Geocentrism as Bad Theology

Debunking the geocentrists’ erroneous claim that the Catholic Church has officially taught geocentrism as a matter of faith, that she has officially condemned all other cosmologies, and that this alleged condemnation is still fully in force.

• The Magisterium Rules: The Debate is Over, by David Palm:  In 1820 Pope Pius VII decreed that there are “no obstacles” or “any difficulties” for Catholics to hold to the motion of the earth.  Two years later the Holy Office decreed that there would be canonical punishments for a Roman censor who refused to allow publication of books supporting the motion of the earth. With good reason, then, Pope St. John Paul II stated in 1992 that the debate concerning whether Catholics may hold to modern cosmological views which include the motion of the earth “was closed in 1820”.

 

• Geocentrism and Strict Canonical Interpretation by David Palm:  The new geocentrists and modern critics of the Catholic Church make strange bedfellows. Both unjustifiably assume that the Church bungled badly with respect to geocentrism, first declaring it to be official Church teaching but then reversing and saying otherwise…..but that isn’t the way it happened. The Catholic Church was more circumspect in her handling of the Galileo controversy than most people think and is not inconsistent in now holding that geocentrism is not a matter of faith. Find out why.

• Geocentrists Peddle Alien Theology of Centrality, by David Palm.  The notion that the Earth must be the center of the universe in order for man to be significant is a new-fangled notion completely alien to classical Western thought and Catholic tradition.  What the new geocentrists have actually done is adopt the false premise of modern critics and concocted a bogus theology in response.

• Geocentrism in the Fathers: A Matter of Natural Philosophy, Not Theology, by David Palm: One of the theological assessors called upon to examine the Galileo case prior to his trial affirms that the Fathers of the Church do not argue positively for the motion of the earth at all (much less present a unanimous consensus as a matter of faith), but rather, “they presupposed, rather than argued, that the earth is at rest, in agreement with the common opinion of the philosophers.”

• The Fathers Don’t Support an Immobile Earth, by David Palm: Fr. Melchior Inchofer, S. J. was one of the theological assessors who examined the Galileo case prior to his trial. Regarding the motion of the earth, which geocentrist Robert Sungenis insists is the crucial point in the debate, Fr. Inchofer says of the Church Fathers that, “I have not found a single one of the Holy Fathers who has dealt with the motion of the earth clearly and positively, as the saying goes.”  So much for an alleged unanimous consensus.

• Sungenis Looses What He Has Bound on Joshua 10, by David Palm:  In his reply to the very last part of Geocentrism and the Pitfalls of Over-literal Interpretation, Sungenis insists that he has “trapped” non-geocentrists by his insistence that God could only have accomplished the miracle of Joshua 10 in “two ways”.  But ironically, he has left the keys to this “trap” in easy reach, providing the solution to his own dilemma right in the pages of his book Galileo Was Wrong.

• Geocentrists and the Canonical Trial Canard by David Palm:  Geocentrist Robert Sungenis has repeatedly claimed that the condemnation of Galileo remains “on the books” and that only another formal, canonical trial can reverse that.  Palm demonstrates that this assertion has no foundation, even in the lone source cited by Sungenis.

• Geocentrism and the Unanimous Consent of the Fathers by David Palm: The geocentrists have failed to show that the Catholic Church teaches geocentrism as a matter of faith. Their final effort is to attempt to create a “Catholic connection” to the Fathers of the Church.  Find out why this fails, too.

• Geocentrism and the Pitfalls of Over-Literal Interpretation by David Palm: The new geocentrists claim to be interpreting the Bible literally. They apply this “literal” interpretation even to poetry, with predictably strange (and sometimes humorous) results.

• Double Standards and Exaggerations on Magisterial Documents by David Palm:  The new geocentrists exaggerate—to the point of complete misrepresentation—the nature, authority, and abiding force of the various magisterial documents that touch on the geocentrism controversy.

• Geocentrist Exaggerations: The Catechism of Trent by David Palm: The leading new geocentrist, Robert Sungenis, has called the Roman Catechism “One of the clearest official and authoritative statements from the Catholic Church defending the doctrine of geocentrism.” Palm demonstrates that Sungenis has misconstrued the contents of the Cathechism, which doesn’t teach geocentrism or any other cosmological system as a matter of faith.