Hopefully Bumphrey this is the last post you have to drag out of me.

"I would say after 1870 is the best time to quote from since infallibility was deeply considered at the top level of the Church, and the Gallileo affair was a prime consideration." --- Bumphrey

Under Vatican I’s ‘Arguments from the assent of the Church,’ we read:

‘The Roman Pontiffs, moreover, according to the condition of the times and affairs advised, sometimes by calling ecuмenical councils… sometimes by particular synods, sometimes by employing other helps which divine providence supplied, [LIKE THE HOLY OFFICE OF 1616] have defined that those matters must be held which with God’s help they have recognised as in agreement with Sacred Scripture and apostolic tradition. For, the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might forcefully set it out…’ --- Vatican I (1869-1870) (Denz. 1836.)

Under Faith, and Faith and Reason, Vatican Council I teaches:     

‘Further, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things must be believed which are contained in the written word of God and in tradition. And those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement or in her ordinary and universal teaching power, to be believed as divinely revealed.’ (Denz. 1792.)

   

Under the heading of faith and reason, the same Council anathematised the idea that scientific assertions that oppose revealed doctrine can be held. It also condemned the idea that the meaning of dogmas can change with the progress of science, such as many of the apologists suggested, especially by members of the Holy Office in 1820, an important aspect of the Galileo case.

‘By dogma in the strict sense is understood a truth immediately revealed by God which has been proposed by the teaching authority of the Church to be believed as such. The Vatican Council I explains: ‘All these things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the word of God written or handed down and which are proposed for our belief by the Church either in a solemn definition or in its ordinary and universal authoritative teaching. Two factors or elements may be distinguished in the concept of dogmas.

(1) An immediate Divine Revelation of the particular dogma, i.e., the Dogma must be immediately revealed by God either explicitly or inclusively and therefore be contained in the sources of revelation.

(2) The Promulgation of the Dogma by the teaching authority of the Church. This implies not merely the promulgation of the Truth, but also the obligation of the part of the faithful of believing the truth. This promulgation of the Church may be made either in an extraordinary manner through a solemn decision of faith made by the Pope or a General Council or through the ordinary and general teaching power of the Church.’[1]

Do these conditions not cover the anti-Galilean decrees? Of course they do, as a reading of the Holy Office’s 1616-1644 records reveal.     

---

[1]Ludwig Ott: Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Mercier Press, Cork Ireland, 1954.

What is the conclusion?  Heliocentrism cannot be taught as a certainty.  It is only a hypothesis, and a hypothesis can either be a possibly true explanation, or an avowedly false one.  Science has not proven either geocentrism or heliocentrism, but the Scriptures, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Magisterium of the Church support the geocentric position.
In fact, the Church has other dogmatic, infallible teachings such as the Immaculate Conception of Mary with less Scriptural, papal, patristic and medieval support than geocentrism. The Church has also not annulled her condemnations of heliocentrism.   Those who hold the geocentric view believe that God made the earth the spiritual and material center of the universe for the Incarnation of His only-begotten Son, where Jesus’ sacrifice is perpetually offered “from the rising of the sun to its setting” (Mal. 1:11), and where Jesus dwells in His Eucharistic presence under the appearance of bread and wine.

The Church condemned heliocentrism as the history listed below demonstrates.  Catholics are not free to hold heliocentrism.  Besides the Church's pronouncement on the subject, it is equally revealing that heliocentrism is eagerly promoted by modern man under the titles of: globalists, atheists, pagans, Jews, Freemasons, etc. Every single heliocentric scientist lauded as founding fathers of the cosmology of Pythagoras, a known Kabbalist, are occult demon worshipers.  Go global, you'll be in fine company there!

Please consider most seriously the following historical developments and Magisterial pronouncements concerning geocentrism seen at the bottom of the page at http://www.scripturecatholic.com/geocentrism.html
or below.

Magisterium / History


Following is a brief chronological summary of the historical developments and Magisterial pronouncements in connection with the Church’s teaching on the universe:
1564 – Council of Trent (Session IV, April 8:  the Council infallibly teaches that no one could “in matters of faith and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine...interpret the sacred Scriptures…even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”  The Fathers unanimously interpreted the Scriptures as supporting a geocentric cosmology.
 
1613 – Galileo publishes his Letters on Sunspots in which he praised the Copernican (heliocentric) theory.

1615 – Galileo writes a letter to one of his students, Fr. Benedetto Castelli, proclaiming the truth of Copernicanism, stating that “Scripture…in physical disputes should be reserved to the last place” as an authority for resolving those disputes.  Galileo writes a similar letter to Dutchess Christina of Lorraine.  Fr. Paolo Antonio Foscarini, a Carmelite friar, also writes a book defending the compatibility of Copernicanism with Scripture.

1615 – On April 12, Robert Cardinal Bellarmine (a saint and Doctor of the Church) writes a letter to Fr. Foscarini, advising him that Copernicanism is contrary to Scripture.  

The following is list of Cardinal Bellarmine’s most salient quotes:
     1.  “to affirm that the sun really is fixed in the center of the heavens...and the earth... revolves with great speed around the sun, is a very dangerous thing…by injuring our holy faith and rendering the Holy Scriptures false.”
     2.  “the Council (of Trent) prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers.  And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes, and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining (ad litteram) that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe.  Now consider whether the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators.”
     3.  “Nor may it be answered that this is not a matter of faith...It would be just as heretical to deny that Abraham had two sons and Jacob twelve, as it would be to deny the virgin birth of Christ, for both are declared by the Holy Ghost through the mouths of the prophets and apostles.”
     4.  “If there were a true demonstration that the sun was in the center of the universe…and that the sun did not travel around the earth, but the earth circled around the sun, then it would be necessary to proceed with great caution in explaining the passages of Scripture which seemed contrary…But I do not believe that there is any such demonstration.”
     5.  “I add the words ‘the sun also riseth and the sun goeth down, and hasteneth to the place where he ariseth, etc.’ were those of Solomon, who not only spoke by divine inspiration but was a man wise above all others and most learned in human sciences and in the knowledge of all created things, and his wisdom was from God.  Thus it is not too likely that he would affirm something which was contrary to a truth either already demonstrated, or likely to be demonstrated.”  

1616 – On March 5, the Congregation of the Index condemns all writings which treated Copernicanism as anything but an unproven hypothesis.  The Congregation declared that such a theory was “false and contrary to Holy Scripture, which teaches the motion of the earth and the immobility of the sun, and which is taught by Nicolas Copernicus in De revolutiionibus orbium caelestium…being spread by... Father Paolo Antonio Foscarini…Therefore, so that this opinion may not spread any further to the prejudice of Catholic truth, it decrees that the said... De revolutiionibus orbium caelestium..be suspended until corrected; but that the book of the Carmelite Father, Paolo Foscarini, be prohibited and condemned.”  Pope Paul V presided at this Congregation and, while his name is not on the decree, approved and ordered the decree as supreme teacher of the Church.

1632 – Galileo publishes the book Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems in which he openly and enthusiastically advocated the Copernican system and ridiculed the geocentric system.  This publication was in direct conflict with the Council of Trent’s teaching that one could not hold a position contrary to the unanimity of the Fathers, Cardinal Bellarmine’s letter holding the Copernican theory contrary to Scripture, and the Congregation of the Index’s ban on all books that taught the Copernican theory.  

1633 – On June 22, the Holy Office formally condemns Galileo for heresy:  “We say, pronounce, sentence and declare that you, the said Galileo...have rendered yourself in the judgment of this Holy office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely, of having believed and held the doctrine which is false and contrary to the Sacred and Divine Scriptures, that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west and that the earth moves and is not the center of the world...after it has been declared and defined as contrary to Holy Scripture...From which we are content that you be absolved, provided that...you abjure, curse, and detest before us the aforesaid errors and heresies and every other error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church.”  Pope Urban VIII took full responsibility for the condemnation of Galileo by enforcing “in forma communi” the Congregation’s prohibitions against books holding the Copernican system as truth.

1633 - Galileo signs a statement which reads “with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith I abjure, curse and detest the aforesaid errors and heresies and generally every other error, heresy and sect whatsoever contrary to the Holy Church...but, should I know any heretic or person suspected of heresy, I will denounce him to the Holy Office or to the inquisitor or Ordinary of the place where I may be…” 1664 – Pope Alexander VII issues Speculatore Domus Israel in which he solemnly sanctioned the condemnation of all books affirming the earth’s movement and the sun’s stability.  Pope Alexander VII published a new official Index which included the Congregations prohibitions from 1596 to 1664. The pope declared “We, having taken the advice of our Cardinals, confirm and approve with Apostolic authority by the tenor of these presents, and command and enjoin all persons everywhere to yield to this Index a constant and complete obedience.”

1758 – Pope Benedict XIV removes Copernicus’ book from the Index, after editors removed nine sentences which taught that heliocentrism was a certainty. This was consistent with the Congregation’s decree in 1616 that the book would be banned until “corrected.”  However, the Church’s condemnations of Copernicanism on the grounds that its teachings are heretical and contrary to Scripture is not (and never has been) overturned.

1870 – The First Vatican Council, Canons and Decrees, Chapter III, infallibly declares that “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 duty of proscribing false science, lest any should be deceived by philosophy and vain deceit.  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 the 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.”  The Council also affirms the inerrancy of Scripture by dogmatically stating: “These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the church.” Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, chapter 2, paragraph 7, 1870.  

1885 – Father William Roberts publishes his book The Pontifical Decrees Against the Doctrine of the Earth’s Movement.  In this book, Fr. Roberts presents a strong case for the position that the Church’s condemnation of heliocentrism is infallible. He concludes: (1) Alexander VIII’s Speculatores was a papal act of supreme authority by which the pope, in the face of the whole Church, confirmed and approved the decrees with his Apostolic authority, and made himself responsible for their publication, that heliocentrism was false; (2) heliocentrism was false because the Church declared it a heresy, and whoever says an opinion is heresy ipso facto says that the contradictory of that opinion has been revealed by God with sufficient certainty to oblige a Catholic to accept it by an act of divine faith; and, (3) infallible teachings, even those ex-cathedra, do not generally generate any fresh obligation of faith, but protect and vindicate one that already exists.

1893 – Pope Leo XIII issues Providentissimus Deus which affirms the teaching of the Council of Trent that the Scriptures are inerrant in all matters written, not just matters relating to salvation.  The pope states “But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow its inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred…For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Spirit; and so far is it from being impossible that any error can coexist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church” (No. 20).

1907 – On July 3, Pope Pius X issues the encyclical Lamentabili Sane which condemned the errors of the modernists.  In connection with creation, science and the inerrancy of Scripture, the following errors, inter alia, were expressly condemned: -Since the deposit of Faith contains only revealed truths, the Church has no right to pass judgment on the assertions of the human sciences (no. 5). -They are free from all blame who treat lightly the condemnations passed by the Sacred Congregation of the Index or by the Roman Congregations (no.8. -Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error (no. 11). -Scientific progress demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption be re-adjusted (no. 64).

1920 – On September 15, Pope Benedict XV issues Spiritus Paraclitus in which he likewise affirms the teaching of the Council of Trent, the First Vatican Council, and Lamentabili Sane on the inerrancy of the Scriptures.  The pope states “by these precepts and limits [set by the Fathers of the Church]…wish, indeed, that inspiration itself pertain to all ideas, rather even to the individual words of the Bible...”  The pope condemns contrary opinions by stating “For their belief is that that only which concerns religion is intended and is taught by God in the Scriptures; but that the rest, which pertains to the profane disciplines...is left to the feebleness of the writer...But how rashly, how falsely this is affirmed.”  

1950 – On August 12, Pope Pius XII issues the encyclical Humani Generis which addressed false opinions that were threatening to undermine Catholic doctrine.  The pope, in echoing St. Augustine and Providentissimus Deus, declared that the modern exegete’s desire to depart from a literal interpretation of Scripture in favor of a non-literal interpretation was foreign to Catholic teaching: “Further, according to their fictitious opinions, the literal sense of Holy Scripture and its explanation, carefully worked out under the Church's vigilance by so many great exegetes, should yield now to a new exegesis, which they are pleased to call symbolic or spiritual.” (no. 23). “Everyone sees how foreign all this is to the principles and norms of interpretation rightly fixed by our predecessors of happy memory, Leo XIII in his Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, and Benedict XV in the Encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus, as also by Ourselves in the Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu.” (no. 24).  

1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church – paragraph 105 says “God is the author of Sacred Scripture.  The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.  For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.” (Emphasis added.)

What is the conclusion?  Heliocentrism cannot be taught as a certainty.  It is only a hypothesis, and a hypothesis can either be a possibly true explanation, or an avowedly false one.  Science has not proven either geocentrism or heliocentrism, but the Scriptures, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Magisterium of the Church support the geocentric position.
In fact, the Church has other dogmatic, infallible teachings such as the Immaculate Conception of Mary with less Scriptural, papal, patristic and medieval support than geocentrism. The Church has also not annulled her condemnations of heliocentrism.   Those who hold the geocentric view believe that God made the earth the spiritual and material center of the universe for the Incarnation of His only-begotten Son, where Jesus’ sacrifice is perpetually offered “from the rising of the sun to its setting” (Mal. 1:11), and where Jesus dwells in His Eucharistic presence under the appearance of bread and wine.  

It is, therefore, consistent with Catholic teaching to believe that Jesus Christ, the God-man, has united divinity with humanity at the center of the universe which is earth. On a more basic level, if the earth is the center of the universe, then this means that someone (God) put it there. Given the dynamics of the universe, the relative positions of the heavenly bodies, and the size of the earth, it would be impossible for the earth to be the center of the universe unless a divine agent worked out all the details.

If the earth is indeed the center, then God is trying to tell us that we are special to Him. We are unique. We are destined to be with Him forever. This is why He opens His written revelation with the creation account. This is also why the atheists and agnostics want so badly to disprove geocentrism, because if they can do that, they can argue that there is no God. They want to argue that there is no God because they don’t want to be accountable to Him. If science would definitively disprove the geocentric theory, then, as St. Bellarmine suggests, “it would be necessary to proceed with great caution in explaining the passages of Scripture which seemed contrary, and we would rather have to say that we did not understand them than to say that something was false which has been demonstrated.  

But I do not believe that there is any such demonstration; none has been shown to me.”