Suscipe Domine Traditional Catholic Forum

The Parish Hall => The Natural Sciences => Topic started by: Xavier on June 09, 2018, 10:01:16 AM

Title: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Xavier on June 09, 2018, 10:01:16 AM
The Lord Jesus gives two simple refutations of the heresy of evolution below. Pope Pius XII authorized the publication of these revelations and both St. Padre Pio and Bishop +Williamson support this particular work. It provides 2 demonstrations of the falsity of evolution.

The second, which is also developed in a separate article here - http://ldolphin.org/wmwilliams.html - is based on the simple observation that changes within kinds are reversible. If your actual ancient ancestors were, say, tall or dark, there are always chances those traits will re-appear in your family line sooner or later, especially when considering a whole population. So how is it man does not again give birth to monkeyish creatures, the alleged ancestral family line that first supposedly gave birth to man? No evolutionist really fears giving birth to a monkey or anything like a monkey. That's because they know as well as we do that their theory is a lie.

Quote from: Williams6. THE MENDELIAN INHERITANCE LAW

The unity of the human race is further established by Mendel's Inheritance Discovery on which evolutionists so much rely. G. Mendel, an experimenter, found that when he crossed a giant variety of peas with a dwarf variety, the offspring were all tall. The giants were called "dominant"; the disappearing dwarfs, "recessive". But among the second generation of this giant offspring, giants and dwarfs appeared in the proportion of 3 to 1. But when these dwarfs were self-fertilized, successive generations were all dwarfs. The recessive character was not lost, but appeared again. Experiments with flowers likewise show that the recessive color will reappear.
Also experiments with the interbreeding of animals have shown similar results. The recessive or disappearing characteristics, or the disappearing variety, will appear again, in some subsequent generation, and sometimes becomes permanent. This law prevails widely in nature, and the recessive traits appear with the dominant traits. "If rose-combed fowl were mated with single-combed fowl, the offspring were all rose-combed, but when these rose-combed fowl were mated, the offspring were again rose-combed and single-combed If gray rabbits were mated with black rabbits, their hybrids were all gray, the black seemingly disappearing, but when the second generation were mated, the progeny were again grays and blacks--God or Gorilla--p. 278. The recessive character always reappears.
Apply these widely prevalent laws to dominant man and his recessive alleged brute ancestor. The simian characteristics would appear in some generations, i£ not in many. We would expect many offspring to have the recessive character of the ape, and we ought not to be surprised, if some recessive stock became permanent.
Following analogy, we ought to look for a tribe of human beings that had degenerated into apes. That we find no such recessive characteristics even among the most degenerate savages, and no such ape-like tribe of human beings, is a decisive proof that man never descended from the brute. Else such recessive characteristics, according to the Mendelian Law, would be sure to appear. We would also find monkeys and apes--the recessive species--descended from man.
7. BIOMETRY

Even new sciences, founded by evolutionists, bear witness against their theory. Mendel's Inheritance Law is one, as we have seen Biometry is another. It was proposed and advocated by Sir Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin. He expected it to be a great prop to evolution; on the other hand, it is another proof of the unity of our race in Noah's day, and hence fatal to their theory. Biometry is defined to be the "statistical study of variation and heredity." It bears heavily against the great age of man.
One of the leading exponents of Biometry, Dr. C. B. Davenport, Secretary of the Eugenics section of the American Breeders' Association concludes that "No people of English descent are more distantly related than thirtieth cousin, while most people are more nearly related than that." Professor Conklin, of Princeton University, approves this conclusion, and adds, "As a matter of fact most persons of the same race are much more closely related than this, and certainly we need not go back to Adam nor even to Shem, Ham or Japheth to find our common ancestor." Dr. Davenport, therefore, says that the English may find a common ancestor thirty-two generations ago; Professor Conklin admits that we need not go further back than Noah to find a common ancestor of all mankind. Noah, therefore, must have been the head of the race. Evolutionists admit we need go no farther back than Noah to find the head of the race, and the population, as we have seen, proves the same thing, and disproves every guess they have made of the great age of man. We have descended from Noah and not from the brute.
This same Professor Conklin says that our race began 2,000,000 years ago (60,000 generations). How is it possible that we must go back sixty thousand generations for a common ancestor, when thirty-two generations will suffice for the English, and about 200 generations since Noah, for the whole race? If we, by the laws of biometry, can find a common ancestor in Noah, we can not possibly go back 2,000,000 years to find one. Professor Conklin's admission refutes his claim of 2,000,000 years for man. Biometry proves that age absolutely impossible.
If the progeny of this ape-like ancestor inter-bred for many generations--as certainly would have been the case--then we are not only descended from all the monkey family, the baboon, gorilla, ape, chimpanzee, orang-utang femur (H. G. Wells' ancestor), mongoose, etc., but are also related to all their progeny. Glorious ancestors! In our veins runs the blood of them all, as well as the blood of the most disgusting reptiles. And yet Professor H. H. Newman, an eminent evolutionist, in a letter to the writer, says, "The evolution idea is an ennobling one!" But biometry saves us from proving it could not be so.
Biometrists find that there is a Law of Filial Regression, or a tendency to the normal in every species, checking the accumulation of departures from the average, and forbidding the formation of new species by inheritance of peculiarities. The whole tendency of the laws of nature is against the formation of new species, so essential to evolution. The species brings forth still "after its kind." "On the average, extreme peculiarities of parents are less extreme in children." "The stature of adult offspring must, on the whole, be more mediocre than the stature of the parents." Gifted parents rarely have children as highly gifted as themselves.
The tendency is to revert to the normal in body and mind. Nature discourages the formation of new species, evolutionists to the contrary notwithstanding. "Like produces like" is a universal and unchangeable law. God has forbidden species to pass their boundaries; and, if any individual seems to threaten to do so, by possessing abnormal peculiarities, these are soon corrected, often in the next generation. Even Professor H. H. Newman says, "On the whole, the contributions of biometry to our understanding of the causes of evolution are rather disappointing." A science that upsets evolution is certainly disappointing to evolutionists.

Quote from: Jesus to Maria Valtorta, Dec 20, 1943

     "One of the points at which your pride founders in error--which, above all, degrades precisely your haughtiness by giving you an origin that, if you were less corrupted by pride, you would repudiate as degrading--is that of Darwin's theory.

     In order not to admit God, who, in His power, was able to have created the universe from nothing and man from the already created mud, you take the paternity of a beast as your own.
    Don't you realize you are diminishing yourselves, for--consider this--won't a beast--no matter how exemplary, selected, improved, and perfected in form and instinct, and, if your wish, even in mental formation--always be a beast?  Don't you realize this?  This testifies unfavorably regarding your pride as pseudo-supermen.

    But if you fail to realize, I will not be the one to waste words to make you aware of it and converted from the error.  I ask you only one question which, in your great numbers, you have never asked yourselves.  And if you can answer Me with facts, I will no longer combat this degrading theory of yours.

    If man is a spin-off from the monkey, which by progressive evolution has become man, how is it that over so many years in which you have maintained this theory you have never succeeded, not even with the perfected instruments and methods at present, in making a man from a monkey?  You could have taken the most intelligent offspring of a pair of intelligent moneys and then their intelligent offspring, and so on.  You would now have many generations of selected, instructed monkeys cared for by the most patient, tenacious, and sagacious scientific method.  But you would still have monkeys.  If there happened to be a mutation, it would be this: the beasts would be physically less strong than the former ones and morally more degenerate, for, with all your methods and instruments, you would have destroyed that perfection of the monkey which My Father created for these quadrumans.

    Another question.  If man came from the monkey, how is it that man, even with grafts and repugnant forms of cross-fertilization, does not become a monkey again?  You would be capable even of attempting these horrors if you knew that it could give approvative sanction to your theory.  But you do not do so because you know that you would not be able to turn a man into a monkey.  You would turn him into an ugly son of man, a degenerate, perhaps a criminal.  But never a real monkey.  You do not try because you know beforehand that you would get a poor result and your reputation would emerge therefrom in ruins.

    For this reason you do not do so.  For no other.  For you feel no remorse or horror over degrading a man to the level of a beast to maintain a thesis of yours.  You are capbable of this and of much more.  You are already beasts because you deny God and kill the spirit, which distinguishes you from the beasts.

   Your science causes Me horror.  You degrade the intellect and like madmen do not even realize you are degrading it.  In truth, I tell you that many of the primitive are more men than you are."
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: GloriaPatri on June 09, 2018, 03:24:54 PM
Too bad private "revelations" are absolutely worthless and have no authority concerning matters of the natural sciences.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Xavier on June 09, 2018, 11:31:48 PM
Says yet another person who lost the treasure of the Faith in no small part thanks to evolution, and its pagan theories of monkeys giving rise to men.

I could easily cite St. Montfort and Fr. Mueller on the pious assent due to revelations made by Christ to His Saints; but when you've rejected the Church and Christ Himself, what good will that do you now? I pray you have the good sense to return someday, at which point Christ will graciously forgive and restore you, as He always does. But Plato never died for your sins, does not know or care anything about you and will not make satisfaction in blood for your soul when you stand before God. You have forgotten all the love Christ has shown you, all the divine power He has demonstrated, the miracles He has worked in the lives of His Saints and the history of His Church, and committed treason against the King Who loves you, and offered His life for yours; all starting from your uncritical acceptance of the pagan dogma of evolution.

The Lord's Word aside, the first link makes purely scientific arguments against the absurdity of evolutionists claiming they have monkeys in their ancestral family tree. If that were so, the simian trait or some slight variant thereof would likely re-appear in some subset of the population - and we would thus find some humans having given birth to ape-like brutes, which never happened anywhere, and which not even the evolutionist deceivers expect to happen to their progeny, all their fanciful claims about their glorious ancestors notwithstanding; ergo, the evolutionists are liars who seek to dupe careless Christians and lead them away from the Faith, not without some degree of success in individual cases.

You bemoan yourself, GloriaPatri, that much of the western world today hardly believes what it once did, that it kills its children; in brief, that it neither loves God nor neighbor; yet you fail to see this is what pagan evolutionism has produced in Christian society. Evolution degrades man, denies his divine origin and corrupts morality. Pagan secularism and its child killing barbarism, Communism and its "scientific atheism" lie, eugenics and much else beside arose not at all coincidentally after evolutionary falsehoods were broadly accepted. This theory was designed in hell solely for the purpose of robbing God of His glory in creating man supernaturally. God is our Father, not the monkey.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Kaesekopf on June 10, 2018, 01:28:48 AM
St mussolini, pray for us!

Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Xavier on June 10, 2018, 04:01:15 AM
Was going to post this in the devotional thread, but hope no one has an objection to it being posted here. Come back, GloriaPatri, Jesus is calling you back to His Church; give up this "platonic realism" foolishness and become again a Catholic Christian. Plato does not love you, he is dead. The Heart of Jesus, burning with love for you in the Eucharist, is waiting for you. Read especially 5.

"THAT THE HEART OF JESUS INVITES ALL, EVEN SINNERS

1. The voice of Jesus.-----Come to Me, all ye that labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you. 

He that is just, let him come, that he may be made still more just: he that is lukewarm, let him come, that he may become fervent: he that is a sinner, let him come, that he may be cleansed and made holy. 

Alas for human frailty! Where is the man, that has not sinned? For, whosoever shall say, that he has no sin, deceives himself, and the truth is not in him. 

2. My Child, if thou feelest thyself burdened with sins, or troubled with defects, hasten to My Heart: here shalt thou be made free; here thou shalt breathe again. 

Let not the greatness of thy sins hinder thee, nor the grandeur of My Majesty: I came not to call the just to repentance, but sinners. 

The greater the miseries to which thou art subject, the greater the pity I feel for thee: and the 
more thou art ill, the greater need thou hast of a physician. 

I am not astonished at thy infirmities; for I know thy frame and thy heart. That thou didst not fall into greater evils, thou owest chiefly to My grace. 

But at this I wonder, that, when I present Myself to heal thee, thou art unwilling to be healed; or, if thou art willing, thou seemest to doubt My goodness. 

Ah! My Child, do not offer this most bitter insult to My Heart. For My Heart loves to forgive, and does not grow weary with pardoning. 

Behold, with what kindness I treat truly repentant sinners, so that I have even been called the friend of sinners. 

3. Where is the heart, that loves as My Heart? No man has a greater love, than that he lay down his life for his friends; but I, the Son of God, have a greater one than this, for I laid down My life for My enemies. 

Who ever loved Me first? Or who ever bestowed his affections upon Me, who did not first experience the effects of My love? 

4. Since many lose their innocence, before they understand clearly what innocence is, or how great its price, it is a great glory of My Heart, to triumph also over their hearts; and of sinners to make 
them Saints. 

O didst thou but know the charity of My Heart, thou mightst then be able to understand, how dearly It loves faithful souls, and how sweetly It invites sinners. 

Who is suffering, and My Heart is not suffering with him? Who sins, and My Heart is not thereby affected? Who is ill, and My Heart does not afford a remedy? Who is unhappy, and My Heart does not feel it? Who, in fine, is there in the world, to whom My Heart does no good? 

5. I am a good Father; and My children, begotten on the Cross, I embrace with the love of My Heart-----which remains open for them, that, at all times, they may have a place of refuge, nor this a common one, but the very centre of My affections. 

Whilst they sleep, My Heart is awake to watch over them; whilst they are watching, It is occupied with their preservation. 

So great is the love wherewith My Heart is inflamed for them, that I love and cherish each, as if he were My only one. 

And if some one, misled by the enemy, wanders away, My Heart wails over him, as over the death of an only-born. I pursue him with My love, I invite, I press, I promise. But if he be unwilling to hearken to Me, I have patience, I stand at the door of his heart, and knock again and again. 

If, at last, he resolves to return to Me; I fly to meet him, I press him to My bosom, whilst My Heart leaps for joy; because I see the child, whom I had bewailed as dead, alive and safely restored to Me.
 
In My joy, I call together all Heaven, that they may congratulate Me, and exult with Me. 

6. If, therefore, thou desirest to delight My Heart, to gladden Heaven, and to refresh thy soul, be converted to Me with thy whole heart. 

It matters not how much, or how little, thou mayst have sinned, come to My Heart, and thou shalt find a cure for all thy ills. 

Trust in Me, My Child, and fear nothing: I call thee, not to upbraid thee with thy faults; but that I may wash them away. 

Come, Child come: I await thee, with open arms, and a burning Heart. 

7. The voice of the Disciple.-----Behold, most sweet Jesus, behold, I come, aroused and reassured by 
the exceeding goodness of Thy Heart. Coming, I beseech and exclaim: Kindly receive Thy prodigal child, returning from a far-off country, squalid with sin, filled with misery. 

I am not worthy to be called Thy child, since I left Thee in a manner so unbecoming, dishonored Thee so shamefully, and grieved Thee so much. 

I have sinned against Heaven and before Thee: guilty as I am, I dare not now throw myself into Thy arms: behold, I prostrate myself in the dust before Thy feet, appealing to Thy paternal Heart, imploring pardon. 

Lo, Thou didst recall me when I fled away: Thou didst seek me, when I was lost: Thou didst bear with me, when I was abusing Thy goodness: with wonderful mildness Thou didst induce me to return: when, at last, I come in this pitiful state, Thou dost not only receive me, but, O goodness! 
Thou dost even embrace me! O Jesus! O never was there such a father! 

Let all the Angels and Saints be glad, and rejoice with me: let them praise and extol Thy mercy forever! 

Behold, now I am Thine for evermore: ever faithful I will love Thee, O Lord, and, through love for Thee, I will comply with all Thy wishes."
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Heinrich on June 11, 2018, 02:09:43 PM
Xavier, when are you entering the FSSP seminary? Please do.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Kaesekopf on June 11, 2018, 04:35:48 PM
I don't think private revelation stuff belongs in a natural sciences subforum, to be honest.

Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: jovan66102 on June 11, 2018, 09:54:15 PM
Quote from: Kaesekopf on June 11, 2018, 04:35:48 PM
I don't think private revelation stuff belongs in a natural sciences subforum, to be honest.

Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

Especially a private revelation of which the CDF said 'in any future reprint of the volumes, each should, right from its first page, clearly state that the 'visions' and 'dictations' referred to in it cannot be held to be of supernatural origin but must be considered simply as literary forms used by the author to narrate in her own way the life of Jesus.'

Italian original:

http://www.lettereadioealluomo.com/Documenti_Valtorta.htm#24 (http://www.lettereadioealluomo.com/Documenti_Valtorta.htm#24)
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Gardener on June 12, 2018, 09:04:55 AM
I'm not a believer in evolution. I've gone through public and private school (k-8, 11-12 public; 9-10 private) and several college level courses. Public pushed evolution whilst the private school did not. College level was focused on the systems themselves and never tried to push one way or another. It was College Anatomy and then Physiology which assisted in kicking my butt away from my resultant post-Army agnosticism. Learning those systems, seeing the irreducible complexity, seeing the amount of necessary interactions within said systems and outside of them to do anything productive, I lost all lack of care towards our Creator and began pursuing Him (granted, amidst many other causes -- the realities of A&P were not alone in this). My Anatomy professor, upon bringing this up with him, admitted he was not an evolutionist either, but a creationist and for the same reasons.

All in all, I find evolution necessitates a sort of faith as much, or more, than creationism.

That being said, I do not find the Valtorta dialogues to be very convincing. The language is stilted and saccharine. It's very romantic, and I'd bet that if one wished to approach it without consideration of the supposed source (Christ), that even a creationist who had a bit of rhetorical ability and knowledge of evolutionary claims could rip it to shreds without effort. The same cannot be said of the words of Christ in Scripture -- His logic is amazingly simple in its complexity/complex in its simplicity, and yet accessible to many stations of learning. He always anticipates the corner and shifts the enemy into it rather than Himself. I don't see that here.

Reading some more of Valtorta's stuff online, I find the interactions just... weird. Very unbelievable, imo. While I do believe Christ had jovial interactions with the Apostles, and had very bland moments, sad moments, etc., I don't believe He came off as one might in a fantasy. And that's what I see in there: a fantastical, day-dream like interaction better suited for a romantic comedy than the Word Incarnate. Perhaps I'm being harsh. I dunno.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: John Lamb on June 21, 2018, 03:39:33 PM
When the rich man in hell asks Christ to warn his relatives of the fate that awaits them, He says that if they wouldn't believe the writings of Moses then they wouldn't believe any sort of miracle, even raising someone from the dead.
That's why there is no need for a private revelation condemning evolution: public revelation already condemns it.
Why would God bother speaking to people who show such contempt for the scriptures? If anyone in our age is wondering why God doesn't just tell us whether or not evolution is true, He'll just point to the scriptures and ask why they refused to listen.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Carleendiane on June 21, 2018, 07:01:00 PM
That being said, I do not find the Valtorta dialogues to be very convincing. The language is stilted and saccharine. Gardener

Probably just me but I've never been comfortable with saccharine or romantic. I do not find that very convincing coming from Our Lord. Of course that is in relation to the conversations provided by those who claim dialogue with our Lord. This may be due to my nature. Though, if My Lord spoke to me in any fashion at all:) I would immediately love it. That being said, I more gravitate to fire and brimstone than saccharine.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Xavier on June 27, 2018, 12:10:07 PM
1. Well, let's begin with the Poem, then. St. Padre Pio could read hearts. If Maria Valtorta fooled others by a clever invention, do you think she could have fooled him? "Mrs. Elisa Lucchi, known as Malvina, from Forlì, a year before Padre Pio's death asked him in Confession, "Father, I have heard mention of Maria Valtorta's books. Do you advise me to read them?" Padre Pio replied, "I don't advise you to—I order you to!" http://www.bardstown.com/~brchrys/Padre-Pio-Valtorta.html That's quite the endorsement, isn't it? In fact, it is so elevated and profound that Bp. Williamson doesn't hesitate to say, "if I had a family to defend: [I would read] aloud each night to the children selected chapters from Maria Valtorta's Poem of the Man-God. And when we had reached the end of the five volumes in English, I imagine us starting again from the beginning, and so on, until all the children had left home!" The 5 volumes can be read here https://archive.org/details/Volume1OfThePoemOfTheManGod Can we not at least take a Gamaliel (the book records his conversion too! another issue known only to a few Christians, unlikely for Maria Valtorta to have invented) like neutral wait and see approach for now? Bp. Williamson is not one to make judgments like this on a whim: H.E. has even stated he would be willing to ordain any man to the priesthood who has finished reading this work, because so many and so useful are the doctrines taught therein.

Pope Pius XII said, "Publish this work as it is. there is no need to give an opinion about its origin, whether it be extraordinary or not. Who reads it, will understand." See http://www.valtorta.org/the_poem_of_the_man_god_reviews_and_critiques.asp for other testimonies from learned and holy Catholic priests. Fr. Gabriel Roschini is considered by some to be the greatest Mariologist of the 20th century,professor at "Marianum", Pontifical Faculty of Theology in Rome, famous mariologist, author of 130 books, and advisor to the Holy Office. Father said, "I must candidly admit that the Mariology found in Maria Valtorta's writings, whether published or not, has been for me a real discovery. No other Marian writing, not even the sum total of all the writings I have read and studied were able to give me as clear, as lively, as complete, as luminous, or as fascinating an image, both simple and sublime, of Mary, God's masterpiece."

St. Padre Pio "ordered" it because he knew the doctrine of spiritual victimhood (that both he and saintly Maria Valtorta lived and practiced) the Lord Jesus teaches in the Poem of the Man God is not of human origin. And it defends the doctrine of Our Lady Co-Redemptrix, (taught by traditional Popes, and the name of one of the SSPX's seminaries, in Le Roja, Argentina) and co-redeeming Victim, with the same zeal that saintly Maria de Agreda defended the Immaculate Conception in Mystical City of God. I am sure many traditional Catholics have found that other work a priceless treasure in learning about the holy life of the Mother of God, Her blessed infancy, Her years in the temple, and the other prodigies of Her life. Poem of the Man God is in the same category, that is why St. Padre Pio, Bp. Williamson, Fr. Barrielle (vocations director of SSPX for many years) and Fr. Roschini defend it as they do.

2. Now, back to evolution. We can know from both (1) Papal teaching and from (2) Tradition that traditional Catholics should reject evolution as false. "Pius IX. The year after the publication of Darwin's evolution thesis, the Provincial Council of Cologne issued the following canon, which was approved by Pope Pius IX: "Our first parents were immediately created by God (Gen.2.7). Therefore we declare as quite contrary to Holy Scripture and the Faith the opinion of those who dare to assert that man, in respect of the body, is derived by spontaneous transformation from an imperfect nature, which improved continually until it reached the present human state." [10] http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/creation/cbutel/humanevo.html

Isn't it clear Vatican I has this in mind when it says: "all faithful Christians are forbidden to defend as the legitimate conclusions of science those opinions which are known to be contrary to the doctrine of faith, particularly if they have been condemned by the Church; and furthermore they are absolutely bound to hold them to be errors which wear the deceptive appearance of truth ... This sole true God by His goodness and omnipotent power ... immediately from the beginning of time fashioned each creature, out of nothing, spiritual and corporeal". True, Pope Pius XII allowed reasons both for and against evolution to be presented, but he forbade polygenism, and also said no one should proceed as if revelation had nothing to say about the subject.

Finally, Tradition leaves us in no doubt whatsoever the special creation of Adam took place less than 10,000 years ago - not millions or hundreds of thousands or whatever other fable the evolutionists come up with. Specifically, in 5200 B.C. This is the same year we arrive at by a literal reading of the Genesis chronologies, and is the year given by Fr. Eusebius, Father of Church history. Maria de Agreda reaffirms this date. Jesus Christ wants us to know the truth about His creation of Adam in His Christmas Liturgy! "In the year 5199th from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, in the year 2959th from the flood, in the year 2015th from the birth of Abraham, in the year 1510th from the going forth of the people of Israel out of Egypt under Moses, in the year 1032th from the anointing of David as King, in the 65th week according to the prophecy of Daniel, in the 194th Olympiad, in the 752nd from the foundation of the city of Rome, in the 42nd year of the reign of the Emperor Octavian Augustus, in the 6th age of the world, while the whole earth was at peace, Jesus Christ, Himself Eternal God and Son of the Eternal Father, being pleased to hallow the world by His most gracious coming, having been conceived of the Holy Ghost, and when nine months were passed after His conception, [all kneel down] was born of the Virgin Mary at Bethlehem of Juda made Man, Our Lord Jesus Christ was born according to the flesh." https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/spanning-east-and-west-christmas-liturgy

3. Scientific demonstrations of the falsity of evolution. There are many scientific demonstrations that evolution is a myth. E.g. that the fossil record clearly disproves millions of apes transitioning into thousands or millions of men over millions of years, that science has proven all of us are descended from one man and from one woman, that it has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt the earth is less than 100,000 years old etc; if one is not sure those words came from Our Lord, and wants to defend evolution, kindly explain why the argument, also advanced by Rev. Williams in the link given in the op is wrong. The evolutionists really have nothing: if apes can give birth to different kinds of apes, apes can also give birth to men. That's the alleged "insight" of evolution. But, in fact, species reproduce only after their own kind, and if apes did indeed become men, it would necessarily follow that men could become apes again. So, (I) do the evolutionists really believe one of their children's children one day will become a monkey? No, not even they believe that: and (II) what happens when we mate the most advanced monkeys with the most advanced monkeys - at what point do we get a man and a woman - a supposed baby Adam and a baby Eve, as theistic evolutionists think? Evolution is Planet of the Apes style storytelling.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Kaesekopf on June 28, 2018, 01:20:52 PM
Quote from: Xavier on June 27, 2018, 12:10:07 PM
3. Scientific demonstrations of the falsity of evolution. There are many scientific demonstrations that evolution is a myth. E.g. that the fossil record clearly disproves millions of apes transitioning into thousands or millions of men over millions of years, that science has proven all of us are descended from one man and from one woman, that it has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt the earth is less than 100,000 years old etc; if one is not sure those words came from Our Lord, and wants to defend evolution, kindly explain why the argument, also advanced by Rev. Williams in the link given in the op is wrong. The evolutionists really have nothing: if apes can give birth to different kinds of apes, apes can also give birth to men. That's the alleged "insight" of evolution. But, in fact, species reproduce only after their own kind, and if apes did indeed become men, it would necessarily follow that men could become apes again. So, (I) do the evolutionists really believe one of their children's children one day will become a monkey? No, not even they believe that: and (II) what happens when we mate the most advanced monkeys with the most advanced monkeys - at what point do we get a man and a woman - a supposed baby Adam and a baby Eve, as theistic evolutionists think? Evolution is Planet of the Apes style storytelling.

I don't have a dog in the evolution fight, but this paragraph mindlessly and irresponsibly reduces evolutionary arguments to a caricature. 

No one will take you seriously if you argue like this, and you'll do far, far more harm to 'convincing' anyone about Creation and/or evolution.  You'll also do great damage to religious credibility if you shout "look at this private revelation, it confirms everything I say!  Checkmate, atheists!"  Private revelation is not good for a foundation, it's worthy of belief, not obligatory, and centuries of folks lived on and died without it. 

If you found yourself in a discussion with a pro-evolution person, he'd make you look like a fool. 
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Vetus Ordo on July 11, 2018, 09:24:51 AM
Quote from: Xavier on June 27, 2018, 12:10:07 PM
1. Well, let's begin with the Poem, then. St. Padre Pio could read hearts. If Maria Valtorta fooled others by a clever invention, do you think she could have fooled him?

Yes.

Padre Pio wasn't God.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Lynne on July 11, 2018, 09:52:15 AM
Quote from: Heinrich on June 11, 2018, 02:09:43 PM
Xavier, when are you entering the FSSP seminary? Please do.

He'll do fine in the SSPX seminary, thank you.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Greg on July 14, 2018, 12:47:47 PM
If I was forced to bet on what happened in light of what appears to be fairly firm science, I would reckon that God took two apes and gave them some sort of enlightenment moment, much like the revelation to Moses, Abraham and others.  He seems to like these watershed moments.  The others did not have this.  Call it ensoulment.

Original sin kinda requires this or some act like it.  And Original Sin is the lynchpin.

How in the he'll they travelled to the Americas from wherever they began,  I have absolutely no idea.  Must has been bitchin difficult.

Luckily, I don't have to bet so can have a sleep in my hotel room here in Hong Kong and take my nieces and nephews out to breakfast in Kowloon when I wake up.  I can die not knowing.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: John Lamb on July 14, 2018, 03:23:50 PM
Quote from: Greg on July 14, 2018, 12:47:47 PM
If I was forced to bet on what happened in light of what appears to be fairly firm science, I would reckon that God took two apes and gave them some sort of enlightenment moment, much like the revelation to Moses, Abraham and others.  He seems to like these watershed moments.  The others did not have this.  Call it ensoulment.

That's more or less what Catholic theistic evolutionists tend to believe, but in a very subtle way I think it's an attack upon the dignity of the human body. The dignity of our bodies is partly from the fact that we are descendants of Adam, the first man whom God created. By separating the "development" of the human body from the creation of the human soul like this, by letting the human body "develop" through natural/secondary causes rather than from the direct creation of God, you put our bodies on the level of the beasts. That's exactly the conclusion that atheistic evolutionists draw: we are just hairless apes, so what it is the problem with fornication and sodomy?

There's a lot in scripture on the dignity of the human body. It's why Our Lord's body was treated with such reverence, why the Gospel bothers to trace His ancestral lineage all the way back to Adam, why the Jews had proper burial rites for the body - this may seem obvious to us, but the Gnostic heretics believed that the body was a disgusting prison, and that Our Lord was only pretending to have a body; evolutionism has parallels with Gnosticism in its degradation of the human body.

The problem with theistic evolution is that it is not necessary or convenient. God certainly has the power to create the human body, and all animal bodies, immediately from the dust of the earth ("out of these stones God can raise up children to Abraham"). We believe that on the last day, God will raise up billions of human bodies and reunite them with their souls; if He's going to raise up billions on the last day, what's farfetched about Him raising up two on the sixth day? Instead, if we accept evolution, we have God taking billions of years to do what we know He could do in an instant, not only wasting time but wasting countless poor creatures who are made to live & die in a brutal process of "survival of the fittest" so that the superior animals can gradually be brought out of the inferior - this casts doubt on God's benevolence, the meaning of scripture, original sin and thus the whole of Christian revelation. Theistic evolution makes perfect sense in Hindu theology, because Hindus believe that death & destruction (Shiva) is part of God's essence, and that a war between life & death, creation & destruction is taking place within God (Vishnu vs. Shiva). So it makes sense, in this false Hindu understanding of God, for the creation of the world to take billions of years as this cycle of creation & destruction unfolds itself throughout the ages. But, on the contrary, the Holy Bible is very clear that God is the God of life, not death, that He has "no pleasure in the destruction of the living", that the original creation was a flawless paradise and not a brutal colosseum of war and death. Modern evolutionists got part of their inspiration from the Hindu texts. The Hindus worship death under the aspect of Shiva, and modern atheistic evolutionists worship death because they believe it's eugenic (it kills off the inferior specimens for the sake of the species).

edit: if I were not a Catholic, I would more or less be a Hindu Pantheist. From a purely intellectual perspective, it has a lot more going for it than atheistic materialism, which imagines this world came into being through dumb chance and atomic collisions. It explains why there is a cycle of life & death, and why there is good & evil in the world. Unfortunately, it provides no absolute reason to prefer life to death or evil to good; this is why in reality I despise this Hindu view of the world more than any other. It's just that, if you're not a believer, it's the one that makes the most sense.

From Chesterton's "Father Brown":

"Look here, doctor; you know me pretty well; I think you know I'm not a bigot. You know I know there are all sorts in all religions; good men in bad ones and bad men in good ones. But there's just one little fact I've learned simply as a practical man, an entirely practical point, that I've picked up by experience, like the tricks of an animal or the trade-mark of a good wine. I've scarcely ever met a criminal who philosophized at all, who didn't philosophize along those lines of orientalism and recurrence and reincarnation, and the wheel of destiny and the serpent biting its own tail. I have found merely in practice that there is a curse on the servants of that serpent; on their belly shall they go and the dust shall they eat; and there was never a blackguard or a profligate born who could not talk that sort of spirituality. It may not be like that in its real religious origins; but here in our working world it is the religion of rascals; and I knew it was a rascal who was speaking."
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Vetus Ordo on July 16, 2018, 09:31:50 AM
Quote from: John Lamb on July 14, 2018, 03:23:50 PM
The problem with theistic evolution is that it is not necessary or convenient.

Actually, it was pretty much an intellectual necessity in the face of the triumph of evolutionary science.

It was a do or die question.

Either theistic evolution was more or less adopted as the position of the mainline Christian traditions when it came to the question of origins, or they would have sunk to utter irrelevance.

There is space for debate and questioning on an individual level but an official position had to be adopted and had to conform to evolution. There was no other way.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Jayne on July 16, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
Quote from: John Lamb on July 14, 2018, 03:23:50 PM
Quote from: Greg on July 14, 2018, 12:47:47 PM
If I was forced to bet on what happened in light of what appears to be fairly firm science, I would reckon that God took two apes and gave them some sort of enlightenment moment, much like the revelation to Moses, Abraham and others.  He seems to like these watershed moments.  The others did not have this.  Call it ensoulment.

That's more or less what Catholic theistic evolutionists tend to believe, but in a very subtle way I think it's an attack upon the dignity of the human body. The dignity of our bodies is partly from the fact that we are descendants of Adam, the first man whom God created. By separating the "development" of the human body from the creation of the human soul like this, by letting the human body "develop" through natural/secondary causes rather than from the direct creation of God, you put our bodies on the level of the beasts. That's exactly the conclusion that atheistic evolutionists draw: we are just hairless apes, so what it is the problem with fornication and sodomy?

The approach to theistic evolution described by Greg seems consistent with the classical/scholastic understanding of humans as "rational animals".  We are not "just hairless apes".  We have souls like angels have in bodies like animals have.  Recognizing that we share common physical features with animals, while being significantly different from them, has always been part of Catholic thought.  I see no reason for this idea to suddenly start confusing people about the seriousness of sexual sins.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: LausTibiChriste on July 16, 2018, 11:28:59 AM
Quote from: Greg on July 14, 2018, 12:47:47 PM

Luckily, I don't have to bet so can have a sleep in my hotel room here in Hong Kong and take my nieces and nephews out to breakfast in Kowloon when I wake up.  I can die not knowing.

So they answered you then?
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Greg on July 16, 2018, 01:46:14 PM
In the end yes, and to a fashion.  But whaf coukd have taken 5 mins took 80
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Xavier on July 17, 2018, 06:02:38 AM
Even beside the controversies over evolution that have been dealt with in another thread, I earnestly recommend all Catholic Christians to read the Poem of the Man God, by Saintly Maria Valtorta. If you read piously, devoutly and reverently, your knowledge and love of Our Lord and Our Lady will grow to an extent you never thought possible. In 5 years of reading this work, you will gain more than 50 years of reading so eminent a Mariologist as Fr. Gabriel Roschini, as he himself testified; and yet, works like his are themselves treasures which pious and learned men peruse with the labors of a lifetime in order to attain true knowledge of Jesus and Mary, and of the Cross, and of self. This work is a treasure of treasures God has made known for our godless age, to rekindle love and affection for Him and for His holy Mother in every human heart.

To learn about the holy life of Our Lady, of the grief and sorrow in which St. Joachim and St. Anne long desired the consolation of a Child, of the 3 Years of Her holy infancy She spent in their company, of the 12 years She lived in consecrated life in the Temple, of Her holy espousal to St. Joseph the Just, of the vow of Virginity She had made while yet the Infant Mother, of Her informing St. Joseph of this vow, of chaste St. Joseph accepting wonderfully this vow and letting Most Holy Mary know that he too was committed to a celibate vocation with Her, and of all the wonders of the holy patriarchs and matrons who are the founders of our holy religion right from that happy couple St. Joachim and St. Anne, these are among the best books there are. (1) The Poem of the Man God (2) The Mystical City of God (3) The Protoevangelium of Jacob/James. (4) The infancy Gospel of St. Matthew. Remember, Pope Pius XII gave the order for its publication, asking it to be published as it is. Let me cite a brief excerpt, from Book 1, of the Pre-Gospel, before the Life of Our Lord, where the Lord praises His Mother, where She Herself speaks of Her childhood, and where St. Joseph meets and speaks to Her after being chosen by the High Priest for espousal to this consecrated Virgin.

1. Jesus says, "Wisdom had inspired My grandparents how to live in a way which was agreeable to God, from their youth to their death, and like a tent protecting from the fury of the elements, Wisdom had protected them from the danger of sin. The sacred fear of God is the root of the tree of wisdom, that thrusts its branches far and wide to reach with its top tranquil love in its peace, peaceful love in its security, secure love in its faithfulness, faithful love in its intensity: the total, generous, effective love of saints.

"Who loves her, loves life and will inherit Life" says Ecclesiasticus. This sentence is linked with Mine: "Who loses his life for My sake, will save it."
Because we are not referring to the poor life of this world, but to the eternal life, not to the joys of one hour, but to the immortal ones.

Joachim and Anne loved Wisdom thus. And Wisdom was with them in their trials.

How many trials they experienced, whilst you, men, do not want to have to suffer and cry, simply because you think that you are not completely wicked! How many trials these two just people suffered, and they deserved to have Mary as their daughter! Political persecutions had driven them out of the land of David, and made them excessively poor. They had felt sadness in seeing their years fading through without a flower that would say to them: "I shall be your continuation." And afterwards, the anxiety of having a daughter in their old age when they were certain they would never see Her grow into a woman. And then the obligation of tearing Her from their hearts to offer Her on the altar of God. And again: their life became an even more painful silence, now that they were accustomed to the chirping of their little dove, to the noise of Her little steps, to the smiles and kisses of their creature, having to wait for the hour of God, their only company being the memories of the past. And much more... Diseases, calamities of inclement weather, the arrogance of mighty ones of the earth... so many blows of battering rams on the weak castle of their modest possessions. And it is not enough: the pain for their far away creature, who was going to be left lonely and poor and, notwithstanding their cares and sacrifices, would get only the remains of Her father's property. And how will She find such remains, since they will be left uncultivated for many years, awaiting Her return? Fears, trials, temptations. And yet, loyalty to God forever! ...

What light is left to Joachim, an invalid, and to his sorrowful wife, in the long and silent nights of two old people who feel they are about to die? Only the little dresses, the first pair of little sandals, the simple toys of their little daughter, now far away, and memories of Her, memories... And peace when they say: "We are suffering, but we have done our duty of love towards God."

And then they were overcome by a supernatural joy shining with a celestial light, a joy unknown to the children of the world, a joy that does not fade away when heavy eyelashes close on two dying eyes: on the contrary, it shines brighter in the last hour, illuminating the truth that had been hidden within them throughout their lives. Like a butterfly in its cocoon, the truth in them gave faint indications of its presence, just soft flashes, whereas now it opens its wings to the sun and shows its beautiful decorations. And their lives passed away in the certainty of a happy future for themselves and their descendants, their trembling lips murmuring words of praise to God.

Such was the death of My grandparents. Such as their holy lives deserved. Because of their holiness, they deserved to be the first guardians of the Virgin Beloved by God, and only when a greater Sun showed itself at the end of their days, they realized the grace God had granted them."...

2. And in the narration of St. Joseph's Wedding to Our Lady, "Zacharias goes out escorting the Pontiff. Anna congratulates Joseph and then she goes out, too.

The betrothed are now facing each other. Mary, full of blushes, is standing with Her head bowed. Joseph, who is also red in the face, looks at Her and tries to find the first words to be said. He eventually finds them and a bright smile lights up his eyes. He says: « I welcome you, Mary. I saw You when You were a little baby, only a few days old... I was a friend of Your father's and I have a nephew, the son of my brother Alphaeus [this is St. Jacob/James, the Lord's cousin brother we read of in the Gospel], who was a great friend of Your mother. He was her little friend, because he is only eighteen years old, and when You were not yet born, he was only a little boy and he cheered up Your sad mother who loved him so much. You do not know us because You were only a little girl when You came here. But everyone in Nazareth loves You and they all think and speak of Joachim's little Mary, Whose birth was a miracle of the Lord, Who made the barren old lady blossom wonderfully... And I remember the evening You were born... We all remember it because of the prodigy of a heavy rain that saved the country and of a violent storm during which the thunderbolts did not damage even a stem of heather and it ended with such a large and beautiful rainbow that the like has never been seen again.

And then... who does not remember Joachim's happiness? He dandled You showing You to his neighbours... As if You were a flower that had descended from Heaven, he admired You and wanted everyone to admire You, a happy old father who died talking about his Mary, Who was so beautiful and good and Whose words were so full of wisdom end grace... He was quite right in admiring You and in saying that there is no other woman lovelier than You are! And Your mother? She filled Your house and the neighbourhood with her songs and she sang like a skylark in springtime
when she was carrying You, and afterwards when she held You in her arms.

I made a cradle for You. A tiny little cradle, with roses carved all over it, because Your mother wanted it like that. Perhaps it is still in the house... I am old, Mary. When You were born I was beginning to work. I was already working... I would never have believed that I was going to have You as a spouse! Perhaps Your parents would have died a happier death if they had known, because they were my friends. I buried Your father, mourning over his death with a sincere heart, because he was a good teacher to me.»

Mary raises Her face, little by little, taking heart, as She hears Joseph speak to Her thus, and when he mentions the cradle She smiles gently and when Joseph speaks of Her father, She holds out Her hand to him and says: « Thank you, Joseph. » A very timid and gentle « thank you.»" A book brimming with unction on every page, to those who read with love of God, full of the deepest insights, that so profoundly teaches the doctrine of spiritual victimhood that Maria Valtorta lived. From the lips of the Lord, you will learn what love of the Cross really means, if you read this profound work.

That's why St. Pio said, "I don't advise you to—I order you to [read the work]!" Happy are those who follow that counsel. And as for you, Vetus, the day your works exceed that of St. Pio, stigmatist Priest for 50 years, I will consider your counsel on par with his. Till then, I intend to obey what he directed and counsel you to do the same.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Jayne on July 17, 2018, 11:58:55 AM
Quote from: Xavier on July 17, 2018, 06:02:38 AM
Even beside the controversies over evolution that have been dealt with in another thread, I earnestly recommend all Catholic Christians to read the Poem of the Man God, by Saintly Maria Valtorta.

I have misgivings about this work, based on its history.  Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia article:

QuoteThe Poem of the Man-God (Italian title: Il Poema dell'Uomo-Dio) is a multi volume book of about five thousand pages on the life of Jesus Christ written by Maria Valtorta. The current editions of the book bear the title: The Gospel As Revealed to Me.

The book was first published in Italian in 1956 and has since been translated into 10 languages and is available worldwide. It is based on the over 15,000 handwritten pages produced by Maria Valtorta between 1943 and 1947. During these years she reported visions of Jesus and Mary and claimed personal conversations with and dictations from Jesus.[1] Her notebooks (published separately) include close to 700 detailed episodes in the life of Jesus, as an extension of the gospels.

Valtorta's handwritten episodes (which had no chronological order) were typed into separate pages by her priest and reassembled as a book.[2] The first copy of the book was presented to Pope Pius XII, and the three Servite priests who attended the 1948 papal audience stated that he gave his verbal approval to "publish this work as is; he who reads will understand."[2] However, the Holy Office forbade publication and, when in spite of that prohibition publication followed, placed the book on the Index of Forbidden Books.[3] L'Osservatore Romano called it, "A Badly Fictionalized Life of Jesus".

In 1992, at the request of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Dionigi Tettamanzi asked the publisher to ensure that "in any future reprint of the volumes, each should, right from its first page, clearly state that the 'visions' and 'dictations' referred to in it cannot be held to be of supernatural origin but must be considered simply as literary forms used by the author to narrate in her own way the life of Jesus".[4] The publisher maintained that this was an implicit declaration that the work was free of doctrinal or moral error.[5]
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Michael Wilson on July 17, 2018, 01:42:24 PM
Greg stated:
QuoteIf I was forced to bet on what happened in light of what appears to be fairly firm science, I would reckon that God took two apes and gave them some sort of enlightenment moment, much like the revelation to Moses, Abraham and others.  He seems to like these watershed moments.  The others did not have this.  Call it ensoulment.
This opinion cannot be reconciled with Sacred Scripture: God formed Adam's body from the slime of the Earth and then breathed a soul into it. Therefore, not from a pre-existing organism.  The formation of Eve from the rib of Adam, means that the case for Eve coming from another pre-existing organism is even less likely than Adam. Unless of course we re-interpret Genesis to the point that the creation narrative is reduced to a fairy tale.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Xavier on July 18, 2018, 07:37:33 AM
Hello, Jayne, do you remember Saintly Maria de Agreda's work was opposed for a long time before it was finally approved fully? This is very common in Church history, but at once the work had many distinguished defenders, against the few opponents, and it ultimately prevailed. While full approval has not come yet, we have the testimony of those from Pope Pius XII to Bp. Williamson, from St. Padre Pio to Fr. Bareille, that the work is extremely edifying and profitable to read. If someone disagrees, I would encourage them to read Mystical City of God by Maria de Agreda for the life of Our Blessed Mother, the knowledge of which is so necessary for our times, and for the Age of Mary to come. For our purposes, Mary of Agreda confirms there that creation of Adam took place roughly 7200 years ago, the figure which we also arrive at by a literal reading of the genealogies from Adam to Noah, from Noah to Abraham, from Abraham to David, and from David to Our Lord Jesus Christ, recorded in Sacred Scripture, in the Latin Vulgate (some other manuscripts give a wrong number, hence Ussher's wrong calculation). In fact, numberless Saints and mystics, even beside the holy Prophet Moses - who worked great miracles, saw God almost face to face, or as close to that as it is possible on this earth, and led the people of Israel out gloriously from Egypt - who is now on trial, have confirmed how beautiful the terrestrial paradise was, how it was the joy and delight of the Angels, and the home of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Adam is buried deep below Calvary, as Saints have seen in visions, and the skull will be excavated at the proper time in the final nail of the coffin of evolution. Happy will we be if we have fought against evolution before then! These are the Four Main Events in Creation and salvation History relating to this matter, that we should believe imo strongly, and if possible defend when they are questioned, (1) The Special Creation of Adam and Eve about 7200 years ago (2) The disastrous fall of Adam and Eve shortly thereafter which had terrible and tremendous consequences for the Earth and all creation (3) The global flood of Noah some 5000 years ago, (4) Finally, the Exodus of Israel under the Prophet Moses some 3500 years ago, after which the Prophet by the inspiration of God wrote the history of creation.

I respectfully disagree with Christians who in good faith hold a differing opinion about evolution, but I would only ask them to be cautious about embracing unproved evolutionary conjectures. If you see the Theotokos article I gave you, it cites a canon from Pope Pius IX and argues evolution is not found in the deposit of Faith and can never be Catholic doctrine. It is perfectly legitimate Catholic freedom to argue that canon will be infallibly approved one day in an Ecumenical Council and that the doctrine of creation already found in the depositum fidei of Scripture and the Fathers will be dogmatically taught by the Magisterium one day. Would you disagree, Jayne?

Now, regarding the Poem, some of the people in Rome (and unfortunately some even on this forum) even believe the Fatima Seers were delusional. You're not allowed to do that, because Fatima is Constat De Supernaturalitate, but they do, because in the main they are naturalistic modernists who hardly believe in the supernatural. And they try to confuse people about where investigations are still ongoing, but many learned and pious women as well as men in office in the Church, have warmly recommended reading the Poem. Here are some testimonies about the Poem from earlier down to recent times, please see also http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/2007/06/in-defense-of-the-poem-of-the-man-god/ for more.

1. "Archbishop Alfonso Carinci, Secretary of the Congregation of the Sacred Rites (1946):
" There is nothing therein which is contrary to the Gospel. Rather, this work, a good complement to the Gospel, contributes towards a better understanding of its meaning."

2. Fr. Dreyfus, of the French Biblical and Archeological School, Jerusalem (1986)
"I was greatly impressed on finding in Maria Valtorta's work the names of at least six or seven towns, which are absent from the Old and New Testaments. These names are known but to a few specialists, and through non-biblical sources... [...] Now, how could she have known these names, if not through the revelations she claims that she had?"

3. John Haffert, author, (1995)
"I have the 10 volumes of The Poem of the Men-God in Italian and French. It is the most wonderful work I have ever read and I consider it a blessing of God. I'm in my seventies. And in my entire life, among all the books I've read, The Poem of the Man-God is the one that has done me the most good in my spiritual life."

4. Msgr. Ugo Lattanzi, dean of the Faculty of Theology of the Lateran Pontifical University, adviser to the Holy Office (1951)
"The author could not have written such an abundant amount of material without being under the influence of a supernatural power."

5. Jean Aulagnier, specialist in ancient calendars, author of a book on Valtorta's work (1995)
"Having established a scientific chronolgy of all events and occurrences in Maria Valtorta's work, I cannot but say it remains unexplainable otherwise than by divine intervention."

6. Fr, Marco Giraudo, 0.P. Commissioner of the Holy Office in 1961, to Fr, Berti, representing the Order of the Servants of Mary, and made responsible for her writings by Maria Vallorta herself (1961)
"You have our complete approval to continue the publication of this second edition of Valtorta's Poem of the Man-God"

7. Sister Monica Foltier, Cincinnati, Ohio (1987)
"lt is fantastic. I could hardly let it out of my hands. After I finished it once, I immediately began to read it again. It is going to have a terrific impact on those who wish to live a more religious life."
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: John Lamb on July 18, 2018, 08:01:02 AM
Quote from: Vetus Ordo on July 16, 2018, 09:31:50 AM
Quote from: John Lamb on July 14, 2018, 03:23:50 PM
The problem with theistic evolution is that it is not necessary or convenient.

Actually, it was pretty much an intellectual necessity in the face of the triumph of evolutionary science.

It was a do or die question.

Either theistic evolution was more or less adopted as the position of the mainline Christian traditions when it came to the question of origins, or they would have sunk to utter irrelevance.

There is space for debate and questioning on an individual level but an official position had to be adopted and had to conform to evolution. There was no other way.

The triumph of evolutionary science is really the triumph of evolutionary propaganda. The Church did not have to succumb to the propaganda. It could have insisted that the science has not been established (which is the truth), and would be in a much more favourable position intellectually today and in the coming years. Of course, it would have been lambasted for not yielding to the propaganda of the secularist establishment, but that is inevitable anyway.

But because the Church gave credence to the propaganda it now has to go through the process of disentangling itself from evolutionary thought, as the secularist world order gradually collapses and with it the evolutionary dogma.

Quote from: Jayne on July 16, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
The approach to theistic evolution described by Greg seems consistent with the classical/scholastic understanding of humans as "rational animals".  We are not "just hairless apes".  We have souls like angels have in bodies like animals have.  Recognizing that we share common physical features with animals, while being significantly different from them, has always been part of Catholic thought.  I see no reason for this idea to suddenly start confusing people about the seriousness of sexual sins.

The problem is that it's difficult to see in the smooth transition from one primate to the next primate where "reason" magically comes in. The infusion of a rational soul by God? Most evolutionists do see the need for that so they assume that man is not any more a "rational animal" than a chimpazee, just one with a higher-functioning brain. Seeing as we are not "rational animals", there is no shame in fornicating like the other beasts; in fact, as Freud argues, it would be more damaging to us to not fornicate because that is "sexual repression". Can there be any denying that this is how evolutionists tend to think?
Also, I don't think it agrees with the classical/scholastic understanding, because the classical/scholastic understanding is that the soul is the substantial form of the human body, not something stuffed into the body at some arbitrary point in its evolutionary line. The human body was made to live in union with the human soul; it did not have a kind of pre-existence as a spirit-less primate body.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Greg on July 18, 2018, 08:06:50 AM
Quote from: Michael Wilson on July 17, 2018, 01:42:24 PM
Greg stated:
QuoteIf I was forced to bet on what happened in light of what appears to be fairly firm science, I would reckon that God took two apes and gave them some sort of enlightenment moment, much like the revelation to Moses, Abraham and others.  He seems to like these watershed moments.  The others did not have this.  Call it ensoulment.
This opinion cannot be reconciled with Sacred Scripture: God formed Adam's body from the slime of the Earth and then breathed a soul into it. Therefore, not from a pre-existing organism.  The formation of Eve from the rib of Adam, means that the case for Eve coming from another pre-existing organism is even less likely than Adam. Unless of course we re-interpret Genesis to the point that the creation narrative is reduced to a fairy tale.

I agree, but a straight forward reading of scripture is hardly par for the course with the Church.

Straightforwardly the earth does not orbit the sun.

But, in reality, it does orbit the Sun.

Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Frank on July 18, 2018, 08:41:23 AM
Quote from: Greg on July 18, 2018, 08:06:50 AM
Quote from: Michael Wilson on July 17, 2018, 01:42:24 PM
Greg stated:
QuoteIf I was forced to bet on what happened in light of what appears to be fairly firm science, I would reckon that God took two apes and gave them some sort of enlightenment moment, much like the revelation to Moses, Abraham and others.  He seems to like these watershed moments.  The others did not have this.  Call it ensoulment.
This opinion cannot be reconciled with Sacred Scripture: God formed Adam's body from the slime of the Earth and then breathed a soul into it. Therefore, not from a pre-existing organism.  The formation of Eve from the rib of Adam, means that the case for Eve coming from another pre-existing organism is even less likely than Adam. Unless of course we re-interpret Genesis to the point that the creation narrative is reduced to a fairy tale.

I agree, but a straight forward reading of scripture is hardly par for the course with the Church.

Straightforwardly the earth does not orbit the sun.

But, in reality, it does orbit the Sun.

True. But I prefer to stick to the idea that the earth does not orbit the sun until we have incontrovertible proof to the contrary - which we now have of course.

We are never likely to get incontrovertible proof in the case of Adam and Eve so I will stick to the literal meaning. Indeed, it is possible that we could get incontrovertible scientific proof - as incontrovertible as the earth orbiting the sun - that evolution between species is impossible. 

Maybe the missing link is missing coz there ain't one. :)
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Michael Wilson on July 18, 2018, 08:47:44 AM
Greg stated:
QuoteI agree, but a straight forward reading of scripture is hardly par for the course with the Church.
The Church teaches that in interpreting S.S. The literal meaning should generally be followed, unless there is sufficient reason to depart from this meaning; an example would be Our Lord telling His disciples that they must take up their cross and follow Him; or that we have to hate the members of our family in order to be His disciples. What are the compelling reasons to depart from the Genesis narrative? Macro evolution is impossible. Nature has no power to produce a spiritual, rational and immortal soul.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Jayne on July 18, 2018, 10:06:02 AM
Quote from: Xavier on July 18, 2018, 07:37:33 AM
I respectfully disagree with Christians who in good faith hold a differing opinion about evolution, but I would only ask them to be cautious about embracing unproved evolutionary conjectures. If you see the Theotokos article I gave you, it cites a canon from Pope Pius IX and argues evolution is not found in the deposit of Faith and can never be Catholic doctrine. It is perfectly legitimate Catholic freedom to argue that canon will be infallibly approved one day in an Ecumenical Council and that the doctrine of creation already found in the depositum fidei of Scripture and the Fathers will be dogmatically taught by the Magisterium one day. Would you disagree, Jayne?

It is legitimate to argue for that position while recognizing it as not binding on other Catholic.

Quote from: Xavier on July 18, 2018, 07:37:33 AM
Now, regarding the Poem, some of the people in Rome (and unfortunately some even on this forum) even believe the Fatima Seers were delusional. You're not allowed to do that, because Fatima is Constat De Supernaturalitate, but they do, because in the main they are naturalistic modernists who hardly believe in the supernatural. And they try to confuse people about where investigations are still ongoing, but many learned and pious women as well as men in office in the Church, have warmly recommended reading the Poem. Here are some testimonies about the Poem from earlier down to recent times, please see also http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/2007/06/in-defense-of-the-poem-of-the-man-god/ for more.

1. "Archbishop Alfonso Carinci, Secretary of the Congregation of the Sacred Rites (1946):
" There is nothing therein which is contrary to the Gospel. Rather, this work, a good complement to the Gospel, contributes towards a better understanding of its meaning."

2. Fr. Dreyfus, of the French Biblical and Archeological School, Jerusalem (1986)
"I was greatly impressed on finding in Maria Valtorta's work the names of at least six or seven towns, which are absent from the Old and New Testaments. These names are known but to a few specialists, and through non-biblical sources... [...] Now, how could she have known these names, if not through the revelations she claims that she had?"

3. John Haffert, author, (1995)
"I have the 10 volumes of The Poem of the Men-God in Italian and French. It is the most wonderful work I have ever read and I consider it a blessing of God. I'm in my seventies. And in my entire life, among all the books I've read, The Poem of the Man-God is the one that has done me the most good in my spiritual life."

4. Msgr. Ugo Lattanzi, dean of the Faculty of Theology of the Lateran Pontifical University, adviser to the Holy Office (1951)
"The author could not have written such an abundant amount of material without being under the influence of a supernatural power."

5. Jean Aulagnier, specialist in ancient calendars, author of a book on Valtorta's work (1995)
"Having established a scientific chronolgy of all events and occurrences in Maria Valtorta's work, I cannot but say it remains unexplainable otherwise than by divine intervention."

6. Fr, Marco Giraudo, 0.P. Commissioner of the Holy Office in 1961, to Fr, Berti, representing the Order of the Servants of Mary, and made responsible for her writings by Maria Vallorta herself (1961)
"You have our complete approval to continue the publication of this second edition of Valtorta's Poem of the Man-God"

7. Sister Monica Foltier, Cincinnati, Ohio (1987)
"lt is fantastic. I could hardly let it out of my hands. After I finished it once, I immediately began to read it again. It is going to have a terrific impact on those who wish to live a more religious life."

I agree with your comments about the influence of naturalism.  That, however, has little to do with my misgivings. I am not comfortable reading something placed on the Index of Forbidden Books.  I have not heard of any of these people you quote above.  It is possible to find people with official sounding titles saying just about anything.  Their recommendations do not overcome my misgivings.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Kaesekopf on July 18, 2018, 10:19:54 AM
Xavier, stop trying to canonize agreda by writing "Saintly" (sic)

Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Jayne on July 18, 2018, 10:35:15 AM
Quote from: John Lamb on July 18, 2018, 08:01:02 AM
Quote from: Jayne on July 16, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
The approach to theistic evolution described by Greg seems consistent with the classical/scholastic understanding of humans as "rational animals".  We are not "just hairless apes".  We have souls like angels have in bodies like animals have.  Recognizing that we share common physical features with animals, while being significantly different from them, has always been part of Catholic thought.  I see no reason for this idea to suddenly start confusing people about the seriousness of sexual sins.

The problem is that it's difficult to see in the smooth transition from one primate to the next primate where "reason" magically comes in. The infusion of a rational soul by God? Most evolutionists do see the need for that so they assume that man is not any more a "rational animal" than a chimpazee, just one with a higher-functioning brain. Seeing as we are not "rational animals", there is no shame in fornicating like the other beasts; in fact, as Freud argues, it would be more damaging to us to not fornicate because that is "sexual repression". Can there be any denying that this is how evolutionists tend to think?

That very well may be the way that secular evolutionists think, but the whole point of theistic evolution is that it recognizes God as Creator.  God uses the process of evolution as a tool to create the physical form He wishes for humans  and then infuses the soul.  There is no reason to think that theistic evolutionists would reject the traditional concept of man as a rational animal or embrace a Freudian understanding of sex.

You are rejecting theistic evolution on the grounds that its proponents will make the same errors that secular evolutionists do, but this is highly unlikely because theistic evolution is significantly different.

Quote from: John Lamb on July 18, 2018, 08:01:02 AM
Also, I don't think it agrees with the classical/scholastic understanding, because the classical/scholastic understanding is that the soul is the substantial form of the human body, not something stuffed into the body at some arbitrary point in its evolutionary line. The human body was made to live in union with the human soul; it did not have a kind of pre-existence as a spirit-less primate body.

As I understand the view of theistic evolution, it also posits that the human body was made to live in union with the human soul.  God created this human body over time rather than in an instant, exercising His Providence through the process of evolution.  Man was not ensouled at "some arbitrary point" but when the physical aspect matched the soul intended for it.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Greg on July 18, 2018, 10:54:49 AM
Quote from: Michael Wilson on July 18, 2018, 08:47:44 AM
Greg stated:
QuoteI agree, but a straight forward reading of scripture is hardly par for the course with the Church.
The Church teaches that in interpreting S.S. The literal meaning should generally be followed, unless there is sufficient reason to depart from this meaning; an example would be Our Lord telling His disciples that they must take up their cross and follow Him; or that we have to hate the members of our family in order to be His disciples. What are the compelling reasons to depart from the Genesis narrative? Macro evolution is impossible. Nature has no power to produce a spiritual, rational and immortal soul.

Yet if God makes men from slime then why make them similar biologically very similar to apes?

Why tempt man to think they must have a common ancestor?  Seems slight agent provacteur to me.  Like he is throwing chairs for me to fall over.

He certainly didn't pull out all the stops to make men very different.  If the closest beast was a lion, then evolution would be no accepted by a vast majority.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Michael Wilson on July 18, 2018, 02:19:22 PM
But why not make him similar to apes? Man in his body is an animal.


Man shares genetic similarities with many animals: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25335-Percentage-of-genetic-similarity-between-humans-and-animals
QuoteIt is very difficult to find reliable data comparing the human genome to animal genome. The principal reason is that few animals have had their full genome sequenced. Even those that have cannot be easily compared in terms of percentages because the genomic length and chromosomal division can vary greatly from one species to another.

Scouring the Web, here is what I have found so far.

- Genome-wide variation from one human being to another can be up to 0.5% (99.5% similarity)

- Chimpanzees are 96% to 98% similar to humans, depending on how it is calculated. (source)

- Cats have 90% of homologous genes with humans, 82% with dogs, 80% with cows, 79% with chimpanzees, 69% with rats and 67% with mice. (source)

- Cows (Bos taurus) are 80% genetically similar to humans (source)

- 75% of mouse genes have equivalents in humans (source), 90% of the mouse genome could be lined up with a region on the human genome (source) 99% of mouse genes turn out to have analogues in humans (source)

- The fruit fly (Drosophila) shares about 60% of its DNA with humans (source).

- About 60% of chicken genes correspond to a similar human gene. (source)


The number of genes across a few tested species can be compared on HomoloGene.
So if you eliminate the temptation of the Apes, you would still have the temptation of the Cows (80%); Cats (90%); Dogs (80 %); So why are there no scientist advocating our descent from Mice (75%)?  which are much higher than Chimpanzees (69 %).
Are they really "being tempted by God" or are they trying to avoid the only real solution? (God)
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: GloriaPatri on July 18, 2018, 02:39:23 PM
Quote from: Michael Wilson on July 18, 2018, 02:19:22 PM
But why not make him similar to apes? Man in his body is an animal.


Man shares genetic similarities with many animals: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25335-Percentage-of-genetic-similarity-between-humans-and-animals
QuoteIt is very difficult to find reliable data comparing the human genome to animal genome. The principal reason is that few animals have had their full genome sequenced. Even those that have cannot be easily compared in terms of percentages because the genomic length and chromosomal division can vary greatly from one species to another.

Scouring the Web, here is what I have found so far.

- Genome-wide variation from one human being to another can be up to 0.5% (99.5% similarity)

- Chimpanzees are 96% to 98% similar to humans, depending on how it is calculated. (source)

- Cats have 90% of homologous genes with humans, 82% with dogs, 80% with cows, 79% with chimpanzees, 69% with rats and 67% with mice. (source)

- Cows (Bos taurus) are 80% genetically similar to humans (source)

- 75% of mouse genes have equivalents in humans (source), 90% of the mouse genome could be lined up with a region on the human genome (source) 99% of mouse genes turn out to have analogues in humans (source)

- The fruit fly (Drosophila) shares about 60% of its DNA with humans (source).

- About 60% of chicken genes correspond to a similar human gene. (source)


The number of genes across a few tested species can be compared on HomoloGene.
So if you eliminate the temptation of the Apes, you would still have the temptation of the Cows (80%); Cats (90%); Dogs (80 %); So why are there no scientist advocating our descent from Mice (75%)?  which are much higher than Chimpanzees (69 %).
Are they really "being tempted by God" or are they trying to avoid the only real solution? (God)

You do realize that Chimpanzees share 96% of their genome with us, right? Which is more than the 75% we share with mice. Which only shows that our common ancestor with chimpanzees is more recent than our common ancestor with mice. Nothing you quoted serves as evidence against evolution.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Vetus Ordo on July 18, 2018, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: John Lamb on July 18, 2018, 08:01:02 AM
Quote from: Vetus Ordo on July 16, 2018, 09:31:50 AM
Quote from: John Lamb on July 14, 2018, 03:23:50 PM
The problem with theistic evolution is that it is not necessary or convenient.

Actually, it was pretty much an intellectual necessity in the face of the triumph of evolutionary science.

It was a do or die question.

Either theistic evolution was more or less adopted as the position of the mainline Christian traditions when it came to the question of origins, or they would have sunk to utter irrelevance.

There is space for debate and questioning on an individual level but an official position had to be adopted and had to conform to evolution. There was no other way.

The triumph of evolutionary science is really the triumph of evolutionary propaganda. The Church did not have to succumb to the propaganda. It could have insisted that the science has not been established (which is the truth), and would be in a much more favourable position intellectually today and in the coming years. Of course, it would have been lambasted for not yielding to the propaganda of the secularist establishment, but that is inevitable anyway.

But because the Church gave credence to the propaganda it now has to go through the process of disentangling itself from evolutionary thought, as the secularist world order gradually collapses and with it the evolutionary dogma.

I wouldn't describe the modern scientific consensus regarding Evolution as a result of propaganda. Despite the naturalistic bias that permeates the sciences, that's not really how things work.

Evolution became an established scientific fact by the mid 20th century. As further as we advanced towards the 21st century and as our knowledge of DNA deepened, the evolutionary facts of common descent and speciation became indisputable, regardless of any insufficiencies of Darwinism itself to explain the mechanisms of Evolution. That's just the reality that we face. The Church had to take a formal position on the matter and concede. And she did.

There was no other reasonable way out, as far as I can see.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Mono no aware on July 18, 2018, 06:00:05 PM
Not only is there the 96-97% DNA commonality with chimpanzees, but there's also the compelling evidence in vestigial traits, such as the coccyx and the appendix (which, if evolution is untrue, are inexplicable).  All human embryos have a tail that they later lose during gestation; why does this occur if humans aren't descended from creatures that once had tails?  Some humans are even born with vestigial tails.  It makes no sense that the genes for tails would be in the DNA of a tailless creature, unless there were tails in its ancestry.  We also carry non-coding DNA for full body hair, the same DNA chimps and gorillas have to grow their coats.  And even though these genes don't activate in humans, humans can still grow full body hair (though not atavistic) because we carry other genes that can do it.  Properly speaking, it's a mutation, and not a vestigiality, but when someone has hypertrichosis (as Julia Pastrana did), it's genetic, and will likely be passed on to the offspring.  Such is the mutability of things.

(https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fallthatsinteresting.com%2Fthumb%2F800.422.http%3A%2F%2Fallthatsinteresting.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F04%2Fjulia-pastrana-og.jpg&hash=ce0461dd7d4f504ae02ff27ea675cf3959f24545)
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Vetus Ordo on July 18, 2018, 06:13:34 PM
Quote from: Pon de Replay on July 18, 2018, 06:00:05 PM
Not only is there the 96-97% DNA commonality with chimpanzees, but there's also the compelling evidence in vestigial traits, such as the coccyx and the appendix (which, if evolution is untrue, are inexplicable).  All human embryos have a tail that they later lose during gestation; why does this occur if humans aren't descended from creatures that once had tails?  Some humans are even born with vestigial tails.  It makes no sense that the genes for tails would be in the DNA of a tailless creature, unless there were tails in its ancestry.  We also carry non-coding DNA for full body hair, the same DNA chimps and gorillas have to grow their coats.  And even though these genes don't activate in humans, humans can still grow full body hair (though not atavistic) because we carry other genes that can do it.  Properly speaking, it's a mutation, and not a vestigiality, but when someone has hypertrichosis (as Julia Pastrana did), it's genetic, and will likely be passed on to the offspring.  Such is the mutability of things.

(https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fallthatsinteresting.com%2Fthumb%2F800.422.http%3A%2F%2Fallthatsinteresting.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F04%2Fjulia-pastrana-og.jpg&hash=ce0461dd7d4f504ae02ff27ea675cf3959f24545)

Astonishingly, Pastrana was able to mate and give birth to a baby.

The impulse for sexual reproduction seemingly breaks all barriers.
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Michael Wilson on July 18, 2018, 06:18:16 PM
G.P. Stated:
QuoteYou do realize that Chimpanzees share 96% of their genome with us, right? Which is more than the 75% we share with mice. Which only shows that our common ancestor with chimpanzees is more recent than our common ancestor with mice. Nothing you quoted serves as evidence against evolution.
G.P.
I'm not arguing against evolution I'm arguing against the commonality of DNA as evidence of evolution (from another species, that is).  Man was created directly by God, and Eve was created from Adam; there is no room for any original "hairless apes" in the narration. Therefore no room for evolution. Either throw evolution for men out or throw Genesis out. 
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Mono no aware on July 18, 2018, 06:37:28 PM
Quote from: Vetus Ordo on July 18, 2018, 06:13:34 PMAstonishingly, Pastrana was able to mate and give birth to a baby.

The impulse for sexual reproduction seemingly breaks all barriers.

Yes, and the baby carried the same genes.  The chances of a person with hypertrichosis passing on the genes for it is 50% with a normal partner, and presumably much higher with a partner who also carries it.  Charles Darwin knew of three generations of Burmese with full body hair (and, in hypertrichosis, it even grows on the face).

(https://www.thehumanmarvels.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/SACRED-FAMILY-OF-BURMA-350x500.jpg)
Title: Re: The Lord Jesus condemns evolution in a private revelation.
Post by: Michael Wilson on July 18, 2018, 06:41:24 PM
Please do not post my and my family's picture any more, without my permission.
Tks.