Friday, March 28, 2025

The Pumapunku Megaliths have “organic matter in volcanic rock”

“After different analysis on thin sections and under an electronic microscope, Joseph Davidovits claims that his team has found “organic matter in volcanic rock”, which is, by nature, impossible”. Taken from: https://www.davidovits.info/tag/pumapunku/ On 7 Aug 2018 In Archaeology At the 10th Geopolymer Camp in 2018, Prof. Joseph Davidovits presented during his annual keynote a brief summary of his last studies on the Tiwanaku (Tiahuanaco) / Pumapunku Megaliths. In November 2017, an international team (a geologist from Universidad San Pablo at Arequipa, Peru and a member of the Geopolymer Institute) went on the site to carry on a survey on these stones. After different analysis on thin sections and under an electronic microscope, Joseph Davidovits claims that his team has found “organic matter in volcanic rock“, which is, by nature, impossible. This points to man-made stone and C-14 dating of the geopolymer stone as well as of the monument (on going research). Go to Tiahuanaco-Pumapunku read the transcript or watch the video of his conférence (English or Spanish dubbed) or also on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-CIo8nUxlo Two scientific papers have been now published in renown international scientific journals. See the details at Scientific Articles SUMMARY OF THE STUDY Tiahuanaco, on Lake Titicaca in Bolivia, is a village known throughout the world for its mysterious Gate of the Sun, ruins of temples and its pyramid. Archaeologists consider that this site was built well before the Incas, around 600 to AD 700. The site of Pumapunku is right next door with the ruins of an enigmatic pyramidal temple built at the same time. Because it is not restored and developed for touristic activity, it is less known to the general public. However, there are two architectural curiosities there: four giant red sandstone terraces weighing between 130 and 180 tons and small blocks of andesite, an extremely hard volcanic stone, whose complex shapes and millimetric precision are incompatible with the technology of the time. And for good reason, since archeology tells us that the Tiwanakans had only stone tools and no metal hard enough to carve the rock. But they would have carved the gigantic blocks of red sandstone (these ancient blocks are the largest of all the American continent!) and were able to carry these hundreds of tons on the site, then to adjust them precisely. Also, they would have been able to carve other smaller blocks made of volcanic andesite, an impossible-to-carve stone with an incredible finish! Archaeologists cannot give any rational explanations on how this was possible. Therefore, for the general public, the assumptions generally advanced to explain these wonders are the achievement by a lost ancient super civilization or by aliens’ involvement. In November 2017, scientists gathered samples taken in the red sandstone and andesite from the Pumapunku site. For the first time, these stones were analyzed under the electron microscope, this had never been done before! They discovered the artificial nature of the stones. They compared the monuments’ stones with the local geological resources and found many differences. Andesite rock is a volcanic stone from magma. It is composed mainly of silica in the form of plagioclase feldspar, amphibole and pyroxene. But the scientists have discovered the presence of an organic matter based on carbon. “Carbon-based organic matter does not exist in a volcanic rock formed at high temperatures because they are vaporized. It is impossible to find it in andesite rock. And because we found organic matter inside the volcanic andesitic stone, scientists will have the opportunity to carry out a Carbon-14 dating analysis and provide the exact age of the monuments”, according to Luis Huaman, geologist at Universidad Catolica San Pablo, Arequipa, Peru. This organic element is a geopolymer based on carboxylic acids which was therefore added by human intervention into andesite sand to form a kind of cement. The giant blocks of red sandstone raise another problem. Sandstone is a sedimentary rock composed of quartz grains and a clay binder. There are several possible geological sources but none correspond to the stones of the archaeological monuments. No known quarry is able to provide massive blocks of 10 meters long. In addition, the local stone is friable and small in size. Scientists have discovered under the electron microscope that the red sandstone of Pumapunku cannot come from the region because it contains elements, such as sodium carbonate, not found in the local geology. Therefore, where does the stone come from? From hundreds to thousands of kilometers? With what means have they been transported? In fact, electron microscopic analysis proves that the composition of the sandstone could be artificial (a ferro-sialate geopolymer) and manufactured to form cement. What is this technology mastered by the Tiwanakans? “Artificial stones were formed as a cement. But, it is not a modern cement, it is a natural geological cement obtained by geosynthesis” says Ralph Davidovits, researcher at the Geopolymer Institute. For this, they took naturally friable and eroded rock like red sandstone from the nearby mountain, on the one hand, and on the other hand, unconsolidated volcanic tuff from the nearby Cerro Kapia volcano in Peru to form andesite. They created cement either from clay (the same red clay that Tiwuanakans used for pottery) and sodium carbonate salts from Laguna Cachi in the Altiplano Desert to the south, to form red sandstone. For gray andesite, they invented an organo-mineral binder based on natural organic acids extracted from local plants and other natural reagents. This cement was then poured into molds and hardened for a few months. Without a thorough knowledge of geopolymer chemistry, which studies the formation of these rocks by geosynthesis, it is difficult to recognize the artificial nature of the stones. “This chemistry is not a difficult science to master. It is an extension of the knowledge of Tiwanakans in ceramics, mineral binders, pigments and above all an excellent knowledge of their environment,” says Joseph Davidovits. Without the selection of good raw materials, these extraordinary monuments could not have been created 1400 years ago. Finally, this scientific discovery confirms local legends that say, “The stones were made with plant extracts able to soften the stone.” This explanation has always been rejected by archaeologists because it made no sense. The evidence provided by the team of scientists from France and Peru shows that the oral tradition was right: they made soft stones that could harden! The hypothesis of the lost ancient super civilization or aliens intervention is false. Tiwanakuans were intelligent human beings. They knew their environment perfectly and knew how to exploit the resources brought by nature. ….

Thursday, March 27, 2025

Giza blocks “are not natural limestone”

by Damien F. Mackey The sample chemistries the researchers found do not exist anywhere in nature. “Therefore”, Barsoum said, “it's very improbable that the outer and inner casing stones that we examined were chiseled from a natural limestone block”. Though I am no technician, I had been very impressed by the theory of the French polymer scientist, professor Joseph Davidovits, Director of the Geopolymer Institute in St. Quentin, France, who had been claiming that the stones of the Giza pyramids were actually made of a very early form of concrete, or liquid (wet) cement, created using a mixture of limestone, clay, lime, and water. According to the Wikipedia article, for a basic view on the professor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Davidovits): Davidovits was not convinced that the ancient Egyptians possessed the tools or technology to carve and haul the huge (2.5 to 15 ton) limestone blocks that made up the Great Pyramid. Davidovits suggested that the blocks were molded in place by using a form of limestone concrete. According to his theory, a soft limestone with a high kaolinite content was quarried in the wadi on the south of the Giza plateau. It was then dissolved in large, Nile-fed pools until it became a watery slurry. Lime (found in the ash of ancient cooking fires) and natron (also used by the Egyptians in mummification) was mixed in. The pools were then left to evaporate, leaving behind a moist, clay-like mixture. This wet "concrete" would be carried to the construction site where it would be packed into reusable wooden molds. In the next few days the mixture would undergo a chemical hydration reaction similar to the setting of cement. Using Davidovits' theory, no large gangs would be needed to haul blocks and no huge and unwieldy ramps would be needed to transport the blocks up the side of the pyramid. No chiseling or carving with soft bronze tools would be required to dress their surfaces and new blocks could be cast in place, on top of and pressed against the old blocks. This would account for the unerring precision of the joints of the casing stones (the blocks of the core show tools marks and were cut with much lower tolerances). Proof-of-concept experiments using similar compounds were carried out at Davidovits' geopolymer institute in northern France. It was found that a crew of ten, working with simple hand tools, could build a structure of fourteen, 1.3 to 4.5 ton blocks in a couple of days. According to Davidovits the architects possessed at least two concrete formulas: one for the large structural blocks and another for the white casing stones. He argues earlier pyramids, brick structures, and stone vases were built using similar techniques. [End of quote] However, as there appeared to be amongst mainstream pyramid experts little interest - to practically none whatsoever - in what seemed to my mind to be the eminently sensible and scientific thesis of Davidovits, and since I personally did not have the sort of scientific expertise to push the case of the matter, I have tended to lose interest in the theory until now. This was not because I am unprepared to back a supposed rogue ‘maverick’ against the mainstream flow of conforming scholars. My acceptance of the revision of ‘maverick’ scholar, or ‘wayward polymath’, Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky (Ages in Chaos series), against the conventional view of chronology, is clear evidence of this. Anyway, my interest in the theory of Davidovits has been rekindled by the following article in support of it: http://www.livescience.com/1554-surprising-truth-great-pyramids-built.html The Surprising Truth About How the Great Pyramids Were Built telling about the discovery along the same lines by one Michel Barsoum, described therein as “a well respected researcher in the field of ceramics”, and “a distinguished professor in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at Drexel University”. The authors of this article, Sheila Berninger and Dorilona Rose, write about how Barsoum, initially as a sceptic, came to reconsider the whole matter: …. Barsoum received an unexpected phone call from Michael Carrell, a friend of a retired colleague of Barsoum, who called to chat with the Egyptian-born Barsoum about how much he knew of the mysteries surrounding the building of the Great Pyramids of Giza, the only remaining of the seven wonders of the ancient world. The widely accepted theory — that the pyramids were crafted of carved-out giant limestone blocks that workers carried up ramps — had not only not been embraced by everyone, but as important had quite a number of holes. Burst out laughing According to the caller, the mysteries had actually been solved by Joseph Davidovits, Director of the Geopolymer Institute in St. Quentin, France, more than two decades ago. Davidovits claimed that the stones of the pyramids were actually made of a very early form of concrete created using a mixture of limestone, clay, lime, and water. "It was at this point in the conversation that I burst out laughing," Barsoum said. If the pyramids were indeed cast, he said, someone should have proven it beyond a doubt by now, in this day and age, with just a few hours of electron microscopy. It turned out that nobody had completely proven the theory … yet. "What started as a two-hour project turned into a five-year odyssey that I undertook with one of my graduate students, Adrish Ganguly, and a colleague in France, Gilles Hug," Barsoum said. [End of quote] The article goes on to explain some of the geology of the matter, “these blocks are not natural limestone”, and to account for what has puzzled Egyptologists over a long period of time: namely, the high water content: A year and a half later, after extensive scanning electron microscope observations and other testing, Barsoum and his research group finally began to draw some conclusions about the pyramids. They found that the tiniest structures within the inner and outer casing stones were indeed consistent with a reconstituted limestone. The cement binding the limestone aggregate was either silicon dioxide (the building block of quartz) or a calcium and magnesium-rich silicate mineral. The stones also had a high water content — unusual for the normally dry, natural limestone found on the Giza plateau — and the cementing phases, in both the inner and outer casing stones, were amorphous, in other words, their atoms were not arranged in a regular and periodic array. Sedimentary rocks such as limestone are seldom, if ever, amorphous. The sample chemistries the researchers found do not exist anywhere in nature. “Therefore”, Barsoum said, “it's very improbable that the outer and inner casing stones that we examined were chiseled from a natural limestone block”. More startlingly, Barsoum and another of his graduate students, Aaron Sakulich, recently discovered the presence of silicon dioxide nanoscale spheres (with diameters only billionths of a meter across) in one of the samples. This discovery further confirms that these blocks are not natural limestone. [End of quote] The article then comes to the same dramatic (and somewhat poignant) conclusion arrived at also by chronological revisionists along the lines of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky (though not intended by the authors of the article): We have been misled. Generations misled At the end of their most recent paper reporting these findings, the researchers reflect that it is "ironic, sublime and truly humbling" that this 4,500-year-old limestone is so true to the original that it has misled generations of Egyptologists and geologists and, "because the ancient Egyptians were the original — albeit unknowing — nanotechnologists." As if the scientific evidence isn't enough, Barsoum has pointed out a number of common sense reasons why the pyramids were not likely constructed entirely of chiseled limestone blocks. Egyptologists are consistently confronted by unanswered questions: How is it possible that some of the blocks are so perfectly matched that not even a human hair can be inserted between them? Why, despite the existence of millions of tons of stone, carved presumably with copper chisels, has not one copper chisel ever been found on the Giza Plateau? Although Barsoum's research has not answered all of these questions, his work provides insight into some of the key questions. For example, it is now more likely than not that the tops of the pyramids are cast, as it would have been increasingly difficult to drag the stones to the summit. Also, casting would explain why some of the stones fit so closely together. Still, as with all great mysteries, not every aspect of the pyramids can be explained. How the Egyptians hoisted 70-ton granite slabs halfway up the great pyramid remains as mysterious as ever. [End of quote] Whilst ignorance in such cases can be to some degree simply a natural outcome of pioneering efforts to reach right conclusions about an overwhelming mass of early evidence, Velikovskian-inspired revisionists would be well aware, too, of another common factor that is inexcusable: the persistence by mainstream scholars to proceed in the face of hard evidence. On this sad phenomenon, see e.g. my article: Dumb and Dumbfounded archaeology (8) Dumb and Dumbfounded archaeology | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu

Tuesday, March 18, 2025

Angelic salutation: Hail Mary

One day Saint Gertrude had a vision of Our Lord counting gold coins. She summoned the courage to ask Him what He was doing. He answered: ‘I am counting the Hail Marys that you have said; this is the money with which you can pay your way to Heaven’. https://www.motherofallpeoples.com/post/heaven-s-greatest-invitation Saint Louis de Montfort - Heaven’s Greatest Invitation Updated: May 30, 2020 The Angelic Salutation is so heavenly and so beyond us in its depth of meaning that Blessed Alan de la Roche held that no mere creature could ever possibly understand it, and that only Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Who was born of the Blessed Virgin Mary can really explain it. Its enormous value is due first of all to Our Lady to whom it was addressed, to the purpose of the Incarnation of the Word for which reason this prayer was brought from heaven, and also to the Archangel Gabriel who was the first ever to say it. The Angelic Salutation is a most concise summary of all that Catholic theology teaches about the Blessed Virgin. It is divided into two parts, that of praise and petition: the first shows all that goes to make up Mary’s greatness and the second all that we need to ask her for and all that we may expect to receive through her goodness. The Most Blessed Trinity revealed the first part of it to us and the latter part was added by Saint Elizabeth who was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Holy Mother Church gave us the conclusion in the year 430 when she condemned the Nestorian heresy at the council of Ephesus and defined that the Blessed Virgin is truly the Mother of God. At this time she ordered us to pray to Our Lady under this glorious title by saying: “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now, and at the hour of our death.” The greatest event in the whole history of the world was the Incarnation of the Eternal Word by Whom the world was redeemed and peace was restored between God and men. Our Lady was chosen as His instrument for this tremendous event and it was put into effect when she was greeted with the Angelic Salutation. The Archangel Gabriel, one of the leading princes of the heavenly court, was chosen as ambassador to bear these glad tidings. In the Angelic Salutation can be seen the faith and hope of the patriarchs, the prophets and the apostles. Furthermore it gives to martyrs their unswerving constancy and strength, it is the wisdom of the doctors of the Church, the perseverance of holy confessors and the life of all religious (Blessed Alan de la Roche). It is also the new hymn of the law of grace, the joy of angels and men, and the hymn which terrifies devils and puts them to shame. By the Angelic Salutation God became man, a virgin became the Mother of God, the souls of the just were delivered from Limbo, the empty thrones in heaven filled. In addition sin was forgiven, grace was given to us, sick people were made well, the dead were brought back to life, exiles were brought home, and the anger of the Most Blessed Trinity was appeased and men obtained eternal life. Finally, the Angelic Salutation is a rainbow in the heavens, a sign of the mercy and grace which God has given to the world (Blessed Alan da la Roche). The Hail Mary—Beauty Even though there is nothing so great as the majesty of God and nothing so low as man insofar as he is a sinner, Almighty God does not despise our poor prayers. On the contrary, He is pleased when we sing His praises. Saint Gabriel’s greeting to Our Lady is one of the most beautiful hymns which we can possibly sing to the glory of the Most High. “I will sing a new song to you” (Ps. 143:9). This new hymn which David foretold was to be sung at the coming of the Messiah is none other than the Angelic Salutation. There is an old hymn and a new hymn: the first is that which the Jews sang out of gratitude to God for creating them and maintaining them in existence—for delivering them from captivity and leading them safely through the Red Sea—for giving them manna to eat and for all His other blessings. The new hymn is that which Christians sing in thanksgiving for the graces of the Incarnation and the Redemption. As these marvels were brought about by the Angelic Salutation, so also do we repeat the same salutation to thank the Most Blessed Trinity for His immeasurable goodness to us. We praise God the Father because He so loved the world that He gave us His only Son as our Savior. We bless the Son because He deigned to leave heaven and come down upon earth—because he was made man and redeemed us. We glorify the Holy Spirit because He formed Our Lord’s pure Body in Our Lady’s Womb—this Body which was the Victim of our sins. In this spirit of deep thankfulness should we, then, always say the Hail Mary, making acts of faith, hope, love and thanksgiving for the priceless gift of salvation. …. Although this new hymn is in praise of the Mother of God and is sung directly to her, nevertheless it greatly glorifies the Most Blessed Trinity because any homage that we pay Our Lady returns inevitably to God Who is the cause of all her virtues and perfections. When we honor Our Lady: God the Father is glorified because we are honoring the most perfect of His creatures; God the Son is glorified because we are praising His most pure Mother, and God the Holy Spirit is glorified because we are lost in admiration at the graces with which He has filled His Spouse. When we praise and bless Our Lady by saying the Angelic Salutation she always passes on these praises to Almighty God in the same way as she did when she was praised by Saint Elizabeth. The latter blessed her in her most elevated dignity as Mother of God and Our Lady immediately returned these praises to God by her beautiful Magnificat. Just as the Angelic Salutation gives glory to the Blessed Trinity, it is also the very highest praise that we can give Our Lady. One day when Saint Mechtilde was praying and was trying to think of some way in which she could express her love of the Blessed Mother better than she had done before, she fell into ecstasy. Our Lady appeared to her with the Angelic Salutation in flaming letters of gold upon her bosom and said to her: My daughter, I want you to know that no one can please me more than by saying the salutation which the Most Adorable Trinity sent to me and by which He raised me to the dignity of Mother of God. By the word Ave (which is the name Eve, Eva), I learned that in His infinite power God had preserved me from all sin and its attendant misery which the first woman had been subject to. The name Mary which means “lady of light” shows that God has filled me with wisdom and light, like a shining star, to light up heaven and earth. The words full of grace remind me that the Holy Spirit has showered so many graces upon me that I am able to give these graces in abundance to those who ask for them through me as Mediatrix. When people say The Lord is with thee they renew the indescribable joy that was mine when the Eternal Word became incarnate in my womb. When you say to me blessed art thou among women I praise Almighty God’s divine mercy which lifted me to this exalted plane of happiness. And at the words blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus, the whole of heaven rejoices with me to see my Son Jesus Christ adored and glorified for having saved mankind. The Hail Mary—Fruits …. The Hail Mary is a blessed dew that falls from heaven upon the souls of the predestinate. It gives them a marvelous spiritual fertility so that they can grow in all virtues. The more the garden of the soul is watered by this prayer the more enlightened one’s intellect becomes, the more zealous his heart, and the stronger his armor against his spiritual enemies. The Hail Mary is a sharp and flaming shaft which, joined to the Word of God, gives the preacher the strength to pierce, move and convert the most hardened hearts even if he has little or no natural gift for preaching. The Hail Mary—Blessings This heavenly salutation draws down upon us the blessings of Jesus and Mary in abundance, for it is an infallible truth that Jesus and Mary reward in a marvelous way those who glorify them. They repay us a hundredfold for the praises that we give them. “I love them that love me … that I may enrich them that love me and fill their treasures” (Prov. 8:17, 21). Jesus and Mary have always said: “We love those who love us; we enrich them and fill their treasuries to overflowing.” “He who soweth in blessings, shall also reap blessings” (Cor. 9:6). Now, if we say the Hail Mary properly, is not this a way to love, bless and glorify Jesus and Mary? In each Hail Mary we bless both Jesus and Mary: “Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.” By each Hail Mary we give Our Lady the same honor that God gave her when He sent the Archangel Gabriel to greet her for Him. How could anyone possibly think that Jesus and Mary, who often do good to those that curse them, could ever curse those that bless and honor them by the Hail Mary? ….

Wednesday, February 5, 2025

Jesus continues to heal the sick

by Damien F. Mackey ‘Go back and report to John [the Baptist] what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me’. Matthew 11:4-6 With these words, based on his miraculous actions, Jesus confirmed to the imprisoned John the Baptist, on behalf of John’s disciples, that He was indeed ‘the One who was to come’, the Messiah. And his healing work has not ceased to this day. With a new miracle (the 71st) now recorded at Lourdes, and with the feast of Our Lady of Lourdes occurring next week, 11th February (2025), I have decided to up-date this article. Caroline De Sury writes: https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2024/12/10/lourdes-confirms-first-miracle-english-speaker-249449 Lourdes confirms 71st miracle—and the first for an English speaker Caroline De Sury — OSV News December 10, 2024 PARIS (OSV News) -- The list of miracles that have taken place at the French Marian shrine in Lourdes now includes, for the first time, an English-speaking soldier-patient. Archbishop Malcolm McMahon of Liverpool, a seaside British city, officially announced on Dec. 8 that the 71st miracle had been granted to a British soldier, wounded during World War I. John Traynor, a soldier in the Royal Navy, was hit by machine-gun fire in 1915 in present-day Turkey. He was cured at Lourdes during a pilgrimage for his diocese in 1923. “This is a very special case, since we simply searched the archives for the result of investigative work that had been carried out almost 100 years ago,” Fra’ Alessandro de Franciscis, the doctor in charge of the Lourdes Sanctuary’s Office of Medical Observations since 2009, told OSV News. “In reality, this healing had already been officially recognized at Lourdes in 1926,” the medical professional, who is also grand hospitaller of the Sovereign Order of Malta, said. [Millions of pilgrims travel to Lourdes each year. What made it such an important symbol of hope and healing?] According to details provided by the sanctuary, Traynor had undergone numerous surgical operations after his injuries, but to no avail. He had lost the use of his right arm and suffered from severe epileptic seizures. Attempts at medical treatment had resulted in partial paralysis of his legs. “He was living on a war pension,” de Franciscis said, “but in July 1923, he went to Lourdes on the occasion of the first pilgrimage of the Archdiocese of Liverpool, and he was cured on the third day, immediately, instantly, after being immersed in the sanctuary’s pools.” St. Bernadette Soubirous witnessed 18 Marian apparitions beginning on Feb. 11, 1858, and people of her time witnessed the first physical and spiritual healing miracles after visiting the shrine or drinking or washing in the spring Our Lady pointed Bernadette to in an apparition. To date, dozens of miracles have been confirmed by the special medical commission permanently working at the shrine, which de Franciscis leads. “When he returned home to the U.K., he was examined by the doctors,” the doctor said. “They were amazed.” “I would point out that his recovery was complete,” de Franciscis added. “Previously, he was almost paralyzed in his legs, and out of condition to have children. But after his recovery, he and his wife had several children,” he stressed. “Three doctors who were with him on the pilgrimage encouraged him to return to Lourdes to testify to his healing,” the head of Lourdes’ medical office recounted. “That is what he did in July 1926. The collegial investigation took place in Lourdes, according to the usual procedures. The conclusion was that this cure was truly inexplicable.” Everything was properly noted by the predecessors of doctors now working in Lourdes. “The sanctuary’s newspaper published in full, at the time, the minutes of the Office of Medical Observations doctors’ meeting, with the testimonies from the English doctors who had examined John Traynor before and after this cure.” Because of post-war turbulence in Europe, communications between Lourdes and Liverpool regarding conclusions of the inquiry were never forwarded to the Archbishop of Liverpool. “But this was the post-war era, and there were still organizational and communication dysfunctions at the shrine. ... In general, the healings recognized by the sanctuary in the 1920s and 1930s were most often not made public until the 1950s,” the lead Lourdes doctor said. “After his recovery, John Traynor became a member of the Hospitalité of Lourdes, where he went every year,” de Franciscis said, referring to the religious confraternity under the spiritual authority of the bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes, which is active in Lourdes during the main pilgrimage season, providing people to welcome pilgrims at … the sanctuary’s baths. “He was strong and healthy, and to English and Irish Catholics, it was obvious that there had been a miracle. But the official documents attesting to his recovery in Lourdes, before and after the miracle, were forgotten,” the doctor told OSV News. “On the occasion of the centenary of this first pilgrimage to Lourdes by the Archdiocese of Liverpool, we turned our attention back to his case,” de Franciscis explained. “We undertook a search of the archives, and found the documents. They prove beyond doubt that the Lourdes Bureau had made a definitive judgment on the unexplained nature of this cure. They are clear and unambiguous.” In recent months, Bishop Jean-Marc Micas of Tarbes and Lourdes, was able to forward a complete dossier to the Archdiocese of Liverpool, which led its archbishop to recognize the healing as a miracle, the doctor confirmed. Traynor, who died in 1943, is therefore the 71st recognized miraculous cure from Lourdes. The 70th person miraculously cured is still alive, de Franciscis said. She is a French woman religious, Sister Bernadette Moriau, now over 85. Her miraculous cure was recognized in 2018, after 10 years of investigation. "And John Traynor is the first case of healing of an English-speaking patient," de Franciscis said. "Most of the miracles are French. There are Italians too, a Belgian and a German. But there were not any English speakers yet." "I am personally sensitive to this," the doctor concluded with a smile. "I myself am Italian, born in Naples, but of an American mother, from Connecticut!" And we read in the article, “Is there a God?”, of the scientifically inexplicable healings there: http://www.is-there-a-god.info/life/lourdes/ Healings at Lourdes This page in brief Apparent divine healings are a challenge to our natural way of thinking. Are the stories true? Is the evidence reliable? Are the explanations we are given true? Do they prove God exists and heals, or is that only for the gullible? This is a brief summary of the apparent miracles at Lourdes, how they have been investigated and the conclusions of a medical commission, which found many apparent miracles had insufficient evidence to justify acceptance, but a small number seem to have no other explanation. A world-famous place of healing Lourdes is a village in southern France, close to the Pyrenees mountains and the Spanish border. Many healing miracles are reputed to have occurred there since 1858, when a 14 year old girl claimed to have ‘seen’ a beautiful lady that Roman Catholics believe was the mother of Jesus. Of the estimated 200 million people who have sought a cure there, millions claim to have been healed. Where possible, people claiming healing are examined on the spot by a medical bureau, and the information is reviewed by an international commission of medical specialists, independent of the Catholic Church and including sceptics. To be regarded as authentic, claims have to satisfy four requirements: • the illness and cure was well documented, • the illness was serious and was unable to be effectively treated, • the symptoms disappeared within hours, and • the healing lasted for sufficient time to ensure the ‘cure’ was not just a temporary remission (e.g. in the case of leukemia, 10 years is required). The miracles Most claims lack sufficient evidence to be verified, but 68 miracles have passed this stringent checking and have been proclaimed as authentic, while several thousand other remarkable cures have been documented. Some examples of claimed healings include: • Margerie Paulette, 22 years old, cured of tubercular meningitis in 1929. • Mademoiselle Dulot, cured of stomach and liver cancer in 1925. • Louise Jamain, cured in 1937 of tubercular peritonitis. • Jeanne Fretel, cured in 1949 of tubercular peritonitis. • Rose Martin, cured of cancer of the uterus in 1947. • Vittorio Micheli, cured of a malignant tumour of the hip in 1963. • Serge Francois, cured of a herniated disc in 2002. The stories of a few other ‘approved miracles’ are outlined below at Some stories. Doubts and questions These miracles which have passed the medical commission’s strict criteria are apparently sufficiently well documented to meet any reasonable requirement for evidence. If we are willing to be convinced by evidence, then the evidence is there that in each of these cases, something very unusual happened. Many atheists and rationalists are quite sure that miracles cannot occur, and thus may not be willing or able to be convinced by any evidence. Therefore they probably will not be convinced here, and will look for natural explanations or, despite the evidence, question the truth of the stories. Protestant christians may also be sceptical that God would heal via the Virgin Mary, and in a place where they may believe superstition is prevalent. But again, how can they explain the evidence? Some stories Jean-Pierre Bely Jean-Pierre Bely was paralysed with multiple sclerosis, and was classified by the French health system as a total invalid when he went to Lourdes in 1987. He received ‘the anointing of the sick’, and when he returned home he was able to walk. Subsequently, virtually all traces of the illness disappeared. Patrick Fontanaud, an agnostic physician who looked after Bely, said there is no scientific explanation for what occurred. Gabriel Gargam Gabriel Gargam was severely injured in a railway accident in 1900, in which he was almost crushed to death and was paralysed from the waist down by a crushed spine. A court ordered the railway to pay him compensation because he was a human wreck who would henceforth need at least two persons to care for him. His condition continued to deteriorate. He was not a religious person, but his mother persuaded him to go on pilgrimage to Lourdes, very weak, fed via a tube and lapsing into unconsciousness. But at Lourdes his paralysis disappeared and he was able to walk, although still very thin and weak. Within a short time, he was eating normally, able to resume work and he lived to 83. Serge Perrin Serge Perrin began to suffer neurological problems in 1964 at age 35, and was subsequently diagnosed with thrombosis in the left carotid artery, for which surgery was nor recommended. He visited Lourdes in 1969 as his condition worsened, but there was no improvement. His deterioration continued until 1970, when he was almost blind and unable to care for himself alone. At his wife’s insistence, he visited Lourdes as second time and received the anointing of the sick. By that afternoon, he could walk without the aid of a walking stick and could see without using spectacles. He returned home, fully cured, as was confirmed by a serious of medical tests. References o Wikipedia on Lourdes and Our Lady of Lourdes. o A description of all 68 approved miracles at Lourdes in The Miracle Hunter. o A Protestant Looks at Lourdes. o Scientific Evidence of Miracles at Lourdes in Doxa.

Wednesday, January 29, 2025

Forgetting God, the works of the Lord, the holocaust

by Damien F. Mackey “Towards the end of his life [Primo Levi] was beginning to worry about precisely what Alastair writes about: that memories would fade and the horror of the holocaust – the greatest evil ever inflicted on man by man – might fade as well”. Fraser Nelson Forgetting the major lessons of history can have dire consequences for humanity. Hence the wise among the Hebrews were forever reminding their people: “Do not forget the works of the Lord!” “That they might not forget the works of God” (3) "That they might not forget the works of God" For instance, according to Psalm 77:11-15 (Douay) /Psalm 78: And they forgot his benefits, and his wonders that he had shewn them. Wonderful things did he do in the sight of their fathers, in the land of Egypt, in the field of Tanis. He divided the sea and brought them through: and he made the waters to stand as in a vessel. And he conducted them with a cloud by day: and all the night with a light of fire. He struck the rock in the wilderness: and gave them to drink, as out of the great deep. A modern prophet had bemoaned the consequences of such forgetting: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened”: Solzhenitsyn (3) "Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened": Solzhenitsyn Although Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn here was thinking essentially about his own Russia, what he said has applications for the whole world. War, torture, starvation, death camps. “… orchestrated famines, deportations, civil wars, terror campaigns, forced labor, concentration camps, and mass killings” (see below). “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened” Fittingly, on the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, a Marist priest in Sydney told of one Primo Levi, himself a prisoner, who had feared that the holocaust, in time, would be forgotten. The priest urged the congregation to obtain a copy of Primo Levi’s book, The Drowned and the Saved: On a far lighter note, the same Marist priest had told a joke. An Italian lady had approached him and told him: ‘You look like Padre Pio’. He replied to her: ‘I look like Padre Pio because I am Padre Pio’. ‘Noooo’, she said. ‘Padre Pio very holy’. Remembering what the priest had said bout Primo Levi, I looked him up on the Internet and found this article by Fraser Nelson (Times and Spectator): https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-primo-levi-s-warning-about-the-young-forgetting-the-holocaust-resonates-now/ Fraser Nelson Why Primo Levi’s warning about the young forgetting the holocaust resonates now • 30 March 2018, 12:00am One of the most thought-provoking pieces in The Spectator this week is from Alastair Thomas on why his generation don’t get so upset about anti-Semitism. He explains the phenomenon and offers an explanation: the years have passed, the memories of the holocaust have dimmed. It’s no longer the experience of someone’s grandparents’ generation, but further back. Since then, there are more recent memories: of the Israeli Defence Force and Gaza. The conflation between Jews, Israel and Zionism has restored the idea of the Jews as being suspiciously powerful – the oppressors rather than the oppressed. This certainly stands to reason. Memories of the holocaust were kept alive for my generation by films like Schindler’s List. But there are few left to tell the story first hand. Reading Alastair’s essay made me think of a book I read years ago: The Drowned and the Saved, by Primo Levi, who was arrested for being a member of the Italian anti-fascist front and sent to Auschwitz. Towards the end of his life he was beginning to worry about precisely what Alastair writes about: that memories would fade and the horror of the holocaust – the greatest evil ever inflicted on man by man – might fade as well. When I first read it, I thought he was wrong: that the holocaust was taught in schools world over and films like Schindler’s List would keep the nightmare vivid for new generations. But perhaps he was right after all. That film is now a quarter-century old. A new generation will have new reference points. …. Levi’s writing is incredibly vivid, yet hard to track down in the digital era: The Drowned and the Saved, even If Not Now, When? are not on Kindle, not Googleable. So we have posted an extract from the book on Coffee House (here) to give a taste. For those who haven’t come across his writing before, you can find it all here, many for under £1. It’s dangerous, he says, to think that the evil of the holocaust sprang from the blackness of Nazi hearts and died with Hitler. It had all-too-human beginnings, and one of them was the general idea that the Jews are suspect, which can come back anytime, anywhere. At church services world over this afternoon, Christians will be saying the Good Friday prayer for the Jews. There’s plenty to think about after a week where Jewish leaders were driven to protest in parliament. But this is about more than Corbyn, or the recent attacks in France: there’s a general sense that anti-Semitism is back – partly because it doesn’t appal a young generation and the scenario that Primo Levi described is now coming to pass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_theology#:~:text=The%20well%2Dknown%20Lithuanian%20Jewish,religious%20observance%20for%20the%20enlightenment. “The well-known Lithuanian Jewish leader, Rabbi Elazar Shach taught that the Holocaust was a divine punishment for the sins of the Jewish people, and for the abandoning of religious observance for the enlightenment”. This is getting to the crux of the matter, not just for Jews, but for Russians, Germans, and indeed for the whole world. Our Lady’s Prophecy Fulfilled: Spreading Errors of Russia …. Our Lady of Fatima warned that if mankind did not stop offending God, and if her messages were not heeded, a worse war was yet to come. To prevent the evil of World War II, Our Lady requested both the Communion of Reparation on Five First Saturdays, as well as the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart. As we have seen, the request was not heeded in time. World War II erupted, and the errors of Russia were spread throughout the world. ________________________________________ Our Lady appeared to the three children in Fatima eight days after Pope Benedict XV’s piercing cry for her intercession for an end to the war. Yet that was not the only providential reason for Our Lady’s appearance to the three children at that specific time. Something dangerous was also happening in Russia which would have a devastating impact on the world. The Russian Revolutions Russia suffered greatly from the negative effects of World War I. The high number of casualties, combined with economic stagnation and food shortages, caused the people to grow angry, restless, and critical of the country’s governance. This national instability culminated in the overthrow of the one thousand year-old Christian monarchy, and the execution of the Russian Tsar and the ruling Romanov dynasty. This revolution occurred in February 1917 (March on the Gregorian calendar), and a provisional government was established in its place. Seeing the Russian monarchy toppled, Vladimir Lenin, who had previously been exiled from Russia due to his revolutionary political agitations, saw his opportunity to return and once again involve himself with the nation’s politics. Lenin was fully committed to the economic, social, and atheistic philosophy of Marxism and sought to implement it in Russia. He banded with other leftist political revolutionaries to form the Bolshevik party, and he became its leader. The discontent about the ongoing war and the instability under the provencial government allowed the Bolsheviks to quickly rise to power, and they seized control of Russia during the infamous October Revolution (November on the Gregorian Calendar). Lenin became the head of Russia, and the Bolsheviks became the Communist Party. This was the keystone event that led to the founding of the Soviet Union. The country once called “Holy Russia” by her people, a land rich in faith and tradition, was overthrown. Our Lady was appearing in Fatima during this critical period in Russia’s—and by extension, Europe’s—history; the first and last of her apparitions corresponded closely with the first and second Russian revolutions in March and November of 1917. The Persecution Of The Church And The Family Essential to the realization of Lenin’s goal to implement his Marxist ideals and transform Russia into a communist country was to eliminate the influence of Christianity, especially the Russian Orthodox church. The following year, Russia implemented the law of separation of Church and State, “In order to ensure genuine freedom of conscience for the working people,” that is, freedom from the moral restraints that religion brings. The law of separation of Church and State was, in effect, a law imposing State atheism. Although religion was not officially banned, its influence on society was intentionally and aggressively attacked. The Marxist revolutionaries knew that to undermine religious practice one must first corrupt the morality of the people. In addition to weakening the Church, they also worked to upend the social unit of the family in order to realize their ideal of a classless society ruled by an authoritarian State. To further this goal, the Bolsheviks instituted no-fault divorce, thus supplanting sacramental marriage with civil marriage. Divorce was made swift and easily obtainable, with no provisions for the support of children. Laws were passed stating that there was now no such thing as an illegitimate child, a revolt against the natural right of children to be born into the stability of wedlock and raised by their mother and father. The result was utter moral decay among the people. Previously a deeply religious people, many Russians became promiscuous and literally began to divorce and remarry with the seasons. Women who were divorced by their husbands while pregnant sought to abort their children out of the fear of abandonment. Under Communist rule, Russia became the first country in the world to legalize abortion, and eventually the nation with the highest rate of divorce and abortion in the world. Before these disastrous laws were implemented, it was the Church who governed marriage, family, and the moral life of the people in the name of God. The Bolshevik Revolution was not merely a political revolution, it was a revolution of the fabric of society itself, and ultimately a revolt against the divine and natural law of God. If the Bolshevik Revolution is—as some people have called it—the most significant political event of the 20th century, then Lenin must for good or ill be regarded as the century’s most significant political leader. Not only in the scholarly circles of the former Soviet Union but even among many non-Communist scholars, he has been regarded as both the greatest revolutionary leader and revolutionary statesman in history, as well as the greatest revolutionary thinker since Marx. Encyclopedia Britannica Once Lenin defeated every political enemy which threatened his power, the Soviet Union was formed in 1922 under Secretary Joseph Stalin. Lenin then became the first dictator of the world’s first Marxist state, although briefly, as he died in 1924. His ruthlessness against his political enemies established precedent for his successor, Joseph Stalin, to preside over a campaign of brutality against his own citizens, especially Christians. Although Our Lady mentioned the need for the consecration of Russia during her apparitions at Fatima, she did not formally ask for it at that time. This request was not given to Sr. Lucia until June 13, 1929. Once again, the timing was providential as there was a significant event transpiring in Russia at that time. In 1929 Russia began a new wave of anti-religious persecution under the dictatorship of the infamous Joseph Stalin. Previously the Orthodox Church was persecuted indirectly; Christians were imprisoned by being labeled as enemies of the State. Now, an official political campaign was begun to actually destroy the Church. Ecclesiastical property and wealth was confiscated, religious activities were prohibited, churches were destroyed, and nearly all clergy, along with many laity, were killed or sent to concentration camps. Christianity in Russia was forced underground. In addition to unleashing a severe persecution on the Orthodox Church, Stalin turned on his own citizens in other evil ways. In the 1930’s Stalin forced a man-made famine on the Ukraine. This genocide killed an estimated 7-8 million people. During the famine’s worst period from 1932-34, it is estimated that nearly 30,000 Ukrainians were dying from starvation every day. Meanwhile, Stalin denied the existence of the famine while exporting Russian grain to other countries. Such was the brutality that would become the manner of rule for atheistic communist dictators throughout the 20th century: orchestrated famines, deportations, civil wars, terror campaigns, forced labor, concentration camps, and mass killings. Perhaps Jacinta, who often received visions of the future chastisements that Our Lady of Fatima prophesied, beheld the devastating Ukrainian famine when she said to Lucia, “Can’t you see all those highways and roads and fields full of people, who are crying with hunger and have nothing to eat? And the Holy Father in a church praying before the Immaculate Heart of Mary? And so many people praying with him?” Russia Spreads Her Errors The central error of Russia was the modern atheistic Marxist-Communist State and its attacks on morality, the natural order of human society, and the Church. This diabolical revolutionary spirit spread to other countries like an infectious disease, starting with the Eastern bloc countries, until more than half of the globe was ruled by communist dictators. Their brutal regimes which severely persecuted the Church and killed millions of their own citizens. …. The Russian Bolshevik revolutionaries … however, actively pursued a global atheistic communism. The Bolsheviks implemented Marx’s Communist Manifesto and became the world’s first communist state. The Soviet Union then became not only a dominant world power, but also a flagship for the rise of atheistic dictatorships around the world. These brutal regimes and their insidious philosophies threatened and slaughtered their own citizens in a heinous manner never before seen in history. The 1997 book, The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression by Stephane Courtois places the death toll of communism in the 20th century at 94 million, making atheistic communist regimes more deadly than the first two World Wars combined: People’s Republic of China: 65 million Soviet Union: 20 million Cambodia: 2 million North Korea: 2 million Ethiopia: 1.7 million Afghanistan: 1.5 million Eastern Bloc: 1 million Vietnam: 1 million Latin America 150,000 International Communist movement and Communist parties not in power: 10,000 In addition to the shocking death toll, the suppression and persecution of the Christian faith and the institutionalization of immorality was the most devastating for the salvation of souls. Without the light of the Christian faith to guide souls to the worship of the One True God, many souls under Communist regimes were lost for eternity. Looking back on this devastation, we are reminded of what Lucia said to the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, on the eve of the anniversary of Our Lady of Fatima in 1982: “The third part of the secret is a symbolic revelation, referring to this part of the Message, conditioned by whether we accept or not what the Message itself asks of us: ‘If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, etc.’ Since we did not heed this appeal of the Message, we see that it has been fulfilled, Russia has invaded the world with her errors. And if we have not yet seen the complete fulfilment of the final part of this prophecy, we are going towards it little by little with great strides. If we do not reject the path of sin, hatred, revenge, injustice, violations of the rights of the human person, immorality and violence, etc. And let us not say that it is God who is punishing us in this way; on the contrary it is people themselves who are preparing their own punishment. In his kindness God warns us and calls us to the right path, while respecting the freedom he has given us; hence people are responsible.” Again, it is incredible to consider that the Mother of God offered a means to prevent this disaster for humanity, with the responsibility of averting it given to the authority of the Vicar of Christ as the shepherd of the world’s souls.

Saturday, January 18, 2025

Père M-J. Lagrange’s exegetical blancmange

by Damien F. Mackey “To take the Genesis account as historical information … its value is simply nil in informing us about what happened “in the night of times”.” M. Lagrange Dr. Dominque Tassot, writing an article, “The Influence of Geology on Catholic Exegesis”, for the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation, tells us something about the opinions of M. Lagrange: http://kolbecenter.org/the-influence-of-geology-on-catholic-exegesis/ …. On June 30, 1909, the Pontifical Biblical Commission granted liberty to Catholic exegetes to consider the word “yom” either in its proper meaning or in a broader meaning (sensu improprio) of indeterminate duration (DS 2128). In 1896, Fr Lagrange (who had founded Jerusalem’s Biblical College in 1893) rejected “concordism”, considering that the hexameron days and geological periods did not correspond. The shaping of the Earth went on a long time after the appearance of life; plants and animals developed in parallel. But remains established the fact that the Earth took a considerable time to form. We renounced forever the historic precise duration of six 24 hours days. …. My comment: The ‘Six Days’ of Genesis One, real 24-hour days, have nothing whatsoever to do with the duration of God’s work of creation, and it is futile to attempt to make them fit so-called scientific views about origins, such as the ‘Big Bang’, or an evolutionary-based geology. On this, see e.g. my article: What exactly is Creation Science? Part One: Our Western obsession with ‘Science’ https://www.academia.edu/35676906/What_exactly_is_Creation_Science_Part_One_Our_Western_obsession_with_Science Some have observed that the ‘Six Days’ (Hexaëmeron) may be a revelation of a creation already effected. Dr. Tassot continues: The further influence of Lagrange on Catholic exegesis is indisputable: he devised the three main ways to render the presence of scientific errors in the Bible acceptable. These were set out in five lectures given at the Catholic Institute of Toulouse a century ago, in November 1902, later published under the title The Historical Method. I will not dispute Lagrange’s dedication to the Church and the Bible. But we will touch here upon the direct influence of geology on the exegesis of the 20th century through Lagrange’s ideas. When a schoolboy, Lagrange used to wander with his uncle, a geologist, in the foothills of the Alps, where he lived. Maybe this explains how readily and completely he accepted the long ages, not only for the earth but also for the history of Man. He wrote in the Biblical Review, which he founded: Mankind is older than one believed when piously collecting the wrecks of remembrances assumed to be primitive. (…) Humanly speaking, oral transmission from the beginning of the world is supremely unbelievable. (…) To take the Genesis account as historical information, … its value is simply nil in informing us about what happened “in the night of times.” So Lagrange invented a new and paradoxical concept: “Legendary primitive history.” The Fall, the Curse, the Flood are neither true history nor simple myth. Genesis gives an account based on a “generating fact” but inevitably distorted and downgraded by the transmission through thousands of generations. Another such concept is that of “historical appearances.” Here Lagrange tried to transpose to history what Leo XIIIth said in Providentissimus Deus about astronomy (the Galileo affair!), that the Bible speaks “according to appearances.” From a Thomistic perspective, our senses give a true path to knowledge. But in the Kantian perspective of that time, “appearance” meant the opposite of reality. In 1919, Lagrange abandoned his theory of “historical appearances,” but the idea remained that the Bible had to be confined to the sphere of religion, and this was indeed the most secure way to prevent any conflict with science. The third method proposed by Lagrange to explain supposed natural science errors in the Bible was the theory of “literary genres.” The idea underlying this explanation was that one does not deceive when simply asserting the false, but only when teaching it: All that the sacred writers teach, God also teaches and this is true. But what do the sacred writers really teach? What they affirm categorically. But—it has been said for a long time—the Bible is not a collection of categorical theses or affirmations. There are such literary genres where nothing is taught concerning the reality of the facts. They only serve as basis for a moral teaching.” …. [And further:] “It is impossible that God teaches errors. Of course [there are places in] the Bible, where everybody is speaking errors; but it is impossible that an intelligent examination of the Bible compels us to conclude that God taught errors.” …. It is obvious that an intelligent use of these three methods is sufficient to get rid of any difficult passage of the Bible. But the authority of the Sacred Writings disappears at the same time, divine inspiration and inerrancy being inseparable! [End of quotes] We could term this method of exegesis as emptying the Bible of all of its meaning. Père Marie-Joseph Lagrange (1855-1938) was a Dominican (OP) priest and the Dominicans figure rather prominently in my life inasmuch as OP priests celebrate Masses at the University of Sydney (St. John Paul II) chapel and at Notre Dame University (St. Benedict’s), at both of which places I attend, or have frequently attended in the past. The day that a well-informed friend of mine queried, in an e-mail, the strange biblical views that have emanated from the École Biblique which père Lagrange himself founded in Jerusalem, I happened to attend a Mass at the University of Sydney chapel celebrated by a learned Dominican priest. I thought that I must tell him about the concerned e-mail letter that I had just received, I being particularly interested to get his (Dominican) reaction. He is a scholar, basically a theologian, who seems to flit effortlessly around Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and French for starters. It soon became clear to me, though, that the Scriptures were essentially, for him, about theology - fair enough - but that what my colleagues and I would consider to be historical accounts were written late, perhaps beginning “about 900 BC”, and that “Moses and Joshua could not personally have written about contemporary events, nor did they record dates”. He also made the typical comment that the early Scriptures would have been passed on by means of “oral tradition”. Also fair enough, but the written aspect always seems to get downplayed. Whilst some of this was starting to rub with me, especially that Moses and Joshua did not write down the biblical events of the time, I did not feel inclined to become argumentative or contrary with a man who has an easy-going, genial nature. But, at the same time, I tried to push home some bullet points, such as: - God told Moses and Joshua to “write”. - Moses, in Egypt, was already a learned man and a scribe. [Cf. Acts 7:22] “Yes”, he replied, “but he did not write in Hebrew, but in Egyptian”. Some of what the priest said here is, I believe, just plain wrong, and smacks of what I find that père Lagrange had written decades earlier. Deferring to the Numbers (Chronology) Men Whilst I (and apparently Monty Python) find accountancy, numbers, to be utterly BORING: Counsellor: (John Cleese) Ah Mr Anchovy. Do sit down. Anchovy: (Michael Palin) Thank you. Take the weight off the feet, eh? Counsellor: Yes, yes. Anchovy: Lovely weather for the time of year, I must say. Counsellor: Enough of this gay banter. And now Mr Anchovy, you asked us to advise you which job in life you were best suited for. Anchovy: That is correct, yes. Counsellor: Well I now have the results here of the interviews and the aptitude tests that you took last week, and from them we've built up a pretty clear picture of the sort of person that you are. And I think I can say, without fear of contradiction, that the ideal job for you is chartered accountancy. Anchovy: But I am a chartered accountant. Counsellor: Jolly good. Well back to the office with you then. Anchovy: No! No! No! You don't understand. I've been a chartered accountant for the last twenty years. I want a new job. Something exciting that will let me live. Counsellor: Well chartered accountancy is rather exciting isn't it? Anchovy: Exciting? No it's not. It's dull. Dull. Dull. My God it's dull, it's so desperately dull and tedious and stuffy and boring and des-per-ate-ly DULL. …. numbers appear to be greatly revered in modern times. Numbers seem to have replaced ideas. It probably has something to do with the power that measuring offers, and, even, of man’s seeking to be ‘the measure of all things’ (Protagoras). Mathematics makes a wonderful servant, but it can be a very cruel taskmaster. Chronologists are the powerful numbers men of (ancient) history. In Egyptology, historians and archaeologists deferred to the ‘superior wisdom’ of the numbers man, Berlin School chronologist, Eduard Meyer (c. 1906), and allowed him to create a chronology of dynastic Egypt that has little bearing on reality. See e.g. my: The Fall of the Sothic Theory: Egyptian Chronology Revisited https://www.academia.edu/3665220/The_Fall_of_the_Sothic_Theory_Egyptian_Chronology_Revisited Was Meyer, the numbers man, dull? “The late great Classical scholar Werner Jaeger once said that the only time the lectures of the immortal Eduard Meyer were really interesting and the only time he was ever able to fill his lecture hall at the University of Berlin was when he talked about the Mormons”. Enough said! Meyer’s artificial dating of the Egyptian dynasties did not fit the shorter histories of, say, the Greeks and the Hittites. So, to save the situation, a massive slice of ‘Dark Ages’ (1200-700 BC) had to be inserted into these histories in order to ‘make’ them align with Egypt. These ‘Dark Ages’ did not occur in real history, and their insertion has caused a disruption to the proper sequence of Greek and Hittite history. Henk Spaan tells briefly what happened and how Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky had identified the problem: http://www.henkspaan2.nl/velikovsky/15darkages.php The history of ancient Greece is usually divided into several periods. The Archaic period is the time of ancient Hellas, that ran until about 1200 BC and ended shortly after the Trojan War. During this period Mycenae was the centre. Then followed a period of decline, the Greek Middle Ages, also called Dark Ages, when the country was invaded by primitive Dorians. The Greek heyday that we call Classical Greece, when Athens was the main centre, lasted from about 700 to 323 BC. Finally there is the Hellenistic period that begins with the conquests of Alexander the Great throughout the Middle East. In the Hellenistic period, Alexandria was the centre and the period lasted until the Roman conquest of Egypt. The part of Velikovsky's work dealing with "the dark ages of Greece" never appeared in print. Velikovsky worked on it in the last years of his life, but could not finish it. It is published in the Internet archive of his work entitled "The Dark Age of Greece". The Mycenaean civilization is closely linked to the 18th Dynasty of Egypt. During excavations in Mycenae, many objects from the 18th Dynasty were found and vice versa in Akhet-Aten, the city that Akhnaton had built, much Mycenaean pottery was found. This means that there must have been a period of more than 500 years between Archaic Greece that existed until 1200 BC and Classical Greece that began around 700 BC. This period is called a dark age because we know little or nothing about it and little remains of this period are found. Understanding those 500 years is difficult, because 500 years of human activity, however primitive, must have left traces above the remains of Mycenaean civilization and there must have been rulers, however barbaric, about whom people wrote of with fear or surprise. However, those traces are not there and neither are the stories. Of the Greek Middle Ages we know of no people like Vikings or Charlemagne of AD history. Yet, if we move the Mycenaean civilization to 500 years later, it will be closer in line with the rise of Classical Greece and we are then more in line with what, for example, Herodotus and other Greek historians thought about their past. Furthermore, many problems become easier. For example, the famous riddle: how could Homer write a detailed report of the Trojan War if the war took place more than 500 years before Homer wrote his work? [End of quote] Thus, when the likes of W.F. Albright, in close alliance with the École Biblique, attempted to date Joshua’s Jericho, the absence of any Mycenaean pottery at the site meant that - at least according to what Eduard Meyer had established chronologically about the Egypt of the same time, that it was to be dated to c. 1400 BC - the Jericho destruction would inevitably have to be shifted back centuries before this time. A major part in all of this was played by another (pottery-) chronologist (numbers man) and another Dominican, père Louis-Hugues Vincent, who joined the École Biblique only a year after it was founded. Of course, coming for a Lagrangian background, père Vincent was always going to be operating from a base of biblical fluidity. He, being a pottery-chronologist, was accorded a respect similar to that of the ‘expert’, Meyer. Consequently, we now find ourselves in the situation in which the biblical events have been separated from their right archaeology and history by many centuries – almost a millennium (c. C24th BC) in the case of the famous Jericho incident. One of my correspondent’s main concerns was that this - the Bible’s no longer fitting with the textbook history - was one of the reasons why many dismiss much of the Scriptures as being myth or fantasy, having little in the way of historical credibility. “Didactic fiction” is how one elderly Dominican in Sydney has described the Book of Jonah. Not that the Bible is essentially about history, or science, of course. For the Dominican priest to whom I spoke, it is really about “theology”. According to pope Francis, in Aperuit Illis, it is about “our salvation” (# 9): The Bible is not a collection of history books or a chronicle, but is aimed entirely at the integral salvation of the person. The evident historical setting of the books of the Bible should not make us overlook their primary goal, which is our salvation. It is clear from this, though, that the biblical books have an “evident historical setting”, contrary to Lagrange’s view that early Genesis is pre-historical, but also non-historical (see below). Dei Verbum even has “our first parents” Abraham, Moses, and so on. …. 3. God, who through the Word creates all things (see John 1:3) and keeps them in existence, gives men an enduring witness to Himself in created realities (see Rom. 1:19-20). Planning to make known the way of heavenly salvation, He went further and from the start manifested Himself to our first parents. Then after their fall His promise of redemption aroused in them the hope of being saved (see Gen. 3:15) and from that time on He ceaselessly kept the human race in His care, to give eternal life to those who perseveringly do good in search of salvation (see Rom. 2:6-7). Then, at the time He had appointed He called Abraham in order to make of him a great nation (see Gen. 12:2). Through the patriarchs, and after them through Moses and the prophets, He taught this people to acknowledge Himself the one living and true God, provident father and just judge, and to wait for the Savior promised by Him, and in this manner prepared the way for the Gospel down through the centuries. …. M. Lagrange, on the other hand, according to the following, denied early Genesis historicity: https://exhibitions.lib.cam.ac.uk/dominicans/artifacts/the-bible-in-context/ …. His major challenge, however, would be to establish for fellow Catholics the importance of the Bible’s literary and historical contexts while still proclaiming it to be the Word of God. To promote Catholic biblical scholarship Lagrange founded first the periodical Revue biblique which was to publish articles on exegesis by teachers at the Jerusalem school and elsewhere, and second Études bibliques, a series of commentaries which began with a study of Judges published in 1903. Church censorship was a continual possibility. Lagrange challenged in his lectures and articles the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and he denied the historicity (though not the truth) of the creation narrative in Genesis 1–11. As a result, he found himself forbidden to publish a commentary on Genesis. [End of quote] The Dominican priest to whom I spoke did not actually deny an Adam and an Eve, but said: “The first man and woman are called Adam and Eve in Genesis, but these would not have been their real names as they are Hebrew names”. I also advanced this bullet point: - The JEDP sources that scholars claim to identify in the Book of Genesis are not fundamentally the sources from which Genesis was compiled. These latter are the toledôt divisions, to be read as endings of family histories, the histories of the pre-Moses patriarchs. Whilst the Dominican priest was familiar with toledôt, he did not comment on my insistence that they were endings, not headings. He admitted to being uncomfortable with JEDP – “you can’t preach it”. I also recalled to him the case of the French Catholic physician, Jean Astruc, really a pioneer of the modern documentary sources, who had intuitively discerned that the Flood account in Genesis appeared to have been composed from more than one source. The toledôt perfectly accounts for that, of course, it having been written by Noah’s three sons. The next series, I said, was signed off only by Shem, who must by then have become separated from his brothers, Ham and Japheth. Furthermore, I said, scholars who deny the influence of Moses in the compilation of the Pentateuch may not have any expertise in the ancient Egyptian language, and are not able, therefore, to discern a prevailing Egyptian influence throughout much of those books - this being an indication that these books, in their original states (before later editing) were written at an early point in time when Israel had been in close contact with Egypt, and not written in a later Babylonian period as the documentists insist. I queried that, if the early Bible were not really historically or archaeologically relevant, why was it that there is a substantial archaeology underlying e.g. the Conquest when properly dated, and not dated according to the whims of the unreliable chronologists. The Middle Bronze I (MBI) people - the priest knew of them - basically trace the same geographical pattern as do the Exodus Israelites, and they are known to have been bearing Egyptian artefacts. But conventional historians (the more biblically-minded ones) tend to identify the partially nomadic MBI as belonging to the time of Abram (Abraham). Once we fix Abram to his right stratigraphical level, however, which is Late Chalcolithic/Early Bronze I, we can identify the destruction caused by the four invading kings as narrated in Genesis 14, Amraphel of Shinar and his confederacy. All of this is a real history, with a real underpinning archaeology. The Book of James considered today Clearly a farmer is not expected to be patient over a period of centuries for his crop to emerge. And that is the difficulty with any timetable that does not accord with the bald statements of Jesus Christ and the Apostles that that very generation would be experiencing his “coming”. The emptying of the meaning from the holy Scriptures, that has already been considered in relation to the Dominican founder of the École Biblique in Jerusalem, Pere Marie-J. Lagrange (1855-1938), seems to be a continuing phenomenon among Dominican priests, with one recently emphasising to Catholics at a Mass in Sydney (Notre Dame University), with regard to Genesis: “Whatever you do, don’t take any of this literally”. Then, a few days later (15th December, 2019), another Dominican priest, at the same venue, made some statements regarding the New Testament Book of James that I would consider to be emptying that book of some of its meaning, and to be implying that the Apostles were rather clueless about “the Second Coming”. First of all, the priest claimed that the Book of James was written about 90 AD. That is after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD (conventional dating). And James was already dead by then. The bald statements of James regarding Jesus’ imminent return (5:7-8): “Be patient, then, brothers and sisters, until the Lord’s coming. See how the farmer waits for the land to yield its valuable crop, patiently waiting for the autumn and spring rains. … the coming of the Lord is at hand” [literally, “has drawn near”]”, was an indication to the Dominican priest that the Apostles did not have any idea as to when the Second Coming was due to occur. But, still, he added, we need to await it patiently just as does a farmer for the land to yield its crop. Clearly a farmer is not expected to be patient over a period of centuries for his crop to emerge. And that is the difficulty with any timetable that does not accord with the bald statements of Jesus and the Apostles that that very generation would be experiencing his “coming”: • Romans 13:12: “The night is far gone; the day is at hand” [literally, “the day has drawn near”]. • Hebrews 10:25: “[Do not neglect] to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encourag[e] one another, and all the more as (because) you see the Day (already) drawing near.” • 1 Peter 4:7: “The end of all things is at hand” [“has drawn near”]. 70 AD, far from being a couple of decades before the Book of James was written, was the year when the prophesied “coming” would occur. For more on this, see e.g. my article: A Coming of Jesus before the Final Coming https://www.academia.edu/106150543/A_Coming_of_Jesus_before_the_Final_Coming Who was this James? The following article poses a similar question: Who Was James, the Brother of Jesus? It is no secret that the Catholic Church teaches, and has always taught, that the Blessed Virgin Mary was just that — a virgin — all the days of her life. This teaching does not come out of nowhere, but is based on a long tradition in Christian history. Despite this venerable Christian tradition, Mary’s perpetual virginity is one of the Catholic beliefs most often questioned by Protestants. It is interesting to note that most, if not all, Protestant denominations have no official teaching on whether or not Mary remained a virgin after giving birth to Jesus. Virtually all of the founding fathers of Protestantism (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, et al.) maintained a belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity. Luther preached that “Christ … was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him” (Sermons on John, ch 1–4). Zwingli wrote, “I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact virgin” (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424.). Most Protestants today, however, assume Mary and Joseph would have had normal marital relations resulting in other children. This is not based on any new historical data unavailable to those in the early Church. Rather it is based on an assumption that … well, that’s just what married people do, isn’t it? For many, the belief that Jesus had younger siblings seems supported by the Bible itself. After all, we have verses like this: “Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James and Joseph and Judas and Simon?” (Mk 6:3). Isn’t this biblical proof that Mary had other children besides Jesus? Before we delve into this specific question, it is important to keep one thing in mind …. The Church has studied the scriptures for thousands of years. Yet the Church maintains that Mary remained a virgin all her life. Has the Church somehow remained unaware of Mk 6:3 all this time? Or is there more to the story? “Brethren of the Lord” There are several other passages that mention the “brethren” of Jesus (Mt 12:46, Jn 7:5, Acts 1:14, 1 Cor 9:5). “Brethren” in this context has always been taken to mean “cousin.” This is how Martin Luther interpreted its meaning in his Sermons on John quoted from above. The reason for this is simple. There was no word for “cousin” in Hebrew or Aramaic (the language Jesus most likely would have spoken). The term “brother” or “brethren” was used generically for any male relative, and this is how it is used in the Greek of the New Testament (even though Greek does have a word for “cousin”). …. Those who maintain that James, Joseph, Judas and Simon were other biological children of Mary and Joseph might say that this “cousin” explanation is a little too convenient. But it can be demonstrated as true in at least one case — the case of James, the most famous “brother of the Lord.” St. James was one of the Apostles, the first leader of the Church in Jerusalem, and a very prominent figure in the early Church. Was he, in fact, another son of Mary and Joseph? We do know that his mother was named Mary. The gospels give us that information. But they also tell us that she was not Mary, the mother of Jesus. We can tell this by comparing the different gospel accounts of the women standing at the foot of the cross. “Among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee” (Mt 27:56). “Among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joseph, and Salome” (Mk 15:40). “And meanwhile his [Jesus’] mother, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene had taken their stand beside the cross of Jesus” (Jn 19:25). If we compare these three accounts, we see three women named Mary standing at the foot of the cross: Mary, the mother of Jesus; Mary Magdalene; and Mary, the wife of Cleophas who was also the mother of James and Joseph. So James’ mother was a Mary, but not the Mary (Mary is a very common name among 1st century Jewish women. I can’t cite it now, but I remember reading in one source that 25% of Jewish women of the era were named some version of “Mary”). What do we know of James’ father? In Mt 10:3, James is called the son of Alphaeus. It is worth noting that the Aramaic name for Alphaeus could be rendered in Greek as either Alphaeus or Clopas/Cleophas. Since James’ mother Mary is described as the “wife of Cleophas” in Jn 19:25, this is probably the same man described here. And what do we know of him? Not too much from the scriptures, but according to the 2nd century historian Hegesippus, he was the brother of Joseph, Jesus’ foster-father. This would make James the cousin of Jesus. However, even if Hegesippus is wrong about that detail, we still know from the gospel accounts that James is the son of Alphaeus/Cleophas and a different Mary, and not the son of Mary (mother of Jesus) and Joseph. In other words, James cannot be the biological brother of Jesus. Does this prove the perpetual virginity of Mary? No. But it does show the danger of challenging any long-held and well-established Christian teaching on the basis of one or two “proof texts” from the Bible. Benedict XVI - Bible “based on history” “The evident historical setting of the books of the Bible should not make us overlook their primary goal, which is our salvation”. Pope Francis In this article I have suggested that the ‘emptying Scripture of its meaning’ exegetical approach of Père Lagrange of the École Biblique appears to have been followed by contemporary Dominicans. From the recent exhortation by one to by no means take literally the content of the Book of Genesis, to another’s insisting that neither Moses nor Joshua wrote down contemporary records - biblical writing did not begin until “900 BC” - to another’s labelling the book of Jonah “didactic fiction”, to another’s uncertainty as to whether Daniel and his three friends were actual historical characters. And that is only a part of it. As a Christian, I found the last one, concerning the Book of Daniel, to be particularly disconcerting as the aged priest mentioned it in a sermon in which he also proposed that the courageous witness of Daniel and his three friends, in the face of fierce persecution, ought serve to strengthen us today as we face persecution and ridicule for our faith. Well, I don’t know how other Christians would feel about this, but if ISIS had a knife at my throat ordering me to renounce my faith, I would not find it terribly consoling to have that particular Dominican close, Book of Daniel in hand, urging me to remember the heroic witness of Daniel and his three friends. “But you said they may not have been real!!!” Far more refreshingly, I think, pope Benedict XVI had insisted that the Bible was “based on history” (as quoted by Greg Sheridan in “Christmas story still resonates down the ages”): The former Pope Benedict, in his magisterial, scholarly book, Jesus of Nazareth, explains the importance of historicity: “It is of the very essence of biblical faith to be about real historical events. It does not tell stories symbolising supra-historical truths, but is based on history, history that took place here on this Earth.” Benedict also explains the severe limits of the historical-critical method in trying to deconstruct the New Testament. Concerning biblical critical studies, which once in their wilder speculations did much to undermine religious faith, Benedict writes: “We have to keep in mind the limits of all our efforts to know the past: We can never go beyond the domain of hypothesis because we simply cannot bring the past into the present. To be sure, some hypotheses enjoy a high degree of certainty, but overall we need to remain conscious of the limit of our certainties”. And more recently pope Francis referred to, in “Aperuit Illis” (# 9): “The evident historical setting of the books of the Bible …”. First, recalling Paul’s encouragement to Timothy, Dei Verbum stresses that “we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully and without error, teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the sacred Scriptures” (No. 11). Since the Scriptures teach with a view to salvation through faith in Christ (cf. 2 Tim 3:15), the truths contained therein are profitable for our salvation. The Bible is not a collection of history books or a chronicle, but is aimed entirely at the integral salvation of the person. The evident historical setting of the books of the Bible should not make us overlook their primary goal, which is our salvation. Everything is directed to this purpose and essential to the very nature of the Bible, which takes shape as a history of salvation in which God speaks and acts in order to encounter all men and women and to save them from evil and death. ….

Tuesday, December 31, 2024

Taken from: https://www.popefrancis2024.sg/mary-the-mother-of-god-and-our-mother/#:~:text=Mother%20of%20us%20all&text=Who%20can%20fill%20our%20emptiness,our%20eyes%20to%20their%20fullness. Mary, the Mother of God, and our Mother Michelle Tan for The Catholic News Singapore “If we want to be Christians, we must be ‘Marians’, that is, ‘children of Mary’,” declared Pope Francis at the Mass for the Solemnity of Mary, the Holy Mother of God, on Jan 1, 2024, in Saint Peter’s Basilica. “The motherhood of Mary is the path leading us to the paternal tenderness of God, the closest, most direct and easiest of paths: this is God’s ‘style’ – closeness, compassion, and tenderness,” he said. “Indeed, the Mother leads us to the beginning and heart of faith, which is not a theory or a task, but a boundless gift that makes us beloved sons and daughters, tabernacles of the Father’s love. It follows that welcoming the Mother into our lives is not a matter of devotion but a requirement of faith.” Mother of God Pope Francis began his homily by explaining the meaning of Saint Paul’s words in the Second Reading: When the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman (Galatians 4:4). “In ancient times, time was measured using vases of water; the passage of time was marked by how long it took for an empty vase to be filled,” shared the Pope. “The phrase ‘fullness of time’ means that, once the vase of history is filled, divine grace spills over. God becomes man and He does so through a woman, Mary: she is the means chosen by God, the culmination of that long line of individuals and generations that ‘drop by drop’ prepared for the Lord’s coming into the world. It pleased God to turn history around through her, the ‘woman’.” The words ‘Mother of God’ are therefore a “dogma of hope” that express “the joyful certainty that the Lord, a tiny Child in His Mamma’s arms, has united Himself forever to our humanity, to the point that it is no longer only ours, but His as well” – a confession of God’s eternal covenant with humanity, he added. The Pope then called on the Church and every society to respect, defend, and esteem women “in the knowledge that whosoever harms a single woman profanes God, who was ‘born of a woman’”. Mother of us all “Just as Mary, the woman, played a decisive role in the fullness of time, she is also decisive in the lives of each of us, for no one knows better than a Mother the stages of growth and the urgent needs of her children,” observed the Holy Father. Referring to the Mary’s intercession for the wedding couple at Cana who had run out of wine (John 2:1-12), he said, “Mary knows our needs; she intercedes to make grace overflow in our lives and to guide them to authentic fulfilment. Brothers and sisters, all of us have our shortcomings, our times of loneliness, our inner emptiness that cries out to be filled. Who can fill our emptiness if not Mary, the Mother of fullness?” Pope Francis concluded his homily with the exhortation, “Let us entrust this coming year to the Mother of God. Let us consecrate our lives to her. With tender love, she will open our eyes to their fullness. For she will lead us to Jesus, who is Himself ‘the fullness of time, of every time, of our own time, of each one of us.”