and did change. Later, the Index, with the exact same level of authority, removed books promoting heliocentrism, indicating the Church now allowed this model.  There is nothing about a pope enjoining obedience to the Index that implies heliocentrism stands forever condemned.  On the contrary, the Index confirms that the condemnation was removed.

Of course I don't deny it but it has nothing to do with the topic. The condemnation of heliocentrism was lifted 70 years before the rise of modernism and 140 years before Vatican II.

Do you deny that the condemnation was lifted?