Anti-Evolution Quotes

«The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.» — Charles Darwin 1902 edition.

“…I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science….It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] & holes as sound parts.” Charles Darwin to Asa Gray, cited by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1991) pp. 456, 475.

“Nowhere was Darwin able to point to one bona fide case of natural selection having actually generated evolutionary change in nature….Ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.” Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crises (Bethesda, Maryland: Adler & Adler, 1986) pp. 62, 358.

“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.” Søren Løvtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth (New York: Croom Helm, 1987), p. 422.

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N. Tahmisian Evolution and the Emperor’s New Clothes by N.J. Mitchell (United Kingdom: Roydon Publications, 1983), title page.

«The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination.» Albert Fleischmann. Witnesses Against Evolution by John Fred Meldau (Denver: Christian Victory Publishing, 1968), p. 13.

Read the rest of this entry »


Serious Question

The Russian physicist Lev Landau once attended a session of the Russian Academy of Sciences at which the notorious agronomist Trofim Lysenko (The founder of «Creative Darwinism») gave a lecture on the so-called inheritance of acquired traits.

When the talk was over, Landau asked a penetrating question:

«You argue that if we will cut off the ear of a cow, and the ear of its offspring, and so on, sooner or later the earless cows will start to be born?»

«Yes, that’s right,» Lysenko replied.

«Then,» Landau continued,

«How do you explain the virgins that are still being born?»
Read the rest of this entry »


QUESTION: Where in the scripture does it say that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL?

We all have a different set of fingerprints.
Some people are tall.
Some people are short.
Most people are of average height.
Some people are thin.
Some are fat.
Most are of average weight.
Some are very intelligent.
Some are retarded.
Most are of average intelligence.
Some are born without arms.
Some are born blind.
Some are born deaf.
Most are born physically whole.
Some are born into wealthy families.
Some are born into poor families.
Most are born into families of average wealth.
Some are born male.
Some are born female.
Some are born red, yellow, black or white.
We all have our own DNA.

ANSWER: It DOESN’T, God didn’t say that, Abraham Lincoln did.

Proverbs 6:16-19 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood. An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

NOTE: The Bible says that men are created equal; only in the sense that:

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

and that CHRIST DIED FOR ALL AND ALL HAVE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR SALVATION.

John 6:35-37 Then Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
Read the rest of this entry »


Psalms 33:6-9 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Psalms 96:4-6 For the LORD is great, and greatly to be praised: he is to be feared above all gods. For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the LORD made the heavens. Honour and majesty are before him: strength and beauty are in his sanctuary.

Psalms 148:1-14 Praise ye the Lord. Praise ye the Lord from the heavens: praise him in the heights. Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his host. Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light. Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens.

Let them praise the NAME OF THE LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.

He hath also stablished them for ever and ever: he hath made a decree which shall not pass. Praise the Lord from the earth, ye dragons, and all deeps: Fire, and hail; snow, and vapours; stormy wind fulfilling his word: Mountains, and all hills; fruitful trees, and all cedars: Beasts, and all cattle; creeping things, and flying fowl: Kings of the earth, and all people; princes, and all judges of the earth: Both young men, and maidens; old men, and children:

Let them praise THE NAME OF THE LORD: for HIS NAME alone is excellent;

his glory is above the earth and heaven. He also exalteth the horn of his people, the praise of all his saints; even of the children of Israel, a people near unto him. Praise ye the Lord.

Psalms 148:5 Let them praise
the NAME of the Lord:
for he commanded,
and they were created.

Read the rest of this entry »


The battle for the King James Bible and its Received Text is heating up to fever pitch, and it is crucial that preachers know where they stand and why. The following important books offer a ready-made library on this topic and will make profitable additions to the library of any preacher or teacher. They also make valuable gifts. It is a blessing to be able to tell our friends that most of the commonly asked questions on this topic are answered in the following books.

The books can be ordered as a package or individually. You save 25% by purchasing the package.

DEFENDING THE KING JAMES BIBLE by Donald A. Waite.

Dr. Waite is a Baptist scholar who has written in the defense of the Received Text and the King James Bible since 1971. Dr. Waite has 118 semester hours (1,888 class hours) of training in the biblical and other foreign languages, plus countless hours of teaching and personal research in the use of these languages. He obtained a B.A. in classical Greek and Latin from the University of Michigan in 1948; a Th.M. with high honors in New Testament Greek Literature and Exegesis from Dallas Theological Seminary in 1952; an M.A. in Speech from Southern Methodist University in 1953; a Th.D. with honors in Bible Exposition from Dallas Seminary in 1955; and a Ph.D. in Speech from Purdue University in 1961. He holds both New Jersey and Pennsylvania teacher certificates in Greek and Language Arts, and has taught Greek, Hebrew, Bible, Speech, and English for over thirty-five years in nine schools. Some (not to say, most!) defenders of the modern versions pretend that today’s King James defenders are intellectual pygmies who merely parrot things they have received from someone else. While there are ignorant people on all sides of the Bible version debate, the view that refuses to recognize the scholarship in defense of the KJV is slanderous. Dr. Waite, for example, has produced a number of exacting studies in the field of Bible versions. I can understand how someone might disagree with the King James defender’s conclusions, but to gloss over or ignore entirely the diligent research behind the positions of men such as this and to pretend that they could not possibly be true scholars is a farce. To find out for himself the exact number and nature of changes that have been made in the critical Greek text, for example, Dr. Waite went through the Westcott-Hort text and compared it with the Received Text. He counted every single word difference, and weighed its significance. When Dr. Waite says there are 9,970 Greek words added, subtracted, or changed from the Received Text in the Westcott-Hort text, he is not merely parroting what he read somewhere. He is citing his own diligent and scholarly research. He has also done this with at least three of the modern English versions (the NASV, NIV, and the NKJV), comparing them word for word with the King James Bible and the Received Text, noting the number and significance of the differences. He has also published the results of these studies. Dr. Waite has written in defense of the King James Bible since 1971, and in our estimation his 1992 book Defending the King James Bible is a masterpiece. In this book, Dr. Waite presents a four-fold superiority of the King James Bible: It is superior in its Greek and Hebrew texts, superior in its translators, superior in its translation technique, and superior in its theology. 352 pages, 5X8, hard bound. $12.00

Read the rest of this entry »


Where was the word of God before 1611 and where is it today?

Those who promote the modern bible versions do not believe any Bible is the inspired, infallible, preserved, and pure words of the living God. They piously tell us «the original Hebrew and Greek» is their final authority, hoping no one will notice that there is no such animal on the face of this earth. They don’t have it, have never seen it, and wouldn’t recognize it if it fell on their heads.

There are no original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts anywhere. There are several different Hebrew texts plus the conflicting Dead Sea Scrolls. There are over 20 different conflicting Greek texts. The multitude of modern versions, like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, depart scores of times from the Hebrew masoretic texts, and often not in the same places. They are also based on very different Greek texts than that of the King James Bible, though none of them always follows the same Greek text as the others. The NKJV does not always follow the same Greek text as the KJB and the meaning has been radically changed in scores of verses. They often differ among themselves in both text and meaning, and contain several proveable theological errors.

We who believe God meant what He said about preserving His words are ridiculed as ignorant, backwater fanatics. We believe God is the sovereign ruler of history and has preserved for us today all His pure words in the King James Bible. God knew what would become of the English language and how the great modern missionary movement of the late 1700’s through the 1950’s would be carried out by American and English missionaries carrying one Bible and translating it into hundreds of foreign languages and dialects. No Bible in history has been used, honored and hated as much as the King James Bible. The King James Bible was even read outloud from space as the astronauts orbited the moon.

God also knew the great battle concerning the preservation of His words would take place during the times of the falling away from the faith before the glorious return of the Lord Jesus Christ. We are living in those times now. Never before has the Holy Bible itself been under such fierce attack. The supreme irony is that those who now attack the Bible are those who bear the name of Christians.

They cannot believe that God in fact preserved His words in the one Book that has been used and blessed by God a hundred times more than any other. History and the sovereignty of God bear witness that the King James Bible is that one Book, without proven error.

God has promised to preserve His words, not in every language or to every people, but in such a way as they would be known by many of God’s believing people. The Lord Jesus said: «Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.» Matthew 24:35

God testifies through Isaiah in chapter 59:21 «As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.» Read the rest of this entry »


Outstanding Credentials of the KJV’s Translators

Alexander McClure and Gustafus Paine have both written excellent biographies of the men who translated the King James Bible.These biographies document the fact that the KJV translators were scholarly and godly men. They lived separated lives and they were orthodox in doctrine. And all of them showed reverence for the divine authorship of God’s Word and God’s promise to preserve His Word.

The King James Bible was translated by men like Lancelot Andrews who wrote Greek devotionals. Lancelot Andrews was an Oriental language expert. He was conversant in fifteen languages. Most new version translators have had only a couple years of Greek, a couple years of Hebrew and might have taken Spanish or French in high school. Lancelot Andrews was conversant in fifteen languages.

Another great man who translated the King James Bible was William Bedwell. Bedwell was an Arabic scholar. He revived the Arabic language. It was about to die, and he literally revived it. William Bedwell wrote an Arabic to English Lexicon. A lexicon is a dictionary that will give the Arabic word and its definition in English. A Greek Lexicon gives the Greek word and its definition in English. William Bedwell wrote the Arabic Lexicon that is still in use today. Go to the library and if they happen to have an Arabic Lexicon it will probably be the one that William Bedwell wrote.

Miles Smith also helped to translate the King James Bible. However, he is better known as the man who translated all the writings of the church fathers into English. Most of the English translations of the church fathers which are still in print today are the translation of Miles Smith. If he was able to translate the church fathers correctly, and the liberals don’t have to rewrite that, it should be a safe assumption that he also translated the King James Bible correctly.

John Boyce was a translator of the King James Bible. At the age of five, he could read the entire Hebrew Bible. At the age of six, he was considered a Hebrew scholar and was teaching the Hebrew language to adults.

These are only a few of the men who translated the King James Bible. Not some guys who had two years of Hebrew and/or Greek at a liberal seminary, but qualified men who wrote lexicons and who taught Hebrew at the age of six.

KJV Translators Were Better Aquainted With Biblical Languages

In the time of the King James Version the Greek, Oriental, and Hebrew languages were studied with intensity. In our day, Greek, Oriental and Hebrew languages are something that you take one or two semesters of in college. Not only were the men who translated the KJV closer to the languages than we are, they lived in the time when there was an intensive study of the languages that just does not exist today.

In the time of the King James translators, they wrote the lexicons for ancient languages. In our day, we use many of the lexicons that they wrote.
Read the rest of this entry »


The Authorized Version continued…

Lancelot Andrews

Dr. Lancelot Andrews, a member of the Westmenster Company is known for his linguistic ability.

«Once a year, at Easter, he used to pass a month with his parents. During this vacation, he would find a master, from whom he learned some language to which he was a stranger. In this way after a few years, he acquired most of the modern languages of Europe.»198

«He was not a man of ‘head knowledge’ only. He was a man of great practical preaching ability and an ardent opponent of Rome. His conspicuous talents soon gained him powerful patrons. Henry, Earl of Huntington, took him into the north of England, where he was the means of converting many Papists by his preaching and disputations.»199

«As a preacher, Bishop Andrews was right famous in his day. He was called the ‘star of preachers.'» 200
Dr. Andrews was also known as a great man of prayer.

«Many hours he spent each day in private and family devotions; and there were some who used to desire that ‘they might end their days in Bishop Andrews’ chapel.’ He was one in whom was proved the truth of Luther’s saying, that ‘to have prayed well, is to have studied well.'»201
Although he was a mighty preacher and prayer warrior, he was not «above» the people around him.

«This worthy diocesan was much ‘given to hospitality,’ and especially to literary strangers. So bountiful was his cheer, that it used to be said, ‘My Lord of Winchester keeps Christmas all years ’round.'»202
Lastly we review his ability as a translator of the Word of God.

«But we are chiefly concerned to know what were his qualifications as a translator of the Bible. He ever bore the character of a ‘right godly man,’ and a ‘prodigious student.’ One competent judge speaks of him as ‘that great gulf of learning!’ It was also said, that ‘the world wanted learning to know how learned this man was.’ A brave old chronicler remarks, that such was his skill in all languages, especially the Oriental, that had he been present at the confusion of tongues at Babel, he might have served as the Intepreter-General! In his funeral sermon by Dr. Buckzidge, Bishop of Rochester, it is said that Dr. Andrews was conversant with fifteen languages.»203
John Overall

Dr. John Overall was another of the King James translators. He, too, was known for his opposition to Roman rule. He was present at the hanging of the Jesuit Henry Garnet, mastermind of ‘the Gun-powder Plot.’

In spite of his opposition to Rome, he had an interest in individual souls and urged Garnet to make a true and lively faith to God-ward.»204

Dr. Overall was vital to the translation because of his knowledge of quotations of the early church fathers. Without a man with such knowledge it might have been impossible to verify the authenticity of passages such as I John 5:7. This verse has a multitude of evidence among church fathers, though its manuscript evidence suffers from the attacks of Alexandria’s philosophers.

This disputed verse is known among textual circles as the «Johannine Comma.» Dr. Edward Hills records some of the evidence in its favor:
«The first undisputed citations of the Johannine Comma occur in the writings of two fourth century Spanish bishops, Priscillian, who in 385 was beheaded by the emperor Maximus in the charge of sorcery and heresy, and Idacious Clarus, Priscillian’s principal adversary and accuser. In the Fifth Century the Johannine Comma was quoted by several orthodox African writers to defend the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals, who ruled North Mrica from 439 to 534 and were fanatically attached to the Arian heresy. About the same time it was cited by Cassiodorus (480-570) in Italy. The Comma is also found in r, an old Latin manuscript of the fifth or sixth century, and in the Speculum, a treatise which contains an old Latin text. It was not included in Jerome’s original edition of the Latin Vulgate, but around the year 800 it was taken into the text of the Vulgate from the old Latin manuscripts. It was found in the great mass of the later Vulgate manuscripts and in the Clementine edition of the Vulgate, the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church.»205
It was also cited by Cyprian in 225 A.D. 206

This is one hundred and seventy-five years before Eusebius penned the Vatican manuscript.

We can see then that Dr. Overall’s contribution to the translation would be of the utmost importance. No «modern» translation has so candidly investigated the evidence of the church fathers.

Hadrian Saravia

Dr. Hadrian Saravia, another learned translator, was as evangelical as he was scholarly. McClure reports:

«He was sent by Queen Elizabeth’s council as a sort of missionary to the islands of Guernsey and Jersey, where he was one of the first Protestant ministers; knowing, as he says of himself, in a letter, ‘which were the beginnings, and by what means and occasions the preaching of God’s Word was planted there.’ He labored there in a two-fold capacity, doing the work of an evangelist, and conducting a newly established school, called Elizabeth College.»207
He too, as any truly dedicated soldier for Christ, was a constant foe of Rome. In 1611 he published a treatise on Papal primacy against the Jesuit Gretser.

He is said to have been «educated in all kinds of literature in his younger days, especially several languages.»208
Read the rest of this entry »


Chapter 9: The Authorized Version

Christian Critics

In this chapter we will be looking at some of the common misrepresentations of the Authorized Version. Many of these misrepresentations are unintentional. Most of the comments against the Authorized Version are, in fact, simply repetitions of what the commentator heard from a pulpit, read in a book, or learned in a classroom.

Most of the fervency against the Authorized Version is not so much due to a conscious hatred against the Book, as much as it is a show of one’s education. This fact, which is a conscious malice, is then coupled with the «flesh» or «natural man,» which may be an unconscious malice, to form a constant antagonism toward the true Word of God. This «old nature» exists in every person, even Christians. It will not change until the rapture. This nature manifests itself in an innate desire not to submit to the authority of God.

Satan realizes this and uses it to his own advantage by giving the flesh ammunition to fight a battle which it naturally wants to fight. The sad result of this spirit of judgment is that the Word of God never really gets a fair trial.

Inspiration vs. Preservation

Today it is widely taught and accepted that God wrote the originals perfectly, but that there is no perfect translation. Yet, there is no scripture that teaches any such thing! This teaching is based on logic, man’s logic. Christian educators of today say that it is absurd to believe that God could use sinful men to translate His Word perfectly. Such a supposition of a perfect translation is no more absurd than the teaching that God used sinful men to write the Bible perfectly in the originals! Every argument for innerrant, infallible inspiration applies also for innerrant, infallible preservation. It is the same God!

If a believer in perfect inspiration says that God overpowered the writers’ ability to make a mistake, the believer in perfect preservation can also state that God overpowered the translators’ ability to make a mistake. It can also very happily be pointed out that a man who claims that God preserved His Words can at least PRODUCE what he claims to believe in!

Put Up or Shut Up

I personally believe that God has perfectly preserved His Word in the King James or Authorized Version. I can at least produce a King James Bible to show what I believe in. Any person who claims that God inspired the original autographs perfectly, cannot produce those original manuscripts to prove it! I do not believe that the King James Bible is a new inspiration. «Inspiration» starts with a blank sheet of paper, a man of God, and God. I am saying that the Authorized Version is every word of God that was in the original autographs, preserved to this day. «Preservation» starts with God’s manuscripts, a man of God, and God. The end result of both is the same: the perfect Word and words of God. It only makes sense.

Many of today’s preachers and self-proclaimed scholars slam their fists down on their pulpits in simulated «righteous indignation» while holding a Bible over their heads and loudly proclaim, «This Book doesn’t ‘CONTAIN’ the word of God, it IS the Word of God! Perfect! Infallible! Without admixture of error!» to the delight of the audience. But ask them, while out of their pulpit, if they believe that THE BOOK IN THEIR HAND is truly without error, and they immediately go into a song and dance routine about «just a translation OF the Bible» and say something about «Forever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.» Try pressing the issue, and they will question your authority to do so (Matthew 21:23), and if you persist you will be labeled a «Ruckmanite.»

All for simply believing that this «godly man» really believed what he had said when he was performing behind his pulpit!

Unwilling Allies

We have studied the history of the MSS, of the New Testament, and the historical plans and attempts to overthrow God’s preservation of His Word. We have seen that the vast majority of MSS and of historical evidence points to the Authorized Version as God’s preserved Word. Still, there is an air of antagonism against the Authorized Version. Strange as it may seem, the only things which Roman Catholics, apostates, Protestants, and fundamentalists can agree on is that the King James Bible should be eliminated! This striking truth in itself should be enough to shock born-again Christians into scrutinizing their position to make sure of which side of the fence they are on. When we find ourselves aligned with Satan’s church against Scripture, we find ourselves in a very dangerous position. This is especially true when we consider what the result would be if these groups were successful in abolishing the King James Version. The elimination of the Authorized Version finds us without a Bible, at which time we find Rome rushing to the rescue with her 1582 Jesuit translation, and the anti-God Local Text of Alexandria. Knowing that no fundamentalist would consciously use a Roman Catholic Bible, the Roman Church has obliged us by changing the cover to Revised Version, American Standard Version, Good News for Modern Man, the Living Bible, the Amplified Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, the Common Bible, the New International Version, the New Scofield Reference Bible, and many more. The story is true; the names have been changed to protect the guilty.
Read the rest of this entry »


Westcott and Hort continued… 3 of 3

Westcott’s Peace-Movement

No true Christian loves war. A Bible believer takes the premillenial view and realizes that war is caused by the sinful nature of mankind — James 4:1. He understands that this will all be changed at Christ’s return — Philippians 3:21.

A Bible rejector who has chosen the postmillenial viewpoint cannot allow himself to believe that mankind is bad. He must find a way to show that man is basically good. All men must be brothers in his eyes. «Brothers,» he assumes, will just naturally work toward peace.

Westcott, a postmillenial socialist, had this to say concerning the «brotherhood» of man in regard to instituting «peace on earth.»

«Christianity rests upon the central fact that the Word became flesh. This fact establishes not only a brotherhood of men, but also a brotherhood of nations; for history has shown that nations are an element in the fulfillment of the Divine counsel, by which humanity advances toward its appointed end.»159
What should these «brothers» do to help establish «peace on earth?» We can at once recognize the part which the Christian society is called upon to take with regard to three great measures which tend to peace — meditation, arbitration, and (ultimately) disarmament — and at least silently work for them.160

«Combine action, in any ways possible, for the bringing about of a simultaneous reduction of the armaments.»161

Once again the Cambridge professor is ahead of his time. «Disarmament» has been the cry of liberal, pro-Communist college students for two decades. Strange it is that as the «peace» movement of the 1960’s was led by a «minister» with the exact same philosophy about world peace!

Westcott wanted an «arbitration board» made up of the «Christian society» to decide international policy concerning disarmament quotas. He first envisioned England and the United States submitting to this idea, assuming then that the rest of the world would be forced to follow.

«The United States and England are already bound so closely together by their common language and common descent, that an Arbitration Treaty which shall exclude the thought of war — a civil war — between them seems to be within measurable distance. When once the general principle of arbitration has been adopted by two great nations, it cannot but be that the example will be followed, and then, at last, however remote the vision may seem, disarmament will be a natural consequence of the acceptance of a rational and legal method of settling national disputes.»162
Westcott even felt that world peace would be worth an «Ecumenical Movement.»

«Other cognate subjects were touched upon — the proposed Permanent Treaty of Arbitration between the United States and Great Britain, the significance of war as extreme outcome of that spirit of selfish competition which follows from the acceptance of a material standard of well being, the desirability of seeking cooperation with the movement on the part of the Roman and Greek Churches — but it seemed best to confine immediate action to a single point on which there was complete agreement.»163
He assumed that «world peace» was of the utmost importance.

«The proposal to work for the simultaneous reduction of European armament is definite, and deals with an urgent peril. Such a disarmament would secure the lasting and honourable peace which the leaders of Europe have shown lately, once and again, that they sincerely desire. We are all sensible of the difficulties by which the question of disarmament is beset, but we cannot admit that they are insuperable.»164
All this was to be done, of course, in the name of Christ. Westcott felt that he was simply trying to bring to pass Luke 2:14. He truly considered himself a man with whom God was «pleased,» as that verse had been mistranslated in the Revised Version.

«The question of international relations has not hitherto been considered in the light of the Incarnation, and till this has been done, I do not see that we can look for the establishment of that peace which was heralded at the Nativity.»165
So here we have a man who doubted the miracles which Christ performed.

«I never read an account of a miracle, but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover some what of evidence in the account of it.»166
Even though he doubted Jesus Christ’s miracles, he didn’t doubt that a Roman Catholic priest could perform them, as he explains what he saw in France at «Our Lady of La Salette» shrine.

«A written narrative can convey no notion of the effect of such a recital. The eager energy of the father, the modest thankfulness of the daughter, the quick glances of the spectators from one to the other, the calm satisfaction of the priest, the comments of look and nod, combined to form a scene which appeared hardly to belong to the nineteenth century. An age of faith was restored before our sight in its ancient guise. We talked about the cures to a young layman who had throughout showed us singular courtesy. When we remarked upon the peculiar circumstances by which they were attended, his own comment was: ‘Sans croire, comment l’expliquer?’ (translated: ‘Without believing how can it be explained?’) And in this lay the real significance and power of the place.»167
We have a man who could read and exalt a Jesuit-inspired poet, Keble, but when it came to reading anything that presented Rome in a negative light, such as Fox’s Book of Martyrs, he said, «I never read any of Fox’s book.»168
Read the rest of this entry »