The Engine and Strategies of Destruction by Lyle Arnold, Jr.

Consequences of Vatican II

The Engine and Strategies of Destruction

Lyle J. Arnold, Jr.

In March 2009, a special conference orchestrated by Prelates and theologians was held at the Vatican in tribute to the 150th anniversary of the publication The Origin of the Species by Charles Darwin. It was inescapably driven by evolution.

Time magazine, November 1996: "Vatican Thinking Evolves!"

This concurs with the words of Pope St. Pius X who predicted that everything would be subject to the laws of evolution, should Modernism (the precursor of Progressivism) prevail. (1) The platform for this March conference was designed, molded and erected by the late John-Paul II. In his October 22, 1996 speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, his dictum is most revealing:

"If taken literally, the Biblical view of the beginning of life and Darwin's scientific view would seem irreconcilable. In Genesis, the creation of the world and Adam, the first human, took six days. Evolution's process of genetic mutation and natural selection — the survival and proliferation of the fittest new species — has taken billions of years, according to scientists... If the human body has its origin in living material which pre-exists it, the spiritual soul is immediately created by God. (2)

At first glance, the late Pope's statement comes off as a kind of ho-hum observation that any grammar school child could substantiate. An irreconcilable conflict exists between two opposing tenets - Genesis vs. Darwin. Any listener would be thinking, "Well, Holy Father, so what is your position in this quandary?"

He does not explain his position in a clear way. Rather, he attempts to make a kind of Hegelian synthesis to please both creationists and evolutionists. I am afraid that he does not please anyone.

Accomplishing an agenda of destruction

One could dismiss this as just another folly of the late Pope in his multiple gaffes: his groveling apologies, his saint factory, his promotion of perverted Prelates, his failure to discipline theologians, priests and religious, his failure to consecrate Russia, (the list is too long to continue). I think folly is not the case. I think JP II was strictly adhering to the strategy of destruction.

John Paul's language makes it clear that he learned the Vatican II’s lesson of ambiguity well. In Chapter VI of Mr. Atila S. Guimaraes book, In The Murky Waters of Vatican II, the author asks if the Council was pastoral or dogmatic?" Guimaraes answers that the Council was "simultaneously dogmatic and pastoral." (3)

Teilhard de Chardin, the condemned Jesuit

Condemned Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin married evolution with the Catholic Faith

He then demonstrates with crystalline clarity that John XXIII presented the Council as "predominantly pastoral." This move was a cunning strategy designed to eliminate the orthodox schemata (three years in the making) and favor a progressivist agenda, with the objective of implanting ambiguity in the very bowels of the Council and ipso facto throughout the Catholic world. (4)

In actuality, two strategies were used. First, there was a Grand Strategy, which presents the ultimate goal: in this case, to destroy the Church. Second, there was a Center-of-Gravity Strategy, which is attacking the hub of all power and movement, on which everything depends. (5) This "hub" in the Catholic Church has always been absolute clarity, the eternal enemy of ambiguity.

Using these strategies provided a shield to hide behind whenever the Council's language on dogmatic principles was questioned. The response would merely be, "Don't let it bother you, the agenda is only pastoral." Later, should a conservative reaction arise, the Vatican would simply allege that the Council was dogmatic. (6) The Council fathers truly executed a forked-tongue strategy. Behold the success of Vatican II!

With this in mind, how does a serious Catholic find the way to the truth? We know that there is no middle ground between the truth and error. St. James warns us to make our speech, "Yea, Yea: No, No: that you fall not under judgment." (5: 12). No ambiguity is permitted.

An invitation to free interpretation of Scripture

Therefore, in the Darwin question, it is either Genesis or evolution. Whether it be pure Darwin Evolution, or Intelligent Design, or Theistic Evolution, there is no Hegelian composition that exists between Genesis and evolution. Those who pretend to explain the problem with such solutions are simply accepting evolution.

In his 1996 address John Paul affirmed that neither Genesis nor Darwin should be taken literally. But to declare that Genesis is not literal is to state a principle. There are 72 books in the Bible, 45 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New. If one book is not to be taken literally, necessarily the same applies to the ensemble of the others, giving the green light for individual interpretation.

As for theistic evolution, a hasty mind could form ipse dixit a hypothesis that this theory could embrace the vegetable and the animal kingdom, but could not be inclusive of man. But we have seen this hypothesis taken much further – even by a Pope who declares that evolution "is more than a hypothesis."

Benedict’s endorsement of evolution

Pope Benedict XVI's book Creation and Evolution confirms his acceptance of theistic evolution. (7) Nor is he alone in advocating it. It is accepted by most mainline Protestant fragmentations as well.

Accepting theistic evolution

Recently Benedict heaped praise on "the great vision of Teilhard de Chardin,” affirming his hope that “in the end we shall achieve a true cosmic liturgy, where the cosmos becomes a living host." (8) This seductive pandering to the cosmos as befitting a locus classicus in sacred matters, is capable of destroying a person's Catholic faith.

The final questions arise: Why is the Vatican showboating Darwin? Why does Pope Benedict praise Teilhard's "great vision" when it has been adequately demonstrated that Teilhard was forming a new religion while laying waste to the Catholic Church? (9)

The answer lies in the words of Pope St. Pius X, who condemned evolution and rightly noted that for the Modernists, everything is subject to it. The engine of destruction is moving at full throttle. Progressivism's tyranny continues to take every precaution to thwart all threats that could cut the Church off from the march of evolution. (10)

May Our Lady keep us in the remnant of her army, until, with a radiant and powerful riposte, we view in the horizon the beginning of her victory over this disgusting Revolution.

1. Pascendi Dominici Gregis, 1907, n. 26 The evolution of doctrine.
2. Wikipedia, John Paul II
3. In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, pp. 132, 136, 180.
4. Ibid., Chapters IV, VI.
5. Robert Greene, The 33 Strategies of War (Viking, NY: Joost Elffers, 2006), Chapter 12.
6. Op cit, Murky Waters, p. 175.
7. Published by Ignatius Press in the U.S. The original German work, Schopfung and Evolution, was published April 2007. Cf. "Reuter's praises `Pope Benedict's evolution book," 6-18-08, Ignatius' Insight Scoop, insightscoop.typepad.com.
8. Progressivist Document of the Week: "Benedict XVI praises the cosmic liturgy of Teilhard de Chardin." Tradition in Action, posted 8-1-09. 9 .Dr. Wolfgang Smith, Teilhardism and the New Religion, Tan Bks.
10. Guimaraes, Animus Delendi I, p. 87.

Share

Follow us

Posted October 26, 2009

Related Topics of Interest

  Liberalism, Modernism & Progressivism

  Benedict XVI Praises the Cosmic Liturgy of Teilhard de Chardin

  Teilhard Condemned

  The Perplexing Pontificate of Pope John Paul II

  The Bad Effects of the Papal Apologies

  The New Canonizations - A 'Saint Factory'

  The Swan’s Song of Galileo’s Myth

  Is Sede-Vacantism an Ally of Progressivism?

Related Works of Interest