Then are we free to teach our children that it is??

Some here on CI say it doesn’t matter if it’s flat or not, but are not some of them perhaps assisting children with homework and subjects in school that teach a clear model (i.e. solar system, endless universe, spinning ball with gravity, people that walk upside down underneath it) that when fully realized completely contradicts Scripture?
And would it not be for the sole purpose of undermining It (Scripture) and God’s Creation?

‘Where is The Firmament oh wise science textbook oracle?’

Well, no, one is not free to teach it if one is aware that the globe earth is false. I homeschooled my children, quite awhile ago, and taught the globe earth, before I knew what the reality is.

And yes, I do think that some (one at least) on this thread are out to undermine scripture and God's creation. Why, I do not know.

Agreed.

Glad to hear it. 

This is a good point to make clear. It is a major theme in the encyclicals I have been quoting. Benedict XV warned about people trying to misuse the teaching in support of modernism.  We can never hold that there errors in Scripture.

This is a very strange statement.  Basically, it says that it doesn't matter what we believe.  That what we believe can be relative. By this statement, it can be said that Protestantism is truth, or unintentional heresy is good because it is relatively Christian, because its intention is Christian.  Either what we believe is absolute, or it is false.  There is no quasi truth.  Relativity is a product of pagan spherical earth where the concept of truth is impossible.  Because on a globe level horizon means curved horizon.  And up means down, depending on where you are on the globe.  That above or risen might mean below or descended, depending.  That direction is not direction but all is relative to one's position.  This is a product of vital immanence, the crux of modernism.  As such, the imprecision and contradictions of the globe make it false.  Bonum ex integra causa malum ex quocuмcue defectu.  Good is of the whole. Evil only needs one defect.  And the globe is full of defects.  

It is not Heliocentrism that leads to a loss of faith, but rather trying to use exegetical principles other than those taught by the Church.  When people try to use the Bible to determine matters of physical science, it is inevitable that there be apparent conflicts between Scripture and science, as well as within Scripture itself, because that is not its intended meaning.  When people accept the Church teaching that Scripture does not intend to speak of physical science, there will never be such conflicts.  There will never even be a temptation to reject Scripture for the reason you suggest.  The Church, in her wisdom, long ago solved this problem.  This exegetical principle goes back to St. Basil and St. Augustine and, starting with Leo XIII, appears in the magisterial writing of several popes.

Concerns about people rejecting Scripture because of science is normally a Protestant problem.  Due to their heresy, they try to interpret Scripture for themselves without the wisdom of the Church to guide them.  Of course, they will run into problems.  But there is no reason for Catholics to see this as an issue.

If you have science based reasons to believe the earth is flat, go ahead.  But appealing to Scripture for support is a rejection of Church teaching on Scriptural exegesis and of the Church's authority as sole interpreter of Scripture.  It is a serious error.

Sorry Jane, but you seem to have missed the point of my post.  Regardless of what you think people should do, the reality is that people do in fact reject The Bible, because they believe it can't be God's Word, if it isn't accurate in regards to Science as well as History, Archeology, Psychology, ect.  
Furthermore, I don't know what catechism you are reading from, but the ones I have read, are consistent with The Bible.  Sure, there are times when a passage from The Bible could be interpreted to mean one of two things, but when taken in context and in its entirety, most of those are resolved.  For the few that aren't crystal clear, The Church may perhaps have used its power to interpret, but never does it contradict The Bible.  

Thanks, I appreciate your support. I should have maybe done a better job of explaining what I meant. I just assume that after having participated on these threads, that everyone here knew what I meant (even if they don't agree with it).

The globe earth leads to secular humanism, because it teaches that our earth is just another globe; one among many. We're just not that big a deal - though our earth does support life, of course. But it may or may not have had a creator, since it's basically the same shape as the others out there. And it has led to assertions that there must be life on other planets. Most people on earth believe in the heliocentric model, which teaches that earth is just one of the planets that rotate around the sun. The sun is at the center, not the earth. I used to watch the history channel, years ago, and all of the goofy alien theories they promote are just ridiculous. Yet they get away with it, because of the heliocentric model. Even my mom (who isn't at all religious) believes in the Jeremiah Sitchin view that we humans were once aliens on other planets. And now my oldest son is starting to believe in those theories, too. This is just one example of how secular humanism depends on the heliocentric globe model.

I'll try to explain it as best I can, as to why the flat earth is important. Hopefully other flatearthers will chime in too, with another perspective on the same thing:

Since the Bible depicts a flat stationary earth (as you mention above WholeFoodsTrad), we know by how different it is from the other bodies out there, such as the sun and moon, which are round. A stationary flat earth, located under the sun, moon, and stars, with a dome above it, as scripture depicts, makes it unmistakable that there is a creator who has put our earth as the center of creation, since the sun, moon, and stars rotate above the earth under a dome.  On a flat earth, the sun is made for the earth and the earth alone, since it moves above the earth. It is obvious that God created all of it with us in mind.

Right, it's all about how we see reality and our place in it.  There can be no such radical difference between physical truth and spiritual truth (no matter how desperately people like Jaynek try to have their "dual truth theories").  There can only be one truth.  

This is typical 19th/20th century speak where everything is vague and unclear.

If they had wanted to say the earth was a globe, they would have said it. BUT THEY DONT.

So can't use this to support your argument. It is too vague. Our quotations from the fathers and the Holy office on the other hand are VERY clear.

Thank you Kiwiboy!  

Bishop Williamson deals with some of the obedience issues in this thread, in the first 4 minutes of this video.  It's a great lecture, if you can stand putting up with the overbearing music and "special effects" that Michael Sestak added and refuses to remove, even after many requests, from lots of viewers too.  



Bishop Williamson: True and False Obedience

The Church does not teach that the earth is a globe.

.
The Church doesn't teach anything about the shape of the earth.
.
The shape of the earth is not something the Church has authority to teach in the first place.
.
The Church is not concerned with what the earth's shape is.
.