from an official capacity, the catholic church has never contradicted itself

PREFACE:i. I retract my comment on Galileo's execution and forgive your confusion between heliocentric and geocentric (insomuch as any voter will find these two errors cancel each other out since they are not crucial to our arguments).ii. In this conclusive round it is pertinent to clarify the argument: from an official capacity, the catholic church has never contradicted itself. The argument is not: according to the official capacity, the catholic church has never contradicted itself. The latter is but an inane statement.iii. The secondary source information is adequate for framing my argument. I am not claiming that in the past the Catholic Church has officially taught a geocentric view, even though scripture and widespread belief clearly indicates this.iv. What I am arguing is that the validity of heliocentrism (as announced by Pope John Paul II in 1992) contradicts the claim of the inerracy of scripture.v. I am not claiming that the Catholic Church takes the bible literally, I am claiming that the Catholic Church believes (it's own interpretation of) the bible as a whole is is the unaltered word of god. "Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus ... reaffirmed the decisions of the Council of Trent and emphasized that the Bible in all its parts was inspired and that a stated fact must be accepted as falling under inspiration, down to the most insignificant item; that is, the whole Bible is the Word of God"(source: Origin, Inspiration, and History of the Bible" preface in New American Bible, Church Edition (Wichita, KS: Fireside Bible Publishers, 2005-2006), p. xxii, Copyright © Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, ISBN 1-55665-493-6, ISBN 978-1-55665-490-9.)vi. If you question the infallibility of Providentissimus Deus, please read: http://www.catholicplanet.com...FINAL POINTS:I. I could be write a whole lot of bible passages justified by Pope Leo XIII's infallible teaching (that the bible is totally inerrant) but you have restricted me not to use bible passages (claiming that the bible is too open to interpretation). However the Catholic interpretation is the true one, and Pope Benedict showed us how:II. During Pope Benedict’s recent visit to France, he spoke at the College des Bernardins in Paris to “representatives from the world of French culture.” In his speech he spoke out against Biblical Literalism and fundamentalism. He stated:Scripture requires exegesis, and it requires the context of the community in which it came to birth and in which it is lived. This is where its unity is to be found, and here too its unifying meaning is opened up. … It perceives in the words the Word, the ‘Logos’ itself, which spreads its mystery through this multiplicity. This particular structure of the Bible issues a constantly new challenge to every generation. It excludes by its nature everything that today is known as fundamentalism.In effect the word of God can never simply be equated with the letter of the text. To attain to it involves a transcending and a process of understanding, led by the inner movement of the whole and hence it also has to become a process of living. Only within the dynamic unity of the whole are the many books one book. God’s word and action in the world are only revealed in the word and history of human beings.The transcending of the letter and understanding it solely from the perspective of the whole is forcefully expressed by St. Paul with the phrase: ‘the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.‘ But the liberating Spirit is not simply… the exegete’s own vision. The Spirit is Christ … Who shows us the way. With the word of Spirit and of freedom, a further horizon opens up, but at the same time a clear limit is placed upon arbitrariness and subjectivity, which unequivocally binds both the individual and the community and brings about a new, higher obligation than that of the letter: namely, the obligation of insight and love. (source: http://www.religiondispatches.org...) III. One pope claims the bible in itself is the word of god, the other claims the word of god is not in the bible itself but in the correct interpretation of it - a contradiction in itself but I digress to my main point.FINAL POINTS:IV: The scriptures provide innumerable indications of geocentrism. The defense of the Catholic church is that 'it depends on your interpretation, namely, if your interpretation is acceptable by us'. It seems the Popes cannot decide if the bible is true in itself or if it is only true in the correct interpretation - namely, the catholic interpretation. However just because this seems to be the case does not mean that my argument depends on it.V. Regardless of geocentrism, the catholic church accepts the validity of heliocentrism (and arguably never officially condemned it). This one last point is on the term official.Official is "Adjective - Of or relating to an authority or public body and its duties, actions, and responsibilities."To detach the official teachings of the Catholic Church from the official duties, actions, and responsibilities of the Catholic Church undermines the term 'official' entirely. If indeed the Catholic Church has reserved for themselves a definition of official that indicates they may say and do as they will as long as they don't contradict themselves in the sense of what they call 'official' - then it seems to be that the Catholic Church is exempt from critique in the sense that every word, passage, or argument is entirely and solely definable by the Catholic Church.VI. In any case, actions speak louder than words, and if the Catholic Church has never "officially" said one thing and then another, this does not prove that from an official capacity the Catholic Church has never contradicted itself, only that according to the offical capacity of the Catholic Church they have never contradicted themselves.VII. And regardless of the point I have focused on, the truth of the church contradicting itself is beyond the constraints of this debates conditions and the Catholic Church's flimsy use of the term "official" in the sense that their definition of official implies infallibility (what are you up to Big Brother? #orwell).CONCLUSION:The truth of the matter is so, that the catholic church has at least once contradicted itself from an official capacity, not according to the official capacity.If your claim is "The Catholic Church has never contradicted itself according to the Catholic Church" then I give you this debate, however I will exit here saying that is a vacuous statement that needs no entertainment or reflection. In the wise words of John Locke:"... it is unreasonable for men to be judges in their own cases, that selflove will make men partial to themselves and their friends: and on the other side, that ill nature, passion and revenge will carry them too far in punishing others" (Second Treatise§13).I thank dairygirl4u2c for the opportunity to debate this topic and for voters for taking the time to read my argument.