Ma'am, the position of the Church preceding various thoughts of popes who came later supersedes any teaching to the contrary.  The Church has spoken.  It is more impossible for the Church to lay down a condemnation and be wrong than a pope to write a paper and be mistaken or misunderstood.  The statements from the Church constitute a universal teaching that cannot be undone.  It is common understanding that when new contradicts old, a true Catholic needs remain with antiquity.  

Decrees of the Holy Office are not infallible.  It actually is possible for them to be wrong and/or superseded by a later papal decree.  The condemnation of heliocentrism was removed in 1820.  

Can you provide an official source that says that the condemnation was removed in 1820? If you've posted an official source already, then I've missed it.

The decree is infallible.  Say, declare, define is the simple proof.  But there are others if you care to look.  It is impossible for the Church to retract such a statement. 

The Church condemned heliocentrism in 1633 and removed the condemnation 1820.  At the time of the condemnation, the main competing model, Ptolemaic geocentrism, included a globe earth.  Therefore the condemnation clearly has nothing to do with the Church wanting to preserve a belief in flat earth.  There was virtually no such belief at the time.

No one can reverse a Church condemnation.  It doesn't matter what the masses believed.  The condemnation supported the veracity of scripture, which is always inerrant.       

The decree is infallible.  Say, declare, define is the simple proof.  But there are others if you care to look.  It is impossible for the Church to retract such a statement.

The Holy Office does not have the authority to make infallible decrees.  The condemnation was overturned by a papal decree in response to an appeal.  It is possible and it happened.

I gave links to this docuмent on two different Vatican sponsored sites.  Meg does not want to acknowledge it so she is pretending that this is not official enough.

The Holy Office does not have the authority to make infallible decrees.  The condemnation was overturned by a papal decree in response to an appeal.  It is possible and it happened.

I gave links to this docuмent on two different Vatican sponsored sites.  Meg does not want to acknowledge it so she is pretending that this is not official enough.

Please.  Your reasoning is faulty and baseless.  The Holy Office has the authority because it did it.  There was no overturning of a decree.  A modification was attempted, but it is proven erroneous by the docuмentation from tradition.  

Your ideas are not backed by tradition in any way.  The Church Fathers who taught about cosmology were unanimous on the subject.  Scripture is specifically against the earth ball, moving or not.  Science and mathematics also prove earth is not a ball.  Nor does it move.  Nor is the sun stationary. 

The hierarchy was duped into denying what the Church already taught. This is easily proven. And the opinions of the prelates must be relegated to the round file in the face of all truth on the matter which includes the perennial teaching of the Church, the Fathers, Scripture and true science.      

There is no perennial teaching of the Church, Fathers or Scripture that the earth is flat.  All you have proven is that you ignore what the Church actually teaches about how to interpret Scripture and the Fathers in order to pretend that she teaches the earth is flat.

That makes sense. Thanks.

It reminds me of the advocates of Vatican ll who say that the Church no longer condemns certain things, like (false) ecuмenism.

Exactly.  Opinions that contradict traditional teachings are merely opinions.  They hold no teaching authority (and no water). 

There is no perennial teaching of the Church, Fathers or Scripture that the earth is flat.  All you have proven is that you ignore what the Church actually teaches about how to interpret Scripture and the Fathers in order to pretend that she teaches the earth is flat.

I have shown throughout these threads that there is not only a perennial teaching, but that it is held by all the Church Fathers who taught on the matter. Plus, it all dovetails completely with Scripture.  AND the Church condemned the contrary model in 1633. AND simple empirical scientific methods of science and math back the whole of flat geocentric earth.  That is a enough duck parts to call it a duck.  You, on the other hand, have no proof except to say that the proof isn't there.  You don't have so much as a feather of proof for your model.  You are refusing to see what the Church teaches in favor of what you prefer, and that is entirely on you.