Bob Sungenis and Geocentrism

  • Thread starter Thread starter charlesbarkley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It won’t be long before some Sungenis-bashers will pop in here and try to derail the topic. .
Its true, I have stuck up for him not to be unfairly misrepresented and his character not to be attacked a couple of times on the internet, whilst acknowledging some of his mistakes. Instead I suggested people debate his theology in a gentlemanly manner. And you wouldn’t believe the incredibly nasty responses I received from some well known Catholics.

I was accused of being an employee, of being blind, of encouraging disobedience amongst Catholics, of being anti-Semitic, I even had a certain person (who shall remain nameless) check up my IP address and accuse me and another person on-line of being sent there by Sungenis to clear his name!!!

I don’t know Sungenis one iota and I acknowledge that it is sore subject for people who are closer to feeling they have been let down by the guy. But come on, to slander Sungenis the way people have on CAF is nothing short of disgusting and I am disappointed the way that certain people do nothing about it.

Anyhow I finish because I am slightly off topic and I will end up ranting!
 
Its true, I have stuck up for him not to be unfairly misrepresented and his character not to be attacked a couple of times on the internet, whilst acknowledging some of his mistakes. Instead I suggested people debate his theology in a gentlemanly manner. And you wouldn’t believe the incredibly nasty responses I received from some well known Catholics.

I was accused of being an employee, of being blind, of encouraging disobedience amongst Catholics, of being anti-Semitic, I even had a certain person (who shall remain nameless) check up my IP address and accuse me and another person on-line of being sent there by Sungenis to clear his name!!!

I don’t know Sungenis one iota and I acknowledge that it is sore subject for people who are closer to feeling they have been let down by the guy. But come on, to slander Sungenis the way people have on CAF is nothing short of disgusting and I am disappointed the way that certain people do nothing about it.

Anyhow I finish because I am slightly off topic and I will end up ranting!
Ericcantona, bless your heart, but you’re being too modest. 😉 I think you’re doing a wonderful job at helping Mr. Sungenis and have been for a while at his website and here at the forums, too. Mr. S, well he doesn’t usually try to look neutral. :o

I thought I remembered your name so I did a little looking. It’s more than a couple times helping him. You really glow about his dignity. 🙂

weblog.xanga.com/bellarmineforum/639352942/response-to-p-catan.html?page=1&jump=1405893109&leftcmt=1#1405893109

That’s you, Dr. Eric, right?

weblog.xanga.com/bellarmineforum/639193632/question-37—comments-from-mark-shea-part-2.html?page=1&jump=1404729322&leftcmt=1#1404729322

weblog.xanga.com/bellarmineforum/655554932/question-61—mark-sheas-new-article.html?page=1&jump=1427772853&leftcmt=1#1427772853

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3624964&postcount=34

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3515902&postcount=24

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3504140&postcount=12

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3495454&postcount=6

And didn’t you put up a posting here asking people to look at Mr. Sungenis arguing about Sept 11 being an inside job? It’s not on the forum anymore.

Some of us notice how even in your thoughts right here you call people who are upset with Mr. Sungenis’ attacks “nasty” and “disgusting” and they “slander” but the things Mr. Sungenis says and does are only “mistakes”. You’re very nice to him.

Is his bishop one of the nasty, disgusting slanderers? Did you stick up for the bishop and write about Sungenis’ slander? What about his slandering Jewish people and Jewish Catholics? Did you write to us here and tell us how upset you were about those things? If you did, that’s wonderful. Really. 🙂 I just don’t remember seeing it and can’t find it. But I forget alot now. 😦

But you really should stop being so modest about your help. Bless your heart.

But I think Mr. Sungenis has every right to talk about geocentrism to his hearts content. I think it’s odd to be doing it nowadays, but at least he’s not saying too many things attacking scientists like he does Jewish people. That’s good.
 
Wasn’t Gallileo supporting the theory put forward by Father Copernicus ?

Wasn’t Father Copernicus working on the relationship of the planets and sun under the direction of the church in trying to produce a more accurate calendar ?

Wasn’t Father Copernicus’ published book on heliocentrism accepted by the church and his calendar largely introduced before the Gallileo affair ?

Didn’t many members of the church, including Gallileo and bishops and other clergy go further and accept Father Copernicus’ theory as fact ?

when Gallileo started teaching Father Copernicus’ theory as fact didn’t the Pope tell Gallileo that there was no problem with advocating a helio-centric view of the world, but that he could not present it as fact until there was enough proof ?

I don’t see where an infallibility regarding geocentrism comes in at all with regards to the church ?

catholic.com/library/galileo_controversy.asp
I think I just heard on EWTN a couple days ago that Copernicus was a deacon, not a priest.
 
And here I thought that the Bible was a history of the People of God here on earth and it turns out to be a science book. Where is quantum mechanics and relativity in it?
 
Does the doctrine of gravity prevent us from floating upward into the bowl of the heavens?
 
Does the doctrine of gravity prevent us from floating upward into the bowl of the heavens?
I wasn’t aware that there was a Catholic doctrine on gravity. Just exactly what is this doctrine. Is it the Newtonian theory of gravity, the Einstein theory of gravity or one of the newer theories which attempts to unite gravity and quaum field theory, such as supersymmetric string theory? Or would it be something else?
 
Ericcantona, bless your heart, but you’re being too modest. 😉 I think you’re doing a wonderful job at helping Mr. Sungenis and have been for a while at his website and here at the forums, too. Mr. S, well he doesn’t usually try to look neutral. :o

I thought I remembered your name so I did a little looking. It’s more than a couple times helping him. You really glow about his dignity. 🙂

weblog.xanga.com/bellarmineforum/639352942/response-to-p-catan.html?page=1&jump=1405893109&leftcmt=1#1405893109

That’s you, Dr. Eric, right?

weblog.xanga.com/bellarmineforum/639193632/question-37—comments-from-mark-shea-part-2.html?page=1&jump=1404729322&leftcmt=1#1404729322

weblog.xanga.com/bellarmineforum/655554932/question-61—mark-sheas-new-article.html?page=1&jump=1427772853&leftcmt=1#1427772853

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3624964&postcount=34

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3515902&postcount=24

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3504140&postcount=12

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3495454&postcount=6

And didn’t you put up a posting here asking people to look at Mr. Sungenis arguing about Sept 11 being an inside job? It’s not on the forum anymore.

Some of us notice how even in your thoughts right here you call people who are upset with Mr. Sungenis’ attacks “nasty” and “disgusting” and they “slander” but the things Mr. Sungenis says and does are only “mistakes”. You’re very nice to him.

Is his bishop one of the nasty, disgusting slanderers? Did you stick up for the bishop and write about Sungenis’ slander? What about his slandering Jewish people and Jewish Catholics? Did you write to us here and tell us how upset you were about those things? If you did, that’s wonderful. Really. 🙂 I just don’t remember seeing it and can’t find it. But I forget alot now. 😦

But you really should stop being so modest about your help. Bless your heart.

But I think Mr. Sungenis has every right to talk about geocentrism to his hearts content. I think it’s odd to be doing it nowadays, but at least he’s not saying too many things attacking scientists like he does Jewish people. That’s good.
Hmmm…WOW…that really is kinda of spooky…are you stalking me??? You have just proved my point. You don’t know me and are looking are looking to be put all sort of insinuated theories together on anyone who says anything that isn’t negative about Sungenis. No I don’t think Sungenis has slandered Jewish people, but I do think he should obey his bishop.

Sept 11th? Your point? That was a genuine question.

Anyhow Brenda, I think this off topic, which is probably my fault on this one for getting this going. You can PM me if you want, but probably not good to go to and fro on this thread regarding this.

However I apologize for going off topic on this thread.

Btw, Dr.Eric? Thanks for the accolade. Not quite yet, but maybe one day!
 
As for the concept of the whole body being incapable of error as a body, the fact is that you will find a preponderance of Catholics today who believe that the earth revolves about its axis giving the appearance of the sun’s motion in the heavens. They also believe that the earth revolves about the sun which in turn revolves about the mass center of the Milky Way galaxy, which in turn revolves about some greater mass center. But don’t let the growing knowledge and understanding of God’s creation confuse the fact that infallibility as expressed by the belief of the faithful at large is a static and immutable thing.
Decidedly what we are looking at is the inability of any bureaucracy to concede that limited understanding is equivalent to limited fallibility. No bureaucracy known to man is capable of the moral strength required to continuously update its definitions of infallible statements. Thus the Church is encumbered with a great pile of documents written to define belief which were based on the best understanding of the times in which they were written but which have never been repudiated by later and better supported understanding of later developments.
What frightens the amateur more than anything else is the idea that scientists may in fact know more about the world than the philosophers. upon whose guesswork they have been relying for centuries.

Matthew
 
Hmmm…WOW…that really is kinda of spooky…are you stalking me??? You have just proved my point.
Goodness. Nothing so scary, Eric. 😉 This is why people should stay away from conspiracy theories like the one you put up from Mr. Sungenis on 9-11. It’s not good for the heart, mind or the soul. I’ve seen people get so dark from these theories. It’s sad.

You wrote on a thread I wrote on just a bit ago and you wrote the same way sticking up for Mr. Sungenis then, too, and I remembered it. I think there was another like that, too. There aren’t many people any more who do what you do for Mr. Sungenis (or who write what Mr. Sungenis writes about Jews), so it wasn’t exactly a big trick. It’s easy to find with google and search on the forums. 😉
You don’t know me and are looking are looking to be put all sort of insinuated theories together on anyone who says anything that isn’t negative about Sungenis.
I was writing just about you, Eric. No one else. And not all sorts of insinuated theories. Just pointing out that you’re being too modest in how much you’ve tried to help Mr. Sungenis. I’ve said nice things about Mr. Sungenis too. I pray for him, too. So it would be kind of silly for me to do what you said I did because I’d be in trouble with myself! 😉 Some of us just notice the way you really downplay the terrible things he does but you tear apart people who criticize him and try to make them stop. That’s all.
No I don’t think Sungenis has slandered Jewish people,
😦 Goodness. That explains a lot to me.
but I do think he should obey his bishop.
Wonderful. 🙂
Anyhow Brenda, I think this off topic, which is probably my fault on this one for getting this going. You can PM me if you want, but probably not good to go to and fro on this thread regarding this.
Yes, I agree. Bless you. 🙂

And I still think Mr. Sungenis can write about geocentrism all he wants. 🙂 But I think Matthew drafdog has a pretty good point. I won’t argue too much because I’m not a scientist though. 😉
 
I wasn’t aware that there was a Catholic doctrine on gravity. Just exactly what is this doctrine. Is it the Newtonian theory of gravity, the Einstein theory of gravity or one of the newer theories which attempts to unite gravity and quaum field theory, such as supersymmetric string theory? Or would it be something else?
That’s my point. The church doesn’t have a doctrine of gravity or on other matters of science. The church wisely forbid the teaching of heliocentrism by Catholics as fact until it could be demonstrated scientifically. And science continues to deepen its knowledge of the physical world.

The church does have some doctrines that intersect with scientific knowledge. One of these would be that the human race is descended from one original couple. Science now seems to confirm at least that all humans descended from one woman.

We differ from Sungenis in that we disagree that geocentrism was infallibly defined as doctrine, especially in view of the fact that a later pope officially authorized the imprimartir which is a statement that the work doesn’t go against the faith.

What is really at issue is the right or ability of one pope to modify the decisions of an earlier pope. When people don’t have confidence that the Holy Spirit guides the church in every age they start worrying that a former papal statement on geocentrism or the form of the Tridentine mass were infallible statements of doctrine and therefore the present pope is an antipope. From there it is a slippery slope to schism.
 
That’s my point. The church doesn’t have a doctrine of gravity or on other matters of science. The church wisely forbid the teaching of heliocentrism by Catholics as fact until it could be demonstrated scientifically. And science continues to deepen its knowledge of the physical world.

The church does have some doctrines that intersect with scientific knowledge. One of these would be that the human race is descended from one original couple. Science now seems to confirm at least that all humans descended from one woman.

We differ from Sungenis in that we disagree that geocentrism was infallibly defined as doctrine, especially in view of the fact that a later pope officially authorized the imprimartir which is a statement that the work doesn’t go against the faith.

What is really at issue is the right or ability of one pope to modify the decisions of an earlier pope. When people don’t have confidence that the Holy Spirit guides the church in every age they start worrying that a former papal statement on geocentrism or the form of the Tridentine mass were infallible statements of doctrine and therefore the present pope is an antipope. From there it is a slippery slope to schism.
You can say that the earth is the center of the universe, at least mathematically, but such a concept is untenable from the point of view of taking into account the various dynamical forces involved according to Newton’s Laws of motion. Newton’s Laws of motion, Kepler’s laws, etc., provide a much neater and more credible theory than a theory with ad hoc epicycles, etc.
 
Hmmm…WOW…that really is kinda of spooky…are you stalking me???
:confused: I wasn’t going to answer you but it wouldn’t be nice to leave you feeling so afraid. It’s nothing so dark and scary. This is why people should stay away from conspiracy theories like the one you put up from Mr. Sungenis about 9-11. They’re poison to the heart and soul. You and I wrote on a couple of the same strings before and I remembered you sticking up for Mr. Sungenis and attacking his critics like you did on this string. If you know how to use forum searches and google it isn’t so mysterious and scary. I hope that makes you feel a little better. 🙂
You don’t know me and are looking are looking to be put all sort of insinuated theories together on anyone who says anything that isn’t negative about Sungenis.
:confused: Goodness, no. I only wrote about you, Eric. And I didn’t put out all sorts of theories, I just showed one thing about what a help you’re trying to be to Mr. Sungenis, bless your heart. You were being too modest. And if I did what you said I did about being against anyone saying something nice about Mr. Sungenis, I’d be in trouble with myself, too. 😉 I’ve written some nice things about Mr. Sungenis here and I pray for him. So what you said is a little silly.
No I don’t think Sungenis has slandered Jewish people,
😦 Well that explains a lot to me.
but I do think he should obey his bishop.
Wonderful, we agree on that. Maybe you can use that energy to help him to listen and to take back his slander of the bishop. You’d really be helping him so much then to get back on the right track. :gopray2:
Anyhow Brenda, I think this off topic, which is probably my fault on this one for getting this going. You can PM me if you want, but probably not good to go to and fro on this thread regarding this.
Okay. Let’s leave it then.

But I still think Mr. Sungenis can write about geocentrism all he likes even if I think its odd. Matthew drafdog wrote something earlier that really made sense to me about it, but I’m not a scientist though. So what do I know? :o

Blessings!
 
Hmmm…WOW…that really is kinda of spooky…are you stalking me???
:confused: I wasn’t going to answer you but it wouldn’t be nice to leave you feeling so afraid. It’s nothing so dark and scary. This is why people should stay away from conspiracy theories like the one you put up from Mr. Sungenis about 9-11. They’re poison to the heart and soul. You and I wrote on a couple of the same strings before and I remembered you sticking up for Mr. Sungenis and attacking his critics like you did on this string. If you know how to use forum searches and google it isn’t so mysterious and scary. I hope that makes you feel a little better. 🙂
You don’t know me and are looking are looking to be put all sort of insinuated theories together on anyone who says anything that isn’t negative about Sungenis.
:confused: Goodness, no. I only wrote about you, Eric. And I didn’t put out all sorts of theories, I just showed one thing about what a help you’re trying to be to Mr. Sungenis, bless your heart. You were being too modest. And if I did what you said I did about being against anyone saying something nice about Mr. Sungenis, I’d be in trouble with myself, too. 😉 I’ve written some nice things about Mr. Sungenis here and I pray for him. So what you said is a little silly.
No I don’t think Sungenis has slandered Jewish people,
That explains a lot. 😦
but I do think he should obey his bishop.
Wonderful, at least we agree on that. Maybe you can use that energy to help him to listen and to take back his slander of the bishop. You’d really be helping him so much then to get back on the right track. :gopray2:
Anyhow Brenda, I think this off topic, which is probably my fault on this one for getting this going. You can PM me if you want, but probably not good to go to and fro on this thread regarding this.
Okay. Let’s leave it then.

But I still think Mr. Sungenis can write about geocentrism all he likes even if I think its odd. Matthew drafdog wrote something earlier that really made sense to me about it, but I’m not a scientist though. So what do I know? :o

Blessings!
 
Hmmm…WOW…that really is kinda of spooky…are you stalking me???
:confused: I wasn’t going to answer you but it wouldn’t be nice to leave you feeling afraid. It’s nothing so dark and scary. This is why people should stay away from conspiracy theories like the one you put up from Mr. Sungenis about 9-11. They’re poison to the heart and soul. You and I wrote on a couple of the same strings before and I remembered you sticking up for Mr. Sungenis and attacking his critics like you did on this string. If you know how to use forum searches and google it isn’t so mysterious and scary. I hope that makes you feel a little better. 🙂
You don’t know me and are looking are looking to be put all sort of insinuated theories together on anyone who says anything that isn’t negative about Sungenis.
:confused: Goodness, no. I only wrote about you, Eric. And I didn’t put out all sorts of theories, I just showed one thing about what a help you’re trying to be to Mr. Sungenis, bless your heart. You were being too modest. And if I did what you said I did about being against anyone saying something nice about Mr. Sungenis, I’d be in trouble with myself, too. 😉 I’ve written some nice things about Mr. Sungenis here and I pray for him. So what you said is a little silly.
No I don’t think Sungenis has slandered Jewish people,
That explains some things. 😦
but I do think he should obey his bishop.
Wonderful, at least we agree on that. Maybe you can use that energy to help him to listen and to take back his slander of the bishop. You’d really be helping him so much then to get back on the right track. :gopray2:
Anyhow Brenda, I think this off topic, which is probably my fault on this one for getting this going. You can PM me if you want, but probably not good to go to and fro on this thread regarding this.
Okay. Let’s leave it then.

But I still think Mr. Sungenis can write about geocentrism all he likes even if I think its odd. Matthew drafdog wrote something earlier that really made sense to me about it, but I’m not a scientist though. So what do I know? :o

Blessings!
 
I have been reading excerpts from Bob’s Sungenis’ (Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right) book on geocentrism. One of the arguments Sungenis makes (from the theological point of view–I hope this thread deals with geocentrism from that perspective) is that Popes Paul V, Urban VIII, and Alexander VII (as well as all the Fathers and the faithful for years) condemened the teaching that the earth moves around the sun as contrary to the faith and the teaching of scared scripture.
Sungenis argues that even if their decress arent infallible they still must be obeyed (since the 2nd Vatican council and Vatican I taught that the Holy Roman Pontiff’s decrees must be obeyed even when they arent speaking infallibly). They, also must be obeyed because no other Pope has revocked or overturned their teaching.

Sungenis seems to also add that he believes the teaching is infallible based on Lumen Gentium’s teaching about the sense of the faithful.
Sungenis writes, LUMEN GENTIUM: THE WHOLE BODY CANNOT ERR

"Perhaps the most signifigant reason why the doctrine of geocentrism should be considered infallible comes, quite surprisingly, from one of the more modern declarations concerning the teaching of the Church. Earlier we quoted from Lumen Gentium 25 to show that catholics are required to give obiedience to both infallible and non-infallible teachings of the Church. Yet Lumen Gentium contains an even more signifigant requirement for obiedience in regards to geocentric doctrine, and it certainly seems to make the doctrine infallible. It is stated in paragraph 12

The holy People of God shares also in Christ’s prophetic office : it spreads abroad a living witness of him, especially by a life and love and by offering to God a sacrifice of praise, the fruit of lips praising His name. (emphasis Sungeis’) THE WHOLE BODY OF THE FAITH WHO HAVE AN ANNOINTING THAT COMES FROM THE HOLYONE CANNOT ERR IN MATTERS OF BELIEF. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of the faith (sensus fidei) of the whole people, when, “from the bishops to the last of the faithful” they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals…

Sungenis continues(his words), " Since it is a fact that the “People of God,” which includes “the bishops to the last of the faithful,” have believed unanimously, firmly and without equivication in the doctrine of geocentrism from the begginning of the Catholic church and throughout two millenia, and who " guided by the sacred teaching authority" to do so, this belief necessarily fulfills the criteria of Lumen Gentium 12 that these same People of God “cannot err.” It is an undeniable fact that all Fathers, all the medievals, all the bishops, priests, saints, doctors, theologians and the remaining Christian faithful of every nation believed in the doctrine of geocentrism. Additionally, three Popes and their Holy Offices officially confirmed this absolute consensus in the 17th century against a few mewn who, because of their own misguided convictions, sought todepart from that consensus, making the attempt in the wake of unproven scientific claims with the express purpose of reinstituting a novel and subjective interpretation of Holy Writ."

Sungenis contunues, " As we have seen, even many years after modern science began to treat heliocentrism as a scientific fact, the Catholic faithful still maintained their vigilance for the geocentric doctrine. It has only been in the last one hundred years or so that this consensus waned." (these excerpts from Sungenis’s book can be found at the front of his web site–pages 42-47)
I would appreciate your thoughts. Are his a rguments strong that geocentrism was/is taught infallible by the magisterium.
If the sun really rotates around the Earth, does that mean abortion is really illegal?
 
That’s my point. The church doesn’t have a doctrine of gravity or on other matters of science. The church wisely forbid the teaching of heliocentrism by Catholics as fact until it could be demonstrated scientifically. And science continues to deepen its knowledge of the physical world.

The church does have some doctrines that intersect with scientific knowledge. One of these would be that the human race is descended from one original couple. Science now seems to confirm at least that all humans descended from one woman.

We differ from Sungenis in that we disagree that geocentrism was infallibly defined as doctrine, especially in view of the fact that a later pope officially authorized the imprimartir which is a statement that the work doesn’t go against the faith.

What is really at issue is the right or ability of one pope to modify the decisions of an earlier pope. When people don’t have confidence that the Holy Spirit guides the church in every age they start worrying that a former papal statement on geocentrism or the form of the Tridentine mass were infallible statements of doctrine and therefore the present pope is an antipope. From there it is a slippery slope to schism.
NO NO NO!!! The point is that the Pope (Urban VIII) stated that the Bible teaches geocentrism. The Bible, being God’s word, has to be believed even in matters of science if that is what is really being taught(by the sacred author). That is my question. Stop going on tangents about gravitiy, quantim meachanical engineering, etc… Now please deal with why or why not these decrees are infallible or not infallible. Also these statements (on geocentrism) have never been revoked by any other Pope.
 
NO NO NO!!! The point is that the Pope (Urban VIII) stated that the Bible teaches geocentrism. The Bible, being God’s word, has to be believed even in matters of science if that is what is really being taught(by the sacred author). That is my question. Stop going on tangents about gravitiy, quantim meachanical engineering, etc… Now please deal with why or why not these decrees are infallible or not infallible. Also these statements (on geocentrism) have never been revoked by any other Pope.
Why is Newton’s theory of gravity a tangent? If geocentrism is untenable according to Newton’s theory of forces, then it is appropriate to discuss it.
 
If a citizen of say France or England had written a play where he made the king out to be a bit stupid, especially where that citizen was friend to the King, i would not suppose the punishment would have been so weak.

britannica.com/eb/topic-619410/Urban-VIII
Your post reminded me of an interesting tidbit we learned back in college Shakespeare class. A group of young players got into very hot water for making fun of the Scottish accent of the new King James I (formerly King Jame VI of Scotland). There theater was taken from them and given to Shakespeare for use! I believe it was Blackfriars.
 
Why is Newton’s theory of gravity a tangent? If geocentrism is untenable according to Newton’s theory of forces, then it is appropriate to discuss it.
It is contested, by Sungenis, that geocentrism is untenable because of Newton’s laws. The point and the question i am asking about, is the Church’s teaching regarding scripture teaching geocentrism. It is pretty clear theat three Popes have taught just that. That the Bible teaches geocentrism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top