I disagree with the first sentence above, but agree with the second.

No one has ever attempted to actually prove the decrees were not infallible that I know of.  They may say it, may think it or even blast it all over the Internet, but none have proven it.  Not even the subsequent ambivalence of the hierarchy proves the statements weren't infallible.  Why would someone even suggest it?  As if to say the Church makes statements She doesn't really mean?  Or to try to pretend the Church didn't take a side in the matter and made a mistake, but because it isn't fallible She can't be held liable? The whole idea borders on the absurd.  It would be very difficult to prove, given that the entire foundation of truths supporting the cosmology of Moses, Enoch and the early Church Fathers show a geocentric flat earth, never a sphere, moving or not.  Not to mention the other cosmology is Luciferian through and through. It follows perfectly with reason and precedence that the Church meant what She said and there's no reason to believe Her "say, declare, define" statements are not binding on the Faithful.  What a can of worms that would open! (and actually has) Is it really so unbelievable that the Church meant what She said to the point of it being impossible to take it back?  Should the pagan model affect us to the point that we're now questioning the Church's statements?  Or saying that the Church's statements are not infallible in the hopes that the pagan model might be true?  What is to be gained by such a strange supposition?        

Yes, they (Fathers, scripture, Church, science, math) do agree, with each other, and I agree with them.  You are spouting things of which you have no knowledge, but rather, merely an opposing opinion.  I've told you I have many proofs, but rather than requesting the proofs, you proceed to knock what I already provided.  When you're ready to learn, or when you've studied it for 10 years, you can check back in and we'll talk, ok?  

I have already seen the "proofs" that you have posted here.  I have seen your lists of quotes that prove nothing.  You clearly do not understand the basic principles of what constitutes proof, so there is no point in asking you for proof.  The only proofs that have any validity are those coming from math and science.  If I cared about what shape the earth is, I would look at those.

But I don't care about that.  At least, not when I am faced with people who abuse Scripture and misrepresent Church teaching.  I know enough about those subjects to be able to see that this is what you are doing.

I have already seen the "proofs" that you have posted here.  I have seen your lists of quotes that prove nothing.  You clearly do not understand the basic principles of what constitutes proof, so there is no point in asking you for proof.  The only proofs that have any validity are those coming from math and science.  If I cared about what shape the earth is, I would look at those.

But I don't care about that.  At least, not when I am faced with people who abuse Scripture and misrepresent Church teaching.  I know enough about those subjects to be able to see that this is what you are doing.

Actually, the proofs provided do prove that the Fathers, The Church, Tradition, science and math are all on the same page regarding flat earth.  You simply reject everything because you proffer a pagan model you prefer.  The fact that all truths even remotely fit, (and they actually totally complement each other and the Faith) and that the sphere doesn't jive with anything at all is reason enough to suspend your opinion until you've investigated.  You've lobbed every unproven kind of "not infallible" bombs that disintegrate before doing one bit of damage to Tradition on the matter.  Your model is defunct and untenable in every way.  You have rejected without consideration that the Fathers spoke of the tabernacle as a type of the earth, that earth is covered with a dome, that it has pillars, four corners and cardinal directions are reality and not just relative.  You also have no proof that the Church's statements on the matter are not infallible.  Again, dozens of proofs from me, zero from you.             

And interpret Scripture incorrectly too.  You are claiming you must be right because you agree with the Fathers but Pope Leo taught:  "in commenting on passages where physical matters occur, they have sometimes expressed the ideas of their own times, and thus made statements which in these days have been abandoned as incorrect."

And he also taught how to tell when they were speaking infallibly and when it was just their personal opinions.  It is only Church teaching if the Fathers are unanimous on a matter they identify as belonging to faith.  The Fathers are not unanimous and they do not identify flat earth as a matter of faith.  Therefore it is their personal opinion, not something that proves you are right.  When you claim that the quotes you have found prove that you are right you are opposing the teaching of Pope Leo and the subsequent popes who affirmed it.

You want to prove flat earth so badly that you are prepared to throw out papal teachings to do it.  You are giving an authority to the Fathers that Church teaching says you should not give.  You are interpreting Scripture in a way that Church teaching says you should not interpret.  I am just saying what the Church teaches.  If you think this "tips things over" your problem is with Church teaching not with me.

Scripture, the Fathers and the Church do not agree with you.  

You are giving an authority to Pope Leo's encyclical that it does not possess.
The Church, the fathers,  and the Bible do not agree with your single argument of Providentissimus as your only refutation of flat earth. 
No one but a fellow Novus Ordoite, steeped in the errors of modernism, would agree with your error. 
True Traditionalists with much better powers of discernment see transparently thru all the errors (ball earth, evolution,  heliocentrism) which you heartily endorse.

Jayne,
you are a liar. These sins just keep piling up. You have no proof that Catholics believed the earth to be round for 1000 years.

Please learn to read your own quotes. I have highlighted it to make it easy for you.

"it was not the intention of the sacred author, when writing the first chapter of Genesis, to teach us in a scientific manner the innermost nature of visible things and the complete order of creation but rather to hand on to his people a popular account, such as the common parlance of that age allowed, adapted to the senses and to man’s capacity" so it is not necessary to treat it as if it were scientific information"

And as for your other point

And if your insistence on flat earth makes you reluctant to accept that authority, ready to claim that multiple popes taught in error, then something is seriously evil about this belief.  Our concerns about the post-Conciliar popes are based on their apparent contradiction of clear Church teaching, not due to them interfering with our pet theories about science.  There was a never such a teaching about flat earth.  For at least the last thousand years, virtually all Catholics believed the earth is a globe, although it was never taught as doctrine.

If you belief ciriticising modern popes is evil, then what are you doing on a trad forum?

The nature of the criticism is different, but fundamentally the same. If you can't see that, then it is you with the problem.

Auguste Piccard, the first man to go up into the stratosphere described the earth as "a flat disk with upturned edge" ... from ten miles up.

At one minute into this video, NASA are mocking us by revealing the method. This is significant because when you discover the method, yet refuse to acknowledge the lie, then you become complicit. You are no longer innocent in the cover up.

Even better are the guy floating across with the harness still on him and then the guy who thinks he's putting some object away but there's nothing there because their special effects malfunctioned.  I thought the NASA conspiracy angle was a stretch ... but this video is very telling.  Of course I know that the US Moon Landing was a total hoax.  So I'm warming up to the NASA Freemasonic conspiracy angle.  Every space agency sports Masonic symbols in their logos and insignia.

Many of the astronauts were Masons or sons of Masons (perhaps with secret membership themselves):
https://aplanetruth.info/space-travelers-and-freemasons/