The text outlined in blue does not say what the person is posting here.  Cosmas of Indiocopleustes INSISTS that the earth is flat and spends his entire book, Christian Topography proving it.  Also, the fact that it says, " it has become a globe at the centre of the universe." is proof that it was once held otherwise but suddenly changed.  Not only that, it doesn't say "why" it has become a globe.  

When you think you have proof of something, read further, you've shown nothing.  

Mr Cassini,

The error that the earth is a globe has been around since Pythagoras, the occultist.

Anytime that the earth is represented as a globe such as with the Infant of prague, it is the sphere of CREATION, not the EARTH. There is a big difference. The picture posted earlier illustrates this.

The dome is solid as St. Augustine believed. with the earth below it, taking the top half of the sphere of creation, it is as in our lady of the miraculous medal.

I actually read the quotation you gave above. There is ZERO evidence that there were saints that held the earth to be a ball in it. It is an outright lie to say so, I am sorry to say, but this is the truth. I would have no problem reading a protestant if he produced citations.

Here are citations from the FATHERS of the CHURCH, included among them St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Jerome.

http://flatearthtrads.forumga.net/t60-pertinent-quotes-from-fathers-and-tradition

If you are trying to make out that it was the ignorant plebiscite mass that thought the earth was flat while the educated saintly elite thought it was round (communist dialectic- by the way), then you will not have two feet to stand on.

Mr. Cassini,
"the lengths flat earthers will go to have their way".  you say. I say in response, that it is simply the reality of things. You are coming at it from a modern perspective, with the presumption that are right and have science on your side. Neither are true.

The Galileo case supports the flat earth in the the aspect of the fact that the earth does not move. And the sun goes around it. You take the what it does not say explicitly (that the earth is a flat disc), and pretend that you can say whatever you like after that. I'm afraid it is not that simple.

If the majority of the Fathers say something, you should sit up and listen. And not be temerous.

I do not deny that the globe error was starting to come in from the middle ages, but you will have to produce serious evidence to say that EVERYBODY said it was a globe.

I think we have all heard of 'Faith and reason' or 'Faith and science (scientia).' Our Catholic faith claims that because it is truth, it will comply with all known and unknown scientia.

'Scientia' by the way is knowledge. It comprises knowledge acquired through the senses, knowledge acquired through the empirical or inductive method, knowledge acquired through philosophy, the search through reason alone, and finally through theology.
Unless all four are compatible, or not contradicted in any of the four conditions, then the truth is not present.

Flat-earthism does not comply with all four conditions of scientia. It denies the empirical science of geodesy, earth measurement on a large scale. This science, which can measure the curvature of the earth, has been practiced since the 17th century and fully accepted as such by both Church and state. Such is the size of the earth that this curvature can only be measured over long distances, thousands of miles. Flat earthers use this fact to argue there is no curvature detectable, using short distance photos for their purpose.

Flat-earthism denies the evidence of the senses, what we see. Leaving apart the fact that every other body created by God is a globe of some sort, lending reason (philosophy) that our earth is also a globe, with gravity measured and changing according to the different positions on global earth, which would not be the case if the earth is flat, flat-earthism denies the curvatures seen in photographs of the earth taken from space. This denial depends on thousands of people involved in space flight all supposedly conspiring to keep the biggest secret known to man a secret, not one of them breaking ranks to expose the supposed conspiracy. Next they will tell us there are no satellites up there at all.

Anyway, my point on this thread is that to claim Catholic theology can be in agreement with such denials and asserted frauds is to put Catholic theology in the same class as cօռspιʀαcιҽs or doubts, used to undermine the truth acquired through scientia.
Global earth, on the other hand, is totally in keeping with all four conditions of scientia, no compromises or denials necessary in any of the four conditions, and that includes the globe of the Child of Prague and the Miraculous medal, both images that have been backed up with miracles of different kinds.

Mr. Cassini,
You throw around a lot of big words, but it is mostly hot air.
Geodesy, if it based on the assumption that the earth is a ball, cannot be approved by the Church, for the simple reason that science tells us that it is not a ball. Our senses cannot contradiction themselves.
I can see that you are finding it difficult to let go of Geo-centrism, probably because you have invested a lot in it. Prayer and humility will help with that.
We can't have long range photos because of perspective, not curvature. It is sufficient to show that the earth is not 46k km in circuмference, which our "short range" photos prove beyond a doubt. That should be enough for you to let go of this ball earth theory.

Do you have a link for the above? I can't find anything online called, "The Doctrine of Geocentrism by Andrew White."

Why is it called Flat Earth if nothing in the diagram is flat? I think the use of the term flat earth and flat earther is like calling oneself a Lefevbrist or Feeneyite, they are pejorative labels created by their antagonist enemies, why accept them?