Guest Submission: We Are All Heretics

Please review post

WE ARE ALL HERETICS

By Sergio Dominguez

EDITOR’S NOTE: The author of this piece, Mr. Dominguez, was hoping that anyone interested in translating his documents in the future would email him at the following address. His native language is Spanish and this document was translated by Google. sergiopdominguez@icloud.com

Few Catholics question that we are suffering the darkest period of our history since the times of Arianism, when the denial of a single truth of faith, the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son, was about to destroy the Church. Back in the year 335, Arius had managed to win almost all bishops for his cause (mostly because of fear and human respect, rather than conviction). But the lay people kept the faith , and protested heretical ideas from the banks of the parishes, sometimes shouting, sometimes violently. The Council of Nicea declared dogmatically that the Son was co-eternal and consubstantial with the Father, Arius was excommunicated and exiled, and the mass of rebel bishops vanished overnight, as if it had never existed.

Following that pattern, the analyzes of the current situation focus on denouncing our ecclesiastical hierarchy as responsible for all our misfortunes. We, the poor sheep, are being led astray by wolves in sheep’s clothing.

But, despite our regrets, our pleas asking for celestial intervention for God to put order in His Church, the situation does not stop getting worse.

And we resume the battle against the Vicar of Christ and his henchmen with renewed forces, typing with agile fingers on our mobiles, launching Twitter and Facebook messages loaded with just fury and holy indignation.

Thus we have more than 100 years. Arianism did not have such a long life. Arius was born in the year 250, the First Council of Nicea condemned him in 325, the First Synod of Tire rehabilitated him in 335 and the First Council of Constantinople returned to excommunicate him, already definitely, in 381. Although his ideas continued to contaminate the minds of some Christian kings, the hierarchy of the Church would not fall into that error again. The Great Heresy was purged in less than 50 years, at a time when traveling from one end of the Empire to the other was a multi-month enterprise.

It is essential that we do a conscientious exam. Our prayers are not being heard, and we must ask ourselves why.

“And whatever you ask in my name, I will do so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.”
(John 14:13)

In a church in Palencia, Spain, this admonition was written a few years ago:

Don’t say “Father”, if every day you don’t behave like a child.
Don’t say “ours” if you live isolated in your selfishness.
Do not say “that you are in heaven”, if you only think of earthly things.
Don’t say “hallowed be your name”, if you don’t honor it.
Do not say “your Kingdom come to us”, if you confuse it with material success.
Do not say “your will be done”, if you do not accept it when it is painful.
Don’t say “give us our bread today”, if you don’t worry about hungry people.
Do not say “forgive our offenses”, if you hold a grudge against your brother.
Don’t say “don’t let us fall into temptation”,
Don’t say “deliver us from evil”, if you don’t take sides against evil.
Do not say “amen” if you have not taken the words of this sentence seriously.

We have always known that the efficacy of prayer is not unconditional, because it depends on our perseverance, hope, and the intensity of our faith . Saint Anthony Mary Claret left us these revealing words in his Catechism for children:

«When the wrath of the Lord has not yet reached its peak, it allows nations to arm themselves against each other, that the fields are barren, that hunger, desolation and death exert their dominion over the earth; but when his righteous indignation reaches excess, he sends the last and most heinous of his punishments, allowing unfaithful ministers, stained priests, scandalous pastors to place themselves among men. Then it is verified that the abominations of the people are the cause of the bad priests, and the bad priests are the greatest punishment with which God afflicts a people. “[1]

“It is verified that the abominations of the people are the cause of the bad priests .”

Bad priests are not the cause, but the consequence. The cause is us .

There can be no bad priests if God does not allow it. If the Church is plagued by them, to the highest places in their hierarchy, we must recognize that our crimes must be frightening to deserve such abominable punishment. If Our Lord has sent us a Destroyer instead of a Pastor, as many say, logic dictates that we are the cause of this misfortune.

“Hypocrite! Take out the beam from your eye first, and then you will see clearly to get the speck out of your brother’s eye. ”
(Matthew 7: 5)

This possibility opens a window to a terrifying landscape, a desolation of fog and darkness. What are we doing wrong, my God! Where is our mistake! But we cannot get carried away by despair, for we would fall entirely into the hands of Satan. We must reflect, asking the Holy Spirit to enlighten our minds and open our hearts to the truth, with perseverance and humility.

Let’s go step by step.

The Errors of Russia

Any analysis of our Apostasy time must begin with the words of Our Lady, in her appearance to the three sighted children of Fatima on July 13, 1917:

«If they fulfill my wishes, Russia will convert and there will be peace; if not, he will spread his mistakes throughout the world, promoting wars and persecutions of the Church: the good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have to suffer a lot; Several nations will be annihilated. Finally, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate me to Russia, which will be converted, and some time of peace will be granted to the world. »

Imagine that this is the first time we read the message. Let’s study the words with new eyes. The Virgin Mary does not direct her attention against the Holy Father, but against the mistakes of Russia. The Vicar of Christ, on the contrary, is presented as a victim, not an executioner.

But we know that the Church was already infiltrated in 1917 by modernist forces, as denounced by Leo XIII, St. Pius X and many other Popes, before and after the Apparitions of Fatima.

We have assumed during all this time that the attack of the Virgin Mary against the hierarchy of the Church is contained in the Third Secret of Fatima. This fits into our theory that they are responsible for all our misfortunes.

But today we are trying to reassess that theory, and we want to see if there are reasons to believe that responsibility can fall on our shoulders. Therefore, we will assume that the Third Secret of Fatima does not directly accuse the hierarchy. We will accept, for the moment, the explanation that the Vatican, through Cardinal Angelo Sodano, gave us in 2000, according to which, the secret announced the attempted murder of St. John Paul II.

We must then recognize that the core of the message and the origin of the problem is in “the mistakes of Russia.”

There has been unanimity, from day one, on the interpretation of the words of the Virgin Mary: she was referring, no doubt, to Communism .

But let’s analyze the matter calmly.

Russia’s mistakes were going to cause wars and persecutions of the Church and they were going to spread all over the world. It is undeniable that communism is one of the errors that Russia exported with catastrophic consequences, but hidden under that visible mantle, perhaps Russia spread another error, more subtle, and much more pernicious. After all, the Virgin Mary spoke of errors , in the plural.

And the truth is that Communism, as a political system, did not spread throughout the world, despite the efforts of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Except for the Soviet Boque, China and a handful of third world countries, Communism was stopped and defeated by Capitalism. Both then and today, the number of countries governed by this political system is very small. Today, communist parties tend to be weak and marginal almost everywhere in the world.

But there was a war a few years after the Fatima message; the most terrifying armed conflict in the history of mankind: World War II.

However, World War II was not promoted by Communism, but by Nazism . Nazi ideology was not spread throughout the world by Russia either.

Hitler believed that the Aryan race was superior and had the moral imperative to rule the world; initiated a eugenic program to eliminate the mentally ill and disabled; he persecuted the Jews, whom he interned in concentration camps and forced labor; Dr. Mengele did experiments with thousands of foreigners and disabled people to study the human body and mind, with the aim of saving the lives that really mattered, the German soldiers and pilots.

Lenin and Stalin started almost identical programs. The USSR had more concentration camps, before, during and after the war, than Nazi Germany; Stalin used the persecution of the Jews as an excuse to eliminate all his rivals in progressive waves of executions, which did not stop until he died in March 1953, while executing his orders to imprison and execute hundreds of Jewish intellectuals, who accused of participating in the ” Plot of Physicians .”

Nazi Germany and the USSR had no common political system, but were almost identical in their vision of Biology, Anthropology and Sociology.

Because what they had in common was a worldview derived from the Theory of Evolution .

And it was the idea of the German Life Space that promoted World War II, the need to extend German borders so that the Aryan race could grow and multiply to thrive on the earth. The Liebensraum theory was developed by Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904), who compared the evolution of the national state with that of a living organism . The idea of ​​living space was a logical extension of the theory of evolution.

The Germany of 1904-1907 carried out the first genocide documented history in present-day Namibia. The Whitaker Report recognized in 1985 that Germany had attempted to exterminate the Herero and Namaqua peoples from their colonies in Southwest Africa. The German intellectual class of the early twentieth century, which decades later would be mostly in favor of Hitler, considered the genocide of these people as a cleansing of missing links in human evolution.

Question: These three people were born Christians, but they became violent anti-clerical atheists after reading The Origin of Species. Who of the three was a seminarian?

Answer: Stalin. And of the three, it was he who persecuted the Church with the greatest fervor.

Yaroslasvky points out that while Stalin was still an ecclesiastical student “he began to read Darwin and became an atheist.” Stalin became an “avid Darwinist, abandoned faith in God and began telling his fellow seminarians that people had descended from monkeys, not Adam.” Become Secretary General of the USSR, Stalin conceived the Communist Party as a living organism , reflecting Hitler’s vision of the German people.

In his book Darwin: Portrait of a Genius , historian Paul Johnson writes:
“Stalin had in mind Darwin’s ” fight ” and ” survival of the strongest ” in his dealings with the Kulaks and when he displaced minorities in Greater Russia: the extermination of ethnic groups was a necessary fact if the party, redefined as “the strong one” at the political level, he had to survive. “Our Lady said that Russia’s mistakes would spread throughout the world; and well they did.

The Chinese Revolution broke out in 1945. The communists began their assault in the northern provinces and in 1949 they had already taken control of the entire country. When they found Catholic missionaries, they sometimes killed them, but sometimes they tried to win them for their cause, with indoctrination, intimidation and threats techniques. The Bishop Cuthbert O’GaraHe was Ordinary of the Diocese of Yualing during the “cultural revolution.” In 1951 he was dragged in front of the altar of his cathedral, stripped and locked in an isolation cell, where he was tortured. After twenty months of suffering, in which he lost the ability to walk, he was released and exiled. The Bishop wrote his traumatic experience in a small libretto, The Surrender to Secularism :

“Now, I ask, what was the first lesson that the indoctrinates received? One could assume that it would be some pearl of wisdom from Marx, Lenin or Stalin. However, that was not the case. The first lesson, the fundamental one , was that man descended from the monkey: Darwinism! Darwinism denies God, the human soul and other life. This void is then occupied by communism as the principle and the reason for the intellectual slavery it has created. ”

Communism failed in its attempt to create an international socialist community, but there is no doubt that evolution has spread like a pandemic, and there is not a single country that does not profess its devotion.

What do Hitler and Stalin, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, Benedict XVI and Pope Francis , modernist Catholics and traditional Catholics, you and I have in common ?

We all believe in the theory of evolution.

And if it turns out that this theory was incompatible with Christianity, we would have a serious problem. Because in that case, evolution would be a religion opposed to Christianity, and God would have very good reasons to send us the worst imaginable punishments.

Like, for example, a plague of unprecedented evil priests.

Furthermore, God would have serious reasons to ignore the prayers of His wayward sheep as long as they did not abandon their idolatry to false religion. And if this correction does not occur:

“A few days before the flood, people kept eating and drinking, and married men and women, until the day Noah entered the ark. They did not realize anything until the flood came and took them all The same will happen with the coming of the Son of Man. ”
(Matthew 24:39)

It is remarkable that Jesus connects the flood with His second coming. Because, I wonder, is the flood and the theory of evolution compatible? Or was Jesus Christ being symbolic and literal, at the same time, in the same sentence ?

Science or Religion?

There are three types of sciences: the exact, the experimental and the historical.

Mathematics, Theoretical Physics and Computation are exact sciences . They produce knowledge from theoretical models, which are then used by experimental sciences.

Medicine, Chemistry and Electronics are experimental sciences . They produce knowledge following the scientific method: observation> deduction> experimentation> hypothesis> theory. Experimental sciences lead to technological advancement: airplanes, submarines, space stations and mobile phones. The reverence of our time towards ScienceAs an unquestionable truth is the result of these palpable achievements. Unfortunately, people ignore that experimental sciences have very little relationship with the next group of “sciences.”

Geology, Astronomy and Evolutionary Biology are historical sciences . Their “theoretical models” are presuppositions, and they cannot do experiments because no one has been able to build a time machine or a ship to travel through hyperspace. It is not possible to observe the past, do experiments without being there and develop hypotheses based on non-existent results.

Which is equivalent to saying that “historical sciences” are not sciences. The scientists themselves recognize it, because their presuppositions are undemonstrable and infalsifiable. This is explained to us by Dr. James Gunn , Professor of Astronomy at Princeton and co-founder of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey :

“Cosmology may seem like a science, but it is not. A basic principle of science is the performance of repeatable experiments, and this cannot be done in cosmology.” [2]

Just as cosmologists cannot travel to the center of the galaxy to prove that Sagittarius A * is a black hole, neither can we travel to the past to prove that primates evolved in humans. Believing in these historical theories, unprovable and infalsifiable, is an act of faith.
Modern scientists, who use a language that nobody understands, who silence any opposition to their authority, who ignore any new theory that does not fit the established doctrine, have long been non-scientists; They have become priests.

Believing in the theory of evolution because 99% of scientists say it is true, is like believing in Allah because 99% of Mohammedans clergy say it exists.

Remember that the scientist who cures cancer, designs ships and develops the Internet is not the same type that presupposes the age of the rocks, presupposes something called dark matter, or presupposesthat all animals have a common ancestor, based on the fact that there are hairy dogs that give birth to hairy dogs. The first and second scientists are not working on the same things, do not use the same tools, and are not subject to the same requirement. If the patient’s cancer multiplies, the ship sinks, or the Internet connection is cut off, the first scientist has a serious problem. If the age of the rocks is different, dark matter does not exist, or evolution is a lie … the second scientist does not exactly care, because his theories, his intellectual fantasies without foundation, do not affect anyone. All they do is change the way we see the world.

And here is its true purpose: historical sciences are disguised ideology .

Science, when founded on Christian principles, is a wonderful tool for understanding the natural world. Because the Christian scientist has a powerful motivation to be precise and careful with his assumptions: not to lie so as not to go to Hell. That is why science is an exclusively Christian phenomenon . But the atheist scientist quickly discovers that lying is very profitable: he can publish more and faster, without worrying about measurements, confirm what his colleagues think, increase his prestige and earn a lot of money. All are advantages.

That is why the priests who govern historical scientific societies have long since ceased to be scientists.

They are worshipers of a religion of death, and do not tolerate dissension. Any priest who dares to doubt his commandments and announces that he wishes to leave the priesthood to become a true scientist is destroyed without contemplation. Just to give an example, Peter Ridd was a professor of Geophysics at James Cook University in Australia. Ridd revealed that 50% of the works on climate change published by his university were impossible to replicate by other scientists (because they were obviously false). The JCU, which is a public institution, fired him and took him to trial for revealing “confidential information.” His story seems written by an amateur of the 1984 novel by George Orwell.

The religion of death was founded by two prophets: Charles Lyell , father of modern geology, and Charles Darwin , father of evolutionary biology.

Although I will dedicate future independent essays to discuss the theory of evolution in detail, I will now describe its origin and how it managed to dominate the academic world.

Its history is similar to the triumph of the Bolsheviks of the October Revolution of 1917 which was the germ of the Soviet Union: lies, intimidation and propaganda fighting against a apathetic wall of confusion and silence.

We will see a pattern that repeats itself: someone makes a presupposition, warning that it should be accepted with caution because there is no data to support it; everyone reacts with enthusiasm, taking the presupposition for certain; someone makes a second presupposition based on the first, warning that it should be accepted with caution; and so on. [3]

The Birth of Tragedy

Historical sciences, and particularly evolution, are based on three fundamental presuppositions: uniformity, naturalism and spontaneous generation.

Uniformity

René Descartes, talented such that God doesn’t  bother him much

The cornerstone of modern science, the first presupposition, was made by Descartes (1596-1650), a friend and probably a member of the Occultist Order of the Rosicrucian, a precursor to Freemasonry. His biographer, Adrian Baillet, narrates that when René was 23 years old and had not yet decided what to do with his life, he had three visions. In the first one, in the midst of a violent storm, the “Spirit of Truth” descended to possess it and instructed him to write about a new way of organizing knowledge. Years later, in the Speech of the Method , Part V (1637), he wrote:

“But it is true, and this is a common opinion accepted by theologians, that the action by which He now preserves [the world] is the same by which He created it at the beginning.”

This presupposition is called uniformity .

According to this principle , the same natural processes that act in current observations have always operated in the past and are applied throughout the universe. That is, the same processes we observe today can explain the origin of the world and its transition to the present.

Aristotle said that a small initial error becomes a monstrous error later. This is easy to visualize. Imagine that we emit a beam of light towards the Sun. If we rotate the emitting source only 1 degree, the beam will deviate from its target more than two million kilometers.

Common sense also allows us to demonstrate that uniformity is a false presupposition. Imagine a scientist who wants to study the snow accumulation rate. To have a uniform supply of data, climb the peak of a mountain. After ten years, observe that snow accumulates at an average rate of 0.0028 meters per year. As our friend believes that natural laws are uniform in time and space, he concludes that snow accumulates at the same speed throughout the universe, from its origin to the present. After his research, the scientist returns home by car. Park on the sidewalk and sleep all night. Upon waking, he discovers that his house is surrounded by a two-meter layer of snow. He looks out the window and is not able to see his car, which has been completely submerged. The scientist comes to the only logical conclusion: during the night he has traveled 700 years into the future!

“Worm holes confirmed!”

Something tells me that the Spirit of the Truth of Descartes must look similar to this one:

“Come on, René, take the pen, which I dictate to you.

Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) was a gifted thinker like Descartes, but unlike him, he had no encounters with spirits, had true Christian piety, and could see the terrible consequences of the arrogant denial of Descartes on the traditional teaching of the Church about the creation of the world, in favor of a naturalistic explanation of the origins. Pascal wrote in Pensees :

“I cannot forgive Descartes; in all his philosophy he has done everything possible to get rid of God. But he has not been able to keep He from moving the world with a snap of His thumb; then he has no longer found God more utility.”

Pascal with the face of a good person.

The “god” of Descartes has an amazing resemblance to the “god” of the Big Bang, who created a unified field force, a handful of hydrogen, helium and lithium, snapped his fingers and then let everything take its natural course.

But Pascal was not the only one who saw beforehand the effects of Uniformism. We were already notified by Saint Peter, the first Holy Father of the Church:

“Know first of all that in the last days there will come men full of sarcasm, guided by their own passions, who will say in a mocking way:” Where is the promise of His Coming? Well, since the Fathers died, everything remains as at the beginning of creation. “”
(2 Peter 3: 3,5)

St. Peter warned that, at the end of time, men would arrive who would believe that everything had been the same since the beginning of creation; that is, that the same natural laws that were operating in the present had been in operation since the first day of Genesis. San Pedro denounced, with 16 centuries of advancement, Uniformism. Let’s see what Saint Thomas Aquinas said about it:

“Because the perfection of the universe, in terms of the termination of its parts, corresponds to the sixth day; but perfection in terms of its operation, to the seventh.” [4]

In other words, the creation of the world did not obey natural laws , which only began operating on the seventh day. All the Apostles, Fathers, Doctors, Councils and Popes understood that God had revealed to Moses that the dawn of the seventh day of creation marked an impassable barrier between theology and the natural sciences.

Can anyone be missed?

What natural law operated on the multiplication of wine, bread and fish? What natural law operated on the healing of the sick, the exorcisms and the resurrection of Lazarus? What natural law operates in the transubstantiation, of which we are faithful witnesses every day, in thousands of parishes around the world?

For this reason, evangelical creationists commit a double heresy : that of their Protestantism, and that of trying to apply the natural laws of the present to the six days of Genesis, as if God were constrained by the limits of his own creation. What blasphemy! These poor scientists, often afflicted by serious epistemological gaps, waste their lives trying to solve spurious riddles because they have decided to ignore the apostolic tradition. Denying the complete truth of faith does not come free.

St. Peter warned us that, in the last days, men would question Genesis. I believe that no interpretation of the Apocalypse of St. John indicates better than the words of St. Peter that we are near the Last Judgment. He was so right in his prophecy that it almost seemed that he fell short. Because nowadays Genesis is not in doubt : is there anyone left to believe it?

Perhaps this allows us to understand the words of Our Lord:

“… But when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?”

(Luke 18: 8)

Although Descartes proposed the idea, the term uniformism was coined by James Hutton (1726-1797) and developed by Charles Lyell in his Principles of Geology (1830):

  • Uniformity of law: natural laws are the same today as in the past.
  • Process uniformity: processes have the same causes today as in the past.
  • Rate uniformity: changes occur at the same rate today as in the past.
  • Uniformity of state: the land is the same today as in the past.

Both Hutton and Lyell argued that the earth had always existed, and that there was no end in sight. Lyell tried to measure the sediment deposition rate using a water container. He noted that each stratum formed on the previous one and concluded that sedimentary stratification occurred over millions of years.

In the real world, however, sediments do not fall vertically on isolated containers from their surroundings, but are dragged horizontally by water currents . The heaviest materials settle at the bottom faster, while the lighter ones are trapped by the heavier sedimentary layers that form at the bottom. Modern laboratory experiments, using artificial streams of water, demonstrate that sediments of different physical properties are deposited simultaneously, forming the same strata that Lyell observed in his bathtub perfectly isolated from the outside. A torrential current can generate stratigraphic layers in a few hours.

However, Lyell’s presupposition was never corrected, despite the fact that modern geologists acknowledge that it exceeded its last three uniformist principles.

Historical scientists have adopted the tactic of tabloid newspapers in the last 150 years. They publish on the first page a spectacular headline, days later they recognize in a footnote that the previous news had serious defects of form, and the next day they go out with a news that continues the narrative of the first article, as if the correction It would never have occurred.

To give an example, Ernst Haeckel published in 1868 his famous series of embryo drawings, which implied that all animal species were identical to humans in their initial stages of development.

Only six years later, in 1874, it was shown that Haeckel had lied shamelessly. Not only is there no similarity between animal embryos and humans, animal embryos do not even resemble each other . Here we have his drawings along with real photographs of each embryo in the same phase of development:

Above, fantastic drawings. Below, photographs of reality.

Although specialized literature recognizes the facts, contemporary textbooks, 151 years later, continue to present Haeckel’s drawings as a demonstration of a common ancestor between man and all animal species.

The argument that human beings have a “reptilian phase,” as Haeckel’s drawings suggest, is still used today by abortion organizations to justify their murders.

Naturalism

It’s not Wolverine, it’s Charles Lyell.

Naturalism, which Wikipedia itself defines as a philosophy , affirms that nature is the only principle of reality. Naturalism does not recognize the existence of a spiritual reality with the ability to affect the material world. This is atheism, pure and simple, with a scientific patina to give credibility.

Proponents of evolutionary theism should consider the implications. Modern science has declared war on God from its own principles. No hypothesis, observation or experiment can ever lead to God, as this is considered a violation of a fundamental principle of science.

Let’s see an example.

In 1927, a group of physicists, led by Niels Bohr , met in Solvay to decide the fate of the world. They had to determine if the universe was a real and objective place, or an unreal and subjective space.

Niels Bohr, the leader of the anti-realists, proposed the model of quantum mechanics, according to which the universe is a probabilistic space, where the measurements force the wave functions to collapse. Bohr’s position was called the Copenhagen Interpretation .

Louis De Broglie (1892-1987) proposed the pilot wave theory , according to which subatomic particles travel as surfers on the waves of a field with hidden variables.

Albert Einstein, and all the defenders of the Copenhagen Interpretation scoffed at De Broglie, because his model required a causally connected hyperdeterministic universe. A causally connected universe suggests that all its parts communicate with each other instantaneously, regardless of distance, which has serious deistic implications.

“But Jesus replied:” My Father works until now, and I also work. “”
(John 5:17)

In addition, the pilot wave theory bothered Einstein personally, as it suggested that the speed of light was not the limit of causation. This was too much for him, and although he had started the conference criticizing Copenhagen’s interpretation because “God does not play dice,” he ended up preferring it over the pilot wave theory, which he defined as a “phantasmagoric action at a distance” ( spooky action at a distance ).

What Einstein described disparagingly, today we know it as quantum entanglement , the ability of entangled particles to communicate instantaneously through arbitrary distances, a phenomenon experimentally demonstrated.

Einstein, like all other conference participants, chose the unsatisfactory and incomprehensible quantum mechanics to the theory that practically required the existence of an omnipotent and omniscient god. Using presuppositions that later proved false , the defenders of the quantum model convinced the French physicist to forget his crazy ideas.

De Broglie: “Well, this chair looks real.” Bohr: “Shut up, Louis.”

We will talk about the pilot wave theory in future works, but suffice it to say that David Brohm resurrected it in 1952 and gains followers every day.

But the theory is so wonderful, that it cannot resist sharing an image of the famous double-slot experiment, in which we see the pilot wave theory in action. The red dot is a photon surfing the field wave. According to quantum mechanics, the photon does not exist until it collides with the detector in the back wall. Until then the photon would be in a state of superposition : that is, at all points of the electromagnetic field at the same time . The beauty of the pilot wave theory is that it provides an alternative, consistent with all observations, that a child can understand. According to De Broglie, subatomic particles behave like a ball on the surface of a lake the size of the universe

Checkmate, Heisenberg.

Which of the two theories is more harmonious with the existence of God? The one that says that the universe is governed by chance and probability, and nothing is real until it is perceived? Or the one that says that the universe is made up of real particles that move through a real field of infinite complexity?

The 1927 Solvay conference had a clear choice. This small group of scientists, who had to decide whether the universe was a real place with mysteries beyond human comprehension, or a subjective space of probabilities, reluctantly chose the unreal universe of Bohr and Heisenberg.
Any option was better than admitting that man’s knowledge could have limits.

Spontaneous generation

“Ignore Pasteur’s experiments, and listen to my speculation.”

The third presupposition on which the historical sciences are based is spontaneous generation, which is like saying that being comes from non-being . This violates a fundamental principle of metaphysics, already described by Parmenides in the 6th century BC:

“Being is, not Being is not.”

Parmenides, like almost all Greek philosophers, and elementary students of all schools in the world, argued that Being cannot come from Non-Being.

Since the world is, Parmenides thought it should have always existed. Even Aristotle believed in an eternal world for this same reason. We must remember that pagan intellectuals were basically like modern atheists. The worship of the gods of the Pantheon was something of the ignorant masses, and no philosopher who prized himself believed in the mythologies of his own nations. Some of them, like Lucretius, believed in the gods as unfortunate spirits, beings that harassed humanity with their cravings and passions, to make their lives impossible. These “gods” were born and could die, as we read in Theogonyof Hesiod, so classical philosophers did not conceive the idea of ​​an Almighty God who would have created the world. This is why the idea of ​​an eternal universe was the only reasonable one for them.

Armed with huge amounts of time in their hands, many pagan philosophers believed that the world was made up of atoms, which had formed animals by random combinations. Lucretius (99-55 BC) explained it in his De Rerum Natura :

” Insensitive so are the atoms . If we give sensitive elements, and n end, the animal to sit, be forced, therefore, that the principles constitutive of the human race (…) analyze their own components elements as being in their structure similar to all mortals, they must be polluted from various elements, and these from other principles, so that you can never find the term.Why sensitive beings could not result from insensitive principles that lack all feeling? ”
Lucretius was the first to propose the idea of ​​survival of the strongest, according to a process of adaptation to the environment.

Charles Darwin (1809-1882) wanted to follow in the footsteps of Lucretius, but Genesis did not allow it. There was not enough time for any evolution if the world was less than 10,000 years old, as the Fathers, Doctors, Councils and Popes of the Church had always maintained.

Darwin needed a weapon to destroy the Genesis account, and he received it from Charles Lyell, who gave him the time he needed for his theory. Darwin tells us in his Autobiography :
“During these two years, I also introduced myself a little into society, and worked as one of the honorary secretaries of the Geological Society. I often saw Lyell. One of his main characteristics was his sympathy for the work of others, and I was as amazed as I was delighted , when I returned to England, for his interest in my views on coral reefs. This greatly encouraged me, and his advice and example were a great influence on me. “This is how Darwin was able to justify his presupposition of abiogenesis : the spontaneous generation of life from non-life. He detailed the theory in his masterpiece: The Origin of Species through Natural Selection, or the Preservation of the Favored Races in the Struggle for Life (1859), now known as The Origin of Species , because of those Obvious racist implications of the original title. I suppose that Hitler’s and Stalin’s insistence on using concepts such as “favored races” and “struggle for life” had given these expressions a bad image. Moreover, today you will not find a single copy with the full title:

Hocus  Pocus

The book is a display of Darwin’s two great passions: speculation and debate. The work can be summarized as a very long argument about its observations and conclusions. There are no experiments, and much contempt for the careful experiments of other scientists. For example, Louis Pasteur had demonstrated in 1848 that abiogenesis was impossible. This is where Darwin explains his famous ” little hot puddle ” theory :

“It is said that the chemical conditions for the first production of life exist in the present, but in some small hot puddle today such matter would be absorbed or devoured, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.”

We break this incredible assertion. Darwin argued that the reason that Pasteur had not been able to spontaneously generate life in his experiments was because current life “absorbed” or “devoured” new life before it could manifest itself.

In short, Darwin wanted everyone to believe that life had arisen spontaneously in the past, but the phenomenon had only happened once and would not happen again, so it was useless to try to reproduce it.

Charles Darwin called for unconditional faith.

And that is exactly what he got.

“It could be expected that anyone can persuade anyone of anything if they could capture the patient in their youth and receive money and equipment from the State. This idea will make great strides when adopted by scientists from a scientific dictatorship.”

Bertrand Russel, The Impact of Science on Society (1952)

Genesis, Tradition and the Magisterium

God, in the person of Jesus Christ, creating Adam in his image and likeness.

Now I will detail the authoritative position that the Fathers, Doctors, Councils and Popes have held for 19 centuries on Genesis.

The reader will not find any dogmatic declaration of divine fide about the special creation of Adam and Eve, under penalty of excommunication.

But beware. I will demonstrate that the Church has pronounced emphatically in all matters concerning creation, including a considerable number of dogmatic statements, whose denial implies automatic excommunication. None of these pronouncements has ever been condemned. All are still valid.

The Myth of Symbolic Catholicism

An insistent lie is repeated today: that it is Protestant evangelists who make a literal interpretation of the Bible, unlike Catholics, who know how to understand that many passages are figurative.

This is false.

The Catholic Church maintains from its foundation to the present the most literal interpretation of Holy Scripture among all congregations that call themselves Christian. Let’s see some examples:

“The Cloud then covered the Shop of Encounter and the glory of Yahweh filled the Abode.”
(Exodus 40:34)

“The angel replied:” The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will cover you with his shadow; that is why he who is to be born will be holy and will be called the Son of God. ”
(Luke 1:35)

The literal interpretation of Exodus 40:34 and Luke 1:35 indicates that the Ark of the Covenant prefigures the Virgin Mary, demonstrating her Immaculate Conception.

“And I in my turn tell you that you are Peter, and on this stone I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.”
(Matthew 16:18)

The literal interpretation of Matthew 16:18 confirms that St. Peter was appointed by Our Lord as Vicar of His Church. This verse is the cornerstone of the constitution of the mystical body of Christ in A Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church .

“Take, eat; this is my body.”
(Matthew 26:26)

The literal interpretation of Matthew 26:26 demonstrates that Our Lord Jesus Christ is present in the Consecrated Host in body, soul and divinity.

“Jesus answered:” Truly, truly, I say to you, he who is not born of water and of Spirit cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. “”
(John 3: 5)

The literal interpretation of John 3: 5 demonstrates that water Baptism is essential for salvation.

“So also faith, if it has no works, is really dead.”
(James 2:17)

The literal interpretation of James 2:17 demonstrates that faith without works does not justify.

Most Protestants symbolically interpret each and every one of the cases cited. Moreover, the Protestant heresy has its origin in the denial of the literalness of these verses.

The Faith of Our Parents

Clarified this error, let’s begin our journey through Sacred Scripture, Tradition and the immutable Magisterium of the Church. The list of references and pronouncements is not exhaustive. If it were, the length of this test would increase by several orders of magnitude.

The first verse of the Bible says in Hebrew:

בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.
bə-rê-šîṯ bā-rā ĕ-lō-hîm’êṯ haš-šā-ma-yim wə-‘êṯ hā-‘ā-reṣ.
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
(Genesis 1: 1)

The word “Elohim” (Gods) is the plural of “El” (God). The suffix “-him” means three or more; however, the verb “ba-ra” (created) is singular. The Holy Trinity is already revealed to us, subtly, in the second and third words of the Bible. Note that the earth was created in the beginning .
Job, deprived of his family, his wealth and his health, regrets his condition. With the certainty that he is a righteous man and deserves no punishment, Job questions the divine wisdom. Almighty God answers:

“Yahweh answered Job from the bosom of the storm and said: Who is this who tarnishes the Council with meaningless reasons? Gird your loins like a brave: I am going to question you, and you will instruct me. Where were you when I founded the earth? Indicate it, if you know the truth.Who set its measurements? Would you know it? Who threw the string on it? What were its bases affirmed? Who laid its cornerstone, among the clamor of the dawn stars and the acclamations of all the Sons of God? ”
(Job 38: 1,7)

To Job’s ignorance, God opposes His wisdom. To weakness, His power. The rhetorical questions of God had no answer in Job’s time, nor will they ever have an answer, since it is not possible to do scientific experiments in the past and there is an insurmountable barrier to the natural sciences between the Hexameron and the seventh day of Genesis. God tells us that the human mind can never penetrate the mystery of creation, but we have His direct testimony in Sacred Scripture, and any attempt to seek an alternative involves doubting His word. And how can the one who suspects of God sustain the faith?

“Well, he talked and it was like that, he sent and it was done.”
(Psalm 33: 9)

The doctrine of all Fathers, Doctors, Councils and Popes has always been the same, God created the world simul ex nihilo , at the same time, out of nothing. God spoke, and the world was. He commanded, and the world was made. In the same way that Jesus spoke, and the blind saw; Jesus spoke, and the crippled ones walked; Jesus spoke, and Lazarus rose again. In 2016, Pope Francis said that “When we read about the creation of the world in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God as a magician with a magic wand.” The Holy Father was right, because Almighty God does not need magic wands; His word is enough to create the world exactly as Genesis tells us.

Our Lord Jesus Christ insisted throughout his public ministry on a theme and a book. The subject, Hell; The book, the Genesis.

“But at the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.”
(Mark 10: 6)

These words leave no room for any evolution. God created Adam at the beginning of creation , not billions of years later. These 12 words not only clash with biological evolution, but also with cosmic evolution. If God created Adam at the beginning, there is no time for a Big Bang, an inflationary expansion, the formation of galaxies, first generation stars, supernovae, second generation stars, the formation of the solar system, the formation of the earth and billions of years of biological evolution until the appearance of Adam. Believing in these theories forces us to reject the words of Jesus Christ. The believer must then decide at his own risk what words of Our Lord are true and which are symbolic, against the unanimous criteria of the Apostles, Fathers, Doctors, Councils and Popes for almost two thousand years. This is the definition of Protestantism, where each Protestant is his own Pope and arrogates the authority to interpret Holy Scripture at will.

“Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, in whom you have placed your hope. Because, if you believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote of me. But if you do not believe in his writings. How are you going to believe in my words? ”
(John 5:46)
The writings of Moses are the Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Jesus tells us that it is not possible to believe in Him without believing in the writings of Moses.

In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus tells us the story of the rich man who is condemned to Hell and asks Abraham to tell his relatives that Hell is a real place.

“Abraham said to him:” They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. “He said:” No, Father Abraham; but if any of the dead go where they will be converted. “He replied:” If you do not hear Moses and the prophets will not be convinced, even if a dead man rises. “”
(Luke 16: 29,31)

Theologians discuss whether these verses describe a parable or a true fact. The mention of the “rich” without giving a proper name reinforces the position in favor of the parable, but the reference, at the beginning of the story, of a poor man named “Lazarus” indicates that it is a true story. Be that as it may, Jesus tells us this episode with the purpose of giving us a teaching, which being self-evident, is reinforced in the light of the insistence of Our Lord on the need to believe Moses, throughout all the Gospels .

In the Confession of the Faith of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 the truth of creation by fiat is authoritatively declared. It is not easy to find the original texts of the Council in Spanish, but we have them in Latin:

“Deus … creator omnium visibilium et invisibilium, spiritualium et corporalium: qui sua omnipotenti virtute simul ab initio temporis utramque de nihilo condidit creaturam, spiritualem et corporalem, angelicam videlicet et mundanam: ac deinde humanam, quasi communem ex spiritu et corpore constittam.”

“God … creator of all visible and invisible things, of the spiritual and the corporeal; who by virtue of His own omnipotence created at the same time from the beginning of time from nothing to every creature, spiritual and bodily, this is , angelic and mundane, and finally to man, constituted in a certain way of both spirit and body. “The bold and underlined are mine. All things were created simul ex nihilo .

At the same time, out of nowhere.

In the First Part of the Summa Theologica (1265-1274), St. Thomas writes:
“The last perfection, the end of the entire universe, is the perfect bliss of the saints, which will be given in the final consummation of the times. The first perfection, which consists in the integrity of the universe, was given in the first institution of the things. This is what is talked about on the seventh day. “[5]Here he associates two perfections of the universe, the first and the second. Anyone who accepts that God will restore all things in Christ after the Last Judgment must accept that the universe was perfect at the time of creation. Perfection cannot evolve, because then it would not be perfect. And how can the imperfect be restored?

The Council of Trent declared dogmatically in 1564 that it is not allowed to make an interpretation of Holy Scripture contrary to the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers and the Church:

“In addition, in order to contain the petulant spirits, [this Council] decrees that no one, trusting in their own ability, shall – in matters of faith, and of morals relating to the edification of Christian doctrine – force the Sacred Scripture to your own senses, presuming an interpretation of such Holy Scripture contrary to the sense that the Holy Mother Church – which is responsible for judging the true meaning and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures – has sustained and sustained; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers “[6]The Roman Catechism is the only catechism that was directly promulgated by an Ecumenical Council, the Council of Trent. It was addressed to the priests, for the instruction of their flock. The Roman Catechism is considered the patron of all compendiums of Christian doctrine, and is the only one mentioned in later catechisms. In the new catechism of 1994 it is mentioned 20 times. In point XXIV, Of the creation of the man of the Roman Catechism, we read:
“Lately God formed man from the mud of the earth, willing and orderly in regard to the body, so that he would be immortal and impassive, not by virtue of his nature, but for the benefit of God. As regards the soul, he formed him in his image and likeness, gave him free will, and with such harmony he ordered his movements and appetites, never ceasing to obey the empire of reason.In addition to this, he granted him the wonderful gift of original justice, and he wanted also to preside over the other animals. All of which the Pastors can easily know for the instruction of the faithful for the history of Genesis. “As we can see, the Roman Catechism indicates to the priests that the history of Genesis itself will serve to solve any question about the creation of man.

The publication in 1859 of Darwin’s Origin of Species caused such an enormous impact on the minds of rationalists and European intellectuals that the Provincial Council of Cologne wanted to express itself in this regard immediately. In 1860 he proclaimed in unequivocal terms:
“Our first parents were immediately formed by God. Therefore, we declare that the opinion of those who are not afraid to affirm that this human being, man, in regard to his body, finally emerged from the spontaneous continuous change of an imperfect nature to a more perfect one, is clearly opposed to Sacred Scripture and Faith. “His Holiness Pope Leo XIII, affirmed in Arcane Divinae Sapientiae , 1880:
“We remember things known to everyone and that nobody doubts: after on the sixth day of creation God formed the man of the earth’s slime and infused on his face the breath of life, he wanted to give a companion, admirably taken from the side of himself while he slept. With which the provident God intended that the couple of spouses be the natural principle of all men, that is, from where the human race would spread and through uninterrupted procreations be preserved for all time. ” God created Eve from the side of Adam, not as a result of simultaneous evolution.

The First Vatican Council began on December 8, 1869, the feast day of the Immaculate Conception , and focused its Third Session, in April 1870, exclusively on issues related to Creation, Revelation, faith and reason . The Council declared in Canon number 5:

“The world and all the things that are contained in it, both spiritual and material, in regard to its complete substance, have been produced by God from nothing.”It was expected that the First Vatican Council would publish a dogmatic decree on the special creation of Adam and Eve, but unfortunately, the Council was forced to close, incomplete. After its Fourth Session, on July 19, 1870, the Franco-Prussian War was declared. The French troops, who protected the Pope from the Italian revolutionaries who besieged the Vatican, left the city to join the war. Pius IX suspended the work of the Council on October 20, without indicating a date for the restart of the conciliar works. The Council was never concluded. But he had already managed to affirm in his Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius that:

“This one and only God, by His goodness and omnipotence, not with the intention of increasing His happiness, nor in fact of obtaining happiness, but in order to manifest His perfection by the good things that He grants to what He creates, by an absolutely free plan, brought to the existence of nothingness the double order created as a whole , that is, of the spiritual and the corporeal, the angelic and the mundane, and later the human, which is, in a way, common to both, since it is composed of spirit and body. “The Canon of the First Vatican Council contains the following dogmatic statements:
“On God the Creator of All Things: V. If anyone does not confess that the world and all the things it contains, spiritual and material, were produced out of nothing by God according to the totality of its substance; or contends that God he did not create by will free of all need, but with the same need with which he loves himself; or I will deny that the world was created for the glory of God; be anathema. “”On Faith: IV. If anyone says that all miracles are impossible, and therefore all their accounts, including those contained in Holy Scripture, should be set aside as fables or myths; or that miracles they can never be known with certainty, nor can they prove themselves to the divine origin of the Christian religion; be anathema. ”

“About the Faith: VI. If anyone says that the condition of the faithful and of those who have not yet reached the only true faith is the same, so that Catholics can have a just cause for doubt, suspending their assent , the faith they have already received under the teaching of the Church, until they complete a scientific demonstration of the credibility and truth of their faith; be anathema. ”

“On Faith and Reason: I. If anyone says that in the divine revelation no true and proper mystery is contained, but that all dogmas of faith can be understood and demonstrated from natural principles for a reason rightly cultivated; be anathema. ”

“On Faith and Reason: II. If anyone says that human disciplines must be developed with such a degree of freedom that their assertions can be held as true even when they oppose divine revelation, and that these cannot be prohibited by the Church; be anathema. ”

“On Faith and Reason: III. If anyone says that it is possible that at some point, given the advancement of knowledge, a different sense can be assigned to the dogmas proposed by the Church than that which the Church itself has understood and understands; be anathema. “The Canons of the Third Session conclude with a severe and prophetic admonition:

“But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy, unless those errors that are approached to a greater or lesser degree are also carefully avoided, we warn everyone of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such erroneous opinions, even not expressly mentioned in this document, they have been banned and prohibited by this Holy See. ”

The dogmatic declarations of the First Vatican Council, pronounced a little over a century ago do not leave much room for movement to that modern idea that the Church has not positioned itself on the question of the origin of the universe, and that every Catholic is free to believe in this regard what you want. If we add the position of all the Apostles, Fathers, Doctors, Councils and previous Popes, that freedom of conscience is reduced to nothing.

“Because the hearts of this people have been blunted, they have made their ears hard, and their eyes have closed; lest they see with their eyes, with their ears hear, with their heart understand and convert, and I heal them.”
(Matthew 13:15)

We have made a chronological journey through Tradition and the Magisterium, but I want to finish this section with the words of St. Paul, which summarizes in six verses all our reasoning, from beginning to end:

“Because the invisible of God, from the creation of the world, intelligence is revealed through his works: his eternal power and divinity, so that they are inexcusable; because, having known God, they did not glorify him as God did not thank him, but rather they were obfuscated in his reasoning and his foolish heart became dark: boasting of wise men they became stupid, and they exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for a representation in the form of corruptible man, of birds, of quadrupeds, of This is why God gave them to the desires of their heart to an impurity such that they disgraced their bodies from each other; to them that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature instead of the Creator, which is blessed forever. Amen. ”
(Romans 1: 20,25)

The Faith of Our Children

I started the arguments making the assumption that the crisis of our time is not the responsibility of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, but ours, which would lead us to recognize that the bad priests that beset us are nothing more than our punishment. Thus, our criticisms of the hierarchy would be like the child who insults the fire he has just caused. The futility and stupidity of his effort is evident. It would not be far fetched to say that it is only making things worse.

I think this assumption has been proven. If tomorrow Pope Francis received the visit of the Holy Spirit and declared dogmatically, hours later, the special creation of Adam and Eve, all of us present would suddenly be self-excommunicated by heresy. So it has been in other cases, and so it would be in this one.

The absence of a dogmatic statement about this particular aspect of Genesis does not allow us to ignore the fact that the Church has always believed in this truth, and we must remember that the Church’s tradition has always been to proclaim a dogma only after the truth It has been threatened, because until then it had been unquestionable. That is why I want to add the following:

To traditional Catholics, I ask you to remember that the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was not declared until 1854, a year before the Holy Virgin Mary appeared to Santa Bernardette and presented with that title, and five years before the publication of The Origin of Species, which would be a direct attack against the special creation of Adam and Eve. The Holy Spirit determined that dogma be established in 1854 to reinforce the faith of believers in the face of the impending attack of evolutionary theory. But that does not mean that believers did not hold the truth of the Immaculate Conception before that date. On the contrary, they had believed in it from the beginning. I think there is a good reason for the Church not to emphasize the importance of Our Lady at the dawn of Christianity. God did not want to reveal the Son for 4000 years, so as not to encourage and confuse the polytheists. Once the Son was revealed, several centuries and many disputes against heretics were necessary to establish His Divinity. The discussion about the Holy Spirit was not overcome without losses, and led us to the disaster, if indirectly, of the Great Schism of 1054. What imprudence it would have been to add, on these conflicts, another debate on the Virgin Mary! Didn’t his rejection contribute to the Protestant Revolution? When the dogma of the special creation of Adam and Eve is declared, a monumental shock will undoubtedly occur. Therefore, it is not reasonable to expect that all truths have been declared dogmatically in the past. Notice that the secular people of the fourth century faced the Arians for denying consubstantiality there will undoubtedly be a monumental shock. Therefore, it is not reasonable to expect that all truths have been declared dogmatically in the past. Notice that the secular people of the fourth century faced the Arians for denying consubstantiality there will undoubtedly be a monumental shock. Therefore, it is not reasonable to expect that all truths have been declared dogmatically in the past. Notice that the secular people of the fourth century faced the Arians for denying consubstantialitybefore it was declared dogmatically. The fact that Tradition and the Magisterium have unanimously maintained the literal interpretation of Genesis for nineteen hundred years should be enough for a traditional Catholic, who in principle does not want to play craps and bet down, decides to confess the the same truth that our fathers professed, from the Apostles to St. Pius X. Men, by the way, wiser and holy than any of us, if only because of their greater closeness to the glorified nature of Adam.

To the most modern Catholics, I want to ask you to reflect on the way in which the theory of evolution has hijacked current scientific thinking. A quick search online will allow you to discover the countless cases of good scientists whose careers have been ruined for daring to doubt the dogmas of evolution. Watch this movie, Expelled , which details the problem. I encourage you to read Michael Behe, an eminent molecular biologist, who will convince you without a doubt that everything is an immense hoax. And on the subject of Genesis, consider the following: wouldn’t your prayers be more effective if you professed the fullness of the faith of the saints who preceded us? If you have sick relatives, or suffer difficult situations, think about the effect that your faith would have to assimilate to those who worked so many miracles.

To non-Catholics, I hope that my exposition of the lies that led to the birth of the theory of evolution, whose arguments defend themselves, allows them to shed the weight of this ominous theory, which has the brightest minds of our time, and in a state of panic to scientists who come to understand the truth. With this weight freed from your heart, I hope you find new open spaces to fill them with transcendental truths about our origin and our destiny.

The Myth of the Evolutionary Christian

Evolutionary Christians contend that God created hydrogen, helium and lithium in the Big Bang and let these three elements form new ones according to the laws He had arranged, as the universe expanded. God used billions of years of deformity, disease, destruction and death so that life evolved until the formation of a group of primates, to which a human soul was breathed. These first humans are symbolically called “Adam” and “Eve,” by identifying them in some way. For 200,000 years, the descendants of the first humans were scratching their heads, not knowing very well what to do with their new intelligence. Occasionally they made a flint stone, but usually looked at each other with a confused face. Suddenly, around 5,000 BC they lit a bulb and began to grow plants like crazy, build cities, write in the corners, organize in complex societies and philosophize looking at the stars. In year 1 Jesus was born, who was the Son of God, suffered and died to redeem the Original Sin committed by the symbolic “Adam” and “Eve,” and which is imputed to us through Baptism. For 1900 years, God allowed His Church to teach a unanimous, but wrong, interpretation of the creation of the world and of man, but using anti-Christian atheist scientists such as Hutton, Lyell, Darwin and Huxley, God revealed the true origin of all the things so that the privileged men of the twentieth century onwards could finally know the truth. build cities, write in the corners, organize in complex societies and philosophize looking at the stars. In year 1 Jesus was born, who was the Son of God, suffered and died to redeem the Original Sin committed by the symbolic “Adam” and “Eve,” and which is imputed to us through Baptism. For 1900 years, God allowed His Church to teach a unanimous, but wrong, interpretation of the creation of the world and of man, but using anti-Christian atheist scientists such as Hutton, Lyell, Darwin and Huxley, God revealed the true origin of all the things so that the privileged men of the twentieth century onwards could finally know the truth. build cities, write in the corners, organize in complex societies and philosophize looking at the stars. In year 1 Jesus was born, who was the Son of God, suffered and died to redeem the Original Sin committed by the symbolic “Adam” and “Eve,” and which is imputed to us through Baptism. For 1900 years, God allowed His Church to teach a unanimous, but wrong, interpretation of the creation of the world and of man, but using anti-Christian atheist scientists such as Hutton, Lyell, Darwin and Huxley, God revealed the true origin of all things so that the privileged men of the twentieth century onwards could finally know the truth. who was the Son of God, suffered and died to redeem the Original Sin committed by the symbolic “Adam” and “Eve,” and which is imputed to us through Baptism. For 1900 years, God allowed His Church to teach a unanimous, but wrong, interpretation of the creation of the world and of man, but using anti-Christian atheist scientists such as Hutton, Lyell, Darwin and Huxley, God revealed the true origin of all things so that the privileged men of the twentieth century onwards could finally know the truth. who was the Son of God, suffered and died to redeem the Original Sin committed by the symbolic “Adam” and “Eve,” and which is imputed to us through Baptism. For 1900 years, God allowed His Church to teach a unanimous, but wrong, interpretation of the creation of the world and of man, but using anti-Christian atheist scientists such as Hutton, Lyell, Darwin and Huxley, God revealed the true origin of all things so that the privileged men of the twentieth century onwards could finally know the truth.

This story is unsustainable.

Who can blame the millions of young people who are abandoning the faith, when they are being told a story without feet or head?

If God chose atheists to teach the ignorant fathers and doctors of the Church a lesson, what’s wrong with being an atheist? Are they not the good guys of the movie?

Does it make sense that the Son of God went down to earth to tell us a mythological story about two symbolic creatures, and then let himself be killed to correct the symbolic error of those two symbolic creatures?

The only rational explanation is to think that, if Adam and Eve are symbols, Jesus must be too. If Jesus is part of the myth, then the story makes sense from beginning to end. A nice story to tell before falling asleep. But other stories are worth it, of course. Always reading the same story is very boring. You can read to your children the story of Christianity one night, the story of Islam the next and that of Buddhism later, as do so many Hollywood actors with their children.

Genesis is the cornerstone of our faith. Without Genesis, the entire deposit of faith collapses. Atheists, who do not suffer our internal contradiction, understand it perfectly.

On April 9, 2012, Cardinal Pell decided to start a debate with the world’s most famous atheist, Richard Dawkins.

At a time of exchange, Cardinal Pell affirmed the following:

“Well, Adam and Eve are terms that mean” life “and” earth. “They are generic names. It is a beautiful mythological story. But it exists to tell us two or three things. First of all, God created the world and the universe. Second, that the key to the entire universe is humans. And third, it is a very sophisticated mythology to try to understand evil and suffering in the world … It is a religious story told for religious reasons. ”

Dawkins could not believe the dialectical gift he was receiving, and said:

“Ah well, I’m curious to know: if Adam and Eve never existed, where does Original Sin come from?”

It is painful to see Cardinal Pell’s silent and helpless expression after hearing this question. He is unable to give an answer.

And what answer could I give? Dawkins is absolutely right. If Adam and Eve are not real people, separated from God by their disobedience, the Original Sin comes from nowhere. And if so, Original Sin does not exist. If the disease is a lie, who needs medicine?

You cannot believe that action is a myth, and the consequence a reality. This proposition offends the intelligence of a child.

He who rejects this truth destroys the foundations of his faith and will be unable to defend it against the most rudimentary argument.

With faith mutilated in this way, how long can it last?

On March 13, 2019, Cardinal Pell was sentenced to 6 years in prison for sexually abusing 5 minors. On August 20, his appeal was dismissed and the judge confirmed the sentence . Pell has been in jail since March.

Would the Cardinal have seen himself in this situation if he believed in Genesis? Of course not!

To believe in Genesis is to get up every day, look out the window and be overwhelmed by the power of God. Who does not humble himself before the God of Armies, who creates a perfect universe, and sacrifices two animals to clothe us after we have offended him [7], while setting in motion the plan for our Salvation! Praise God, because His Goodness knows no limits. Have mercy on us, Lord, that we have offended you.

Who does not understand that little angel, who faced Lucifer’s incredible rebellion, rose to exclaim WHO AS GOD? How dare you rebel against this God, who is not capable of evil, who has given us everything? A God who has only created good things, who deserves all our love and thanks. How dare you!

The faith of the one who believes in Genesis is solid as rock. God has given us the only sacred book in the world that has no strikethrough or contradiction. The economy of Salvation has such a argumentative force that it converted the wild men of Northern Europe, the aborigines of the Amazon, the feudal peasants of Japan …

But today we cannot convert even our baptized brother, who has grown up surrounded by cathedrals and studied in a Catholic school … Because our mind and the mind of Catholic teachers are poisoned with the same lie that infects our brother’s ideas .

Our brother asks us: “Why did the car run over me? Why did I lose my sight! God does not exist, and if he exists, he is evil!” 

And we don’t know what to answer. Because, how can he use suffering to sanctify one who is not in a state of grace? His pain is useless. His pain can only be a punishment … And what will my brother have done for God to punish him …? Isn’t it that my brother is right …?

But he who believes in Genesis says: “God created Adam with abundant gifts, in a world without pain, death, disease, or deformity, to reign over the world, and later, go up to heaven to live with He for all eternity, as his adopted son and co-heir.But Adam disobeyed God, and introduced Evil into the world! What insolence, what misfortune! Do not be like Adam, and obey, so that God will protect from the evil that our father brought us, and save your soul from this valley of tears! For today, as at the beginning, God is only capable of good things, and desires your salvation! ”

This argument convinced St. Vladimir I of Kiev, the brutal Viking king who converted after marrying a Greek princess, who underwent a complete transformation of his personality after being baptized, and then converted the Rus from Kiev to Christianity. How he won’t convince our brother!

What good are our prayers for the conversion of our family, if we do not want to convert ourselves?

To encourage my brothers, I want to remember the words of GK Chesterton in The Eternal Man :

“A dead thing can go with the flow, but only a living thing can go against it.”

The Synthesis of All Heresies

Compare now two worlds. One where Genesis is a myth and the theory of evolution is the truth, and another where Genesis is true and the theory of evolution is a myth.

Feminism

Without Genesis, man and woman are equal, and therefore, any inequality between them, an injustice.

With Genesis, Adam was created by God, who forbade him to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eve was created from Adam’s side, to help him and submit to him. Eve did not receive the prohibition directly from God, but indirectly, through her husband, Adam, who thus manifests himself as God’s representative in the family. Eve, therefore, must have faith in her husband to be faithful to God. There is a divine hierarchy in the original marriage. That is why Satan tempted Eve, not Adam. Eve was the weak link in the family chain, having received the divine mandate indirectly. Although Eve sinned first, only Adam’s sin breaks the covenant with God.Only Adam’s sin causes the Fall. Because Adam, as head of the family, is the priest, who must exercise his authority over the woman. By eating from the tree, the woman violates her obligation to obey her husband. But if Adam had rebuked Eve, if he had explained her mistake, she could have asked for forgiveness and corrected herself. There would have been no Fall.

That is why we speak of the Sin of Adam , although both sinned, and Eve did it first.

Man has inherited Adam’s fundamental weakness: lack of masculinity , which leads him to effeminate irresponsibility ; while the woman has inherited Eva’s weakness: vanity and the desire for control. By rejecting their own nature, man and woman become incompatible. The man falls into apathy and the woman in a fantasy of power.

Genesis reveals to us why priests can only be men. Not because “no one would have accepted that Jesus ordained women as Apostles in Jewish culture in the days of the Roman Empire,” but because God established the divine order of the Ecclesia Docens (Teaching Church, the priestly order, which teaches) and Eecclesia Discens (Church Dissent, the faithful, who learn) in the original family of Eden itself , which prefigures the mystical marriage of Jesus Christ with His Church.

God created Adam to be responsible and authority in the family, therefore, man will only find peace of mind when he is responsible and authority of his family. God created Eve to help Adam and submit to him, therefore, the woman will only find peace of mind when she helps and submits to her husband.

Immaculate Conception

Without Genesis, the Virgin Mary cannot be the Immaculate Conception , as she defined herself when she first appeared to Saint Bernadette in Lourdes. If Adam and Eve, who lacked Original Sin, were conceived by two semi-human beings, then Adam would be the Immaculate Conception Number 1 and Eve would be the Immaculate Conception Number 2 .

Therefore, if Adam and Eve are the product of evolution, the Virgin Mary lied or confused Santa Bernardette in her first appearance in Lourdes. In order not to fool ourselves, he should have replied: “I am one of the Immaculate Conception,” “I am the last Immaculate Conception,” or “I am the Immaculate Conception Number 3.” But the Virgin said: “I am the Immaculate Conception.”

With Genesis, Adam was created without Original Sin ex nihilo , not conceived. Eve was created without Original Sin from the side of Adam, not conceived. The Word is co-eternal with the Father, and became incarnate of Mary (Nicene Creed), or was born of Mary (Apostles’ Creed), so the Son of God was not conceived. The only creature that was conceived without Original Sin is the Blessed Virgin Mary, so she is The Immaculate Conception , unique in all creation, from the beginning to the end of time.

Salvation

Without Genesis, there is no need for Salvation. For if Adam and Eve did not really exist, they really ate the forbidden fruit and really became enmity with God, then Jesus Christ lied, was confused, or did not really exist either. In any case, he died without reason and the Catholic Church is no different from any other religion. We can be faithful to any of them; It is a cultural issue without ontological relevance. The identification of Christianity with European civilization becomes inevitable, and its “imposition” on other cultures, an act of imperialism.

With Genesis, only through Baptism do we receive the free gift of the Redemption of the Original Sin of Adam and Eve, by the infinite merits of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross, the Tree of Life, which elevates man and opens the gates of heaven after the fall caused by eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Therefore, it is imperative that Catholics evangelize all men in the world to bring them the truth and save their souls from Hell.

“Go therefore and make disciples of all the people by baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
(Matthew 28:19)

Eucharist

Without Genesis, Adam and Eve are symbols, and therefore, the Redemption of Original Sin must also be symbolic. The Eucharist celebrates the Sacrament of Redemption, in which the Church announces the death of Jesus Christ and proclaims his Resurrection [8]. But if the Redemption is symbolic, the celebration itself lacks substance, and becomes a service in memory of a distant event in the past, of confusing significance. In fact it does not matter, because it becomes inevitable that this act becomes a social event where man celebrates himself. Without Genesis, God is an after-thought , a secondary matter. The important thing is to give yourself peace with joy and play the guitar with enthusiasm, so that people congratulate you on leaving.

With Genesis, the poison of theForbidden fruit is eliminated by the adorable flesh of Christ. If the Original Sin was Gluttony, a disorder in eating, it is necessary that the Holy Mass instruct us about an order in eating. If the forbidden fruit was a poison ingested by the mouth, it is convenient that the antidote be ingested by the mouth, “which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote so that we do not die, but live forever in Jesus Christ” [9 ]. If Adam and Eve are real, and Original Sin is real, it is logical that Jesus was real, and it is not difficult to understand that the creator simul ex nihilo of all things, capable of multiplying bread and fish, can effect the transubstantiation of bread and wine in their flesh and their adorable blood, throughout the world, until the end of time, without losing an iota of their own substance .

Identity

Without Genesis, the human being has no intrinsic nature, since it is constantly evolving towards an Omega point of absolute perfection. Therefore, you can and should change your identity, your gender, the object of your passions, and your own body, overnight, as many times as you like, without arbitrary restrictions.

With Genesis, man is created by God in his image and likeness. His body, as the sacred temple of the soul, is inviolable and does not belong to him. God commanded man to unite with woman in one flesh, to reproduce and multiply. He who violates these commandments attempts against his body, attempts against God, and against the natural and divine law.

Euthanasia

Without Genesis, the only difference between man and animal is their brain development. Therefore, if clinical brain death is determined, man ceases to be a man, and can be left to die, even if he has a pulse, breathing and demonstrates the ability to perceive his surroundings. Philosophically, killing a man in brain death is the same as sacrificing a useless animal. Euthanasia is nothing more than a rational administration of available resources. For the same reason, since a fetus has the same brain development as an animal at the same stage of development, a fetus is an animal. If society considers that this animal should not consume resources, because it can never return the investment, the reasonable thing is to eliminate it so that it does not entail a burden for anyone.
With Genesis, God creates every human soul ex nihilo at the time of conception, following the example that Genesis teaches us in the creation of Adam. The soul, as a spiritual reality, has non-material operations that transcend the body, so the soul survives the body. The soul remains attached to the body while it has the slightest chink of life. Only God can decide when a soul should leave the body of a man innocent of crimes against society. Consequently, anyone who interrupts the operations of the body of an innocent person is inevitably committing murder.

Eugenics

Without Genesis, eugenics is a moral imperative, as it eliminates weak members and accelerates the progress of the species towards its Omega objective , its most perfect form.

With Genesis, all human beings possess souls, they are creatures of God and all can become His adopted children if they collaborate with the graces they have received. Every human life is therefore precious and irreplaceable. Eugenics is a crime that claims the revenge of Heaven.

Parent Relationship

Without Genesis, nature is not in the process of degeneration, but of evolution. Therefore, children are better than parents, because they are better adapted to their environment, and owe no respect to their elders. Respecting a less evolved being would be absurd!

With Genesis, nature itself is in the process of degeneration since the Fall of Adam. Adam introduced death, disease, deformity and pain in the world.

“For the anxious wait for creation vividly desires the revelation of the children of God. Creation, in effect, was subjected to vanity, not spontaneously, but by the one who submitted it, in the hope of being freed from the servitude of corruption to participate in the glorious freedom of the children of God. For we know that the entire creation groans to the present and suffers labor pains. ”
(Romans 8: 19,22)

Each human generation is one step further from Eden, and therefore, from the preternatural gifts of Adam and Eve. Genesis teaches children that their parents are one step closer to the original uncorrupted nature of man, and instills them to show due respect, for the purpose of existence is to return to that state of grace with God.

Tradition

Without Genesis, today’s men are more perfect, smarter and wiser than yesterday’s men, and can reinterpret, ignore or develop any knowledge of the past, which is always an incomplete understanding of the world, born of ignorance and lack of intelligence of primitive cultures.

With Genesis, the men of antiquity were more perfect, smarter and wiser than today’s men. The knowledge of the past is one step closer to the Truth than the knowledge of the present. Yesterday’s testimony, more reliable than today. The culture of today, more primitive and wild than yesterday.

Agency and Presence of God

Without Genesis, God is reduced to a hidden and unknowable being, who created a handful of hydrogen, helium and lithium 13.8 billion years ago, and then let things take their natural course. If we also deny the Universal Flood, the divine destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the partition of the Red Sea, and turn them into natural catastrophic phenomena, we reduce the agency of God to such an extent, that we may well replace it with a quantum fluctuation at the beginning of the Big Bang, and leave us stories.
With Genesis, God created all things simul ex nihilo , at the same time, out of nothing. There is no species of animal, plant, or celestial object that has not been created directly by God. With Genesis, God is omnipotent and omnipresent, creator of all things, who keeps them with the constant work of his divine Providence. God wants us to know Him, to approach Him, and we are shown on every tree leaf, every bird flight, every cloud turn, so that we can enjoy Him and His Work.

Goodness and Beauty of God

Without Genesis, God created a world full of death, pain, disease and deformity, without which, the symbolic Adam and Eve could not have evolved from the primate. Therefore, death is not the result of Original Sin, but a fundamental part of divine design. Thanks to the death of billions of creatures, through a trial and error mechanism, “Adam” and “Eve” evolved from single-celled organisms to human beings. God, therefore, is the origin and creator of Evil, and can be blamed directly for any misfortune we suffer.

With Genesis, God is a being of infinite Goodness, Beauty and Truth, who created man to crown him King of creation and to form a family with him on earth and later in heaven. The whole creation was good, perfect, without error or stain. God only created good things .

“God looked at everything he had done, and saw that it was very good. So there was one afternoon and one morning: this was the sixth day.”
(Genesis 1:31)

Animals were not created to feed each other, or for food for man, but for him to enjoy naming them and marveling at their countless forms and operations. Original Sin introduces death into the world, and it is the sole responsibility of man, and only to him can the appearance of Evil be attributed.

Identifying the Heresy

When the head of the hydra is cut off, two appear in its place.

In his Encyclical Pascendi Domini Gregis (1907), St. Pius X defined Modernism as “a set of all heresies.” This definition is as accurate as it is not very operative. Because how can we face this enemy? How can we isolate it, fight it and defeat it? Does Modernism include the advance of experimental sciences? What aspects of progress should be preserved? This dilemma remains unsolved, one hundred years later.

Recently, Dr. Taylor Marshall commented that Arianism, like all other heresies, was defeated with a simple question. In the case of Arrio, the question was:

Do you believe in consubstantiality?

Once the dogma was defined in the Council of Nicea, and the Council of Constantinople was armed with determination to impose it, it was not difficult to isolate the heresy and bring it to light. Unable to hide, he vanished overnight.

Dr. Marshall regretted that there was no equivalent question to identify the threat of our time; this hydra, this monster with ten heads and twelve horns, this synthesis of all heresies.

But once we understand that feminism, gender identity, abortion, euthanasia, eugenics, family disintegration, liturgical degradation, abandonment of faith, globalization, destruction of the Christian roots of the West, and All other evils of our time have only one origin, which is the negation of Genesis, we have found the body that was hidden in the waters of the swamp. We can already shed light on the hydra to see it as a whole. The question is very simple:

“Do you believe in the creation simul ex nihilo?”

Someday, when the Holy Mother Church declares the dogma of the special creation of Adam and Eve, whoever answers this question negatively will be identified as a heretic and excommunicated. The dogs of the infamous Actaeon will turn against their owner, the secular dictatorship will collapse, and the regeneration of Christian civilization can begin.

Notes and References

[1] San Antonio María Claret y Clará. Catechism of Christian doctrine: explained and adapted to the capacity of children . Religious Library, Barcelona 1862, p. 403. Tenth lesson: “Of the Sacrament of Order.”

[2] Cho, A: A Singular Conundrum: How odd is our universe? Science 317: 1848-1850, Sept. 28, 2007.

[3] I cannot help but see the parallel between the evolution of modern science and the way in which the liturgy of the Novus Ordo has succeeded in replacing the liturgy in Latin.

[4] Saint Thomas: Summa Theologica I , Question 73, answer 2 to the Objections.

[5] St. Thomas: Summa Theologica I , Question 73, Article 1.

[6] Council of Trent, Session IV, April 8, 1564. history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html

[7] With the sacrifice of two animals, from which he obtains the skin to cover Adam and Eve, God prepares the people of Israel to understand that animal sacrifices will not redeem their sins, they will only cover them to avoid their shame, an extension until the arrival of Christ, the only one who will be able, by his infinite merits as God and as Man, to redeem man’s infinite offense against God.

[8] Cf. MISSALE ROMANUM, former decree sacrosancti Oecumenici Concilii Vaticani II instauratum, auctoritate Pauli Pp. VI promulgatum, Ioannis Pauli Pp. II cura recognitum , editio typica tertia, day April 20, 2000, Typis Vaticanis, 2002, Missa votiva of Dei mercy, oratio super oblata, p. 1159.

[9]Saint Ignatius to the Ephesians , 2.20.

Thanks

To Hugh Owen, director of the Kolbe Center, for his kindness and valuable contribution.

To Dr. Taylor Marshall, for inspiring the structure of this work.

To Timothy Gordon, for encouraging me to pray to the Holy Spirit when I did not see how to undo the Gordian knot.

May God bless you all, and the Holy Spirit enlighten us to the truth.

© 2019, Anthony Stine. All rights reserved. You may reuse or copy this post by giving credit and providing a link.

Comments

Please comment