Search This Blog

Friday, January 13, 2017

Good Grief! Paul Ehrlich is Speaking at the Vatican?

There is definitely something rotten in the state of Vatican City!

The Population Bomb, by Paul Ehrlich was published in 1968 the year I graduated from Trinity College (which was already becoming an enemy to the faith). I read it. Wow!

What a piece of horror fiction! A baby was on the cover of the book inside a bomb with a lit fuse. You know what they say about a picture being worth a thousand words. Clearly, babies were the enemies of the earth.

It would have been more accurate to have a black baby inside the bomb because people like Ehrlich and his liberal friends always had their sights on the third world, but that wouldn't have been politically correct and might wake people up to what was really going on.  After all, as Margaret Sanger said, “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. And the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Ditto today where blacks like Faye Wattleton, who was the face of Planned Parenthood from 1978 until 1992, promote the murder of black children.

Hysteria filled the pages of Ehrlich's book. The sky was falling. Unless we immediately used draconian methods to limit births, the earth would be a wasteland, we would all be starving, there would be no food or water, and our landscapes would be covered with the bodies of the dead. Well, maybe not that last bit, because he predicted as recently as 2014 that we would all be eating the bodies of the dead. It gives new meaning to the term road kill. (One wonders how many times Ehrlich watched the 1973 film, Soylent Green.) The man was not only wrong in 1968, he was "spectacularly wrong." But his work pleased the rich cadre of population controllers and they bought up tens of thousands of his book to distribute on college campuses to brainwash countless students. And it worked.

I was accosted a number of times at fast food restaurants and in stores when I was pregnant with my third child in 1974. How dare I have another baby. Didn't I know there was a serious population problem? My husband and I also heard it from couples in our marriage preparation groups who planned not to have children at all because the world was "overpopulated," a decision that would make their marriages invalid. Ironically, they often specifically mentioned overpopulation in poor countries, code words for third world blacks. Honestly, population control has always been racist!

Now, if Ehrlich were a true prophet, of course, none of us would be here to tell the tale. But he was wrong in 1968 and he is still wrong today. Exactly what are his credentials for participating in the Vatican meeting? Ehrlich is an extreme pro-abort who never let the fact that he was dead wrong interfere with his extremism. He is the poster boy for despair, a "celebrity atheist." And yet this man will give a talk, along with fellow atheist, Partha Dasgupta, on  "Causes and Pathways of Biodiversity Losses: Consumption Preferences, Population Numbers, Technology, Ecosystem Productivity."

It would be interesting to go through the list of speakers at the Biological Extinction meeting, which clearly begins from the assumption that mankind is destroying the planet, and see how many are atheists and/or Darwinian evolutionists. The subtitle of the conference, How to Save the Natural World on which We Depend clearly echoes the Humanist Manifesto that no God is out there to save us. We're on our own to solve all the problems of the universe with our brilliant minds that are much more godlike than any "Teapot in the sky" as Richard Dawkins so cavalierly dismisses the Almighty. If you want to understand what 's happening to the culture and why, read the three versions of the Humanist Manifesto here, here, and here. Clearly those ideas have infiltrated even the Vatican at the highest levels.

With regard to the participants at the meeting, I checked a handful of names on the list. Werner Arber a microbiologist and geneticist, is a "theistic evolutionist" whatever that means. Sociologist Margaret Archer, president of the Pontifical Academy on Social Sciences, appears to be a liberal Catholic (I presume she's Catholic although I couldn't find anything confirming that. At today's Vatican such an assumption is questionable.) Phil Lawler took Archer to task in an article at Catholic Culture over her response to a piece at First Things critiquing the Vatican meeting on climate change:
Stefano Gennarini of the Center for Family and Human Rights..., called attention to the errors in the prelate’s replies [Bishop Sanchez Sorondo] in a clear but respectful piece for First Things. He did not denounce or insult the archbishop; he merely made his points—presumably hoping to stimulate a genuine debate. 
Instead, Margaret Archer, the president of the PASS, fired back with a vituperative attack on Gennarini. In a shocking diatribe, Archer completely ignored the substance of Gennarini’s arguments to concentrate on an ad hominem attack. Invoking a hoary old pro-abortion canard, she claimed that pro-lifers are only interested in human life up until the time of birth....She asked Gennarini the insulting question: “which lobbyists meet your salary bill?” 
And that, friends, is another indication she's a liberal. They rarely engage in a civil discussion when they disagree, but immediately go for the ad-hominem jugular!

Another speaker, John Bogaarts is Vice President of the Population Council, a population control group using abortion, contraception, sex ed, and other evil means to promote "sustainable development." Bogaarts, employeed at the Rockefeller's eugenics organization since 1973, can hardly be anything but a population control ideologue and member of the "Population Firm" described in a detailed 2004 report on The Inherent Racism of Population Control by LifeSiteNews.

Kill the people; save the planet!
Professor of astrophysics, Martin Rees, is another atheist on the program, a convicted evolutionist who sees the salvation of the planet in science. In 2013 at a British science festival he said this: "To survive this century we'll need the idealistic and effective efforts of natural scientists, environmentalists, social scientists and humanists."

I suspect if I continued researching the speakers, faith would not be an important element for most of them unless it was "faith" as described in the Humanist Manifesto. I haven't found a Louis Pasteur or Gregor Mendel and it appears that God has no seat at the table and nothing to offer in "saving the natural world" He created. The "saviors" of the planet, rather, appear to be the scientists themselves, at least in their own minds.

All I can say is the fact that the population control monster is well represented at the Vatican's Biological Extinction meeting indicates the proper illustrator for the meeting's publication is Goya. The fact that we are facing extinction may, in fact, be correct, but not for the reasons these arrogant academics believe. The answer can be found at Fatima and Lucia's prediction that the final battle will be over the family. Pray and fight for the faith.

Lord Jesus, Savior of the World, have mercy on us and our children.
Our Lady, Queen of the Universe, pray for us.


Gigi said...

SO disheartening! I’m getting and tired of disappointingly “sighing” every time we get new news from the Vatican and/or Pope Francis. I keep trying to give him the benefit of the doubt but it’s becoming more and more difficult. :(

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

I agree, Gigi. Such a mess when those who have the obligation to lead us to the truth give us people like Paul Ehrlich. But it does make it easier to recognize the false gods and fight. Not everybody wearing a roman collar is telling us the truth. There do seem to be a huge number of Judases these days though. Sad.

Farm Lassie said...

Theistic evolution is a synonym for evolutionary creationism, which is the belief that God created the Earth's species then it changed through evolution. Basically it puts evolution and creation on equal terms.

Any Catholic worth his salt knows the error of that ideology. The fact that this ambiguous person and other not so ambiguous persons are being presented at the Vatican makes me look even more askance at Pope Francis' s environmental tendencies.

Chriss Rainey said...

CCC 362 The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language when it affirms that “then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

CCC 364: The human body : it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit. (1Cor. 6:19-20; 15:44-45)

Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day. (Daniel 3:57-80)

I ask, where is there any room for evolution in this? If man when he was created, was the summation of the elements to "their highest perfection", then how could there be any improvement in any period of time no matter how many years you propose that to be?

When I read this yesterday in the CCC, I was amazed. It is such a beautiful thought to know that when we sing, we speak for the mountains and when we pray, we give praise for the fields and the valleys. We alone speak. And this is why. We are both material and spiritual, whereas those other things are not. Who would dare to think this could be improved upon?

Ian said...

With all this going on in the Vatican I wonder, does anyone think that perhaps the problem is not merely Pope Francis or the Vatican insiders, but the Roman Catholic system itself? Perhaps it is broken so deeply that it can't be fixed by a better pope or new cardinals and that the only the solution is to run from Catholicism altogether and simply believe Christ alone, trust in his work only, and not in a church.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

I can't agree, Ian. When Jesus asked His apostles if they wanted to leave after He affirmed His Real Presence in the Eucharist (John 6), Peter replied, "Where would we go? You have the words of eternal life." Then Jesus said something interesting, "Did I not choose the twelve of you? Yet one of you is a devil." Nothing has changed. There are still devils among the clergy.

But Jesus Himself made Peter the first pope and called Him the rock on which He built His Church. The fact that there are Judases in the Church doesn't change that. The doctrine of the Church is the authority of Christ. What Christ does one believe in when he "runs from Catholicism?" The Christ of Martin Luther who didn't really redeem man but covered up his sins like snow covers garbage? The Christ of John Calvin who predestines men to hell? The Christ of tens of thousands of splintered Christian sects? When a person runs from the Catholic Church he doesn't reject one pope, he chooses a million popes because every person in the pew becomes his own pope interpreting the Bible with no authority to back up his personal vision.

I'll stick with the Church Christ founded and the authority found in the infallible doctrine.