Sunday, August 29, 2010

Reconciling Faith With Reason Is Not The Same As Reconciling Faith With Science

Archbishop Martin of Dublin gave a speech in Italy to the members of the Communion and Liberation movement.  The speech dealt with Cardinal Newman's time as rector of Ireland's first Catholic University. Most of the commentary has dealt with Archbishop Martin's comments on the state of Catholicism in Ireland and it's apparent dearth of theological maturity.  However, I had a different reaction to this speech.  This link will take you to a full translation, but the following short extract really hit home to me:

"In the Catholic university Gazette of 9 February 1855, Newman quotes from an earlier speech: "One of the greatest disasters of modern times is the separation between religion and science, and the perfection of knowledge is a combination of both ... which makes men not only educated but good Christians."

Directly after this quote, Martin shifts Newman's point entirely:

The question of relationship between faith and reason was particularly delicate at that time — maybe less in Ireland than the rest of the United Kingdom and continental Europe — with the increase of the sceptical attitude toward religion. Newman wanted to show his contemporaries that faith and reason do not conflict, but also that “reason could not be the sole arbiter of all truth”.

This substitution of Archbishop Martin's is done all the time by Catholic teachers.  Newman was referencing faith and science, not faith and reason.  There is a huge huge difference between the two concepts.  In Newman's time, as with our own, there are major conflicts between traditional faith and scientific understandings, gaps which reason is hard pressed to reconcile.  Equating reason with science is a nice trick, one which the teaching authority attempts to do with regularity.  Reason is an intellectual tool both science and theology use to arrive at truth.  The difference is science uses reason to rule out false assumptions, theology all too often uses reason to justify false assumptions.  Where as there may not be an inherent conflict between faith and reason, depending on one's starting assumptions, there can be a huge conflict between faith and science.

At no point in his entire speech does Archbishop Martin refer to Newman's original point about reconciling faith and science.  It's faith and reason which must be reconciled, which in too many cases means ignoring scientific evidence which contradicts underlying unexamined faith assumptions.  Some tenants of Natural Law morality come to mind.

I am personally very frustrated by the dearth of theologians who are delving into the latest scientific advancements, especially in quantum theory and human consciousness.  I don't understand how an honest person trying to reconcile faith and science can ignore whole fields of science which describe an incredible reality of enormous potential.  Maybe it's too frightening, but to continue to ignore these kinds of scientific advances is to admit traditional Christian understanding can not be reconciled with scientific reasoning.  I happen to think that's not true, but reconciling the two will take the courage to read the Gospels with fresh eyes, minus the accretions of centuries of false assumptions as to how the universe really works.

Short personal note.  I should be back up and posting regularly by the end of the week.  I sincerely want to thank the people who have donated to the support of this blog.  It's been both affirming and humbling, giving me a real boost when I needed one.


  1. Galileo Galilei was a famous victim of the Inquisition.

    In 1992 JP2 indicated the heretic, might be forgiven because, after all, it was just a "tragic mutual incomprehension"

    In 2008 Ratzinger suggested Galileo be considered a hero of faith and science. It was about 400 years too late. " In January, Benedict canceled a speech at Rome's La Sapienza University after a group of professors, citing the Galileo episode and depicting Benedict as a religious figure opposed to science, argued that he shouldn't speak at a public university."

    I cant' wait.


    PS: Ha, ha, ha, the word verification is : Storm

  2. I recommend Raimundo Panikkar. He happens to be a theologian, philosopher and a scientist, having doctorates in all three areas.

    His last book, which he intends as a summary of his life's work, The Rhythm of Being, has just been published.

    I intend to purchase it soon.

    Amazon Books has made available a bit of it to read.

    It sounds fascinating.

  3. Anon, thanks for the link to this book. I will have to buy it and spend much time digesting it. Pannikar seems to be my kind of seeker.

  4. The headline to this says it all. I am glad you caught this Colleen. Attention to detail is one of those things that if one is not careful one will overlook the obvious & go down into a rabbit hole. Seems the Professors and teachers in the hierarchy do a lot of overlooking of the pertinent details.

    If they were more careful about dotting their own i's and crossing their own T's, perhaps hundreds of years of wasted energy and persecution against many enlightened Christians & Catholics and those of other faiths might be reconciled. If only they could examine themselves first before propagating chaos and confusion.

    The intellectual sloppiness of the hierarchy has become too much the pattern and that is becoming ever more obvious the more they open their mouths or write anything.

    It really seems to me that the hierarchy and this Papacy is too concerned about destroying what they deem as bad influences on the faith, rather than concentrating on being creative and not being a bad influence themselves!!

  5. Just a note about Raimundo Panikkar- he passed away on August 26 in Spain. He was 91 years old.

  6. I would also recommend Panikkar, a theologian whose work is truly in a league of its own.

    The best theologian writing on the intersection between religion and science right now is, in my opinion, John Haught.

    As far as Cardinal Martin's speech goes, I wish he had identified the source of the quotation from Newman that "reason could not be the sole arbiter of all truth." I'm quite curious to know what he meant by that.

  7. I was curious about that quote as well, but I assumed it was about Newman's mystical bent. That might be an unwarranted assumption.

    Besides Haught, I also have fun with Diarmuid O'Murchu's thinking.

  8. "Pannikar seems to be my kind of seeker."

    I warms my heart to see that you are fond of Pannikar......who was a priest of Opus Dei.

    God is not mocked.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  9. Mouse I haven't read anything of Pannikar's. I've only read the intro to his book on Amazon. I haven't mocked God quite yet.

    By the way, who in your opinion isn't corrupted by Opus Dei?

  10. Panikkar was in Opus Dei but left in thge early 60's when its authoritaria streak became evident.

    He refused, apparently, to state anything more about it from what I could find on the 'Net.

    At any rate, if one reads Panikkar, from his early Unknown Christ of Hinduism to his Trinity and World Religion to his translation of Vedic texts and beyond, one will not find much if anything that resembles any Opus Dei doctrine.

    I could be wrong but I doubt it.

  11. For once Mouse is correct, Panikkar was at one time in Opus Dei.

    In the mid-sixties he decided to leave. They basically kidnapped him and kept him at an Opus Dei residence in Rome. Apparently they tried to get Pope Paul VI to laicise him. The pope decided instead that he should be freed from Opus Dei, which he was.

    After that time he was very reluctant to talk about his time with Opus Dei. According to the biography on his official site, he only spoke about it once publicly.

    One only has to read his work to confirm that he was not corrupted or in any way compromised by his early involvement with Opus Dei.

  12. 'The Mouse' has been correct about many things. However there are some who (like Pannikar) have abandoned the pristine Catholic Faith for one of their own invention.

    Those who choose not to believe the truths of the Faith.....that is their problem. I wash my hands.

    "Panikkar was in Opus Dei but left in thge early 60's when its authoritaria streak became evident."

    Assuming for the sake of discussion that he did, in truth, actually leave Opus Dei (which is assuming a lot....), Pannikar was part of the 'authoritarian' element in the 40s.

    Playing fast & loose with history is dishonest.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  13. Pannikar, quoted in his autobiography, refers to his 'active years' with Opus Dei thus:

    "I do not repent of that period of my life….."

    Translation: he never truly left it.

    When one has done and been involved with evil, one repents of it. Or one does not dare call oneself as Christian.

    So much for Pannikar.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  14. Raimon Panikkar died on Thursday, Aug 26, 2010 - age 91.

  15. Raimon Panikkar, quoted on his official website: "I started as a Christian, I discovered I was a Hindu and returned as a Buddhist without having ceased to be a Christian."

    Does that sound like someone who "never truly left" Opus Dei to you?

  16. I hate to admit this but I was once a Republican. I also once had great confidence in the office of Pope. People do grow and develop and in doing so they must change.

    I think that sometimes we all must grow through beliefs as life and facts show us differently. Experience has indeed been my greatest teacher. dennis

  17. "Does that sound like someone who "never truly left" Opus Dei to you?"

    Very much so.

    As we have stated previously: Opus Dei has used persons & groups on the Right AND Left. On the Left this would include Bernardin, Mahoney & Daneels.

    To directly answer the question, he sounds like someone who lost whatever Faith he may have had. He was very high up in Opus Dei. There are more then a few persons of that eschelon who are (or pretend to be) "Liberal".

    As to loss of and/or utter lack of Faith (on the 'Right'), Mother Theresa had none for the better part of her 50 year career. Yet was always posed as if in prayer for the cameras, or mouthing pious things. And she was very much a devotee of Escriva.

    For those who read with no guile of agenda, I would remind of the Civil Rights & Vietnam Antiwar movements in the US. The various groups comprising these were heavily penetrated by 'the other side'. Moles & plants were used. Whole groups started as front operations.

    Those capable of critical thought should comprehend what is being said here. And have understanding.

    Anon Y.Mouse

  18. Mouse- Your logic escapes me.

    If Panikkar was still a member of Opus Dei, then why do his writings show and reveal a philosophy/ theology that is so antithetical to the premises of Opus Dei?

    Are his writings in a code that only the Illuminati truly understand?

    Or are you accusing Opus Dei of actually being an atheistic nihilist organization using pious language as a cover?

    This would be in accord with Straussian thinking.

  19. Enlightened Catholism?


    This blog stands for everything that is wrong with the Catholic church. I wish you would leave and go to the Unitarian church where you can worship the moon and the stars.

    pro-abortion creep!

  20. Thank you for the ever so intelligent comment. No wonder many of us find 'true' Catholicism to be intellectually bankrupt and hostile to the tenants of Christ. Fascism at it's finest under the guise of promoting 'life'.

  21. Yes, thanks anonymous for interjecting the peace, love and joy of Jesus Christ into the conversation here. I'm overwhelmed by the life giving energy from your comment.

    You know, dogs are lovely creatures when their handlers treat them to respect others & teach them that their are boundaries of which they should not venture. They can be trained to obey commands like sit, stand, sniff and find things, do nice tricks, catch frisbees and balls, even run through hoops of fire. But if the handler is rotten to the core of their being they can train them to perform evil deeds such as tearing people apart.

    The Romans would not feed the lions before the Christians were led into the arena to be devoured. There were thousands in the stands cheering as the lions tore them limb from limb.

    word verification is dulmen

  22. "....then why do his writings show and reveal a philosophy/ theology that is so antithetical to the premises of Opus Dei?"

    For the simple reason that Opus Dei believes in itself. "God" is merely a useful construct to it. As to the conservative/Right Wing official stance of theirs, it is a useful sham. One of Escriva's key maxims is: "the end justifies the means".

    The fanatical 'official members' are largely useful idiots.

    "Or are you accusing Opus Dei of actually being an atheistic nihilist organization using pious language as a cover?"

    The only correct words in the above are: 'using pious language as a cover'.

    No, they are not atheistic; they are Luciferian. Nor are they nihilistic. As a group, they know what they are doing & have planned well. They are serving Satan; the precise cognition of this reality will vary, depending on the individual & their status.

    " creep!"

    While I would not use such rhetoric, those who favor the sin of abortion need to pray for the salvation of their souls. As they are (perhaps unwittingly) promoting murder.

    Of course, when one designs & engages in a Strategy of Tension, one controls elements of both sides. Pitting them against each other.

    Opus Dei has & is doing this in re Abortion. They have their fingers on BOTH sides.......

    Anon Y. Mouse

  23. 'Enlightened' Catholic,

    I see you have a video on your sidebar of the dirtbag Sarah Silvermann bashing the Pope.

    Let me ask you, do you actually go up to recieve communion every week?


  24. True Catholicism is not & never can be 'bankrupt' in any way.

    Yet the true core of the Catholic Faith has nothing to do with 'fascism'...or any 'ism'. Nor does it have anything to do with mere academicia or the related notion of 'intellectualism'.

    At the same time, Christ does not allow Abortion. Sorry - it is murder. Especially when it is used as 'birth control'.

    The proper balance is not to be found in the Opus Dei led polarizaton of both sides of the Abortion issue. But rather in putting $$ & energy into providing unlimited HELP (of all kinds) to women in crisis pregnancy. To make it possible for them to bear the child. And keep it, if they wish to.

    This must be done without shaming, lecturing, preaching - even in subtleties.

    Also in the intelligent use of contraception to prevent unsafe (or economically unfeasible) pregnancy.

    ....but not for the enabling of hedonism!

    Anon Y. Mouse

  25. To the other Anon....

    In re Sarah Silvermann's video.....

    While I do not like her as a comedian, she makes a very valid point: the very existence of the Vatican buildings & infrastructure are an affront to Christ. They do nothing to feed the poor.

    Albino Luciani (Pope JP1st) seriously wanted to sell much of the Vatican real estate & works of art, to feed the poor. To relocate to more humble quarters in the Roman suburbs. He even had real estate appraisers & art experts start the work of evaluating the holdings for potential sale/divestment.

    Luciani clearly saw that the Vatican was not congruent with the Gospel.

    ....and neither is Herr Ratz.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  26. Google selects the videos. I have nothing to do with it. In fact, I pay zero attention to them.

    As to my religious practices, I am not aware I have to answer to you or any other human. But if it makes you feel better, my reception of communion is not a public act. It is a spiritual act.

    I have no idea why abortion has been interjected in this conversation. The post is about reconciling faith and science, not when human life may or may not begin. Although some people may wish differently, reconciling faith and science is a much bigger subject than abortion.

  27. Mouse JPI had a number of unacceptable notions. It's hardly surprising he only lasted a month. So much for working for any congruence between the Gospels and the 'rich' tradition.

  28. "I see you have a video on your sidebar of the dirtbag Sarah Silvermann bashing the Pope."

    It is my understanding that the blogger has no control over the videos and does not post them.

    Also, the name of the blog "Englightened Catholicism" is a pun.

    As for someone receiving communion, if you are, it does not seem to have any good affect when you call someone a "dirt bag" or are ignorantly presumptuous enough to assume that someone who does not share your views should not be included in receiving Christ.

    Do you not know that God is in each and every soul?
    Labeling people as a "dirt bag" reminds me of high school and the immature mentality that goes with it.

  29. JPI was murdered by Opus Dei....which has absolutely nothing to do with the Catholic Faith.

    The Vatican is not identical with the Catholic Faith. And it does not believe in it. One must wrap one's head around this to understand spiritual reality.

    For ANYONE to knowingly receive Holy Communion in a state of serious sin, is a grave sin itself. It only compounds matters. Those who favor/advocate abortion are in a state of sin as they are advocating murder. It is up to them to examine their conscience first & seek conversion & repentance.

    That statement has nothing to do with the official position of the Vatican. It has everything to do with the Law of God.

    As to faith & science, it is truly an irrelevant topic. The Church has long had a vested interest in controlling science. Which it currently does. Both via Vatican academies & through persons & entities linked to Opus Dei.

    There is simply not enough time left to worry about that.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  30. Anon Mouse,

    You are a tool of Satan.


    are you the professor in this video?!

  31. Anon -

    Anyone can take cheap & completely anonymous pot-shots at someone in an online forum or blog. Perhaps you would consider expounding upon your condemnation of myself.

    ...and just perhaps (like myself) you might at least try to give yourself an 'identity' here (as I have), rather then coming from a black hole.

    If you consider me a 'tool of satan' for my criticism & condemnation of the Vatican and the Opus Dei, perhaps you need to be taken to school:

    Neither entity is divine.

    Anon Y, Mouse

  32. Anonymous, I did not look at the video and will not as I don't have time to waste on your silly infantile games.

    Obviously you are a bully and have nothing better to do than insult people you do not know.

    "Love thy neighbor as thyself."

    That would be the Christian thing to do anonymous.
    But nothing you have said reminds me of Christ at all, so be gone and get behind me Satan.

  33. Buttery, Anon Mouse, Colkoch

    Sorry for the insults.

  34. There seems to be some real confusion here. I'm not sure that any points are being made.

    It seems that there's an argument that once Opus Dei has its mits on you, it's impossible to leave or change one's mind. One is irrevocably doomed to be Opus Dei forever.

    A peculiar thought.

  35. Anon,

    I've only been here a few months. We've had some serious discussions about abortion, but discussion is not advocation. To characterize Colleen as a pro-abortion creep is simply wrong.

    You are pretty quick to condemn. What don't you like here? The lack of deference to clerics? The condemnation of sinful and illegal activities by clerics? The questioning of moral teachings? The close reading of scriptures? The drapes? Mouse gets tiresome, but surely you don't damn us all for our distrust of Opus Dei?

    Join the discussion you might learn something if you think about it.


  36. To the anonymous who said they were "sorry" I accept your apology and wish you the peace, love and joy of Jesus Christ.

    To the anonymous who said "It seems that there's an argument that once Opus Dei has its mits on you, it's impossible to leave or change one's mind. One is irrevocably doomed to be Opus Dei forever."

    If one is young and involved with Opus Dei, they could outgrow OD, just like us older folk have outgrown our youthfulness and lack of wisdom.

    Nothing is impossible With God.

  37. ".....once Opus Dei has its mits on you, it's impossible to leave or change one's mind. One is irrevocably doomed to be Opus Dei forever."

    There is partial truth in this.

    When one is lured into OD, it becomes your life. All of your social & business contacts are in it. For this (and other...) reasons it has long been correctly termed: Ecclesiastical Freemasonry.

    That term is at the same time BOTH literal AND figurative.

    You do not leave it. Nor more then one can truly ever leave the CIA. They can & will do anything and everything to prevent someone from leaving Opus Dei. Those who do manage to wiggle free often escape with only the clothes on their back.

    Factually, those who have tried to leave it have had their lives & careers ruined. Assuming they were allowed to live. More then a few of these have told their horrid personal stories, which perfectly illustrate the masonic modality OD is.

    If you leave, you lose everything. You will not be employed. Your friends will become your enemies. You are left destitute, in every sense of the word.

    Of course, God is in control of all. Those ex-OD who cling to Him will find solace - and their daily bread. And healing. But they will be forever damaged as persons by what has been done to them 'in the Name of God'.

    Once again, I repeat for the Deaf & Blind: Opus Dei very much uses & has great influence on the Left. Using priests & prelates, as well as laity.

    The excesses of the Left are just as evil & spiritually damaging as those of the Right. Both extremes serve Satan, not God.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  38. Anon Mouse-

    Well then....Panikkar was a covert Opus Dei operative, writing texts and giving lectures worldwide on religion and philosophy ( at variance with the public ultramondane theology of Opus Dei and its exclusivistic theology), in order to deceive unwitting readers and listeners into accepting the major theses of Opus Dei without realizing they had done so.

    This is an amazing revelation.

    Only the Illuminati could rival such deception but then they could, as well as the Freemasons, very well do so.

    So...the world is an arena of struggle between the Freemasons, Opus Dei, and the Illuminati, ( perhaps also the remnants of the Third Reic and, of course, the atheistic Jewish cabal).

    You should write a novel or a screenplay for could easily rival Dan Brown.

  39. Here's an example of the current situation;

  40. Anonymous, thanks for the link to Hawking's big bang gap ideas.

    Some reflections
    The problem as I see it with regard to the Reconciling Faith With Science has to do with one's idea of God to begin with. Faith that is sterile, unused, misunderstood, twisted, cannot be the guiding principle in true knowledge of God, which would account for so many atheist and the rejection of religion. Religion has done a poor job of conveying a truthful understanding of God, veered off course for quite some time and in many ways has essentially made up their own notions of God that are not true at all. This is a gap, a barrier of a gap that consequently bars the intellect from reconciling faith with science.

    I want to know the God that Jesus knew, whom He called "Our Father." As people of faith we believe God is Love and is the life giving energy inside that every consciousness can tap into, talk to and communicate with. Jesus was always communing or communicating with God, Our Father.

    Yet still the notion of God for many is that God is Wrath and judgment, more like a cancer than in resembling Jesus' God the Father of life itself.

    Maybe the gap in our understanding of God, or how God is conveyed falsely, is the gap that Hawking speaks of and of which he projects?

    If I have any understanding of God it is that I know I will never completely understand God, and yet I am to love God with my whole heart, mind and body. The face of God is that of Jesus, the Lord and giver of Life, who was, is, and ever shall be. His kingdom has no end. Our Father, who art in Heaven, is not in time. God transcends time and space. We are in time and space in our material existence. Yet, we have a spiritual existence, that is, some of us do.

    I know that there is very little peace on this earth now and so many religions. Atheist are born from failed religions that fail at truth.

    When I think of the big bang it does remind me of the "light bulb" that goes off, the spark of light and joy that can occur when we arrive at certain conscious understandings that expand our notions of God, the world and the universe and it has the power to change our minds, our thinking, our own horizons, and it can create life. Call them life altering experiences of consciousness raising. We are made new. Born again. Are these the sparks of creation itself within our consciousness that make us new or whole or wise?

    Is creativity a big bang on an infinitesimally smaller scale within our consciousness and derived from a divine entity and/or dimension that is outside time itself? I wonder.

    I would include healing powers as creativity, not just the arts or sciences.

  41. Perhaps Newman did not use reason in this particular quote, but anyone familiar with his work will know that the relationship between faith and reason was a major and consistent theme throughout his life.

    The quotation is probably not contrary to his spirit.

  42. Butterfly-" and so many religions. Atheists are born from failed religions that fail at truth."

    Is this an anti religious pluralism statement? Is it wise to say our personal doorway into the mystery of the Divine (our birth religion)is the *only* way that people can reach that transcendent totality? What about Catholics who later became atheists, is Catholicism "a failed religion that failed at truth?" Just some food for thought.

  43. "You should write a novel or a screenplay for could easily rival Dan Brown."

    For all practical purposes, Dan Brown was bought & paid for by Opus Dei. Those who cannot grasp this need an oil change....

    As to Pannikar being a 'covert OD operative", he was never 'covert'. Let us deal with reality: he never left, he simply morphed into a useful Cooperator. There are hundreds of thousands of Cooperator/Collaborators with OD globally. On the Left & Right. One need not be Catholic to be in this membership status. Or Christian. Or even a Theist.....

    One merely has to be in agreement with elements of an agenda. Such Cooperators may do so completely voluntarily or be paid. Just like a Mata Hari.

    "So...the world is an arena of struggle between the Freemasons, Opus Dei, and the Illuminati"

    Such struggle is nonexistent. Rather there is great collaboration. The first two groups factually exist; the third exists in spirit. Any perception of such 'struggle' is deception. Rather like the Legion of Christ vs Opus Dei. While OD is the top dog & there is some rivalry, any perception of true discord is window dressing.

    As to 'remnants of the 3rd Reich', your friends at Opus Dei (in the Vatican & the US intelligence community) facilitated their escape to the US & Latin America. This is reality. Using 'the Jews' as a scapegoat is an old trick.....

    Opus Dei is Ecclesiastcal Freemasonry, which has nothing (directly) to do with the regular Lodge. Yet there are ties between the two; dual members (cleric & lay). The one likes to use the other as a convenient foil. It's a game. Like pretending the Knights of Columbus has nothing to do with regular Masonry.

    Only the proverbial idiot child would believe that.

    The key to understanding Opus Dei is this: Satan does not care WHAT you believe, as long as it is not Christ. The real Jesus of Nazareth.

    So why make the overt pretense of the ultramontane.....yet use 'Liberals' to operate a seeming counter-agenda? As long as ppl are deceived into something other then the true Christ, their agenda has been served. It is Satan's agenda; all about power.

    The method was summed up famously by Mao Tse Tung:

    :...let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend...."

    Such thought & policy would only work if one was truly in charge.

    Understand that & then one can begin to understand how Mahoney, Weurl, Gregory, Bernardin, are of one mind & heart with Finn, Myers, DiNardo, Egan, Dolan, DiMarzio, Gomez.

    Or how Catholic (cleric & lay) linked to Opus Dei operated both the Communist groups AND Solidarnosc in Poland.

    A Strategy of Tension is a contolled, engineered ...'conflict'. Satan is the penulatimate master & teacher of this method.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  44. Anonymous

    1.) "Is this an anti religious pluralism statement?" No

    2.) "Is it wise to say our personal doorway into the mystery of the Divine (our birth religion)is the *only* way that people can reach that transcendent totality?"

    I did not say that.

    3.) " What about Catholics who later became atheists, is Catholicism "a failed religion that failed at truth?" In some cases, yes. A lot would depend on their teaching and the teacher.

    In the case of Catholics who later became atheists, would you say Catholicism failed at religion, failed at truth in every circumstance and personal decision?

    "Just some food for thought." I've thought of it before.

  45. Mouse-

    There's no way to argue against you.

    After all, you, yourself might be a "cooperator" with Opus Dei by making the statements you have be seen by others as absurd, irrational, and delusional.

    I, too, might be a "cooperator" with Opus Dei by making the above statement.

    Opus Dei is truly awesome.

  46. Anon E Mouse, I suggest you have your own blog about Opus Dei. Do you have anything at all to say about Reconciling Faith With Reason Is Not The Same As Reconciling Faith With Science".... Just wondering.

  47. There is truly only one conspiracy in the world:

    That Satan wants to keep souls from God.

    The literal myriad of methods are to complex to list. Yet they boil down to manipulating the human mind to deceive. To accomplish this the emotional & psychological needs of the person are manipulated. The weakest points are attacked. Using other human agents.

    His work is in deception, whether on one person or involving many. Or universal deception.

    Christ indicated plainly (for those with Eyes to see & Ears to hear) that organized religion would be the playground for Satan. The primary entity through which to deceive many. Working through useful idiots & willing servants. Wolves in sheep's clothing.

    Those who are of the Leaven of Escriva are not going to overtly dismantle it piece by piece.Using cold logic, harsh realities - both mundane & spiritual. They would also never speak against The Father, referring to him (correctly) as one manifesting the classic symptoms of possession.

    "Opus Dei" existed long before 1928, but did not assume a formal, publicly known organizational face until then. It serves Satan. Go & read from "The Way", invoking the aid of the Holy Spirit. He will cut through the smokescreen for you. And show clearly what is reality.

    As OD has had de facto control of the Vatican for some years now, it is impossible to speak of the Vatican...of the Church....and not note it.

    The topic of Opus Dei was introduced via the person to first mention Pannikar.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  48. "By the way, who in your opinion isn't corrupted by Opus Dei?"

    No well known Catholic pundits, authors, or talking heads at present would qualify.

    Those who would qualify have no voice in the public square.

    The answer to that question lies in whether the person in question has the 'phone number' for the Holy Ghost.

    Such will neither be found on EWTN nor the NCR, Commonweal, America,

    Mary was sent by God repeatedly to warn you. Yet you will not listen. You will not take seriously her words. You laugh at the Rosary & Eucharistic Adoration as if an out of date fashion faux pas. When pressed on such issues you backpedal & equivocate, so as to pretend neutrality - while smirking. You think she & her words are a quaint joke. Or something invented by the Vatican.

    Rather her words point to that which became Opus Dei as of great evil.

    Nor would you heed Marie-Julie Jahenny.

    Neither do you believe in what is foretold in Scripture of this.

    Very well....

    "...if they will not listen to Moses & the Prophets, they will not listen, were on to rise from the dead".

    Anon Y. Mouse

  49. I see Marie Julie Jahenny is another stigmatic mystic with end of the world prophecies. Three days of darkness would spell the complete end of life as we know it. It would be very very cold after three days without sun light.

    In my own personal thinking, what groups like OD and it's imitators are doing is preserving an old form of energy based in an old form of consciousness. It's a form of energy or thought process which infantilizes God and most certainly infantilizes humanity, while at the same time semi divinizing self proclaimed religious leadership.

    To be honest Zechariah Sitchin's thinking about the Annunaki make more sense to me than the prophecies of Marie Jahenny. I can't fathom a God who is so petty that He would stack the odds against his own creation and then destroy it all except for a few chosen folks. This is not my definition of a God of love. This is a God for a person whose rolodex is very limited and stuffed with a limited view of God.

    I just so love this kind of thinking. The quote is from her official biography: "To purify His elect and to make them victims of atonement, God often uses Satan, who in his hatred of mankind, is in His hands the most active instrument. Sacred Scripture and especially hagiography give us numerous examples of this conduct of Providence."

    I guess this propensity to attack His chosen victims with Satan makes God a member of OD. Or maybe it's all just Satan having some fun with naive hyper suggestive disassociative peasant women and the myriad of people willing to suspend judgment and follow them.

    I notice in this case a prophecy of hers showed up in 1974, thirty some years after her death, that condemns the Novus Ordo. How terribly convenient.

  50. Butterfly- If that is indeed what you meant, next time you wax philosophical you should make your thought less convoluted and triumphalist then.

  51. Anonymous says: " If that is indeed what you meant, next time you wax philosophical you should make your thought less convoluted and triumphalist then."

    I wrote what I wrote and do not apologize for it was inspired and a reflection of inspiration.

    I don't find your comment to be helpful or inspirational at all and is just a personal put down and seems to indicate you are here just to argue and knit pick while not creatively advancing the discussion.

    Next time you wax insulting criticism maybe you could distinguish yourself from all the other "anonymous" people writing here.

  52. Colleen-

    Sadly, your statements are indicative of a lack of Faith.

    God has used chosen persons like Marie-Julie Jahenny to both confirm & expound upon pre-extant prophecies. Just as He used Noah to warn Man, before the then prophecied chastisement of the Flood.

    God created Man & gave him a few simple rules to follow. In his utter stupidity, Man has repeatedly shown (as a group) all the focus & attention to detail of a drooling infant - concerned only with self.

    More then once has God destroyed 'the world' (human civilization & most of mankind) in His Mercy & Justice. And then let Man repopulate & 'try to get it right'.

    In His Mercy & Justice, God will 'smite' both the just & unjust alike. The true Justice. The just as Mercy; that they not continue in ways which would harm their souls. That they might be saved. And prevented from further temptation - and of oppressions from the unjust.

    The souls of the Just who die thus are not being punished; they are being taken by God to Himself.

    He destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah for their utter hedonism & unfaith. Sparing only Lot and his family - as Mercy. The true sin of those cities was lack of faith (and occultism).

    This will now happen globally, as indicated in Scripture, for the same reasons. Except that this time it is on a vast, global scale. As the rot is so systemic that 'this world' (man's civilization) is beyond repair. And being led by wolves in sheep's clothing.

    Sitchen is a tool of Opus Dei, enabling great deception.

    The God whom you 'cannot fathom" is the real God. You do not know Him & seemingly refuse to comprehend.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  53. (cont.)

    As to Marie-Julie Jehanny, no complete English translation of ALL her words is available. To the best of my knowledge.

    However, neither that nor any attempt by traditionalists to misuse her words alters their import or veracity. FYI....what she wrote of a future 'mass' has not yet come to pass. She also predicted the then future manifestation of Opus Dei, long prior to its founding. As did Mary.

    What Jehanny said of the Three Days Darkness is corroborated by the words of other legitimate prophets, the words of Our Lady, & in Scripture. It is indicative of both spiritual/paranormal phenomena, coupled with the results of a nuclear exchange.

    "Or maybe it's all just Satan having some fun with naive hyper suggestive disassociative peasant women and the myriad of people willing to suspend judgment and follow them."

    This is precisely the spin one would expect from the Vatican Administration. Curiously similar to what some Atheists would assert.

    As a created creature, even Satan must serve God. He has no choice so to do, anymore then any othe. God allows him to act via His Passive Will; wherein He lifts His protective Hand, allowing evil to happen. Marie is correct.

    When one submits to God in prayer (which = aligning your will with His), then you are protected from Evil. He will only allow as much of it to affect you as is needed to teach you. To make you heed. If He wills that you suffer, & you accept & offer it up as a sacrifice, it becomes redemptive. For yourself & for others. Even your enemies.

    Opus Dei demoniacally twists this into BDSM. One does NOT seek pain. One should always alleviate the suffering of others. And to heal your own pains (medically). There is a great difference between the OD mode, and peacefully accepting what God Wills for you. That is love of God, NOT masochism! Nor is it masochism to offer up your sufferings for others.

    Mary gives the perfect example. She had to complete cooperate with God, to will the Passsion & Death of her son. Or to bear & raise Him. She had the option to say 'no'. Instead, she said 'yes' to God.

    God teaches & chastises those whom He loves,like a good parent. If a parent does not thus teach a child it means that the child is being allowed to go his own way into destruction. It becomes less & less likely that said child will walk the right path, as he will not heed the parent.

    Those whom God does not chastise & teach are those who are not of God. Those who go through life with little pain, struggle...of ease. Some are pew sitters.

    They may be in for a big surprise in the final accounting.

    Anon Y. Mouse

  54. Mouse what if the Flood, which as you note has been cited by many different cultures, was not an act of God, but an act of life? What if Noah got a heads up about this impending natural disaster?

    It would be a far different kind of divine intelligence that gave a heads up about a naturally occuring event, rather than the one who wreaked it Himself because he was pissed the self aware sentient creature he created used the free will he also gave said creatures to make poor choices at the behest of the Satanic force this God also created and 'passively' set loose on poor humanity.

    I still say Sitchin has a much better rationale for the creation story in Genesis--at least the second creation story. And I still say the second creation story is the worst thing ever foisted on humanity--especially the female end of humanity.

  55. 1) Sitchen is both a Mason & linked to Opus Dei. So much for him....

    2) In denying the Biblical story of the Great Flood, you are none too subtly calling God a liar.

    You are also very clearly demonstrating your complete lack of understanding of the Mystery of Iniquity. Or you are merely playing at words.....

    A miracle is the apparent violation of (what man perceives to be) the laws of nature. God, as Creator, controls all. Nothing happens which is not the Will of God. The reality is that what man perceives via his 'science' as 'how things work'... rather akin to Plato's allegory of the cave.

    The point is that God uses nature in chastisement. Both the seeming regular cycles & laws of physics...and the suspending of them.

    It becomes pointless to speculate on the precise nature & extent of the Great Flood. Except that is was a global (or near global) cataclysm. With regional 'Noahs' who built virtual floating biospheres.

    The conclusion of the 2nd Chapter of Genesis is actually a very tender story, showing the love of God for his human creatures. Regardless of the actual mechanics which it illustrates, it shows the intimacy & complimentary relationship between man & woman.

    That they were naked & unashamed indicated they were then sinless & without guile, as God intended them.

    Anon Y.Mouse