The Smoke of Satan in the Church

rising_smokeTogether with his friend and colleague, the journalist Alessandro Gnocchi, the legal philosopher Mario Palmaro recently made headlines for criticising Pope Francis in a series of articles published by ‘Il Foglio’.  On learning that Palmaro was seriously ill, Pope Francis phoned him and had a moving exchange with him.

A few days ago, Mario Palmaro wrote a heartfelt letter to Riccardo Cascioli, Director of  the Catholic online daily, La Nuova Bussola Quotidana, in response to his editorial analysis of the new Secretary of the Italian [Socialist] Democratic Party, Matteo Renzi. In his letter Palmaro expressed “his indignation about the direction the Church is taking, above all regarding the homosexual aggression which is of interest to the whole world.”  

Cascioli asks for prayers for the ailing Palmaro.

You can read the English translation of the letter in its entirety on Rorate Caeli

Here is a substantial extract from Mario’s long and hard-hitting message:

My problem is the Catholic Church. The problem is that on the subject of the worldwide outbreak of the homosexual lobby, the Church has fallen silent. We have silence from the Pope to the humblest priest in the peripheries. And if the Pope speaks, the day after Padre Lombardi has to rectify, specify, clarify and differentiate. Please abstain from dusting off letters and declarations made by Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio ten years ago. If I find out today that my son takes drugs, what should I say to him: “go and re-read the joint declaration made by me and your mother six years ago when we told you not to take drugs”? Or would I face him and try to shake him immediately as best I can?

Dear Director, where are the Episcopal Conference and the bishops in this battle? A deafening silence has fallen upon them. Actually, no: Monsignor Domenico Mogavero, Bishop of Mazara del Vallo, ex-under-secretary to the CEI and canonist – no less – spoke – oh, and how he spoke:

The law cannot ignore hundreds and thousands of people cohabitating. It is right that cohabitating couples be recognized also in Italy without putting them on equal terms with families.” For Mogavero, “The State can and must protect the pact that two cohabitants have made between themselves. In contrast to Christian mercy and universal rights – note well – two cohabitants don’t exist for the law. Today, if one of the two is taken to hospital, the other is even denied in the lending care or receiving medical information, as if they were an outsider.” The Bishop concludes: “I think it is legitimate to recognize rights such as the reversibility of pensions or the transfer of rent in virtue of the person’s importance. It is unsustainable – Mogavero underlines – that the cohabiter is a Mr. Nobody for the law.” And as regards the Church, for which Pope Francis has invited reflection on this theme, in view of the extraordinary Synod on the Family, “without equating them to married couples, there are no obstacles to common-law unions.” Amen.

Do you get it, dear Director? Shortly they’ll take my son of seven and at school they’ll make him play with condoms and his genitals, and what does the Church talk about with me? About boatloads which sink near Lampedusa, about Jesus who was a refugee, about an obscure Jesuit of the 17th century just beatified!

No, my problem is not Matteo Renzi.

Dear Director, where is the Archbishop of Milan, Angelo Scola in this battle?

Shortly they will stop us from saying and writing that homosexuality is against nature, and Scola talks to me about half-castes and of the need to understand and value the Roma culture. And again, it was the Archbishop of Milan some weeks ago who invited the Archbishop of Vienna, Schönborn, to our Cathedral: as the Church is disappearing in Austria, they asked him to come and explain to the priests of our diocese how to obtain such results – what their secret was. Just like this: a coach has brought his team to fall down on the league, and so we’ll give him the teaching post at Coverciano! [The central training ground and technical headquarters of the Italian National Football Team.]

And would you look at the coincidence, among other things: Schönborn – who wears the habit of St. Dominic and Thomas Aquinas – came to explain to the Ambrosian priests that he had personally intervened in protecting the nomination of two homosexuals for a parish council. Schönborn says he met them and: “I saw two pure young men, even if their cohabitation is not what the order of creation has foreseen.” There you have it, dear Director, this is purity according to a prince of the Church at the dawn of the year 2014.

And my problem should be Matteo Renzi and the PD?

They are going to take my seven-year-old son and brainwash him into thinking that homosexuality is normal and in the meantime, my Archbishop invites a bishop to the Cathedral to teach me that two homosexuals living together are examples of purity?

And so to finish. The Matteo Renzi who promotes civil unions is a physiological byproduct of a Pope who, in his travels is interviewed by journalists on the plane and declares: “Who am I to judge” etc, etc. Obviously, I know too that these two are not of the same nature, that the Pope is against these things and certainly suffers regarding them, and that he is motivated by good intentions. However, facts are facts. Confronted with that little sentence – epochal from the mouth of a Pope “Who am I to judge”–,  loads of corrective and reparatory articles can be written, which tireless troops of “normalists” have been doing now for months, in order to say, don’t worry all is well – everything is just fine.

But we both know well, and anyone else who knows the mechanisms of communications does as well, that, that “Who am I to judge” is a tombstone on any political and legal battle regarding the recognition of homosexual rights. If we were in rugby, I would tell you that that little sentence gained in a few seconds more meters in favour of the homosexual lobby, than decades of work by the world’s homosexual movement. I’ll tell you too, that bishops like Mogavero, in the shade of that little sentence “who am I to judge” can build castles of dissolution without impunity, and the only thing left for us to do is to keep our mouths shut.

Let’s be clear: to impute that the Pope or the Church are to blame because all the countries in the world are normalizing homosexuality would be foolish: this rising tide is unrestrainable, it cannot be stopped. The reason is simple: London, and Paris, New York and Rome, Brussels and Berlin have become a gigantic Sodom and Gomorrah. The point is however, whether we want to admit this, dispute and denounce it, or whether we want to play smart and hide behind the “Who am I to judge”. The point is also, whether this worldwide Sodom and Gomorrah, merit the language of mercy and comprehension.

Well, then, I wonder, why don’t we also reserve the same mercy for the traffickers of chemical weapons, the slave-traders and financial embezzlers? Aren’t they also poor sinners? Right? Or do I have to ask Schönborn to meet them for lunch and evaluate their purity?

Dear Director, the situation by now is very clear: any Catholic politician, intellectual or journalist even if he wants to fight on the homosexualist front, will find himself spiked in the back by the mysticism of mercy and forgiveness. We are all completely de-legitimized, and any bishop, priest, theologian, director of a diocesan weekly or politician of the Catholic-democratic-type can shut us up with that “Who am I to judge”. We would be riddled with shots like a farm pheasant in a hunting chase by types like Mogavero.

Dear Director, our problem is not Matteo Renzi.

Our problem, my problem, is that the other day the Holy Father said the Gospel “is not proclaimed with doctrinal beatings, but with sweetness.” Also here, I would please ask “normalists” and timewasters to abstain. Even I know that effectively the Gospel is announced like that – apart from the fact that John the Baptist had rather brusque methods himself, and the Lord defines him “as the greatest among those born of woman”.

But you know very well that with that little sentence, we have both been spiked like codfish.

We have both been fighting against legalized abortion, divorce, in vitro fertilization, euthanasia, homosexual unions and cunning politicians like Matteo Renzi, who are promoting and spreading all that stuff. But there you have it, we are both irremediable doctrinal bashers, people without charity, ethicists, “theologians”, as some journalist from Communion and Liberation calls us. Furthermore, phenomenon like La Bussola and Il Timone are anachronistic examples of this lack of charity, of this unpresentable moral rigour. Plus, the daily, titanic efforts of the “normalists” will not be enough to subtract these titles of de-legitimization from official Catholicism, as all the balancing exercises in trying to keep your feet in two different shoes, always end up, sooner or later, with a tragic flight into the void.

I also think that the problem – forgive the personal aspect – is not dirty, ugly and bad Gnocchi and Palmaro, because of what they wrote in Il Foglio.

I would re-write the same thing again, ten, a hundred, thousand times more, since unfortunately, everything is coming to pass in the worst way, much worse than what we could have ever predicted.

This is why, dear Director, our problem and the problem of Catholics and ordinary people is not Matteo Renzi.

The problem is our Mother Church, who has decided to abandon us in the jungle of Vietnam: the helicopters have taken off and we have been left where we’ll let ourselves, one at a time, be spiked by the “Vietcong relativists.” I am not protesting for myself, and you know the reasons why. And besides, I prefer a thousand times, to stay down here waiting for the Vietcong, rather than ever get into one of those helicopters, in which perhaps there is the promise of a little seat in some clerical conference of the type “Scienza e Vita,” under the illusion that one is a part, in some way, of the official power, together with all the other ecclesial movements. Or with the crazy idea – written in black and white – that, Gnocchi and Palmaro were perhaps right, but they shouldn’t have said it, because certain truths should not be uttered, rather they should be somewhat denied publically in order to confound the enemy.

No, I am not protesting for myself.

However, I still have the problem of that seven-year-old son of mine and three older ones too. I don’t want to and can’t give them the response of the boatloads sinking near Lampedusa, the homosexual example of purity from Cardinal Schönborn, the half-castes and the praise of the Roma culture by Cardinal Scola, the disdain for doctrinal thrashings according to Pope Francis and the eulogizing of civil unions by Mogavero. To these children I cannot tell the fairy-tale called “Matteo Renzi.” Anyway, regarding Renzi, ten minutes done well by Crozza (Ed. a comedian of scathing satire) will fix him.

Dear director, dear Riccardo, why would I ever write these things to you? Because last night I couldn’t sleep. And because I’d like to understand – and ask the readership of Bussola a question: What more has to happen in the Church for Catholics to stand up, once and for all, and shout their indignation from the rooftops? Attention: I am addressing individual Catholics, not associations, secret meetings, movements, sects which for years have been managing the brains of the faithful for the benefit of third parties, dictating the line the followers have to take. These groups seem to me to be placed under the care of those minus habens [of lesser intelligence] and headed from afar by more or less charismatic individuals, who are more or less trustworthy. No, no: here I am making an appeal to individual consciences, to their hearts, their faith and their virility. Before it is too late.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to The Smoke of Satan in the Church

  1. johnhenrycn says:

    Palmaro’s letter is in the same class as Zola’s J’Accuse…!, a depressing, gut wrenching jeremiad that denounces our corruption and prophesies our impending destruction:

    How doth the [Vatican?] city sit solitary, that was full of people! How is she become as a widow! She that was great among the nations, and princess among the provinces, how is she become tributary!

    Lamentations 1:1

    But, insofar as the homosexualist Fifth Column is concerned, it is not the ‘root’ cause of our predicament. Of course, Original Sin is the root, root cause; but earlier than homosexualism on the list of prime causes is artificial birth control, which led to the separation of sex from procreation, which led to the victory of adultery, which led to the present state in which absolute sexual freedom is declared to be as ineluctably necessary to a healthy society as freedom of religion and speech. We will never in our lifetime defeat the homosexual agenda because we (meaning society at large) will never give up our human ‘right’ to scr** whoever and whenever we choose. The liberty now enjoyed by homosexuals is a symptom – not the cause – of our malaise.

    Like

  2. johnhenrycn says:

    NB: Calling Palmaro’s letter “a depressing, gut wrenching jeremiad” is not to say I disagree with it.

    Like

  3. Giovanni A. Cattaneo says:

    There is nothing to add, he puts it’s as precise as anybody with two good eyes can see it. Which of course makes u wonder, how is this so clear to a layman and yet the Pope and his commissars seem untouched or rather living in an alternate reality to which we are not allowed to participate in.

    Like

  4. johnhenrycn says:

    You’ve got a problem, Giovanni, which shows up in most of your commentary. Nothing wrong, in principle, with questioning “the Pope and his commissars”, but to frame your distress in those terms is disrespectful of the Vicar of Christ and the Apostolic Succession.

    Like

  5. Giovanni A. Cattaneo says:

    No it’s not, as u have not understood the context of the comment.

    Like

  6. johnhenrycn says:

    “…the Pope and his commissars…” is an insult that no ‘context’ can excuse. It’s not an outrageous insult, but it’s an insult nonetheless.

    Like

  7. Roger says:

    Science has produced some remarkable studies on Sodom and Gomorrah.
    Look consider this the canonisation of saints and the requirement for miracles! The Bible and especially the Gospels. I say this because the Authority of the Papacy requires belief in the Resurrection because it was after that when Peter was given the keys!
    Why get sidetracked into arguments over seeking to justifying Sin?
    Peter’s Authority with Anathema’s etc. is recognised by Heaven.
    Justifying Sin is arguing with Heaven and this has consequences which is why the children at Fatima were shown Hell!
    The smoke of Satan? well among some meanings is the seduction of reasoning in the justification for Sin.
    Divorce (the sacrament of Marriage) is behind much of the sexual issues. Divorce is Man imposing Man’s Authority over God. Divorce is hatred where the promise and oath is Love. Just say Sin must be condemned because the wages of Sin are Eternal death (Hell). If Rome doesn’t condemn then Rome is denying the mandate given to St Peter!

    Like

  8. Giovanni A. Cattaneo says:

    Whatever

    Like

  9. Toadspittle says:

    “Science has produced some remarkable studies on Sodom and Gomorrah.”
    Really, Roger?
    I’d be fascinated to read them.
    Where can they be found?

    Interesting times, all right. (Now I mean, as well as way back then.)

    Like

  10. Roger says:

    Toad.,
    There are a number but this Fox one is interesting especially since recorded and observed Russian experience with their Bus size asteroid!
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/04/01/researchers-asteroid-destroyed-sodom-and-gomorrah/
    The Act of Sodomy is an enshrined reference of course to the Chistianity that formed the West, its Laws, culture and Media.
    The point that should not be lost here is St Peter was expressly asked Loves Thou Me More Than The Rest? (First of the Ten Commandments).
    The Authority to Feed the Lambs was because St Peter placed God First.
    Now does Rome obey the First Commandment? Because the crticism is that it doesn’t!
    I point out that the test for a Pope is the First Commandment because His Authority derives from placing God first!
    The charm, solicitude and known Acts of Charity are well Associated with Masonry of course. Note that the late Father Malachy Martin expressly said that Satan had been Enthroned (with blood sacrifice) in the Vatican. The Day that the Pope becomes the Man’s Global Moral spokesman first and God’s Vicar second you will know that this is the opposite of what Our Lord asked St Peter.

    Like

  11. Toadspittle says:

    ”We will never in our lifetime defeat the homosexual agenda because we (meaning society at large) will never give up our human ‘right’ to scr** whoever and whenever we choose.”

    If JH is correct in his analysis – and I suspect he might well be – it means that Freud, the Great Atheist, was right all along.
    It is all about sex, and nothing else. Always has been, in fact.
    Perhaps it’s just that we are less hypocritical nowadays.

    A friend of mine is a ‘gay’ Catholic priest. He says that the extent and scope of homosexual involvement and influence in The Church is vastly greater than any lay person could imagine. Why that should be, I don’t know.

    Like

  12. johnhenrycn says:

    “Why that should be, I don’t know.”

    I can think of some reasons why homosexuals are attracted to the priesthood:
    1. They can hide in plain sight, not being expected to marry.
    2. The love they have for the theatrical, for making fashion statements, for cutting a bella figura – which is not to say that I oppose beautiful vestments, because I do not.
    3. And most sadly, not to mention wickedly, because some are attracted to boys.
    ___
    Freud was wrong; it’s not “all about sex”. Yes, carnal lust exerts a heinous influence in most of our lives, but no more so than a few other deadly sins I could mention. Which holds a more odious grip over your life, Toad, sloth or sex? And which is worse?

    Like

  13. kathleen says:

    Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves“, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said when he became the Holy Father, knowing that he was going to need plenty of Divine help so he might fulfill his obligations as successor to St. Peter.

    There was a lot of speculation at the time as to who these “wolves” were. Were they the liberals and dissidents in the Church that he was referring to? Militant feminists? Those in the hierarchy who refuse to teach the fundamental truths to their flocks? Etc.
    Yes, probably he had all these others in mind too, but it appears that the most “ferocious” and “dangerous” of these “wolves” are the members of the clergy that form the powerful (and mostly hidden) “homosexual lobby”. Either through participation in these evil acts themselves, or in sympathy through their own disordered inclinations, the Sodom and Gomorrah crowd are a force to be reckoned with. When our dear Pope Emeritus realised his strength was failing, and the pressing importance of rooting out this evil from the Church still ahead of him, is when he decided to step down as Pope and hand over to a younger, more energetic man.

    Like

  14. Roger says:

    The World, The Flesh and the Devil.
    The greatest Sin? Easy PRIDE and this bitchy self rightous backbitting judgement of others.
    The Sin of Luxuria covers all of these. Self and self gratification this is what we are really looking at. Could just as easily be Gluttony.
    The Sin is in the Act not in the temptation! Then also their is God’s Justice and Forgiveness except for Sins against the Holy Ghost!
    What is prayer and penance if it is not the spirit imposing its dominance over the rapacious Self and the self glorification? This battle is a lifelong battle.
    There is a vast difference from being Tempted and the self Justification of Sin.
    The wages of Sin = Death of the Soul = Hell.
    Its obvious that targetting Holy celebracy is the Road to taking way the channel for the sacraments.
    The Royal Road to Heaven? God First, Neighbour next after God and a long way last self.

    Like

  15. John Henry, I don’t agree with you. As long as comments are made out of love, that is love for the Church and Her teaching in this case, I don’t see what the problem is with Giovanni’s comments? I think you are being unfair actually.

    This is something which annoys me with someone I know who thinks that any criticism of the Church is uncharitable. No, it’s not and although it’s good not to go on and on, I would go doolally if I couldn’t voice my frustration with the Pope.

    Like

  16. Roger, let’s not confuse pride with a calling a spade a spade.

    Like

  17. Roger says:

    Kathleen is right, but there is a difference between being Tempted and Sinning.
    The evil here is in the destruction of Souls. Heaven places Souls in the hands of its priests. It places Souls in the hands of its religious.
    Now He who scandalises ONE OF THESE LITTLE ONES OF MINE!!! forget the judgment of the World! We must start looking at Heavens interests! Placing Heavens interests before that of this world.
    If Catholics do not place God first then they are more culpable for the state of this world that the heathen. Quoting Our Lady WE MUST LEAD GOOD LIVES! That is an imperative placed on Caholics .
    The smoke of Satan? Well lets look at Our Lord’s Temptation and 40 days fast! The World was offered to Him! Then look at Our Lords question to St Peter.
    Understand that the destruction of Rome is this placing of Social Justice, The Moral keeper of the World.
    The danger facing Mankind is the lukewarm Catholics and worldly Hiearchy! I critic the Papacy since 1960 because of this placing of the World before Christ. All of this worldly praise BUT the Divorces and Abortions GO ON!

    Like

  18. johnhenrycn says:

    Here’s an thoughtful current article that exemplifies my idea of how people, including me to some degree, who are vexed with the course being navigated by our pope should express their worries.

    Like

  19. Toadspittle says:

    Excellent reasons re: the gay priest phenomenon from JH.

    “Which holds a more odious grip over your life, Toad, sloth or sex?”

    A patsy, JH. For the first 60 or so years – sex. Now – sloth.
    (Both have their ups and downs. Sex, certainly. Sloth is more restful.)
    So I claim to know – in this case for once, at least – what I’m talking about.
    Generally sane-ish men will go to the most ridiculous, dangerous, ruinous, imbecile – and yea, even boring – lengths merely to satiate their lust.
    …Because the ‘Darwinian’ evolutionary impulse to reproduce is ‘hard-wired’ – along with the need to eat, drink and survive – into our thick heads.

    With sloth, we just lie there, watching re-runs of Monty Python, while eating Doritos dipped in liquid, orange-coloured cheese.
    Hard to say which is worse? I suggest not.

    Like

  20. johnhenrycn says:

    The “‘Darwinian’ evolutionary impulse to reproduce is ‘hard-wired’ – along with the need to eat, drink and survive…”

    If only. Tell that to your metrosexual male and to your glass-ceiling breaking fembot.

    btw: Did you know that “freude” means “joy”? Not sure what “freud” means. Absence of joy?

    Like

  21. Toadspittle says:

    “Freud” probably means whatever JH would like it to mean. No more, no less.

    I said… “The “‘Darwinian’ evolutionary impulse to reproduce is ‘hard-wired’ – along with the need to eat, drink and survive…”
    Surely nobody ( except Roger, perhaps) will deny that? Maybe not.
    We all are surely subject to those driving forces? Otherwise, we’d be like the Dodo..

    Like

  22. kathleen says:

    Roger @ 20:42 on 12th Jan.

    “Kathleen is right, but there is a difference between being Tempted and Sinning.”

    Er, I think we would all agree with you there, Roger. But who out of us have said otherwise? We would all be in deep waters if temptation itself were a sin. What person, above the age of reason, has never been tempted? Even Our Blessed Lord Himself was tempted – another sign of His Human Nature – and He was The Sinless One (together with the Blessed Virgin).

    May I just say that I like your comments (except for your weird punctuation and occasional spelling 😉 ); they hold a lot of insights into the deep meanings of the Truths of Catholic thought and teaching.

    Like

  23. Roger says:

    The topic is the smoke of Satan which is a term perhaps not understood except in vague terms. Smoke implies a Fire. No smoke without Fire. But what Fire? This Fire is of Hell. Hell exists as the place furtherest from God. God is Love so Hell is Hatred.
    More Expressly God is Charity , perhaps best thought of as God’s Grace poured out over Creation.
    There is however a counterfeit of Charity that has at its root self and love of self.
    Satan can appear as an Angel Of light (hence Lucifer the maning of His name) . So we must discern between the Couterfeit and the True! This since 1960 has meant watching and NOT Blindly following anything which has come out of the Vatican. The presence of the spirit of Masonry (Visible darkness) where it should not be points to double speak (a feature of Masonry) and the deception of appearances (coded signals).
    Consider this the Great Masonic Nations were embroiled in WW I few think of this Truth!
    What keeps Us on Our Metal? Prayer and Penance (the Rosary) do not drop your guard! Do not be seduced by worldly Popularity! Test the spirits!

    Like

  24. Roger says:

    Toad, Darwin and Marxism are the self same coin! All Marxism is the speeding up of Change! Come the Revolution! Hitler and His Master Race is in perfectly in accord with Evolving Perfection!
    The Author of Marxism and Darwinism? Satan because His was the First Revolt!
    Here is the problem of the Evolutionists inbreeding ALWAYS leads to degeneration. NOT improvement but degeneration. Ever Breeder knows this to be true.
    Man is expressly flesh, spirit, soul. God creates the Soul outside of time! Our Lord expressly made a distinction between death and the death of the soul! A man can be dead BUT Alive. the God of the Living NOT the dead. A Man can be alive but HIS Soul DEAD! In other words the flesh isn’t the measure of what is Living or what is Dead!
    At the moment of Conception that cell is a complete living HUMAN!
    Abortion and Divorce have destroyed Our World and saddled the Nations with sterile ageing populations berefit of Family Charity (Charity begins at Home , Divorce isn’t Charity and is de facto Hatred where there should be Love). The consequences of Evolution, Divorce and Abortion are now being played out before Our eyes.

    Like

  25. Toadspittle says:

    “Toad, Darwin and Marxism are the self same coin!”
    Oh no, they’re not.
    Darwin – by which I take you to mean ‘Natural Selection’ – is a scientific theory, constantly being re-verified by overwhelming evidence, such as DNA fairly recently, to the point that even some Catholics acknowledge its veracity, whereas Marxism is a political theory, based on the dialectic, which has yet to prove successful – and indeed, may very likely never do so.

    “At the moment of Conception that cell is a complete living HUMAN!”
    No it isn’t. Ask Burro.
    It has the potential to be, but very often – more often than not, in fact – that potential is not realised.

    “The consequences of Evolution, Divorce and Abortion are now being played out before Our eyes.”
    That’s true. Although I was under the impression you didn’t believe in evolution, Roger, so how can you believe in its consequences?

    Like

  26. Roger says:

    Toad
    I believe in the CREED! The CREED comes from the same sources as the Gospels and with the same Authority.
    Marx himself identified with Darwinism because the Human Society obviously flows from Humans. In other words an Evolving Human requires a different Social Structure. Sic in the Land of the Blind the one with Sight Rules. The Society of the Sighted is different from the Society of the Blind. Darwinism and Marxism are inseparable.
    The point about Conception is that in God’s eyes the Soul NOT the Body is the measure of the human! Hence saying that a Man could be dead BUT Alive! Sadly Men can be physically alive BUT their Souls Dead.
    Our Lord never looked at Man through the eyes of Flesh (Fallen Corrupt and under Original Sin) , but instead through the eyes of Man as Created by God but now sadly Fallen. From which it follows that the arguement of the Flesh and its development can never be the Yardstick of a Christian. That Concieved egg is a complete human in Gods eyes. Proof this is true is that Angels do not have flesh!

    Like

  27. Roger says:

    DNA? Crick recognised that you can’t have global catastrophies and evolve DNA. He thought that it had been seeded from outer space. Consider that the fossils of horses exist in America BUT the Spainish introduced the Horse because it had died out!
    The fossil record has no evidence of species jump. Liquifaction does provide a logical rational for strata by density of body which might seem like a change over millenium. This has been tested by the way. Liquifaction occurs under huge pressure (earthquakes) and has been recorded.
    Instead let Science explain the Shroud and the Image of Our Lady Of Guadalope! Science cannot explain the incorruption of the bodies of Saints can it? Neither true and verified miracles which are required by the Church for Canonisation!
    I will simply repeat what should be obvious that Science is very Political and research requires funding. Who is putting money into Creation Science?
    I keep telling you but Science jumps all over the place. Look Asbestos was the wonder product of its time. Science waxed lyrical NOW its recognised as the Killer that it is.

    Like

  28. kathleen says:

    “.. (T)he Flesh and its development can never be the Yardstick of a Christian. That Concieved egg is a complete human in Gods eyes. Proof this is true is that Angels do not have flesh!”

    Yes! A brilliant insight from you Roger, that could well be used in the pro-life argument.
    (But sadly, only in the case of those who believe in Angels in the first place!)

    I do not see Science as the enemy of Religion. Nearly all the first real scientists were Catholics! Faith and Science can even be complementary in some fields, scientific evidence pointing towards the veracity of many firmly held beliefs of Christians.

    Like

  29. Roger says:

    The consequences of Evolution, Divorce and Abortion. Well consider that Man thinks that he can create a Utopia world without God. In this world Evolving Society is recognised and has now reached the point of justifying military intervention to force regime change! In this evolution of society and new social structure we find Divorce, Abortion and re definitions of human relationships. In other words Social change BUT not at the behest of the voters! No rather superior Science and a globalist Society.
    In this Christianity has declined to the point that it has been marginalised and the West is in Apostacy.
    Now simply put this was expressly fortold by Our Lord was it NOT. The evidence in the Gospels is 2000 years old and readily available.
    So we are faced with the Truth as in the Incarnate God and His Passion (a Creator making reparation for the Sins of His Created) and modern Prophets of the rational and modernist variety!
    Here is the nub. Heaven or Hell Hatred or Love. Because 20th century exhibits world wars (hatred) and right now we are sufering under Wars. Economic financial crisis are WARS! inflicted upon Society!

    Like

  30. Roger says:

    Kathleen the existence of Angels follows within Aquinas and of course Science dovetails into God because its part of his creation! However modern Science at least that part that attracts the money is in the hands of those whose arguments are materialist and economic! There is no way that Creation Science will be getting public funding! It is fashionable to flow with evolution!! fashionable and there is no opposition! But Creation well this is immediately sreamed at and rebuked! Yet here are good scientists that will tell you that the evidence is actually the reverse. 90% for Creation and some 10% debateable!

    Like

  31. kathleen says:

    Yes Roger, I know. I most definitely believe in Angels (of course), and all the teachings of Holy Mother Church.

    There is indeed an aggressive element in some scientific investigation in the world today, doing its best to debunk much of Christian thought and belief. Yet all they can push forward are theories; they cannot prove that anything within our Doctrines is incorrect.
    Some of the language in the Bible perhaps needs to be better understood, e.g. the “days” of Creation in Genesis, that would probably have been more likely “eras” of time rather than days. That does not conclude that Evolution in the form of “Darwinic” ideas – all of life coming from the same source and evolving – has any substantial evidence at all. In fact in talks on Religion versus Science I’ve been listening into on EWTN, substantial evidence is being uncovered that his theories were wrong!

    I meant to add in my above comment, that where scientific investigation completely fails to find even a possible explanation for some phenomena or marvel of nature, further evidence for a supreme transcendent, loving, Creator (God) can be the only answer.
    However, just as JH has wisely noted on another thread, possibly no atheist was ever convinced by argument alone, or even a multitude of material proof. Faith is a mystery and a supernatural gift, but searching for God with a sincere and open mind can be the first step towards gaining it.

    Like

  32. Roger says:

    Hi Kathleen I grew up with young enthusiastic Scientists who dropped God to obtain their Science degrees. The peer pressure precludes the search for Truth. Richard Dawkins takes glee and delight in reeducating graduates. Unless you go along with the curriculum you will not get your degree. In the same vein you can’t teach Creation because the Official Science has Evolution.
    Evolution is taught in Catholic Schools as is comparative religion. In other words pre and muddly water through the same pipe!
    My experience with a Garabandal kissed relic knocked all of this off into the trash can. Nobody dares to say but Modern Science owes a huge debt to Hitler. The western allies grabbed the German scientists and their notes, granted them immunity at the End of World War II.
    Few or Many doesn’t matter Our Lord sets babies and children before the Wise of this world. Note La Salatte, Fatima and Garbandal.
    Our Lord is Truth, sadly few believe Him! Genesis? Well its set in Paradise and thats NOT this Fallen Earth is it? What does a Day equate to in Paradise? Elsewhere A day is a thousand years! If the Great mystics have found Genesis beyond their comprehension why listen to the Worldly Wise? Many walked away when Our Lod spoke of eating His Flesh!

    Like

  33. Toadspittle says:

    “The fossil record has no evidence of species jump.”

    Yes it does.
    If you mean the discovery of earlier versions of currently existing animals – including several early prototypes of ‘homo erectus.’
    If you don’t mean that, God knows what you do mean.

    “Richard Dawkins takes glee and delight in re-educating graduates.”
    …and so he should – if their heads are stuffed full of Creationist nonsense (which I doubt of graduates, in the U.K., at least. In certain parts of The State, anything is possible.)
    So should any responsible teacher.

    Like

  34. Toadspittle says:

    …certain parts of “The States..” (Doh!)

    Like

  35. Roger says:

    Toad if you are interested the ongoing debate over Bats and Whales (“..echolocation – a biological sonar – for hunting..”) “..“the exact evolutionary relationship of bats to their closest mammalian relatives is poorly understood due to their unique morphological features associated with flight, a lack of intermediate forms, and a poor fossil record.” BUT 2008 “the fossils represent a breakthrough in the understanding of bat evolution!“ and labeled as “ a missing link that “demonstrates that the animals evolved the ability to fly before they could echolocate.” FLYING WHALES?.
    “..“Darwin’s Doubt” by Stephen Meyer has to do with an explosion of complex life forms such as the Cambrian arthropod having a large complex brain that all of a sudden appears in the fossil record were expected ancestors of these animals have not been discovered. ..”
    EXPECTED ANCESTORS ..HAVE NOT BEEN DISCOVERED.. COMPLEX LIFE FORMS .. SUDDEN APPEARS IN THE FOSSIL RECORD?
    Upper limit to DNA discovered by Manchester University. “..the team of evolutionists accidentally stumbled upon an upper limit on DNA preservation. How much of a limit? 100 million years, 50 million years? 10 million years? Nope! Not even 1 million years, rather no DNA was discovered in Amber thought to be 10,600 years old so that is your upper limit! What does this mean for evolution where we see claims of soft tissue in fossils like in T-Rex that is claimed to be 68 million years old?..”
    Toad enjoy the endless round robin!

    Like

  36. Roger says:

    But The smoke of Satan and what False Light (Lucifer might mean) . Well undermining the Faith but casting rational doubts. Abortion and the fertilised ovary. Man is Soul, Spirit and Flesh. Nobody talks of what Spirit means yet Our Lord at the Transfiguration His Body became glorified!
    God the Creator and His Word that daily Creates. The Sacraments are Creative, Miracles through Words. The Blessed Sacrament , the Host becomes the Body, Blood , Soul and Divinity of Christ YET the external is Bread! Humble Bread!
    The appearance of the fertilised ovary isn’t the reality of that newly created Human! No more than the exterior of the Baptised, Ordained, or the HOST.
    But Science confirms that the cycle of the life of the Flesh has begun from that fertilised Ovary. So Science isn’t at variance with the Creator.
    Does the Flesh change with Baptism? Can blessings be measured.
    My own experience was (and I wasn’t seeking nor expecting) of the Life and power of a Blessing in a Garbandal kissed relic! Forced to understand that the material physical is infinately inferior to the Divine (the Blessing) .
    The sacraments are Words folloqwwed by Divine change BUT NOT material difference. So Adam Created from Earth YES!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s