Correct.
There is nothing wrong in believing that the view of the middle ages can be "overturned in response to new evidence."


Somehow you keep arguing that the Middle Ages' view is untouchable, even as you admit (above) that it's not.  Your views are highly contradictory.

I am not saying medieval science is untouchable.  I'm saying it reveals how Catholics interpreted Scripture for over a thousand years.  They believed Scripture was compatible with belief in globe earth.

I certainly am biased toward medieval Catholics over ancient cultures. You seem to think this is a bad thing.

It's true that I might reject the proof that you provide, if I think that what you provide does not represent the commonly held view of ALL Catholics, not just some of your university elites.

"494. After rejecting the opinions of those who held false theories about the earth, the Philosopher here pursues the opinions of those who, while holding a true theory about the earth, namely, that it is at rest, assigned unsuitable explanations for the earth's rest."

The idea that "if the earth is to be at rest, it has to be flat" is categorized as a "false theory about the earth". St. Thomas clearly disagrees with it.

I've tracked it down.  There was an article that took some words of St. Thomas out of context to make it look like he was saying the earth is flat.  In fact, the context shows it is the view of neither Aristotle nor St. Thomas, but of others .  We had a thread about it here: https://www.cathinfo.com/the-earth-god-made-flat-earth-geocentrism/flat-earth-priest-responds-to-tradidi-claims-over-st-thomas/

Here is an English translation of the passage which shows which words were removed along with comments from me.

=============================
This quote does not come from St. Thomas's conclusion.  It comes from an earlier section commenting on Aristotle describing and discarding incorrect arguments.  Here it is in context at 493.  I have underlined the part omitted in the article of the OP.  It clearly changes the meaning of the passage.

"493. He gives a second argument at [352] and says that they add a further argument for the same, namely, that if the earth is to be at rest, it has to be flat. For a spherical shape is easy to move, because so little of it is in contact with a plane; but a wide shape is totally in contact with a plane, and is consequently apt for rest."

This is not the position of either St. Thomas or Aristotle. This is an argument ascribed to "they" i.e. others.  This is made even more clear in the following the section: 

"494. After rejecting the opinions of those who held false theories about the earth, the Philosopher here pursues the opinions of those who, while holding a true theory about the earth, namely, that it is at rest, assigned unsuitable explanations for the earth's rest."

The idea that "if the earth is to be at rest, it has to be flat" is categorized as a "false theory about the earth". St. Thomas clearly disagrees with it.
========================
Tradman you were apparently deceived by a dishonest article.  There is no teaching from St. Thomas about the earth being flat.

Thanks, Jayne.  This is the quote.  It says a lot.  St. Thomas is clear, that if the earth is stable, it must be flat.


Concludit propositum: quod terra sit in medio mundi quia omnia corpora gravia moventur ad medium terræ. (That the earth is in the middle of the universe and all heavy bodies are moved per se to the middle of the earth ) Et sic, ex præmissis, nihil movetur in loco ad quem naturaliter movetur, quia ibi naturaliter quiescit. Sed terra aliquando movetur ad medium mundi, (from the foregoing as follows: Nothing is moved in the place toward which it is naturally moved. But the earth is naturally moved to the middle of the world.) ut probatum est, ergo, terra nullo modo movetur. (Therefore the earth is not in motion in any way)

After all these commentaries, he concluded that to be stable, the earth must be flat: Necesse est terram, ad hoc quod quiescat, habere figuram latam:( that if the earth is to be at rest, it has to be flat.) nam figura sphærica facile mobilis est quia in modico tangit superficiem, sed figura lata secundum se totam tangit superficiem, et ideo est apta ad quietem. (For a spherical shape is easy to move, because so little of it is in contact with a plane; but a wide shape is totally in contact with a plane, and is consequently apt for rest and to be firm.)

I am interested in an english translation of the whole context of this part.

Given that me, a fallible human, can make this simple mistake, perhaps you did too, and quoted a false argument that St Thomas intends to prove wrong.