His point was that being at the spatial center does not automatically imply the sort of bias you and others seem to impute. Indeed, it would have been considere

His point was that being at the spatial center does not automatically imply the sort of bias you and others seem to impute. Indeed, it would have been considered idolatrous and prideful to put Man at the center (who should prefer to reign in Hell rather than serve in Heaven?). God is at the center, in the ancient world but especially during the Medieval period. Someone once remarked that the spatial centrality of the earth was commonly understood as a kind of centrality within the lowest order of reality (Man himself is, in Catholic tradition, the lowest of the intellectual beings). This actually sheds some light on why the Incarnation is such a big deal. Compare this with the Jewish and Muslim rejection of the notion that God would lower Himself by entering and uniting with Creation in such an intimate way. If anything, it is the Enlightenment that dethrones God and installs Man at the center of concern. Modernism is in this sense a kind of worship of Man, and what is worship if not putting something at the center? I think people attach too much significance to the historical belief in geocentrism. It is a very reasonable default position to take given what is observable. Much of the mythology surrounding heliocentrism and how supposedly theologically disastrous it was is fabrication and Enlightenment propaganda.