Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Church Teaching or Science: Which is more Certain?  (Read 963 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Twice dyed

  • Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 478
  • Reputation: +200/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • Violet, purple, and scarlet twice dyed. EX: 35, 6.
Church Teaching or Science: Which is more Certain?
« on: January 08, 2024, 04:52:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • "Philosophy tells us that truth exists. If there were no truth, science could not exist." pg. 3
    I received this with a Christmas card for 2023 from Fr. X, neo-SSPX. I am not sure who wrote it or when...It is printed on a 8 1/2" x 11" sheet, printed on both sides with 2 folds; this results in a 6 page leaflet. I placed Page 6 as Page 1 because it is the Introduction. I suppose it is a gentle rebuttal of: 'The Realist Guide to Religion and Science', 2018 AD., by Fr. Paul Robinson.

    .  
    Logged
    La mesure de l'amour, c'est d'aimer sans mesure.
    The measure of love is to love without measure.
                                     St. Augustine (354 - 430 AD)

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46410
    • Reputation: +27313/-5045
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Church Teaching or Science: Which is more Certain?
    « Reply #1 on: January 08, 2024, 06:12:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Possibly feels guilty about belonging to an organization that promotes Robinson's Modernist Guide to Religion and Science and wants to do a little something to offset the damage being done thereby?
    Logged

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 32588
    • Reputation: +28800/-570
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Church Teaching or Science: Which is more Certain?
    « Reply #2 on: January 09, 2024, 11:24:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Right off the bat, we have to distinguish between

    Science: the study of the natural world created by God, building up a base of human knowledge based on testing, re-testing, making hypotheses, the Scientific Method, etc.
    Anything in this body of knowledge, any experiements done, are ALWAYS welcome to be reconsidered, re-testing, confirmed by other scientists. There ARE NO HERETICS or "deniers" in the world of Science. Only imaginative thinkers and brilliant men who question things, re-test things, think outside the box, and advance humanity's knowledge ever closer to a more perfect grasp of truth and reality.


    Science!: See "I f*cking LOVE SCIENCE!", "Trust the Science!", "The Science is settled!", "Most Scientists/Experts consensus is..."
    (The F-bomb is on the T shirt, possibly without the *, so I had to include it...)
    In Science! there are TONS of heretics who are to be cancelled, burned at the stake, etc. if they go against the consensus, against any of the religious "dogmas" held by Scientists.
    This is actually a materialist/pagan religion, believing in all sorts of nonsense (information/being/order coming from nothing, no Creator for the world, etc.) and a religious belief that if you spend enough time, or throw enough money at something, Science! is literally omnipotent. Even solar panels you drive over will be possible with enough "development" or if enough people throw money at it. Also the belief that man can create his replacement, something superior to himself, a literal god ("self aware AI") and many other such errors.

    Even though you can't falsify reality or true science, it is obvious to any rational man that "Science!" is a total crock.

    P.S. You might be tempted to say, "Burned at the stake? really?" and I'd say YES. What would you call "Doesn't deserve to live?" When you CANCEL someone, make it impossible for them to be hired anywhere, you obviously don't care if they live or die -- and in fact, you DO have a preference: you prefer that they die a slow, painful death on the streets, homeless with no friends, possessions, or income. How is that ANY WORSE than just burning them at the stake?
    Logged
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline TheRealMcCoy

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1336
    • Reputation: +959/-198
    • Gender: Female
    • The Thread Killer
    Re: Church Teaching or Science: Which is more Certain?
    « Reply #3 on: January 09, 2024, 11:52:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I use the term "scientism".
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46410
    • Reputation: +27313/-5045
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Church Teaching or Science: Which is more Certain?
    « Reply #4 on: January 09, 2024, 02:18:31 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Yep, and then they leverage this programmed worship of science into false arguments from authority ... such as what they did to get people to get the jab.  "Trust the science."  They believe that by just using the programmed term "science", they automatically win the argument, and science is taken for granted as being correct, or even having been done at all.  Of course, the real scientists were not stupid.  They knew EXACTLY what the jab was going to do, and intended these effects.  So, the jab was not a "failure" but actually a great success, if we understand what it was actually intended to do.  Now, they had some uncertainty, so they had control groups where many jabs were saline, others had different stuff in them, etc.  They also had some uncertainty about how the general public would react.  So part of the last Plandemic was a learning exercise, and they'll take those lessons learned into the "next one" (that Bill Gates chuckled about).
    Logged

    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3771
    • Reputation: +2809/-272
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Church Teaching or Science: Which is more Certain?
    « Reply #5 on: January 10, 2024, 07:29:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • ‘Satan uniquely entered the Catholic Church at some point over the last century, or even before. For over a century, the organizers of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, Liberalism, and Modernism infiltrated the Catholic Church in order to change her doctrine, her liturgy, and her mission from something supernatural to something secular.’ (Taylor Marshall, LifeSiteNews, October 4, 2019)

    Here below is the reason why millions of souls abandoned the Catholic faith and chose science instead.

    ‘By confusing the mathematical outlook with the physical it is possible to arrive at all sorts of conclusions. It is not easy for an untrained mind to distinguish what is rightly proved from what is little more than speculation. Some of these conclusions are startling, and appeal to the popular imagination. It requires only a further step to apply them to the most obtrusive and sacred matters of philosophy and religion...’---    Fr Henry V. Gill, SJ, M.A (Cantab.), M.Sc. (N.U.I.): Fact and Fiction in Modern Science, Gill and Son, Dublin, 1943, pp.71, 160.


    ‘In 1741, in the face of optical proof of the fact that the Earth revolves round the sun, Pope Benedict XIV had the Holy Office grant an imprimatur to the first edition of the Complete Works of Galileo.’--- Galileo Papal Commission; Nov. 1992.

    ‘In 1820, Canon Settele lodged an appeal [to obtain an imprimatur for his new heliocentric book] with Pope Pius VII (1800-1823)… In 1822 a favourable decision was given [by way of two decrees forbidding the censorship of ‘modern’ heliocentric books]. This papal decision was to receive its practical application in 1835 [under Pope Gregory XVI (1831-1846)] with the publication of a new and updated index [emptied of all heliocentric books].’- Pope John Paul II’s Galileo Commission, 1992.

    ‘The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are. We cannot but deplore certain attitudes (not unknown among Christians) deriving from a short-sighted view of the rightful autonomy of science; they have occasioned conflict and controversy and have misled many into opposing faith and science.’--- Gaudium et spes, # 36.

    The reference given to this passage was Fr Pio Paschini’s Life and Work of Galileo Galilei, a book on the Galileo case that had been subjected to ‘several hundred modifications’ after Fr Paschini died. Here above they have God supposedly leading the suspected heretical Galilean scientific reformers while all the Fathers, saints, Trent, popes, cardinals and theologians who defended Biblical geocentrism are depicted as little more than ‘fundamentalists.’

    We see then, from 1741 popes began to take SCIENCE more seriously than Church teaching. But that ended from 1820-to 1835 when science became more truthful to them than the Bible and Church teaching. But not only that, if you objected to science and went by Church teaching you would be punished;

    ‘The most excellent [Holy Office of 1822] have decreed that there must be no denial, by the present or by future Masters of the Sacred Apostolic Palace, of permission to print and to publish works which treat of the [supposedly scientifically proven] mobility of the Earth and of the immobility of the sun [the defined heresy in 1616], according to the common opinion of modern astronomers, as long as there are no other contrary indications, on the basis of the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Index of 1757 and of this Supreme [Holy Office] of 1820; and that those who would show themselves to be reluctant or would disobey, should be forced under punishments at the choice of [this] Sacred Congregation, with derogation of [their] claimed privileges, where necessary.' Cited by A. Fantoli: Galileo; For Copernicanism and for the Church, p.475

    ‘All modern cosmology stands or falls with this concept [the Copernican Principle] being correct, even though, to quote a text approved by Einstein: “We cannot feel our motion through space, nor has any experiment proved the Earth in motion.”--Lincoln Barnett: The universe and Dr. Einstein, Dover Publications, 1948, p.73.’.

    ‘It is a duty for theologians to keep themselves regularly informed of scientific advances in order to examine if such be necessary, whether or not there are reasonsfor taking them into account in their reflection or for introducing changes in their teaching.’--- Pope John Paul II’s response to Papal Commission findings, 1992.
    Logged
    Pages: [1]
    « previous next »