Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: What do Flat Earthers Believe is the Single Most Compelling Piece of Evidence..  (Read 29303 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Meg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6173
  • Reputation: +3147/-2941
  • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
  • This issue is important to salvation. One of the most effective lies of the enemy, to lead people away from God, is the lie of evolution. This lie requires additional lies in order to appear to be true. Some of these additional lies are: earth that is billions of years old (disputing the Word of God), a sun-centered universe (a masonic, sun-worshipping lie), and globe theory (historically pushed by freemasons and currently pushed by the freemasonic NASA).

    Well said, Cera.

    Yes, evolution is a lie, predicated on lies which began with Copernicus' errors, which were then built upon by the heretic Galileo. It seems that both men wanted to prove the Bible wrong. And for most of the world's population, including most traditional Catholics, they have proved the Bible wrong. Except that the Bible isn't wrong. The earth is a level plane. Not a globe.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline Cera

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5210
    • Reputation: +2290/-1012
    • Gender: Female
    • Pray for the consecration of Russia to Mary's I H
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    All you have to do is step outside on a clear night and look at the full moon at midnight.
    .
    But for flat-earthers, that's too much work.
    .
    They'd rather read the Book of Enoch, SAY they're reading Scripture, but forget to mention that the Book of Enoch is not Scripture.
    .
    Instead of looking at the full moon with their own eyes, they prefer to "believe" what is found in the Book of Enoch (not in Scripture).
    .
    I step outside and look at the full moon and in no way does that convince me of globe theory. And no, I have never read the Book of Enoch.
    Have you read the Church Fathers who argued against globe theory? They have been posted numerous times here, and that, along with Genesis, is what convinced me.
    I already knew about the masonic roots of NASA, the staged moon landing, the sun-worship of masons which led to heliocentric theory; but what finally led me away from evolution theory, billions of years old-earth-theory, sun-centric theory, and globe theory was an open-minded reading of Genesis. Then I read the Church Fathers.
    I let go of my brainwashing that began with the globe in my Kindergarten class and continued through college, along with "news" papers, magazines, movies and tv.
    Pray for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary


    Offline kiwiboy

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 518
    • Reputation: +217/-455
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Here we have a liar, who historically claims that flat Earth is not a Dogma, implying that those who disagree with her flat Earth view are modernist and humanist (i.e. Heretics). Then in her blind hatred for those who don't hold her views, even views that are not religious in any way, she says it's Vatican IIish and ambiguous to not be Dogmatic about something that hasn't been defined and is not Dogma.

    No even steVen.
    You are the liar.
    you have claimed publically that the Church Fathers were not against the globe , yet they were.
    Eclipses neither prove nor disprove the flat earth.

    "As for whether or not I work for NASA, I'm sorry, but I fail to understand what that could possibly have to do with anything" Neil Obstat, 08-03-2017

    Offline kiwiboy

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 518
    • Reputation: +217/-455
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    Yes, it's very difficult to answer because the flat-earthers don't have an answer.
    .
    They have no answer because there is no answer.
    .


    Except you're not interested in the answer Neil.

    You're always right.
    Eclipses neither prove nor disprove the flat earth.

    "As for whether or not I work for NASA, I'm sorry, but I fail to understand what that could possibly have to do with anything" Neil Obstat, 08-03-2017

    Offline kiwiboy

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 518
    • Reputation: +217/-455
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No it's not. If it was it would be revealed explicitly in Scripture and handed down through Tradition and probably defined by the Church.No it's not. If it was you would be able to point out the exact passage that says "the Earth is flat". St. Basil and St. Augustine explicitly say that Genesis is silent as to the shape.
    People are free to believe what they want to believe it means. What's absolutely for sure is that it doesn't absolutely mean the Earth is flat.

    I am still unsure as to whether you are malicious or just really stupid.

    It has been explained so many times before to you by me, that the flatness is only one aspect of creation, that no one focused on.

    The sphere is what the Fathers attacked, and the sphere is what is NOT in scripture.

    Where the Fathers of the Church speak on the issue, the majority of them condemn the sphere. Meaning they thought the earth was flat (there's no other option)

    https://flatearthtrads.wixsite.com/flatearthtrads/church-fathers
    Eclipses neither prove nor disprove the flat earth.

    "As for whether or not I work for NASA, I'm sorry, but I fail to understand what that could possibly have to do with anything" Neil Obstat, 08-03-2017


    Offline kiwiboy

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 518
    • Reputation: +217/-455
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • I am still unsure as to whether you are malicious or just really stupid.

    It has been explained so many times before to you by me, that the flatness is only one aspect of creation, that no one focused on.

    The sphere is what the Fathers attacked, and the sphere is what is NOT in scripture.

    Where the Fathers of the Church speak on the issue, the majority of them condemn the sphere. Meaning they thought the earth was flat (there's no other option)

    https://flatearthtrads.wixsite.com/flatearthtrads/church-fathers

    We've been over this many times. Lacantius is the only Church Father that condemned Globe Earth. The majority of quotes about the shape of the Earth from the Fathers say it's a Globe or Shpere etc... There are even two Fathers (Basil and Augustine) who say that Scripture is silent about the shapes of the Earth and Creation. You are a liar and are so blinded by your pride that you are not willing to admit any of this.


    People can see for themselves that you are wrong by reading.

    Here is the link

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

    Clearly  you did not do very well in school when it comes to reading comprehension. If anyone else thinks I am wrong, then please tell me.

    Also, accusing me of the very thing you are guilty of (lying, prideful) will only worsen your case and make you look downright silly.
    Eclipses neither prove nor disprove the flat earth.

    "As for whether or not I work for NASA, I'm sorry, but I fail to understand what that could possibly have to do with anything" Neil Obstat, 08-03-2017

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • I step outside and look at the full moon and in no way does that convince me of globe theory. And no, I have never read the Book of Enoch.
    Have you read the Church Fathers who argued against globe theory? They have been posted numerous times here, and that, along with Genesis, is what convinced me.
    I already knew about the masonic roots of NASA, the staged moon landing, the sun-worship of masons which led to heliocentric theory; but what finally led me away from evolution theory, billions of years old-earth-theory, sun-centric theory, and globe theory was an open-minded reading of Genesis. Then I read the Church Fathers.
    I let go of my brainwashing that began with the globe in my Kindergarten class and continued through college, along with "news" papers, magazines, movies and tv.
    Wow. "I let go of my brainwashing that began with the globe in my Kindergarten class and continued through college, along with "news" papers, magazines, movies and tv."
    This is a powerful statement and worth consideration because it is a difficult thing to do for those of us raised with the Copernican Doctrine. The Copernican Revolution made way for Modernism, and human beings are mired in it. So, if a false teaching dictates every single aspect of one's understanding, that person will be hard pressed to come to the truth...unless that person dismisses the underlying tenets of false doctrines in order to discern.  That Copernicanism was condemned by the Catholic Church, there is no doubt.  That Copernicanism teaches earth is a globe, there is no doubt.  From these facts alone, one must begin to shed the armor of a model wholly at odds with Catholic teaching in order to get to the truth. Cera, your posts are forever noteworthy to me.

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Again, apparently you have never been to this link that you post all the time. There is one Church Father that condemns Globe Earth. It's hilarious how you post this all the time. Obviously with the hopes that no one will actually go to it and/or research it for themselves.
    I posted a number of quotes from Fathers that are either favorable to Globe Earth or tell us that Scripture is silent as to this whole matter and that it has no religious importance. It's in the Library section. https://www.cathinfo.com/the-library/church-fathers-did-not-condemn-flat-earth/
    It would behoove you to read the threads and know the discussion before you bleat nonsense. Other notable Fathers of the Church who taught flat geocentric earth are: Theophilus of Antioch in the second century, Clement of Alexandria in the third, based on the seventh verse of the first chapter of Genesis, both taught that spread over the earth was a solid vault, "a firmament," and they added the passage from Isaiah in which it is declared that the heavens are stretched out "like a curtain," and again "like a tent to dwell in." From Moses, Enoch, Clement and Theophilus and many others, Cosmas also reiterates, that earth is like a house: the earth is its ground floor, the firmament its ceiling, under which the Almighty hangs out the sun to rule the day, and the moon and stars to rule the night. This ceiling is also the floor of the apartment above, and in this is a cistern, shaped, as one of the authorities says, "like a bathing-tank," and containing "the waters which are above the firmament."
    Besides those above, there are Methodius, Severian, bishop of Gabbala, St. John Chrysostom, Eusebius, see the Proep. Ev., xv, 61. St. Basil, see the Hexaemeron, Hom. ix. For Lactantius, see his Inst. Div., lib. iii, cap.
    3; also citations in Whewell , Hist. Induct. Sciences, London, 1857, vol.
    i, p. 194, St. Martin, Histoire de la Geographie, pp. 216, 217.

    St. Basil: "In the midst of the covering and veil, where the priests were allowed to enter, was situated the altar of incense, the symbol of the earth placed in the middle of this universe; and from it came the fumes of incense." (The Mystic Meaning of the Tabernacle, Bk V, Ch VI; Clement of Rome, Stromata, Bk V)
    Cosmas of Indiocopleustes expands on this subject of the tabernacle being a form of the earth (according to Moses) and the firmament is the 'veil'. Cosmas' book Christian Topography describes earth like a two story house with heaven above and the flat earth/hell below.


    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Wrong.
    I am not saying that the Earth is not the Center of the Universe, it may be. I am only saying that the Church did not Infallibly condemn Copernicanism. If it did, one would have to say that the Pope above taught heresy.
    The Church absolutely and unequivocally condemned Copernicanism.  As seen in this excerpt from Paula Haigh's article, "Galileo's Heresy".  Full text here:  http://www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/evolution/galhrsy.htm   Another Paula Haigh article on the subject:  http://www.ldolphin.org/geocentricity/Haigh3.pdf
    After giving the text of Galileo's abjuration, Fr. Langford says: "The condemnation of Galileo was now complete. The scientist had tried to batter down the old view of the universe and the traditional exegesis of Scripture by beating his head against a wall of conservatism and mocking those who felt that it should not be torn down ... "(29) Thus have the truths of faith, i.e., that the Scriptures are inerrant and that the Church can rule upon their meaning -- for all time -- these truths have been cast by Fr. Langford and most of his contemporaries, into the ephemerally temporal political category of a stiff-necked conservatism.
     But the Decree of the Holy Office against Galileo has never been abrogated -- nor can it be. The wording is quite absolute. It is otherwise with the Index of Forbidden Books, as we shall see presently.
     Living in the midst of triumphant modernism as we do today (in the1990's), it is easy to recognize in the Decree against Galileo what is perhaps the first specific condemnation of a primary modernist tenet: "that any opinion may be held and defended as probable [even] after it has been declared and defined as contrary to Holy Scripture." The modernists of today do this all the time. Witness Fr. Anthony Zimmerman's defense of polygenism, condemned by Humani Generis in 1950; the questioning of the truths of faith concerning the Divinity of Our Lord, His knowledge of His Messiaship and His physical Resurrection by the likes of Fr. Raymond Brown, and the wide-spread defiance of all the Church's most sacred and authoritative moral teachings by a host of so-called moral theologians.
     Truly, Galileo was the first modernist of note, and the current attempts to exonerate him only prove that "birds of a feather flock together."
     What is not to be found in the standard defenses of Galileo is the list of subsequent condemnations issued in the course of the 17th century and the many defenses of the geocentric system set forth by learned men of science in the Church as far as into the late 19th century. I am told by a friend that St. Anthony Mary Claret (1807-1870) was a firm geocentrist. And would it not be surprising to find a single saint of the Church who was not? Evidences for the infallibility of the Church's decision in the Galileo case will form the matter of the last paper in this series.
     The Church was slow to give way to heliocentrism but less so in the case of evolution, though Humani Generis (1950) still holds. That the modern papacy, albeit unofficially, has recognized both errors as compatible with Holy Scripture, can only be a sign of that apostasia -- that gradual slipping and falling away from the total Deposit of Faith spoken of by St. Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. We may not believe "that in these latter times there has been spread a general obscuring of the more important truths pertaining to religion, which are the basis of faith and of the moral teachings of Jesus Christ."

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Condemnation was made by the Congregation of the Index. Not the Popes themselves.
    The Congregation condemning it is absolutely and unequivocally not the same as the Church condemning it. Also, Geocentrism does not prove flat Earth because a globe shaped Earth can still be the center of the Universe because God is Omnipotent.

    Some Quotations From

    The Pontifical Decrees Against the Doctrine of The Earth’s Movement

    and the Ultramontane Defense of Them

    "1605-1621 - Reign of Pope Paul V, who issued a 1616 decree condemning Copernicanism.
    1623-1644 - Reign of Urban VIII, who issued a 2nd decree [1633] condemning Copernicanism.
    1655-1657 - Reign of Pope Alexander VII, who issued a Bull [1644] reinforcing that Copernicanism was heretical...." (p.1 of O’Hanlon’s 4 page intro.) [Color is my emphasis]

    -------

    "The Cardinal [Bellarmine] begins the paragraph immediately preceding the remark in question by observing that the Copernican interpretation of Scripture is already under the ban of the Council of Trent...." (p. 24. Also p.26: That Council met barely three years after Copernicus’ book was published in 1543.)

    -------

    "...the Cardinal’s opinion was reported to Galileo, most probably by Prince Cesi, in the following unmistakable terms: ‘With regard to the opinion of Copernicus, Bellarmine, who heads the Congregations that deal with such matters, told me himself that he holds it to be heretical, and that the doctrine of the earth’s motion is beyond all doubt whatever (senza dubbio alcuno) contrary to Scripture.’" (p.26)

    -------

    "...That the sun is in the centre of the world and altogether immovable by local movement," was unanimously declared to be "foolish, philosophically absurd, and formally heretical, inasmuch as it expressly contradicts the declarations of Holy Scripture in many passages, according to the proper meaning of the language used, and the sense in which they have been expounded and understood by the holy Fathers and theologians...." (p.27)

    -------

    "We say, pronounce, and declare that you, the said Galileo, on account of the things proved against you by docuмentary evidence, and which have been confessed by you as aforesaid, have rendered yourself to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy--that is, that you believed and held a doctrine false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures--to wit, that the sun is in the centre of the universe, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth moves and is not in the centre of the universe; and that an opinion can be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture." (p.30)

    -------

    "...Urban VIII, by his decree of the 16th of June [1633], ordered a Pontifical Congregation to inform Galileo that heliocentricism had been declared and defined to be contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures in such sense that his holding it afterwards would be ‘heresy....’" (p.31)

    -------

    "...Catholics of the present day [1885] have become so habituated to Copernicanism that unless they take special pains they can do no kind of justice to the violent shock which that theory inflicted on the Catholic’s most legitimate and laudable prepossessions. Scripture, whether taken by itself, or interpreted by the traditional theology, would not lead its readers so much as to dream of any other idea, than that this earth, as it is the moral, so also is it the physical centre of the visible universe. In Scripture Statements, the earth is no satellite of the sun, but rather the sun is a satellite of the earth. ‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,’ whereas not till the fourth day did He create the sun; and then ‘that it might preside over the earth’s day,’ and shine over the earth.’" (pp.36,37)

    -------

    "The principle involves the conclusions that ‘the heavens and the earth and all that in them is’ were made in literally six days (Exod. xx.11), that the flood was literally universal, and destroyed, outside the ark, literally every living substance from off the face of the earth’ (Gen. vi. 17; vii 4, 19-23); that the doctrine of evolution in all its forms is a heresy, altogether contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures. Let anyone read Bishop Clifford’s letters in the Tablet...and he will realize how completely Rome has abandoned the ground on which she once took her stand." (Footnote p.48: And this was written in 1885! Consider what the author would be saying in these early years of the 21st century!)

    -------

    "Since it has come to the knowledge of the above-named Holy Congregation that the false Pythagorean doctrine [HERE], altogether opposed to the divine Scripture, on the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun...this Congregation has decreed that the said books...be suspended till they are corrected; but that the book of Father Paul Antony Foscarini the Carmelite be altogether prohibited and condemned, and all other books that teach the same thing; as the present decree respectively prohibits, condemns, and suspends all...."(pp.56,57)

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • The Church was slow to give way to heliocentrism but less so in the case of evolution, though Humani Generis (1950) still holds. That the modern papacy, albeit unofficially, has recognized both errors as compatible with Holy Scripture, can only be a sign of that apostasia -- that gradual slipping and falling away from the total Deposit of Faith spoken of by St. Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. We may not believe "that in these latter times there has been spread a general obscuring of the more important truths pertaining to religion, which are the basis of faith and of the moral teachings of Jesus Christ."

    Paula Haigh


    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Tradition / Church Fathers
    In 1564, the Council of Trent (Session IV, April 8) infallibly declared that 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.” 
    This infallible declaration was restated by the First Vatican Council: “In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers” (On Revelation, April 24, 1870, chapter 2, no. 9).
    Pope Leo XIII explained why we are required to hold to the interpretation of the Fathers when they are unanimous: “the Holy Fathers, We say, are of supreme authority, whenever they all interpret in one and the same manner any text of the Bible, as pertaining to the doctrine of faith or morals; for their unanimity clearly evinces that such interpretation has come down from the Apostles as a matter of Catholic faith” (Providentissimus Deus, 1893, no. 14).
    In other words, when the Fathers are unanimous about an interpretation of Scripture, their understanding comes from the Sacred Deposit of Faith handed down by Christ and the Apostles. The Fathers unanimously interpreted the Scriptures to support a geocentric cosmology.  According to Trent and Vatican I (two dogmatic ecuмenical councils of the Catholic Church), we are not permitted to depart from their interpretation of the Scriptures, because their interpretation is deemed to have come from the Apostles. Those who reject geocentrism must explain why they do not submit to this rule of biblical interpretation set forth by two infallible councils.
    With that, let us look at some of the quotes from the Fathers.
    Things to consider when reading the Fathers regarding the earth and sun:
     1) The Fathers never say the earth moves, except at the end of time.
     2) The Fathers always say the earth is at rest at the center of the universe.
     3) The Fathers never say the sun is the center of the universe.
     4) The Fathers never say the sun does not move around the earth, even in their scientific analysis of the cosmos.
     5) The Fathers always say the earth is the center of the universe.
     6) The Fathers always say the sun moves as the moon moves.
     7) The Fathers recognize that some of the Greeks held that the earth moves and rotates, but they do not accept that teaching.
     8) The Fathers accept the Chaldean, Egyptian and Greek teaching that the earth is at the center of the universe and does not move.
     9) The Fathers hold that the earth was created first, by itself, and only afterward the sun, moon and stars.
     10) The Fathers hold that light was created after the earth, but that this light preceded the light of the sun and stars.

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Again, and we can quote from non-Infallible sources all day long if you want:
    The Catholic Encyclopaedia is not infallible either.  Further, it has nothing on which to base its premise.  The writings of the Church Fathers, scripture, the Galileo Affair, Popes, etc. have made clear their position.  At least two more recent scholars that I posted in this thread, Paula Haigh and Fr. William Roberts, show how the teaching is most certainly infallible.  
    Also, the Church teaches infallibly that there are no antipodes and that Jerusalem is in the middle of the earth.  The illogical notion that the Church can say these things with such certainty and be incorrect is an outrage.



    Due to the spread of the Copernican theory and complaints of theologians, the Holy Office in 1633 condemned the following propositions and explained why they are false:

    I. The sun is the center of the world and completely immovable by local motion.
    II. The earth is not the center of the world, not immovable, but moves according to the whole of itself, and also with a diurnal motion.

    "We say, pronounce, and declare that you, the said Galileo, on account of the things proved against you by docuмentary evidence, and which have been confessed by you as aforesaid, have rendered yourself to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy--that is, that you believed and held a doctrine false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures--to wit, that the sun is in the centre of the universe, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth moves and is not in the centre of the universe; and that an opinion can be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture."


    "Since it has come to the knowledge of the above-named Holy Congregation that the false Pythagorean doctrine, altogether opposed to the divine Scripture, on the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun...this Congregation has decreed that the said books...be suspended till they are corrected; but that the book of Father Paul Antony Foscarini the Carmelite be altogether prohibited and condemned, and all other books that teach the same thing; as the present decree respectively prohibits, condemns, and suspends all...."




    When you can provide official Church teaching on the Heliocentric Copernican globe, then you can suggest these teachings might be false, not official nor infallible.   Until then, all official Catholic teaching, even from the ordinary magisterium are considered necessary for belief.    

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Some Quotations From

    The Pontifical Decrees Against the Doctrine of The Earth’s Movement

    and the Ultramontane Defense of Them

    "1605-1621 - Reign of Pope Paul V, who issued a 1616 decree condemning Copernicanism.
    1623-1644 - Reign of Urban VIII, who issued a 2nd decree [1633] condemning Copernicanism.
    1655-1657 - Reign of Pope Alexander VII, who issued a Bull [1644] reinforcing that Copernicanism was heretical...." (p.1 of O’Hanlon’s 4 page intro.) [Color is my emphasis]

    -------

    "The Cardinal [Bellarmine] begins the paragraph immediately preceding the remark in question by observing that the Copernican interpretation of Scripture is already under the ban of the Council of Trent...." (p. 24. Also p.26: That Council met barely three years after Copernicus’ book was published in 1543.)

    -------

    "...the Cardinal’s opinion was reported to Galileo, most probably by Prince Cesi, in the following unmistakable terms: ‘With regard to the opinion of Copernicus, Bellarmine, who heads the Congregations that deal with such matters, told me himself that he holds it to be heretical, and that the doctrine of the earth’s motion is beyond all doubt whatever (senza dubbio alcuno) contrary to Scripture.’" (p.26)

    -------

    "...That the sun is in the centre of the world and altogether immovable by local movement," was unanimously declared to be "foolish, philosophically absurd, and formally heretical, inasmuch as it expressly contradicts the declarations of Holy Scripture in many passages, according to the proper meaning of the language used, and the sense in which they have been expounded and understood by the holy Fathers and theologians...." (p.27)

    -------

    "We say, pronounce, and declare that you, the said Galileo, on account of the things proved against you by docuмentary evidence, and which have been confessed by you as aforesaid, have rendered yourself to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy--that is, that you believed and held a doctrine false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures--to wit, that the sun is in the centre of the universe, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth moves and is not in the centre of the universe; and that an opinion can be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture." (p.30)

    -------

    "...Urban VIII, by his decree of the 16th of June [1633], ordered a Pontifical Congregation to inform Galileo that heliocentricism had been declared and defined to be contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures in such sense that his holding it afterwards would be ‘heresy....’" (p.31)

    -------

    "...Catholics of the present day [1885] have become so habituated to Copernicanism that unless they take special pains they can do no kind of justice to the violent shock which that theory inflicted on the Catholic’s most legitimate and laudable prepossessions. Scripture, whether taken by itself, or interpreted by the traditional theology, would not lead its readers so much as to dream of any other idea, than that this earth, as it is the moral, so also is it the physical centre of the visible universe. In Scripture Statements, the earth is no satellite of the sun, but rather the sun is a satellite of the earth. ‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,whereas not till the fourth day did He create the sun; and then ‘that it might preside over the earth’s day,’ and shine over the earth.’" (pp.36,37)

    -------

    "The principle involves the conclusions that ‘the heavens and the earth and all that in them is’ were made in literally six days (Exod. xx.11), that the flood was literally universal, and destroyed, outside the ark, literally every living substance from off the face of the earth’ (Gen. vi. 17; vii 4, 19-23); that the doctrine of evolution in all its forms is a heresy, altogether contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures. Let anyone read Bishop Clifford’s letters in the Tablet...and he will realize how completely Rome has abandoned the ground on which she once took her stand." (Footnote p.48: And this was written in 1885! Consider what the author would be saying in these early years of the 21st century!)

    -------

    "Since it has come to the knowledge of the above-named Holy Congregation that the false Pythagorean doctrine [HERE], altogether opposed to the divine Scripture, on the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun...this Congregation has decreed that the said books...be suspended till they are corrected; but that the book of Father Paul Antony Foscarini the Carmelite be altogether prohibited and condemned, and all other books that teach the same thing; as the present decree respectively prohibits, condemns, and suspends all...."(pp.56,57)

    Thanks for posting the above information, happenby. It shows that there were popes who condemned Copernicanism, and that the Council of Trent banned a Copernican interpretation of scripture. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline noOneImportant

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 223
    • Reputation: +138/-168
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Oh look, more posts by people incapable of telling the difference between a thing being round and a thing being in motion. You'd think this wouldn't be that difficult...