Replies

You wrote:

“To put it somewhat facetiously, sez you.”

Can you show it to me from the Catechism where it says it is a Catholic doctrine? How about the Catechism of the Council of Trent? Nope.

“It’s not? But didn’t popes and bishops and theologians teach it for a long time?”

Not as a de fide Catholic doctrine they didn’t, and it isn’t an issue of faith or morals either.

“If long-held teachings can be discarded in the name of “science,” then what’s to prevent any doctrine from being so discarded???”

No doctrine was discarded. Show me where in the Catechism of the Council of Trent you see where geocentrism is taught as a doctrine of the faith. Can you?

“This being the case, why favor one over the other, except for a need to prove the Bible is primitive and full of mistakes?”

Your question is irrelevant here. Geocentrism is NOT a doctrine of the Church.

“I hope you don’t defend evolution as well. From your defenses of Mr. Sungenis I had concluded that you shared his commitment to total Biblical inerrancy, but now you seem to be back-pedalling.”

Nope. I never back pedel. I also don’t defend evolution. I also don’t question Biblical inerrancy.

“Unfortunately, in addition to being anti-Semitic, Mr. Sungenis has long rejected the literal interpretation of the early generations of mankind in the early chapters of Genesis, insisting that “begot” refers not to direct fatherhood but mere paternal ancestry. This is in conflict with Jewish tradition as well as the literal meaning of the text and means his “inerrancy” isn’t really inerrancy.”

Irrelevant. Geocentrism is still not a doctrine of the faith no matter what you think Sungenis denies about anything.

“Again, I was sorry to see Mr. Sungenis take the road that he did, but I understand he was merely publicizing teachings not his own and which had fallen into disuse in the modern era. I support this with regard to “science,” but not with regard to anti-Semitic teachings.”

If you can’t show it in the Catholic catechisms then you have no case.