It does not need to be a perfect sphere (as defined by geometry) to perfectly fulfill it's function. Your definition of prefect(sic) is flawed.
==========================
Again. I did not say that the Sun needed to be a perfect geometrical form. OI said that in order to comply with Thomas Aquinas' insistence that everything other than earthly objects were the perfect creations of a perfect Deity, the Sun would have to be geometrically perfect. Since it is not, we can conclude that St Thomas Aquinas' insistence is incorrect: heavenly bodies are not perfect creations. They are not geometrically perfect,and may not be creations at all, since they could have been more or less formed according to the natural process started by the Big Bang.
The Sun is not perfect. It does what it does and it is what it is. We also know that no heavenly body is eternal, either, which was another of Aquinas' beliefs.
I was not referring to the Sun as flawed, but simply as evidence that geometric perfection in celestial bodies is either rare or nonexistent. What is flawed is St. Thomas Aquinas' theological view of the Universe.