Monday, October 10, 2016

... on "Catholic" Anti-Creationism - end of video

1) ... on "Catholic" Anti-Creationism · 2) ... continued · 3) ... and continued · 4) ... on "Catholic" Anti-Creationism - end of video

Our Catholic view "radically different" from a Fundamentalist's view of Scripture? No, it is not. We believe in the four senses. The first of these is the literal sense. In any historic book, the story directly at hand as told there. This the Fundamentalist believes too. The Allegoric sense, however, they have varying views. When we see Church as Ark of Noah (allegorice or typologically), some of them prefer to see Jesus alone as it. Since Church is His mystic body and bride, the sense is not completely wrong, only incomplete in order to accomodate a Protestant view of the Church. So, no, this "radically different" understanding is simply not there. The literal sense is not THAT mystic.

[What is different is usually interpretation of certain passages + making their own interpretation, unchecked by patristics - as is yours! - the final authority in matters of faith.]

Baronius is not a saint. As in canonised. I heard he had considered also Apocalyptic expectations as the foundation of Protestant Reformation. Well, no. If you can read Apocalypse so UN-literally as to consider the rule of Antichrist as perduring over centuries, instead of the literal 3 years and 6 months, that is because Luther was NOT expecting Leo X to turn out to be THE guy who gets defeated by Christ at Harmageddon. I think Galileo quoted Baronius. I also think SAINT Robert Bellarmine had something else to say about the matter. Even Baronius had not explicitly dared to say there were obiter dicta in the Bible.

I happen to have written Guy Consolmagno more than once, and also not to have recived answers on my mail. It seems the "Pontifical" Academy of Sciences (which hardly as it stands has the approval of Supreme Pontiff Michael, as per Vatican in Exile) has a very cavalier attitude about Creationists and Geocentrics. If they are too polite to SAY "creatard" that seems nevertheless to be what they think, when challenged.

These meetings between scientists at Vatican ... were ever any Creationist or Geocentric scientific experts invited?

"the creator of Heaven and Earth" Is an Evolutionist Creator still a GOOD creator, as surely the Creed implies? And is He also still author of the books of Moses, as per qui locutus est per prophetas?

Is the beginning of the creed all that matters, or is all of the creed important? There is a religion which has a drastically shorter creed than we have. It is Islam. I would NOT follow their example in short creeds, or reduce infallibility of creed to its beginning.

"I would urge them to study the book of nature just as intently" etc as the "book of faith".

Ruiz, are you aware there are creationists who are DOING precisely that?

Creation vs. Evolution

Miss/Mrs Morrissey, can you name ONE prominent creationist who thinks they ARE incompatible?

Quote from "John Paul II" How has science lately been "purifying" specifically the Catholic religion "from error and superstition"? Wasn't it founded by Christ on Peter or sth?

No comments: