Does Steven Dutch Know History?

1) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Does Steven Dutch Know History?, 2) Creation vs. Evolution : Two Points on Asher’s Book – and a Third One

Here is his attack on the Kolbe Center (had to check it is not Kolbe Centre, but no, American spelling).*

He cites them from their site (without linking to a specific page) and then gives his rejection of them within brackets. One which shows he has no idea about history.

Quoting Dutch's page:

The Kolbe Center

This modernist attitude is refuted by the progressive and degenerative moral effect produced by rejection of, first, geocentrism in the 17th century, then special creation in the 19th century, and now the very existence of human life in the womb in the 20th.

[Maximilian Kolbe was a priest had pioneered religious use of mass media before World War II, and who voluntarily took the place of a condemned prisoner at Auschwitz. He was later canonized for his heroism. To have his name associated with something like this is truly revolting, indeed, as sacrilegious as any of the evils this group attacks. Also, sorry, but I don't think abolishing slavery, granting rights to women, establishing due process, and so on, count as "degenerative."]

Commenting

on quote just given.

What were the causes given by Kolbe Center?

degenerative moral effect produced by rejection of, first, geocentrism in the 17th century, then special creation in the 19th century, and now the very existence of human life in the womb in the 20th.

What does Dutch consider as not degenerative?

Also, sorry, but I don't think abolishing slavery, granting rights to women, establishing due process, and so on, count as "degenerative."

A fair reply A:

i

If slavery was in a sense abolished by Enlightenment, was that not a slavery reintroduced by Renaissance Humanism which had previously been abolished by Christian Middle Ages?

ij

And women having rights, if we mean right to not be put out at birth because parents already had one daughter, well, it was the Christian Middle Ages, it was Constantine who by banning abortion gave them this right. When a girl who became a martyr and a Saint was called Caecilia, that does not mean her parents had lookd for a name and come up with Caecilia, it means her father's last name was Caecilius. We do not hear of very many Pagan Roman families where she could even have had a sister called Caecilia Secunda. Christianity granted new born girls the right to life and the right to a personal name - like being called after the martyr St Caecilia or Cecily. Steven Dutch could of course be referring to more sinister things than the right to live. And in fact the Woman of the Middle Ages had more rights than the one of Renaissance or Code Napoléon legislation.

iij

And due process was first established, partly in Codex Iuris Civilis, in reaction against the arbitrary process of those persecuting Christians, then by Inquisition (in Spain people would commit some more leniently punishable crimes in order to get tried by Inquisition, because it was a due process), and if Enlightenment (partly in reaction against two aspects of Inquisition, namely lack of lawyer and permission to limited torture, excepting England) established due process, that was also a re-establishment of due process rather than a first establishment thereof, precisely as Enlightenment abolishing slavery was a re-abolishing of something already abolished. Before. By Young Eart Creationist and Geocentric Christians. More precisely Athanasian Trinitarians, and believers in Councils, Bishops, Monks, Seven Sacraments and Holy Mass.

A fair reply B:

If Enlightenment and its XX^th C. aftermath can indeed brag with some betterments as abolishing slavery, giving rights to women, establishing due process, and this was a repetition of "progress" or rather betterments made during or just before Middle Ages, why should we believe the taste for such betterments came from Heliocentrism, Darwinism, and later Einstein and Roe vs Wade?

A fair reply C:

Through Roe vs Wade, slavery is being reestablished and death penalty has got its due process abolished. When heads were cut off during French Revolution, heads were also attacked by Shrinks. Both shrinks and Robespierre were ardent believers in Laplace and ardent disbelievers in the Church, because it had refused to abandon Geocentrism. Blacks of the United States (or of certain states) were going through a worse slavery in the XX^th C. thanks to Margaret Sanger being a devotee of Darwin, Huxley, Galton, than they had been freed from during the XIX^th C. by Beecher Stowe, John Brown, Abe. Or in some cases already before, by Lee. In my own country Sweden, Lapps and Tatters had that Hell during the XX^th C. also. From 1935 (Hitler imitated the move next year, our Per Albin was before him) to the Seventies.

A fair reply D:

If this does not convince Dutch that Kolbe Center has pretty good reasons, as far as history of ideas is concerned, to oppose the revolutions in "science" along with more tangible evils, perhaps he could at least consider to stop patronising St Maxilian Kolbe against it. His resumé of the latter's activity does not quite show any familiarity with in what exact way he was "a priest [who] had pioneered religious use of mass media before World War II", he does not show any great familiarity with the fact that Rzyczerz Niepokalanej was dedicated to convert Jews and Freemasons, and included some sharp criticism of these, both categories. No, I cannot say the Center** choose its Patron badly.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Bpi, Georges Pompidou
II Sunday of Lent
16-III-2014

* Steven Dutch : Pseudoscience : Geocentrism
https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/Geocentrism.HTM

** Center being of course US spelling of Centre.