Review: The Church and the Modern University: Who's the Real Enemy of Science? - Robert Sungenis vs David Pence

This morning I was able to listen to a debate entitled The Church and the Modern University: Who's the Real Enemy of Science? - Robert Sungenis vs David Pence. You can purchase the debate here.

I just wanted to offer a few reactions. I know it will be argued that I am biased on this topic, and I am. However, as I point out below, I was not always a geocentrist. I have come to accept the position over time. In any case, as far as debates go, clearly, Dr. Pence was ill-prepared for this debate and possibly presumed he would easily win over his home-court fans in the audience with his preceding reputation, his entertaining jokes, presentation style, and generalizations on Church teaching as well as logical fallacies towards Sungenis by equating his position with atheists and protestants. Pence's case, if it could be distilled is: We are in the 21st century and no modern pope or cleric believes or teaches that the Earth is the center of the universe, besides, look at the observational evidence. Sungenis, on the other hand, not only refuted Pence's presentation, point by point, but offered as evidence: Scripture. the unanimous testimony of the Fathers, St. Thomas Aquinas, the popes in the 1500-1700's, the condemnation of heliocentrism as heresy, and the most important I think for those "on the fence" is the testimony of famous scientific experiments in the 19th and 20th cenuries but also modern and current scientific findings in peer-reviewed journals. In my opinion, if you presume neither position, and approach this evidence fresh with no biases, it seems clear that the overwhelming weight on the side of geocentrism should hold at least your provisional acceptance, until evidence to the contrary materializes. 

...

A blogger that was present at the actual debate wrote this about his experience, to which not only Robert Sungenis responded to, I offered the following comment today:

David, please define "rabbit trail" and how this venture on the issue of geocentrism is "a waste of his talent as an apologist." Even while Robert has devoted most of his energies to this topic in the last decade or so, he has still managed to produce the best apologetical materials out there to a caliber far surpassing all those professional Catholics out there whose main "bread and butter" are solely apologetical. I would only suggest as a possible way to proceed: suppose we were to walk into this issue with no background in the history, science, or ecclesial debates... while at the same time a Catholic, and having the logical capacity to look at the evidence, and then listen to the entire debate and Q and A of this presentation. Considering the evidence presented by both Dr. Pence and Dr. Sungenis, where Pence offers no ecclesial, Scriptural, or scientific evidence that his opponent was not able to respond to, and yet, Dr. Sungenis presents the witnesses of Scripture, the Fathers, Aquinas, the Trent Catechism, and here's the icing, modern cosmological evidence... I think, then, an unbiased individual would be convinced of the geocentric position. In the interest of transparency, I am an associate of Dr. Sungenis, and for the longest time I was agnostic to this issue for years while working with Bob. I just appreciated his apologetical work so much that I would simply ignore the geocentric stuff. Over the years, however, having listened to his debates, talks, and attending the geocentric conference, and of course the new The Principle documentary, I am convinced of the geocentric position. I am fine with the ridicule from the opposition, in no less of a way than I am fine with the ridicule on issues of the Eucharist, the papacy, the Mass, the Sacraments etc. I for one don't understand the hermeneutic or heuristic of limiting my assent or support on only the issues which the Church has imposed on the faithful for belief.

Thank you for your time.

Laurence Gonzaga