[Meg]

The classical period Romans, in general, did believe in a globe earth.  They followed Aristotle and the Greek tradition of globe earth models. Pliny writing in the first century AD, not only said the earth was a globe, but that everyone agreed on this.

For them the term orbis terrarum was figure of speech for referring to the whole world, just as saying "the globe" in English can be a way to refer to the whole world. Usually, the connotation does not concern the shape but that the entire world is included. All the encyclicals containing the expression orbis terrarum which Myrna quoted were written when Catholics believed that the earth is spherical, so "globe" is a very good translation for the Latin.

Here is an example in which "globe" is the translation of orbis terrarum that makes the most sense. Saint Bede, a Doctor of the Church, who also believed the earth is a sphere, in 725 wrote:  

Causa autem inaequalitatis eorundem dierum terrae rotunditas est; neque enim frustra et in scripturae divinae et in communium literarum paginis orbis terrae vocatur.

The cause of the inequality [in length] of these days is the roundness of the earth; for it is not in vain that, both in Divine Scripture and in the pages of common literature it [the earth] is called the globe.

The Latin language does not have terms to describe a globe earth, regardless of whether or not a Catholic chooses to proclaim as such.

[Jaynek]

The Latin language does not have terms to describe a globe earth, regardless of whether or not a Catholic chooses to proclaim as such.

You are responding to a post in which I quoted St. Bede in Latin explicitly teaching that the earth is a globe.  Obviously Latin has terms to do this and St. Bede used some of them in that passage.

And I just wrote that, unlike your assumption, the Romans did believe in a globe earth. Obviously they were able to express this in their own language.

It makes no sense to respond by asserting that the Latin language does not have terms to describe a globe earth.  

[Meg]

You are responding to a post in which I quoted St. Bede in Latin explicitly teaching that the earth is a globe.  Obviously Latin has terms to do this and St. Bede used some of them in that passage.

And I just wrote that, unlike your assumption, the Romans did believe in a globe earth. Obviously they were able to express this in their own language.

It makes no sense to respond by asserting that the Latin language does not have terms to describe a globe earth.  

I don't have to respond to everything you proclaim.

All of the possible definitions of 'Orbis'

1. round
2. sphere
3. circle
4. disk

Do you understand that there is no precise term for "globe?"

Possible definitions for 'Terrae':

1. Land
2. World

[Smedley Butler]

Just read the Wikipedia article on geocentric model (or any reference work you consider more reliable.)  It is common knowledge.

When it says "medieval philosophers usually combined the geocentric model with a spherical earth" it is talking about Catholics like St. Thomas Aquinas. The Ptolemaic model (which specifies a spherical earth) was taught at Catholic universities.

Note that this is the model of geocentrism in competition with the heliocentrism of Galileo.  Virtually everyone believed in a globe earth at this time.

Thank you for pointing out the Church erroneously teaching the pagan Ptolemaic (a pagan) globe earth model.
The Church was wrong then, just as it is wrong now in its teaching of heliocentrism.

[Neil Obstat]

Where does the Church teach that everything in an approved private revelation is a part of Church doctrine and teaching? And - where does the Church teach that the earth is a globe?
I'm not going to watch that video. It's not a part of official Church teaching.

I'm asking for Church teaching - I don't understand why you don't understand that. What Catholic encyclopedia teaches that the earth is a globe? What catechism teaches it?

.
The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1917 has an article on Geography and the Church, containing the following:
.
The object of geography is to extend our knowledge of the earth's surface and to determine the position of our planet in relation to cosmic and physical phenomena. For the fulfillment of its first and more important task, the accuмulation of geographic information, the prerequisites were at hand even in the earlier days. It needed only intrepid men to penetrate from known to unknown countries. But the powerful incentive of a purely scientific interest was still lacking. The motives that led to geographical progress at that time were greed and lust of conquest, as well as a far nobler motive than these — the spread of Christianity. To this mission the most intelligent, the most upright, and the most persevering of all explorers devoted themselves. Consequently, it was they who achieved the greatest success in the field of discovery during the Middle Ages and far into later days, right up to the time when modern scientific research became its successor. The second purpose, geographical theory, commonly called universal geography, could only be profitably attempted after adequate progress had been made in the auxiliary sciences of astronomy, mathematics, and physics. But herein, too, medieval clerical scholars were the first to show their clearsightedness. For them there was no more attractive pursuit than to trace the vestiges of the Creator in all the marvellous harmony of the universe. How, then, was it possible that the laws governing this globe of ours could escape their search for truth? Of course, they could only have a presentiment of these laws but frequently enough their ideas came very close to the precise results of the great modern scientists, equipped with the best of modern instruments. Again, one of the greatest of them all was a theologian — Copernicus.

Under these circuмstances it was inevitable that the part contributed by the Church to this branch of human knowledge should be of great importance, as the most distinguished geographers bear witness. We may therefore rightfully present a coherent picture thereof.

...

Especial importance attaches to the map of the world made by the Spanish monk Beatus. Numerous copies of this show the entire area of the globe as known in 776 after Christ.

...

But geographical problems made great and unexpected progress when they received a more scientific basis. This basis was provided by the scholastics when they made the Aristotelean system the starting-point of all their philosophical researches. Their thorough logical training and their strict critical method gave to the work of these commentators on Aristotle the value of original research, which strove to comprehend the entire contemporary science of nature, as at the same time the Almagest of Ptolemy was brought to light again by the presbyter, Gerard of Cremona (1114-87), there was not a single problem of modern physical and mathematical geography the solution of which was not thus attempted. The fact that the writings of Aristotle and Ptolemy, on which they founded their investigations, had already passed through the hands of Arabian scholars, who, however, probably received them at some time from Syrian priests, proved of advantage to the consequent geographical discussions. The most eminent representative of physical studies was Albertus Magnus; of mathematics, Roger Bacon. Their precursor, William of Conches, had already given evidence of independent conception of the facts of nature in his "Philosophia Mundi". Also Alexander Neckham (1150 to about 1227), Abbot of Cirencester, whose "Liber de naturâ rerum" contains the earliest record of the use of the mariner's compass in navigation and a list of remarkable springs, rivers, and lakes.

Blessed Albertus Magnus (1193-1280), a master with whom in the universality of his knowledge only Alexander von Humboldt is comparable, opened up to his contemporaries the entire field of physiography, by means of his admirable exposition of Aristotle, laid the foundations of climatology, botanical geography, and, in a certain sense, even of comparative geography. His work "De cœlo et mundo" treats of the earth as a whole; his "libri meteororum" and "De passionibus aeris" include meteorology, hydrography, and seismology. In the "De naturâ locorum" he enlarges upon the system of the zones and the relations between man and the earth. He [Albertus Magnus] furnished proofs of the sphericity of our planet that are still popularly repeated today; he calculated accurately the duration of the day and the seasons in the different quarters of the globe. Ebb and flow, volcanology, the formation of mountain-ranges and continents — all these subjects furnish him material for clever deductions. He carefully recorded the shifting of coastlines, which men at that time already associated with the secular upheaving and subsidence of continents. He also ascertained the frequency of earthquakes in the neighbourhood of the ocean, He closely observed fossilized animals...

...

Under the leadership of La Salle, the Franciscans Hennepin, de la Ribourde, and Membré penetrated to the Great Lakes and Niagara Falls in 1680 and the following years. The same men navigated the Mississippi, of which even the Delta had been scarcely known until then. Mexico and California as far as the Rio Colorado were traversed by the Jesuits Kino (1644-1711), Sedlmayer (1703-1779), and Baegert (1717-1777). We find that between 1752 and 1766 — eighty years before Meyer, the celebrated circuмnavigator of the globe — the Jesuit Wolfgang Beyer reached Lake Titicaca.
.
.
The part about Albertus Magnus (d. AD 1280) should be of special relevance to your question:
.
He furnished proofs of the sphericity of our planet that are still popularly repeated today; be calculated accurately the duration of the day and the seasons in the different quarters of the globe.
.

[Meg]

Thank you for pointing out the Church erroneously teaching the pagan Ptolemaic (a pagan) globe earth model.
The Church was wrong then, just as it is wrong now in its teaching of heliocentrism.

I'm not convinced that the ptolemaic model was taught at Catholic universities, as Jayne has contended. I'll try to do some research into that. I have a book about St. Thomas and his work at the University of Paris, where the Dominicans and Franciscans were basically at war with each other. It might give some good insight into what St. Thomas, and the Dominicans and Franciscans actually taught there. I doubt that Ptolemy was a part of it at all.

[happenby]

Just like when it was wrong when it taught geocentrism. Right?

That's not what SB was saying.  You pointed out that the Church taught aspects of what it condemned as if you rejoice in it.  This is a common behavior among the globalists.  The Church didn't teach wrongly, the people in the Church accept error.  The Church Herself can do no wrong.   

[happenby]

I'm not convinced that the ptolemaic model was taught at Catholic universities. I'll try to do some research into that. I have a book about St. Thomas and his work at the University of Paris, where the Dominicans and Franciscans were basically at war with each other. It might give some good insight into what St. Thomas, and the Dominicans and Franciscans actually taught there. I doubt that Ptolemy was a part of it at all.

Now that's what I'm talking about.  Good old fashioned humility.  Checking first before opening one's mouth, something deficient in the globalists.

[Smedley Butler]

Ptolemy lived in the second century AD and developed the astronomical model that soon dominated the Western world. This geocentric model had a spherical earth. He wrote the definitive text on astronomy used in Catholic universities.  Virtually no Catholics supported flat earth after the Patristic period.  Even by the sixth century when Cosmas wrote, he was a rare exception to the consensus among Catholics that the earth is a globe.

Copernicus did not introduce the idea of a ball-shaped earth to Christendom which had already accepted this idea for many centuries as part of the Ptolemaic/Aristotlean model.  Copernicus introduced heliocentrism.

Enoch is not an authority, godly or otherwise.  That is why it matters that it is non-canonical.  It tells us that Enoch has no authority.

And yet Ptolemy's first premise is wrong (provably so) which renders his entire work in error.

[happenby]

.
The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1917 has an article on Geography and the Church, containing the following:
.
The object of geography is to extend our knowledge of the earth's surface and to determine the position of our planet in relation to cosmic and physical phenomena. For the fulfillment of its first and more important task, the accuмulation of geographic information, the prerequisites were at hand even in the earlier days. It needed only intrepid men to penetrate from known to unknown countries. But the powerful incentive of a purely scientific interest was still lacking. The motives that led to geographical progress at that time were greed and lust of conquest, as well as a far nobler motive than these — the spread of Christianity. To this mission the most intelligent, the most upright, and the most persevering of all explorers devoted themselves. Consequently, it was they who achieved the greatest success in the field of discovery during the Middle Ages and far into later days, right up to the time when modern scientific research became its successor. The second purpose, geographical theory, commonly called universal geography, could only be profitably attempted after adequate progress had been made in the auxiliary sciences of astronomy, mathematics, and physics. But herein, too, medieval clerical scholars were the first to show their clearsightedness. For them there was no more attractive pursuit than to trace the vestiges of the Creator in all the marvellous harmony of the universe. How, then, was it possible that the laws governing this globe of ours could escape their search for truth? Of course, they could only have a presentiment of these laws but frequently enough their ideas came very close to the precise results of the great modern scientists, equipped with the best of modern instruments. Again, one of the greatest of them all was a theologian — Copernicus.

Under these circuмstances it was inevitable that the part contributed by the Church to this branch of human knowledge should be of great importance, as the most distinguished geographers bear witness. We may therefore rightfully present a coherent picture thereof.

...

Especial importance attaches to the map of the world made by the Spanish monk Beatus. Numerous copies of this show the entire area of the globe as known in 776 after Christ.

...

But geographical problems made great and unexpected progress when they received a more scientific basis. This basis was provided by the scholastics when they made the Aristotelean system the starting-point of all their philosophical researches. Their thorough logical training and their strict critical method gave to the work of these commentators on Aristotle the value of original research, which strove to comprehend the entire contemporary science of nature, as at the same time the Almagest of Ptolemy was brought to light again by the presbyter, Gerard of Cremona (1114-87), there was not a single problem of modern physical and mathematical geography the solution of which was not thus attempted. The fact that the writings of Aristotle and Ptolemy, on which they founded their investigations, had already passed through the hands of Arabian scholars, who, however, probably received them at some time from Syrian priests, proved of advantage to the consequent geographical discussions. The most eminent representative of physical studies was Albertus Magnus; of mathematics, Roger Bacon. Their precursor, William of Conches, had already given evidence of independent conception of the facts of nature in his "Philosophia Mundi". Also Alexander Neckham (1150 to about 1227), Abbot of Cirencester, whose "Liber de naturâ rerum" contains the earliest record of the use of the mariner's compass in navigation and a list of remarkable springs, rivers, and lakes.

Blessed Albertus Magnus (1193-1280), a master with whom in the universality of his knowledge only Alexander von Humboldt is comparable, opened up to his contemporaries the entire field of physiography, by means of his admirable exposition of Aristotle, laid the foundations of climatology, botanical geography, and, in a certain sense, even of comparative geography. His work "De cœlo et mundo" treats of the earth as a whole; his "libri meteororum" and "De passionibus aeris" include meteorology, hydrography, and seismology. In the "De naturâ locorum" he enlarges upon the system of the zones and the relations between man and the earth. He [Albertus Magnus] furnished proofs of the sphericity of our planet that are still popularly repeated today; he calculated accurately the duration of the day and the seasons in the different quarters of the globe. Ebb and flow, volcanology, the formation of mountain-ranges and continents — all these subjects furnish him material for clever deductions. He carefully recorded the shifting of coastlines, which men at that time already associated with the secular upheaving and subsidence of continents. He also ascertained the frequency of earthquakes in the neighbourhood of the ocean, He closely observed fossilized animals...

...

Under the leadership of La Salle, the Franciscans Hennepin, de la Ribourde, and Membré penetrated to the Great Lakes and Niagara Falls in 1680 and the following years. The same men navigated the Mississippi, of which even the Delta had been scarcely known until then. Mexico and California as far as the Rio Colorado were traversed by the Jesuits Kino (1644-1711), Sedlmayer (1703-1779), and Baegert (1717-1777). We find that between 1752 and 1766 — eighty years before Meyer, the celebrated circuмnavigator of the globe — the Jesuit Wolfgang Beyer reached Lake Titicaca.
.
.
The part about Albertus Magnus (d. AD 1280) should be of special relevance to your question:
.
He furnished proofs of the sphericity of our planet that are still popularly repeated today; be calculated accurately the duration of the day and the seasons in the different quarters of the globe.
.

This is too funny.  A globalist promoting the globalist agenda. Using this to try to prove your case is called begging the question.

[Neil Obstat]

.
Typo -- that should say "he calculated..." not "be calculated..."
.
The part about Albertus Magnus (d. AD 1280) should be of special relevance to your question:
.
He furnished proofs of the sphericity of our planet that are still popularly repeated today; he calculated accurately the duration of the day and the seasons in the different quarters of the globe.
.
BTW we moderns have at our instant disposal a vast resource far more accurate and comprehensive than Albertus Magnus ever imagined. You can get a quick glimpse of it by visiting the Astronomy section of https://www.almanac.com/astronomy (the Old Farmer's Almanac website).

[Neil Obstat]

This is too funny.  A globalist promoting the globalist agenda. Using this to try to prove your case is called begging the question.

.
What's so "funny?" Meg asked for a Catholic Encyclopedia example teaching the globe earth and I provided one.
.
But to you answering an honest question with an honest answer is "funny." 
.

[happenby]

.
What's so "funny?" Meg asked for a Catholic Encyclopedia example teaching the globe earth and I provided one.
.
But to you answering an honest question with an honest answer is "funny."  
.

Yes, its funny.  It says proof of earth being spherical has been provided.  That's the problem with the response.  It hasn't.  

[Smedley Butler]

Do the globalists believe Genesis where it says God divided day from night? 
If you do, this contradicts Ptolemy's first premise: that earth cannot be flat because the Sun would light it all up at once.
But, the sun does NOT light up earth all at once because God DIVIDED day from night.

Under the globalists' theory, day and night occur due to the rotation of earth. But that contradicts the Bible which says earth does NOT move. 
 
Only one can be true: Ptolemy or the Bible. 

The sun does not light up the entirety of the flat plane because God divided the light in HALF. The sun circles above the motionless earth lighting up half at a time.

[Neil Obstat]

All of the possible definitions of 'Orbis'

1. round
2. sphere
3. circle
4. disk

Do you understand that there is no precise term for "globe?"

Possible definitions for 'Terrae':

1. Land
2. World

.
You're missing some "possible definitions."
.
The Latin orbis can also mean 
5. globe
6. spheroid
7. orb
8. ball
9. ellipsoid (one that closely appears to approximate a sphere) 
.
The Latin terrae can possibly be defined as 
3. earth
4. territory
5. country/countries
6. environs
.
Also, terrae is the form meaning plural or possessive case, feminine gender, so it would then be
1. lands not "land." (The Latin for land is terra, not terrae.)
.