And I do absolutely DESPISE this heretical teaching of Father Paul Robinson.  I've actually seen the destructiveness of this in action, after 7 years of being taught the exact same garbage by the Jesuits, first in High School, then at University (both Jesuit).  I saw many young men at the Jesuit High School lose the faith because they were immediately taught that the Book of Genesis was a myth, there weren't a real Adam and Eve, that these are all stories to make a point, that the Bible didn't intend to teach about history or science, that the parting of the Red Sea was just because at certain times this marsh they walked through would recede, and on and on and on.  That's where the Modernists got their start, attacking Sacred Scripture.  What else was just something "not intended by Scripture".  Oh, St. Paul, in his misogynistic passages, was just reflecting the attitude of his times, and that wasn't the Holy Ghost teaching that (for those who even believed that the Holy Ghost had anything to do with Sacred Scripture).  What's next?  This type of crap shattered the faith of countless young men at my Jesuit All-Boys' High School.

So, I will not hold punches, I will not be "nice" or "nithe" ... since the fact that he poses at a Traditional priest makes him THAT MUCH MORE DANGEROUS, since the more dressing you put on top of the poison, the more likely people are to swallow it.  If the same thing were said by some Jesuit wearing a rainbow stole while officiating a clown Mass, people of good faith would immediately recognize it as heresy and reject it outright.  But put the same nonsense behind a Trad priest using all the smells and bells, and "well, I guess it must be OK to think this way".

NO !!!  Father Paul Robinson is a Modernist Heretic, and his book belongs on the Index.  And the SSPX should be condemned for approving of and promoting his book.  People have been burned at the stake for FAR LESS than what he holds and teaches.

Galileo was condemned as a heretic for FAR LESS, for something that could even be debated slightly more, i.e. by claiming that when Sacred Scripture says that the sun moved or the sun stopped, this really means that the earth stopped, etc.  In a sense, motion is relative, so one could make a better case for that.

But Sacred Scripture clearly teaches that during the Great Deluge, the ENTIRE earth was covered with water, the peaks of ALL the mountains, and that ALL flesh was destroyed from the earth except those in the ark ... that does not mean there was a local flood in the Mediterranean basin that wiped out maybe 10% of all humanity, covered NO mountain peaks (since the water would quickly dissipate below that level) ... and where instead of spending decades building an Ark, Noah could have just packed up and moved a couple hundred miles.  There's no way to RESCUE that without having to attribute error to Sacred Scripture.  That's heresy.  St. Robert Bellarmine declared that Galileo was heretical not because scientific matters themselves can be heretical, but because by implication he denied the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture, by contradicting it, i.e. his positions were heretical not ex parte objecti, sed ex parte Dicentis, not because of the objective content but because of WHO TAUGHT IT, namely, the Holy Ghost.

Now if I say ... "Well ... in my opinion, it's just that, I think Father Robinson is mistaken." and of course I add, "oh, but I have the greatest respect for him, and he's a wonderful Trad priest, just that he's wrong about this." ... what would I be doing?  I'd be CONDONING THE HERESY, saying it's just opinion, and that it's no big deal and does nothing to detract from how great a priest he is, etc. etc.  Sorry.  No can do.  I call out heresy as heresy.

I mentioned that the Councils declared anathemas against heretics.  Well, they often added anathemas against those who TOLERATED heresies and effectively being complicit in them and enabling them.  If I "softened" up against Father Robinson, I'd become an enabler of his heresies, and I refuse to do that.  I will not be party to the wreckage of faith his errors can cause and have caused.  Also, even charity toward the heretic requires being blunt and direct.  Had the Dubia "Cardinals" just come straight out and said he was teaching heresy ... I think that could have caused a massive cascading effect in the Church.  Instead, most of those who self-identify as Catholic might have mentioned a thing or two about it on X, until they got bored, and moved on with a yawn.

I have just read through this post on Fr Paul Robinson and Ladislaus's reference to his heresies in his book : A Realist Guide to Religion and Science, Gracewing, 2018. Based on this book alone, it is obvious Fr Robinson teaches heretical stuff, and even atheistic stuff according to St Augustine, stuff lauded on this book's website.

Here are a few examples:

‘Does the Bible want us to read it like a science textbook using scientific language? Or is it meant to be read in another way? The answer is obvious from the very beginning of the Bible; which presents serious challenges for anyone seeking to find properly scientific information about the formation of the world, at least anyone possessing today’s extensive knowledge of the universe’s true architecture.’--- Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. p.247-8.

So, according to Fr Robinson, ignore that supernatural creation of Genesis, and believe my scientific version.

‘Galileo’s aggressiveness at a sensitive time about a delicate issue, combined with his lack of scientific proof, drew down upon him a condemnation of the Church. That condemnation admittedly went too far, but in no way did it involve the Church’s infallibility or make geocentrism a dogma of Catholic belief.’ (Reference given was Arthur Koestler’s, The Sleepwalkers) --- Fr Paul Robinson: Ibid, p.284.

‘As Fr Stanley Jaki (1924-2009) points out, it was not really until a statistically significant parallax shift was observed that heliocentrism was grounded in strict scientific evidence.’--- Fr Paul Robinson; p. 282.
Given stellar parallax is found in a geocentric universe it is NOT proof that the decrees for Biblical geocentrism was ever proven wrong.

‘This position on the Flood as being graphically universal meets with serious scientific difficulties. For one, how can you get enough rain to cover the entire earth?…Clearly this is popular, not a scientific description….To impose a scientific sense upon the Bible then is to do violence to the sacred text and the divinely intended meaning.’--- Fr Paul Robinson: pp. 274-5.

In his book, The City of God, St Augustine replies to the likes of Fr Robinson:

‘Who but an atheist, first they imagine it impossible that any flood should become so huge as to exceed the height of any mountain fifteen cubits.’(Ch. XXVII)

So, according to Fr Robinson, not even God could ‘get’ enough water to cover all mountains of the entire Earth. Why then did Moses tell us in Genesis chapter nine that there will never be another such ‘cataclysmos’ flooding of the Earth like that of Noah’s and that God created the rainbow under the clouds as a sign of this promise? Given that local floods happen all the time on Earth, are they inferring God went back on His word thereafter?

‘From a scientific perspective, the universe began its infancy at time 0, 13.7 billion years ago, it is now in its middle age, and it is heading toward old age billions of years in the distant future. The triumph of the Big Bang theory was a triumph for science, for the universe corresponding to it can be explored by the scientific mind to an astonishing level of detail.’---Fr Paul Robinson SSPX: Realist Guide, p.366-7.

No wonder the supernatural creation of Genesis is long gone. On the 16th June, 2025, the newly elected Pope, Leo XIV, addressed young astronomy students learning at the Vatican Observatory, encouraging them to share their discoveries and the joy of learning about the universe. He then tells them they will confirm every secular theory of a natural evolved Creation.

‘Students will focus on the telescope’s contributions over the last three years to the evolution of galaxies, birth of stars, and planetary systems and the origin of life. “For the first time, we are able to peer deeply into the atmosphere of exoplanets where life may be developing and study the nebulae where planetary systems themselves are forming.” Pope Leo said “The authors of sacred scripture, writing so many centuries ago, did not have the benefit of this privilege, yet their poetic and religious imagination pondered what the moment of creation must have been like.” Pope Leo discussed scientists’ ability to trace “the ancient light of distant galaxies,” which he said “speaks of the very beginning of our universe’--- EWTN website.

On goes Fr Robinson's heresies, those that caused Bruno to be burned at the stake, now passed on to the next generation.                                                                                                                         

...A Realist Guide to Religion and Science, Gracewing, 2018. Based on this book alone, it is obvious Fr Robinson teaches heretical stuff, and even atheistic stuff according to St Augustine, stuff lauded on this book's website.

Here are a few examples:

‘Does the Bible want us to read it like a science textbook using scientific language? Or is it meant to be read in another way? The answer is obvious from the very beginning of the Bible; which presents serious challenges for anyone seeking to find properly scientific information about the formation of the world, at least anyone possessing today’s extensive knowledge of the universe’s true architecture.’--- Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. p.247-8.

So, according to Fr Robinson, ignore that supernatural creation of Genesis, and believe my scientific version.

‘Galileo’s aggressiveness at a sensitive time about a delicate issue, combined with his lack of scientific proof, drew down upon him a condemnation of the Church. That condemnation admittedly went too far, but in no way did it involve the Church’s infallibility or make geocentrism a dogma of Catholic belief.’ (Reference given was Arthur Koestler’s, The Sleepwalkers) --- Fr Paul Robinson: Ibid, p.284.

‘As Fr Stanley Jaki (1924-2009) points out, it was not really until a statistically significant parallax shift was observed that heliocentrism was grounded in strict scientific evidence.’--- Fr Paul Robinson; p. 282.
Given stellar parallax is found in a geocentric universe it is NOT proof that the decrees for Biblical geocentrism was ever proven wrong.

‘This position on the Flood as being graphically universal meets with serious scientific difficulties. For one, how can you get enough rain to cover the entire earth?…Clearly this is popular, not a scientific description….To impose a scientific sense upon the Bible then is to do violence to the sacred text and the divinely intended meaning.’--- Fr Paul Robinson: pp. 274-5.

In his book, The City of God, St Augustine replies to the likes of Fr Robinson:

‘Who but an atheist, first they imagine it impossible that any flood should become so huge as to exceed the height of any mountain fifteen cubits.’(Ch. XXVII)

So, according to Fr Robinson, not even God could ‘get’ enough water to cover all mountains of the entire Earth. Why then did Moses tell us in Genesis chapter nine that there will never be another such ‘cataclysmos’ flooding of the Earth like that of Noah’s and that God created the rainbow under the clouds as a sign of this promise? Given that local floods happen all the time on Earth, are they inferring God went back on His word thereafter?

‘From a scientific perspective, the universe began its infancy at time 0, 13.7 billion years ago, it is now in its middle age, and it is heading toward old age billions of years in the distant future. The triumph of the Big Bang theory was a triumph for science, for the universe corresponding to it can be explored by the scientific mind to an astonishing level of detail.’---Fr Paul Robinson SSPX: Realist Guide, p.366-7.

No wonder the supernatural creation of Genesis is long gone. On the 16th June, 2025, the newly elected Pope, Leo XIV, addressed young astronomy students learning at the Vatican Observatory, encouraging them to share their discoveries and the joy of learning about the universe. He then tells them they will confirm every secular theory of a natural evolved Creation.

‘Students will focus on the telescope’s contributions over the last three years to the evolution of galaxies, birth of stars, and planetary systems and the origin of life. “For the first time, we are able to peer deeply into the atmosphere of exoplanets where life may be developing and study the nebulae where planetary systems themselves are forming.” Pope Leo said “The authors of sacred scripture, writing so many centuries ago, did not have the benefit of this privilege, yet their poetic and religious imagination pondered what the moment of creation must have been like.” Pope Leo discussed scientists’ ability to trace “the ancient light of distant galaxies,” which he said “speaks of the very beginning of our universe’--- EWTN website.

On goes Fr Robinson's heresies, those that caused Bruno to be burned at the stake, now passed on to the next generation.                                                                                                                       

Cassini, thank you for bringing this to our attention - I'm reasonably new here on Cathinfo. and although I had heard people at our chapel speaking against his book, I was unaware of the depth and scope of his errors. This has to be stopped.

Fr. Paul Robinson's book is selling for 52 euros (hardback) on Amazon. I checked ebay  - both Uk and America - and it is advertised there in abundance too. I agree, this is scandalous. It is scandalous that he hasn't been ordered to withdraw his books. And it is totally scandalous that YOUR book is not the one being promoted.

I read through one of the reviews that gave his book one star. It was posted by an American calling himself Christian. He provided what I thought was a thorough over-view. I will post it in abbreviated form here (please forgive the length but it raises some very good points from another Catholic's perspective (if there is anything questionable, please point out as it is not a topic I am familiar with other than historically):

Reviewed in the United States on 22 May 2018
Verified Purchase

 "... there are two serious objections (to this book): (1) it promotes the Big Bang theory (on p. 456) in the sense of “cosmic theistic evolution,” i.e., that God created the Big Bang and then guided the cosmic evolution of the universe through natural secondary causes over billions of years by the “fine-tuning of the universe necessary for stars, galaxies and planets to form,” and (2) it denies that Noah’s Flood was geographically universal over the entire earth.

--1. Even though Fr. Robinson claims to be promoting progressive creationism (p. 253), his position corresponds to cosmic theistic evolution because he says that, once God created the initial matter and energy of the Big Bang, the non-intelligent secondary causes of the universe did not require God’s direct and special causality and intervention to develop into galaxies, stars and planets. Progressive creationism, on the other hand, teaches that the physical universe and all life forms were created by the direct and special causality of God rather than by natural processes of secondary causes by themselves.

--Fr. Robinson’s explanation of cosmic evolution actually coincides with the Deist explanation of the creation and evolution of the universe, which compares God’s act of creation to that of a watchmaker who builds a watch, sets it in motion, and then no longer intervenes in its actions.
--Many Deists reject the possibility of miracles. They teach that after God established the natural laws of science and set the great cosmos in motion, He no longer needed to interact with His creation, since He endowed all the elements of the universe with the necessary forces to produce the formation of galaxies, stars and planets by themselves.
--However, some Deists do admit the possibility of miracles in exceptional cases, since God is all-powerful and can do whatever He wills, including temporarily bypassing his own natural laws.

--The natural religion of Deism is the foundation of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ’s idea of God as the “Great Architect” of the Universe. The emblem of compass and square used in Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ supposedly symbolizes the mathematic and scientific principles used by God to design the universe—as if referring to Wisdom 21:11, which says that God “hast ordered all things in measure, and number, and weight.”
--Thus, Fr. Robinson’s explanation of cosmic evolution tends to coincide with the Deist / Freemasonic idea that God should be seen as the Great Architect of the Universe, Who simply sets everything in motion for cosmic evolution after the Big Bang—by the “fine-tuning of the universe necessary for stars, galaxies and planets to form.”

--2. Fr. Robinson’s idea of cosmic evolution is not possible according to the very principles of causality. For God’s natural causality moves secondary causes according to their natural mode of operation. As St. Thomas Aquinas says: “Whatever is received, is received according to the mode of the receiver.” But the natural mode of operation of secondary causes of the universe (matter and energy, e.g., atoms, molecules, gases, gravity, etc.), is non-intelligent, for by nature they are blind forces. Thus, the natural motion they receive from God does not move them towards intelligent de-sign and complex order. It’s true that they possess a certain degree of intrinsic design (e.g., atomic structure, ordered mode of operation, etc.), but scientific evidence shows that they are not naturally predetermined, pre-programmed or “fine-tuned” to act intelligently and develop into the com-plex and beautiful design we see in the universe.

--Consequently, even though secondary causes of the universe can produce various effects with beauty and simple design (e.g., the formation of mountains, landscapes, oceans, lakes and rivers, waterfalls, the Grand Canyon, etc.), they cannot give themselves intelligent design, i.e., organize themselves and develop into the complex order and intelligent design of stars, galaxies and planets, without the direct and special intervention of God. This supernatural/special action of God is precisely His “six-day” work of creation and formation of all things in the universe, as revealed in Genesis and explained by St. Thomas Aquinas and the Fathers of the Church.

--3. Deleted as quite long, technical, and unnecessary for the purpose here.


--4. With regard to Creation Science and a young universe, St. Thomas Aquinas gives the reason why God can create the universe in a highly developed condition without the need of long periods of time to form into stars, galaxies and planets. He says: “God produces being in act out of nothing, and can, therefore, produce a perfect thing in an instant, according to the greatness of His power” (Summa: I,66,1,2). This principle applies to all being, whether organic or inorganic. Thus, if God created the universe this way, then even though it would have the physical perfection and development of an “ancient” universe, it would actually be very young.

--For example, the light produced by stars and galaxies would have extended great distances quickly across the universe without the need of millions/billions of years. Thus, we read in Isaiah 44:24: “I, the Lord, am the Maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself, and spreading out the earth all alone.” (See also Isaiah 45:12). Similarly, the human body of Adam and Eve, along with the formation and development of the brain, vital organs, etc., did not need the normal 25-30 years necessary for development from an embryo to adulthood. Once God’s work of creation was finished and He rested on the “seventh day,” the universe—with its cosmic, chemical and biological perfection—simply continues in its existence and operation according to the normal laws of physics established by God.

--5..... Concerning Noah’s flood: (a) Evolutionary anthropologists are all convinced that the human race had spread over the entire earth by Noah’s time. Now, Christ himself declares that the flood took away “all” the people of the earth (Matt. 24:39). Therefore, Noah’s flood must have been geo-graphically universal; (b) There are seashells and other marine fossils on the summits of all the mountains in the world, including the Himalayas, Rockies and Andes. How could this be possible—unless all the mountains were under water at one time in the past?
--However, this doesn’t mean that the flood waters had to be as high as these mountains, because, according to Dr. Walter Brown’s “Hydroplate” theory, many major mountain chains only formed “during” the flood period, when the rising mid-oceanic ridges caused the tectonic plates—the hydroplates—to slide away from their fracture zones and to collide with each other and buckle. Those that buckled up-ward took marine fossils with them; those that buckled downward formed ocean trenches. Thus, in Gen. 7:11 we read: “All the fountains of the great deep were broken up and the flood gates of heaven were open.” Modern scientists themselves say that the Himalayas were formed when the continental plate of India slammed into the continental plate of Asia.

--6. According to Fr. Robinson, since the galaxies, stars and planets of the universe have the appearance of being formed over millions/billions of years, God could not have created them as described in Genesis, otherwise He would be intentionally deceiving mankind by making the universe look old when it is actually very young, thereby “preventing His rational creatures from using their reason to understand what He had created.”
-- However, this kind of thinking is not correct, for not only does it deny God’s right to give special and direct formation to His creation without the need of long periods of time, it also goes contrary to the reality that God did in fact bring into existence many creatures already formed and developed. For example, Adam and Eve were created in their adult state without the need of 20-25 years to grow into adults. Also, God created all the animals in their adult state, since infant animals cannot be born (come into existence) and survive without the causality of their adult “parents.”
...........................

--7. Fr. Robinson also seems to make contradictory statements. First of all, he says that it is metaphysically impossible for blind forces to produce intricate order, and that “the earth is a result of such complex causes that it is most likely the only habitable planet in the universe” (p. 410). But then he says: “but we grant that our planet could have formed by merely natural processes without a direct intervention by God or an intelligent agent. The theory has reputable, mathematical models behind it.”

--However, even Isaac Newton shows opposition to this opinion in his Principia Mathematica: “Though these bodies [planets] may indeed continue in their orbits by the mere laws of gravity, yet they could by no means have at first de-rived the regular position of the orbits themselves from those laws… This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being.”

--Secondly, Fr. Robinson states that natural selection can-not produce macro evolution, i.e., one life form evolving into another (p. 456). But in another place he says: “Once God has created, for instance, animals with all five senses, like dolphins, then secondary causes—such as dolphins, natural selection, humans, and even good and bad angels—can modify dolphins to make other animals that are new to some degree” (p. 405); and he also says: “Once a biologist admits the existence of formal causes outside the mind, he can then propose a coherent naturalistic evolutionary process for one life form changing into another” (p. 449). These statements are contradictory and ambiguous."


 

"..... From the 17th to the 19th centuries, certain men embarked on a mission that would change how persons in both Church and State perceived this geocentric universe and man’s place in it, a comprehension that gave witness to the omnipotent God of the Bible and the Catholic faith. Their intent was to implement the beginning of the great reset, the hermetic principle ‘as above, so below,’ an ancient pagan belief that would first question and then remove this sacred understanding of the Holy Trinity, the Creator of all, from the minds of many, ................ it can be classed as the most ingenious ‘scientific,’ intellectual, metaphysical, doctrinal, and heretical deception in mankind’s history. When popes from 1757 to 1835 submitted to this Galilean reformation in Biblical understanding, Modernism entered the womb of the Catholic Church. It was this Galilean reformation that led to the rejection of the supernatural for a natural interpretation of Genesis, that in turn: 'contributed, and is still contributing to the destruction of the church...'"

Excellent summary. And gives depth and historical background to the key point that the reviewer observed in regards to Fr. Robinson's book:
"--Thus, Fr. Robinson’s explanation of cosmic evolution tends to coincide with the Deist / Freemasonic idea that God should be seen as the Great Architect of the Universe, Who simply sets everything in motion for cosmic evolution after the Big Bang—by the “fine-tuning of the universe necessary for stars, galaxies and planets to form.”

Which tells us where this Modernism - "synthesis of all heresies" - has originated from.

Am I surprised? Upset, yes. Surprised, not so much. I firmly believe that when satan thought he had the Church hierarchy in the palm of his hand with generations of this nonsense, Archbishop Lefebrvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer emerged as out of nowhere as Soldiers of Christ.  Caught off guard, he quickly rallied his Fabian spies, and sent a number into the SSPX seminary to rise up through the ranks and plant this Modernist philosophy yet again. This is no doubt. We would be very naive to think that the Freemasons would leave the SSPX to work away doing all the good they have been doing.  Does this mean that SSPX is corrupt? No. No more than the Church. It means that there are (past and present) infiltrators - a corrupt element inside - setting the groundwork for such ideas to be accepted. And these infiltrators are in EVERY organization. I'm not saying that Fr. Robinson is one - he is a product of his pre-seminary education - but I am suggesting there is someone far more subtle, with authority to pass this book, who is either directly one of them, or has been groomed from old to think this way. I know of many SSPX priests who do not hold with theses views, including our own parish priest. But, yes, its a worry that such error is being allowed to free range by the SSPX authorities.

Cassini, you mentioned that Cathinfo was the only place that allowed you to air your book. By that I take it you have approached the SSPX and they have refused to engage. So the answer is that someone who has the means needs to publish your book and get it on the main-stream outlets to counteract against this poison. Will keep this in our family prayers.

I think Fr. Paul Robertson is in charge of the Angelus press.

I see. And the district Superior since 2020 has been a Fr. John Fullerton. Who was the District Superior when Fr. Robinson's book was first published? I think it was 2018 if I remember correctly.

Meanwhile, the following link is a profile of the priest who published the book: 
https://www.shu.edu/profiles/paulhaffner.html

A big issue with Fr Paul Robinson and his evolutionary views is not just the fact he was allowed to publish a book that one may read or not:  he teaches at the school.  Even though my daughter was already homeschooled at this point, she had friends in the school telling her that he was having a debate on the subject in his book.  Evidentially then he is pushing these ideas on the youth, much as Ladislas has mentioned regarding his experience with Jesuits (not all that long ago).  My own father was taught by Domincans in the 1950's that Scripture is just stories. 

Who is protecting these young minds at the school? 

Seriously?!! Do you know what school he is teaching at?

He teaches at the school in Denver.  To be fair, my daughter's experience was several years ago now.  Perhaps he no longer teaches or perhaps he has been corrected by now.  We have been out of the school for quite some time and do not maintain much contact in this regard.  

Based on a Mass I watched from St Isidore in Watkins Co two weeks back (too ill to attend Mass at neochapel) there is a new priest who is now the principal of the neoS school for this September. Whether or not Fr Robinson, whom I have also heard preaching on the livestream of the Sunday Mass, is still teaching I know not. But he is still preaching and is the prior I believe of said parish. He might also be doing the online parish catechism. I have seen one of those as well.

If you're talking about the livestream from August 17, that's Fr. Joseph Haynos. He was just transferred from Syracuse, NY.