Four corners - N, W, E and S. From the extremities, from the ends of the earth.
I wonder if perhaps you’re missing rossum’s point. You know
now that such language is metaphorical, but did they know that
then? Other ancient cultures certainly held such language literally, that the earth literally had four corners.
What has struck me in looking into this particular topic is just how consistently, among the Church Fathers and the medieval theologians, these matters of cosmologies were taken as matters of natural philosophy and
not as matters of faith.
For example, surveying the array of patristic quotations presented in support of geocentrism we can ask how many give any support to a central, immovable earth based upon a scriptural citation? (The list linked is materially the same as that presented in Galileo Was Wrong vol. 2)
Unless I am missing some–which is possible, I’m open to correction–I see two: one from Athenagoras and one allegedly from Clement of Rome. I say allegedly because, although Sungenis presents it as from St. Clement, it is actually from one of the
Clementine Homilies which are universally acknowledged not to emanate from St. Clement of Rome–Sungenis does not alert the reader to this fact. So from Sungenis’ evidence only one Father actually cites sacred Scripture on the matter of a centralized earth. The quote from Athenagoras is as follows: “To Him is for us to know who stretched out and vaulted the heavens, and fixed the earth in its place like a center.” Notice that this is simply a bare citation from the poetic Psalms, it is not a patristic exposition supporting geostationism per se.
Eight other witnesses do speak, in various astrological/quasi-philosophical/quasi-scientific terms, of earth at the center of things. These are Anatolius of Alexandria, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Thaumaturgos, Hippolytus, and Methodius. But in none of these instances do the witnesses cite Scripture, say or even imply that they are passing on a sacred Tradition, or indicate that their view is divinely revealed by God. As was argued elsewhere here on CAF:
But providing quotes which prove that the Church Fathers personally held geocentrism (which is all John Salza does) is not the same as providing evidence that they held it to be a a revealed truth of the Christian faith. In fact, none of the Church Fathers (much less all of them) ever made such a claim. Again, let me point out that when Saint Thomas argues for geocentrism in the Summa, he argues based on the observations of a natural scientist and a pagan: Ptolemy. Not a single Church Father. Not a single passage of Scripture. Ptolemy. Geocentrism is a question for natural science, not a truth of the Catholic faith. (
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6714246&postcount=135)
Now these relatively few witnesses certainly do not represent any “unanimous consent of the Fathers”. And notice that the majority even of these don’t cite Scripture or Tradition in support of geostationism. What or whom do they cite? Anatolius cites the Greek philosophers Eudemus, Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes. St. Basil speaks generally of “inquirers into nature who with a great display of words give reasons for the immobility of the earth”; notice that he makes this a matter of natural science, not a theological point. Hippolytus cites Ecphantus and Sungenis seems to me to have misread the saint, for Bob asserts that St. Hippolytus is refuting Ecphantus, but it appears to me from the text that St. Hippolytus is merely stating what Ecphantus believed without making any judgment on it. Thus this is actually one less Father that can be cited in support of geostationism or, if Sungenis is correct, then one Father who refutes it. And Methodius speaks of the “Chaldeans and Egyptians” and also of the mathematicians of the Greeks.
Thus, only one Father explicitly cites Scripture on geostationism (if that is actually what he’s doing, which is not clear from that single passage), but several Fathers reference the Greeks and other pagans on the matter of geostationism. This is what is found in the citations provided by Sungenis himself. The evidence certainly suggests that they did not see this as a matter of faith.
And taking St. Thomas as representative of medieval thought, as was already mentioned above:
Even Saint Thomas, when he argued for the geocentric cosmology in the Summa, argued based on the observations of Ptolemy, a natural scientist and a pagan. Not the Bible. Not the Church fathers. Ptolemy. This is a question for natural science, not an article of the faith. (
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6706105&postcount=75)
A question for natural science and not an article of faith – that is exactly what is taught by Popes Leo XIII (in Providentissimus Deus 18-91) and Pius XII (in Divino Afflante Spiritu 3). As Catholics in these matters we have freedom in these matters. We are certainly not compelled, as a matter of faith, to buy into a view of the universe that I think I have adequately demonstrated above represents a massive exercise in special pleading.
nly He knows how everything exactly came into existence.