Was the decision taken in the Galleo case infallible?

 

The final conclusion? Ms. Haigh:

However, ... it simply is not the teaching of either Vatican I or Vatican II that the Church's
infallibility (which is enjoyed and exercised by the Pope alone under certain conditions) is limited
to the field of dogma, that is, to the determination and promulgation of truths revealed by God
in either Scripture or Tradition. Rather, infallibility also covers other truths which are closely
linked to divine revelation, and which cannot be denied without endangering this deposit of
revealed truth in some way. … ... truths concerning faith or morals which are necessary to
safeguard the deposit of faith are not Catholic dogmas, but they are Catholic doctrines. And
the Church can teach them infallibly. The Vatican I definition of papal infallibility expressly said
that it extends to "doctrine" (doctrina) -- a general term which covers both dogmas and the
secondary, related truths.

Is it not certain that a geocentric/geostatic universe as upheld so definitively in the Galileo case
and by the 1664 Bull, Speculatores by Alexander VII, is one of these secondary, related truths --
secondary to the received dogma of divine revelation?

The Vatican I Fathers were not told by Bishop Gasser that there was anything sacrosanct about
the word "define." All that is necessary is that the Pope clearly express his intention of speaking
decisively and with finality on a point of doctrine, in such a way that good Catholics can be certain what the truth is.

All these conditions were certainly fulfilled in the Galileo case and by the subsequent editions of
the Index. It seems equally certain that neither Benedict XIV nor Pius VII made any attempt to
legally undo or abrogate the actions of their predecessors in this matter. Therefore, what prevents
these former decisions from being still in force and binding on our consciences? Mere practice,
such as the permission to read forbidden books, does nothing to change the heretical nature of those books. No more does the failure to denounce such practices as birth-control and abortion change at all their grievously sinful nature.

Finally, if a doctrine, teaching or position of the Church is constant from Apostolic times, as the
geocentric/geostatic cosmology is, it really matters little what legal form its verbal expression
takes. The legal form it is given indicates the degree of concern for the souls of the faithful on the
part of the chief shepherds. Tha anathemas of former Councils, like those of St. Paul, manifest
great love for souls and care for the protection of the Lord's flock. Conversely, the absence of such
warnings indicates a terrible indifference.

POSTSCRIPT

To those who attack these papers, I offer the following considerations:

When sacred, time-honored structures are torn down, something just as worthy or better should be put in their place.

But what has been put in the place of the Aristotelian-Thomistic synthesis?

Nothing but the man-made bricks, and straw and slime of a new Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:3) -- process theology, bringing about moral and doctrinal
relativism; theistic evolutionism, leading to pantheism and New Age demonism.

Much of what passes for theology today is indistinguishable from pop psychology.

What has replaced the divine liturgy of the Mass? Something that more and more Protestants can recognize as their own.

All that is true in the modern sciences could easily be incorporated into the Thomistic synthesis. But this task can only be accomplished by competent
scientists and theologians full of supernatural Faith, Hope, Charity and the Gifts of the Holy Ghost. May God raise up such men for His Church very soon.