Karl Keating Disclaims Responsibility for Paris Archdiocese Having a Prejudice on YEC = Protestant, Claims he Never Said So

Spot the Moral Monster + Other Stuff · Karl Keating Disclaims Responsibility for Paris Archdiocese Having a Prejudice on YEC = Protestant, Claims he Never Said So

Summary : Karl Keating used Fundamentalist about very virulent Anti-Catholics, but involves the Chicago Statement which is shared by people not so, and he didn't claim Fundamentalist in this sense equals YEC or all YEC are Fundamentalists in this sense. He has not so far suggested that some people might be using the word a bit differently than he, and therefore that his words were inherently likely to give the said very unfortunate impression. When it comes to licitness of YEC within Catholicism, he places it, not on magisterium like Trent (which makes it obligatory, since none of the Church Fathers were Old Earthers, and several disagreed with longer timelines suggested by Pagans), nor is he satisfied that YEC was academically defended in the 19th C. bby Catholics and their faith is still relevant, even if technical solutions on more recent problems could be taken from Protestants. Oh, no. A Catholic must in defending YEC go on Catholic only expertise, and this one for academic intellectual property reasons cannot cite Protestant experts without actually naming them and their works. And somehow, some modern Catholics have no problem citing C. S. Lewis on the nature of damnation, while some other ones for strictly technical problems require the solutions to be presented by Catholics only - but this somehow doesn't apply against Atheists giving their solutions on why GC is supposed to be millions and over a billion years old./HGL

THE

status

YeeHAH! Cowboy steak: bone-in, high-fat rib eye. Angus. Seared then broiled under a gas flame on a cast iron grill pan. Marinade is Fines Herbes, onion and garlic powders, iodized sea salt, olive oil and then red wine added after sitting a bit. 7 minutes first side, 5 minutes second side. With a side of shredded cauliflower, salt, and a touch of cream and butter.

Skipping

some. Mostly praise of the cooking, well deserved, according to looks of it.

Karl Keating

Sounds wonderful, except for the execrable cauliflower, which should have remained classified as an inedible weed.

Skipping

some (including but not limited to banter).

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Karl Keating - you need education on two issues.

• 1) Cauliflower is good if you add cream, butter or olive oil (haven't tried the latter, but presume so);
• 2) You have Catholic YEC and Flood Geologists to read up on.

Which ones? I have a little list ...

Creation vs. Evolution : Protestants Not Citing Catholic Predecessors (Short Note)
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2019/11/protestants-not-citing-catholic.html

Karl Keating

Hans-Georg Lundahl Your comment prompted me to look at my book shelves. I have at least 19 books defending young-Earth creationism. I think all are by Protestants, but maybe one or two are by Catholics.

I collected these books because I'm planning to write one or two books on the subject, but I don't expect to start until at least the middle of next year--and likely later. (I have several other books that must take precedence.)

You not only are a YECist but a geocentrist. As you know, several years ago I wrote a book against geocentrism. If I get around to writing the books about YEC, they will be in refutation of it, not in support of it.

I say I might write one or two books. If I write two, one will be strictly on Grand Canyon, and the other will be a global look at YEC. I have considerable first-hand familiarity with Grand Canyon. I have hiked there many times. I will be backpacking there twice this year, in March (doing the New Hance Trail/Grandview Trail loop) and in October (doing a rim-to-rim).

Hans-Georg Lundahl

You have written one book, often cited in France, in which YEC is presented (at least some superficial readers got the impression, including a former Dominican of Paris, now laicised) like an outgrowth of the more conservative group of Calvinists in US at a certain time.

I have some fatigue at being suspected, due to your sloppy research in history of ideas, as a Protestant or as someone confused who doesn't know if he's Protestant or Catholic.

As to GC, I'm willing to discuss that anther time, first you look up Bosizio, Trissl, Veit, please, and give me my honour as a Catholic back!

Karl Keating

Hans-Georg Lundahl I didn't suggest you were Protestant. Don't pretend I did.

To date I have NOT written a book about YEC. At most I have mentioned the topic in passing elsewhere.

The only books I can find by Bosizio and Trissle are from the nineteenth century. (I can't find anything by Veit.) Aren't there any recent books by Catholics who defend YEC? The YEC argument has grown in sophistication over the last century and a half, and I see little reason to bother with books that no longer have much relevance.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Karl Keating "I didn't suggest you were Protestant."

No, I didn't say you did.

"Don't pretend I did."

I didn't pretend you did.

I do however recall a book by Jacques Arnould mentioned you. I cannot swear it was a book he mentioned. And it was about ten years ago that I read his work, part of it, or nine.

It concluded that Calvinists had divided on the matter. So that YEC starts out from a Calvinist schism.

"The only books I can find by Bosizio and Trissle [sic] are from the nineteenth century. (I can't find anything by Veit.)"

Veit is also 19th C.

It so happens, the arguments back then are still relevant.

This guy was a monsignore:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Joseph_Lamy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Joseph_Lamy

His view on the flooding of Pyrenees was, this is a purely scientific question (he was cited in article Déluge in Dictionnaire Apologétique de la Foi catholique) and if scientists conclude there is no solution, he is very willing to say God multiplied the waters, like afterwards he multiplied the breads.

Now, note : to him, whether the area now Pyrenees can have been entirely flooded or not is a scientific question : ergo - he would have no qualms about taking a scientific hint from Tas Walker, despite him being Protestant - since the HOW about the universal flooding was a scientific question, and only the THAT was a theologic one.

The same article also mentioned (around 1880 - 1890's) that the advocates for a universal Flood were lots fewer then than "twenty years ago" - meaning it was after all the traditional position among Catholics.

The two books by Catholics you found, were they Baltimore Catechisms and Haydock Bible?

You know how Haydock accounted for our knowing of the Genesis 3 events?

// Concerning the transactions of these early times, parents would no doubt be careful to instruct their children, by word of mouth, before any of the Scriptures were written; and Moses might derive much information from the same source, as a very few persons formed the chain of tradition, when they lived so many hundred years. Adam would converse with Mathusalem, who knew Sem, as the latter lived in the days of Abram. Isaac, Joseph, and Amram, the father of Moses, were contemporaries: so that seven persons might keep up the memory of things which had happened 2500 years before. But to entitle these accounts to absolute authority, the inspiration of God intervenes; and thus we are convinced, that no word of sacred writers can be questioned. H. //

E-Catholic 2000 : Haydock : Genesis 3
https://www.ecatholic2000.com/haydock/untitled-05.shtml

Hans-Georg Lundahl

It is one of these two books, where I recall your being cited:

Amazon : Les Créationnistes (Français) Relié – 31 janvier 1996
de Jacques Arnould (Auteur)
https://www.amazon.fr/Créationnistes-Jacques-Arnould/dp/2204053236

FNAC : Dieu versus Darwin
Jacques Arnould (Auteur) Les créationnistes vont-ils triompher de la science ? Paru en janvier 2007 Essai (broché)
https://livre.fnac.com/a1905811/Jacques-Arnould-Dieu-versus-Darwin

Sure you mentioned nothing on the subject in this book?

Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians" Paperback – March 1, 1988
by Karl Keating (Author)
https://www.amazon.com/Catholicism-Fundamentalism-Attack-Romanism-Christians/dp/0898701775

Karl Keating

Hans-Georg Lundahl (1) I didn't discuss YEC in C&F. (2) I don't give much weight to Haydock's opinions. (3) You haven't been able to provide me with modern pro-YEC Catholic book titles, so maybe there aren't any.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"(1) I didn't discuss YEC in C&F."

In that case, Jacques Arnould seems to have got the impression YEC was implied in "fandamentalist". [sic]

"(2) I don't give much weight to Haydock's opinions."

Too bad for you, doesn't change they are more standard Catholic (over the centuries) than yours.

"(3) You haven't been able to provide me with modern pro-YEC Catholic book titles, so maybe there aren't any."

I'll give one of my own : Neanderthals, Göbekli Tepe and what about Carbon 14. It's a homemade essay collection printed in perhaps 15 copies so far.

Now, the problem is, some seem to have got in their mind (perhaps through Jacques Arnould misunderstanding your use of the word Fundamentalist, which to many over here simply means Biblical literal inerrantist) that "fundamentalism" (in their view equal to things like Young Earth Creationism, literal Exodus from Egypt etc) arose as a split within US Calvinism around the time of Civil War or perhaps a bit earlier.

I think I have sufficiently documented that this is NOT the case.

I do not know exactly why you are so insistent on modern editions that are YEC from Catholics, if it is bc of technical problems not yet known to people (like human cave art with associated carbon dates of 20 000 BC) or if it is because you think the magisterium works according to most modern printed books.

If it's the latter, I disagree. If it's the former, the technical solutions are very much non-theological (except for the theologeme of literal inerrantism) and you should have no more qualms about taking technical hints from Tas Walker or Jonathan Sarfati than you apparently have about taking such from heretics like Cuvier, Lyell, Darwin and a few more. The last of these also in the end apostate.

I think Pope Michael may have a few old titles reprinted, at least he has one for papal decrees about Geocentrism.

And if your point is, "Pope Francis" doesn't endorse this reprinting, that's my point too about his not being a real Catholic, since not in the real continuity with the tradition of the Church.

Karl Keating I can add there is a part of a book which actually is:

// A new book “Saint Patrick After The Ancient Narrations” by Rev. Philip Lynch C.S.Sp. has just been published by his nephew James Lynch. //

A few decades of pages in this book were also dedicated to Rev. Philip Lynch's view of the Deluge.

Technically not very good, I would say, but certainly Roman Catholic and certainly published after 2000.