CathInfo.com

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.  

It is a fact yes, most men once thought the earth was flat. Eventually however, they discovered it was a globe.

Cosmas of Indiocopleustes thought the earth was the shape of a tabernacle, not round but nevertheless with all six sides NOT FLAT. Flat is a pancake.

I am still trying to understand how the Miraculous medal, described by Our Lady Herself, showing her standing on half a globe can be interpreted as her standing on a flat earth. If she stood on half a globe upside-down so as to be standing on the flat part, then yes, but because she chose to design the medal showing only half the earth, and she standing on the curved half earth, and that is how millions of Catholics have understood it since its inception, then that is the truth.

Similarly the globe of the Child of Prague. To say, as you did or inferred that it represented a flat earth, just as you said the Miraculous medal represented a global earth, shows me that we really are dealing with people whose faith in a flat earth is beyond reason.

Andrew White's description of the Doctrine of Geocentrism is probably the best summary of it I have ever read. I know he was an anti-Christ, but his description cannot be faulted.

Dante held to a globe. The terrestrial globe, for Dante, is constituted by earth and water, and is surrounded by a sphere of air, which in turn is surrounded by a sphere of fire. All spheres.

The three saints in White's geocentrism all understood the earth is a globe. Then there was St Robert Cardinal Bellarmine. Personally I find no fault is these saints and no amount of silly rejections can make them flat-earthers.

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.

To describe the ball of the Child of Prague as a sphere of creation, a symbol of a flat-earth, just about illustrates the lengths the flatearthers will go to have their way. Add to that the dome of the earth Our Lady was standing on was really a flat-earth is another bit of theological nonsense.

As you should know well, only if ALL the Fathers agree on an interpretation of Scripture can it NOT be challenged. The Galileo case, which your referenced site uses as a theological argument for flat-earthism, I reject absolutely. Not once was a flat earth brought up by either the philosophers or theologians in the Galileo affair. All presumed that the earth is a globe at the time, and Pythagorism was only in the context of a moving sun and the earth immobile at the centre of the universe.

So what if many of the Fathers held to a flat earth, this confirms nothing but that they were wrong.

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.