Monday, April 6, 2015

Karl Keating

Dear Mr. Karl Keating:


It all comes down to this:


Whom do you choose to be the one Father and Head of the human race:


1.       A hominid evolved from a population of ape-like creatures; or

2.      The Adam described in Genesis 1-2-3 ?


It must be one or the other.


It seems to me the basic assumption of all your honorably courteous discussion with us Geocentrists is that you have chosen #1 in the above options.  Because, if you had chosen #2 ….


Well, let me take a most obvious consequence, that of language based, also, on the dominion passage (Gen.1:27-28) and Genesis 2:19-20, wherein Adam names all the animals and birds.  In your book, The New Geocentrists, page 174, you ask of Dr. Bouw:  “Does he (Bouw) remove all instrumentality from men, giving them no liberty to form their own language over time?”  You have done a good deal of the necessary homework for this book, Dr. Keating, but you have not done so on this particular point.  It has been experimentally verified that language MUST be LEARNED and that by more than one “teacher”.  Children, for example, learn their native tongue from the family group……..a possible exception was Tarzan who taught himself from books found in his parents’ cabin.  But he had no way to hear the sounds.  And the examples of feral children demonstrate their virtual inability to speak at all given the absence of this teaching group.  I did extensive research on this subject years ago and reported it somewhere. 


The conclusion, quite demonstrably proven (excuse the awkward phrasing).  The fact is that language MUST be given to the first man and Scripture implies that Adam (and then Eve) HAD been GIVEN a language.  Adam named all the animals!  That says volumes, not only for Adam’s vocabulary, but also for his infused knowledge of the nature (i.e., substantial form) of each creature created during the first Six Days of the World.  (I have written extensively on these necessary Six literal days.)


This may not seem conclusive proof to you that the evidence for language greatly favors the Biblical Adam as our “first parent” – but there are many other considerations also which I haven’t the energy or mental synapses to pursue here.  But all are crucial because the Biblical Adam is a prototype of Christ, Our Lord, in ways that an evolved hominid could never be.  Rather, the hominid choice, as you must see, is a colossal insult to Our Divine Lord and His Immaculate Mother, and this is just what Lucifer, the great counterfeiter and liar, intends!


And of course, languages have changed over time, even as all the varieties of dogs, cats, cows and horses also have.  But can you guess what is the analogy with language?  I never could have until I took Father Charles Hart’s course in Thomistic Metaphysics.  While I was studying at Catholic University in the 1950’s, there was a war going on between Father Hart and Fr. McAlister, who taught the course in Logic.  Fr. McAlister believed that Metaphysics was really Logic.  But I have come to see that Metaphysics, the highest of all the sciences, insofar as it descends at all, is much closer to grammar than to the propositions of Aristotelian formal logic of propositions. (Please excuse the redundancy.)


In all languages, there is this unchanging contrast:  all languages have nouns and verbs and modifiers.  These realities reflect the substance and accidents of Metaphysics.  And, of course, the nouns presuppose existence.  As do all things presuppose Creation – thus its absolute importance!


Thank you for devoting a whole chapter to my work promoting geocentricity.  And perhaps, most of all, for the real honor of linking me with my great friend and mentor, Solange Hertz.  She is, indeed, the Grande Dame of the traditionalist movement – or what remains of it?  Please be assured of my prayers and best wishes that, as St. Thomas More said, “May we merrily meet in Heaven!”  - to his executioner! 


PS…I am just on page 174, but if you have not, please look up Redmond O’Hanlon.     

1 comment:

  1. Instrumentality of forming one's language usually involves choices like whether one pronounces a Swedish r like in Italian of French.

    Such instrumentality does not exclude the fact that, as said, there is no coherent evolutionary origin of language presented by anyone and also that God invented (or allowed angelic beings, good or fallen, to invent) 72 new languages and imposed them on men by changing their memories at Babel.


Please keep comments charitable. Comments are not reviewed, but inappropriate comments may be removed.