The return to scientific reality

“Legendary reclusive genius Wolfgang Smith demonstrates on shockingly obvious grounds the dead end at which physics has arrived, and how we can “return, at last, to the real world”. https://philos-sophia.org/about-the-film/ THE END OF QUANTUM REALITY Mathematician-philosopher-physicist extraordinaire Wolfgang Smith has chosen to emerge now, at the summit of his life’s work, in order to prepare a new generation for what he calls “a singular moment in history.” Is the so-called “quantum reality problem” actually the sign that a four-century arc of human history—what René Guénon has called “the reign of quantity”—is reaching its end? From the creative team that brought you The Principle in 2014, The End of Quantum Reality—which also features Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Olavo de Carvalho, and narrator Richard DeLano—is now available on disc and digital streaming. Don’t miss this singular documentary designed to blow the doors off the quantum reality problem, and signal the end of the Reign of Quantity. SYNOPSIS Almost one hundred years ago, the project to reduce the world to mathematical physics failed suddenly and completely: “One of the best-kept secrets of science,” physicist Nick Herbert writes, “is that physicists have lost their grip on reality.” The world, we are now told, emerges spontaneously, out of “nothing,” and constitutes a “multiverse,” where “anything that can happen will happen, and it will happen an infinite number of times.” Legendary reclusive genius Wolfgang Smith demonstrates on shockingly obvious grounds the dead end at which physics has arrived, and how we can “return, at last, to the real world.” The End of Quantum Reality introduces this extraordinary man to a contemporary audience which has, perhaps, never encountered a true philosophos, as intimately at ease with the rigors of quantum physics as with the greatest schools of human wisdom. • “Wolfgang Smith broaches a vast range of subjects with a mastery that bespeaks an immense culture… It would be hard to exaggerate the importance of [his] work.” —Jean Borella, Professor of Philosophy, University of Nancy, France • “Here is that rare person who is equally at home with Eckhart and Einstein, Heraclitus and Heisenberg!” —Harry Oldmeadow, Professor of Philosophy, La Trobe University, Australia • “Wolfgang Smith is as important a thinker as our times boast.” —Huston Smith, Professor of Philosophy, M.I.T., and author of The World’s Religions

Pope Francis and the Vatican cautious about apparitions and weeping statues

“… [Pope] Francis has expressed skepticism about more recent events, including claims of repeated messages from Mary to “seers” at the shrine of Medjugorje, in Bosnia-Herzegovina”. Nicole Winfield On the Medjugorje phenomenon, see my (Damien Mackey’s) articles: Medjugorje and the Mad Mouthings of the ‘Madonna of the Antichrist’ (1) Medjugorje and the Mad Mouthings of the 'Madonna of the Antichrist' | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu and: Medjugorje is all about the money (2) Medjugorje is all about the money | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Now, we read at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vatican-stigmata-statues-pope-medjugorje-b2547725.html Vatican updates rules on weeping statues and stigmata amid fake news fears Apocalyptic prophesies are spreading online faster than ever before, causing confusion among the faithful Nicole Winfield …. Church figures who claimed to have experienced the stigmata wounds have inspired millions of Catholics The Catholic Church has a long and controversial history of the faithful claiming to have had visions of the Virgin Mary, of statues that purportedly wept blood tears and stigmata that erupted on hands mimicking the wounds of Christ. On Friday [17th May, 2024], the Vatican announce[d] new norms to help determine whether and when these seemingly supernatural events are authentic. It’s stepping in amid a boom in claims and concern that apocalyptic prophesies are spreading online faster than ever before, causing confusion among the faithful. When confirmed as authentic by church authorities, these otherwise inexplicable divine signs can lead to a flourishing of the faith, with new religious vocations and conversions. That has been the case for the purported apparitions of Mary that turned Fatima, Portugal and Lourdes, France into enormously popular pilgrimage destinations. Church figures who claimed to have experienced the stigmata wounds, including Padre Pio …have inspired millions of Catholics. …. But the phenomena can also become a source of scandal. That was the case when the Vatican in 2007 excommunicated the members of a Quebec-based group, the Army of Mary, after its foundress claimed to have had Marian visions and declared herself the reincarnation of the mother of Christ. Francis himself has weighed in on the phenomenon, making clear that he is devoted to the main church-approved Marian apparitions, such as … Our Lady of Fatima, who believers say appeared to three illiterate shepherd children in 1917. But Francis has expressed skepticism about more recent events, including claims of repeated messages from Mary to “seers” at the shrine of Medjugorje, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, even while allowing pilgrimages to take place there. “I prefer the Madonna as mother, our mother, and not a woman who’s the head of a telegraphic office, who sends a message every day at a certain time,” Francis told reporters in 2017. On Friday, the Vatican’s doctrinal office will issue a revised set of norms for discerning apparitions “and other supernatural phenomena,” updating a set of guidelines first issued in 1978. Those guidelines largely left it in the hands of the local bishop to investigate purported visions or supernatural events to determine if they were worthy of belief among the faithful, and tended to err on the side of caution. …. The Vatican has generally refrained from intervening, leaving it in the hands of local bishops and offering its approval to fewer than 20 reported apparitions over several centuries, according to Michael O’Neill, who runs the online apparition resource The Miracle Hunter. Last year however, it announced the creation of a special commission, or observatory, within the Pontifical International Marian Academy to study the phenomenon and provide consulting services to bishops. The commission is made up of a scientific committee of experts, including Fastiggi, from a variety of disciplines. Its director, Sister Daniela Del Gaudio, will join the Vatican’s doctrine czar in announcing the new norms at a news conference Friday. The observatory’s mission statement says experts will analyze and interpret apparitions, lacrimations, or weeping statues, stigmata “and other mystical phenomena that are in progress or have already occurred, but are still awaiting a pronouncement of the ecclesiastical authority on their authenticity.” “It is important to provide clarity, because often alleged messages generate confusion, spread anxious apocalyptic scenarios or even accusations against the pope and the church,” said the academy head, the Rev. Stefano Cecchin. There has been no shortage of controversy surrounding reported apparitions or other supernatural phenomena. ….

Mary, Mother of the Church

Pope Francis with an ancient icon of Mary in St. Mary Major Today (20th May, 2024) is the feast-day of Mary, Mother of the Church. How did this come about? We read back in 2018: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2018-03/pope-institutes-new-celebration-of-mary--mother-of-church.html Pope institutes new celebration of Mary, Mother of Church Pope Francis inserts the Memorial of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, into the Roman Calendar on the Monday following Pentecost Sunday. By Devin Watkins Pope Francis has decreed that the ancient devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, under the title of Mother of the Church, be inserted into the Roman Calendar. The liturgical celebration, B. Mariæ Virginis, Ecclesiæ Matris, will be celebrated annually as a Memorial on the day after Pentecost. In a decree released on Saturday by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Cardinal Robert Sarah, its Prefect, said the Pope’s decision took account of the tradition surrounding the devotion to Mary as Mother of the Church. 03/03/2018 Cardinal Sarah: ‘New Marian memorial aid to Christian life’ He said the Holy Father wishes to promote this devotion in order to “encourage the growth of the maternal sense of the Church in the pastors, religious and faithful, as well as a growth of genuine Marian piety”. ‘Mother of the Church’ in tradition The decree reflects on the history of Marian theology in the Church’s liturgical tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers. It says Saint Augustine and Pope Saint Leo the Great both reflected on the Virgin Mary’s importance in the mystery of Christ. “In fact the former [St. Augustine] says that Mary is the mother of the members of Christ, because with charity she cooperated in the rebirth of the faithful into the Church, while the latter [St. Leo the Great] says that the birth of the Head is also the birth of the body, thus indicating that Mary is at once Mother of Christ, the Son of God, and mother of the members of his Mystical Body, which is the Church.” The decree says these reflections are a result of the “divine motherhood of Mary and from her intimate union in the work of the Redeemer”. Scripture, the decree says, depicts Mary at the foot of the Cross (cf. Jn 19:25). There she became the Mother of the Church when she “accepted her Son’s testament of love and welcomed all people in the person of the beloved disciple as sons and daughters to be reborn unto life eternal.” In 1964, the decree says, Pope Paul VI “declared the Blessed Virgin Mary as ‘Mother of the Church, that is to say of all Christian people, the faithful as well as the pastors, who call her the most loving Mother’ and established that ‘the Mother of God should be further honoured and invoked by the entire Christian people by this tenderest of titles’”. Votive Mass now made a fixed celebration Then, in the Holy Year of Reconciliation in 1975, the Church inserted into the Roman Missal a votive Mass in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church. With the present decree, Pope Francis inserts that celebration into the universal Church’s liturgy as a Memorial on a fixed date. The Congregation for Divine Worship has published the official liturgical texts in Latin. Translations, the decree states, are to be prepared and approved by local Bishops’ Conferences before being confirmed by the Congregation. Please find below the official English-language text of the Decree: Prot. N. 10/18 DECREE on the celebration of the Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of the Church in the General Roman Calendar The joyous veneration given to the Mother of God by the contemporary Church, in light of reflection on the mystery of Christ and on his nature, cannot ignore the figure of a woman (cf. Gal 4:4), the Virgin Mary, who is both the Mother of Christ and Mother of the Church. In some ways this was already present in the mind of the Church from the premonitory words of Saint Augustine and Saint Leo the Great. In fact the former says that Mary is the mother of the members of Christ, because with charity she cooperated in the rebirth of the faithful into the Church, while the latter says that the birth of the Head is also the birth of the body, thus indicating that Mary is at once Mother of Christ, the Son of God, and mother of the members of his Mystical Body, which is the Church. These considerations derive from the divine motherhood of Mary and from her intimate union in the work of the Redeemer, which culminated at the hour of the cross. Indeed, the Mother standing beneath the cross (cf. Jn 19:25), accepted her Son’s testament of love and welcomed all people in the person of the beloved disciple as sons and daughters to be reborn unto life eternal. She thus became the tender Mother of the Church which Christ begot on the cross handing on the Spirit. Christ, in turn, in the beloved disciple, chose all disciples as ministers of his love towards his Mother, entrusting her to them so that they might welcome her with filial affection. As a caring guide to the emerging Church Mary had already begun her mission in the Upper Room, praying with the Apostles while awaiting the coming of the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 1:14). In this sense, in the course of the centuries, Christian piety has honoured Mary with various titles, in many ways equivalent, such as Mother of Disciples, of the Faithful, of Believers, of all those who are reborn in Christ; and also as “Mother of the Church” as is used in the texts of spiritual authors as well as in the Magisterium of Popes Benedict XIV and Leo XIII. Thus the foundation is clearly established by which Blessed Paul VI, on 21 November 1964, at the conclusion of the Third Session of the Second Vatican Council, declared the Blessed Virgin Mary as “Mother of the Church, that is to say of all Christian people, the faithful as well as the pastors, who call her the most loving Mother” and established that “the Mother of God should be further honoured and invoked by the entire Christian people by this tenderest of titles”. Therefore the Apostolic See on the occasion of the Holy Year of Reconciliation (1975), proposed a votive Mass in honour of Beata Maria Ecclesiæ Matre, which was subsequently inserted into the Roman Missal. The Holy See also granted the faculty to add the invocation of this title in the Litany of Loreto (1980) and published other formularies in the Collection of Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary (1986). Some countries, dioceses and religious families who petitioned the Holy See were allowed to add this celebration to their particular calendars. Having attentively considered how greatly the promotion of this devotion might encourage the growth of the maternal sense of the Church in the pastors, religious and faithful, as well as a growth of genuine Marian piety, Pope Francis has decreed that the Memorial of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, should be inscribed in the Roman Calendar on the Monday after Pentecost and be now celebrated every year. This celebration will help us to remember that growth in the Christian life must be anchored to the Mystery of the Cross, to the oblation of Christ in the Eucharistic Banquet and to the Mother of the Redeemer and Mother of the Redeemed, the Virgin who makes her offering to God. The Memorial therefore is to appear in all Calendars and liturgical books for the celebration of Mass and of the Liturgy of the Hours. The relative liturgical texts are attached to this decree and their translations, prepared and approved by the Episcopal Conferences, will be published after confirmation by this Dicastery. Where the celebration of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, is already celebrated on a day with a higher liturgical rank, approved according to the norm of particular law, in the future it may continue to be celebrated in the same way. Anything to the contrary notwithstanding. From the Congregation of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, 11 February 2018, the memorial of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Lourdes. - Robert Card. Sarah, Prefect - Arthur Roche, Archbishop Secretary

Gospels as direct testimonies

“Here we reach the biggest mystery of today's Christian exegesis — with the exception of Orthodox exegesis: All these discoveries testify that our faith is not in vain, that it rests upon real historic facts and should be welcomed with a relevant enthusiasm; instead, they are met with silence or worse”. Professor Marie-Christine Ceruti-Cendrier Whilst searching for a useful review of Claude Tresmontant’s The Hebrew Christ: Language in the Age of the Gospels (1989), I (Damien Mackey) came across the following terrific article by Professor Marie-Christine Ceruti-Cendrier (2013): http://www.churchinhistory.org/s3-gospels/(g354)-carmignac&tresmontant.htm JEAN CARMIGNAC & CLAUDE TRESMONTANT Chapter 14 of our booklet provides an outline of the findings of two French researchers. The Association Jean Carmignac promotes their work more fully and details of it are available at the end of this article. Here, Professor Marie-Christine Ceruti-Cendrier, administrator of the Association, examines several reliable dating methodologies which have been used to date the Gospels. She contrasts these with the unreliable literary analysis (form criticism) which is preferred by many modern exegetes. -----0----- Let's be straightforward: I believe the Gospels to be direct testimonies that tell real and non-mythic or symbolic facts. I do not believe it by fideism — not because of my faith — but because I have rational, scientific, carefully researched reasons to do so. Indeed, we who affirm the absolute historicity of the Gospels are now only a small minority. Although this truth of the faith was strongly asserted by the Second Vatican Council and has been believed by millions of Catholics throughout the centuries of Christianity, we nowadays seem to be considered as outsiders. Let's examine here the different aspects of this situation. Should the Supernatural in the Gospels be Simply Denied? The resolution of differences regarding the dating, the origins, the authors, the nature of the Gospels lies in this interrogation: Should they be analyzed in the view of all hypotheses applied to them but one? Should they be treated like any ordinary text for which the authenticity of the facts it contains is usually admitted? Or should they, by exception, be systematically denied what is in them: the supernatural (even when all other explanations have failed)? Three Reliable Ways to Establish the Authenticity of a Document Usually, scientists studying a written document they want to date have a choice of three courses of action at their disposal. They first (A) can look for the period of time to which the paper, the parchment, the ink, the shape of the writing belong, all of which underpin the text and can be analyzed through chemistry, paleography, papyrology, etc. . . . They also can turn their inquiry towards (B) the language, the dialect, the style, the expression, i.e., philology, linguistics; and thirdly (C) they can rely on clues helping to locate the period of time when the work was written. For example, any reference to steam engines, to the way of harnessing a horse, to a well-known historic event. All these help the search. Obviously none of the three methods excludes the others. Using these three methods, scholars followed the footprints of the Gospels and collected a rich harvest of facts that confirmed their historicity. A Fourth Way; But is it Reliable? But most of the exegetes preferred a fourth way, in which a work is dated through its literary content, i.e., in more simple terms according to the subject of the story. Let's not forget this has nothing to do with the style, the vocabulary or the expression, but states that the larger the quantity of supernatural the text contains the older it is; the more philosophical and intellectual it proves to be the recent it is; and the shorter and thinner it is the more archaic it is, the accumulation of time having perhaps piled up new layers to enrich the story. The Gospels and Extra-Biblical History It is time here to give a few important details. The oldest Gospels that reached us are written in Greek, the international language during Christ's time. In the Holy Land the commonly spoken language was Aramaic and the sacred language was Hebrew — some specialists are convinced Hebrew was also spoken, while others think it was only written, but this does not matter. In any case, these languages are very similar. In A.D. 70 an event occurred that, in both human and religious terms, has been considered most loathsome by Jews ever since that time: the fall and destruction of the Temple and the City of Jerusalem by the Romans. Most of its inhabitants were killed; the rest were deported or scattered. Had the Gospels been written in Greek, it could have been at any time. If, on the other hand, their first redaction (before being translated to Greek) had been written in a Semitic language (Hebrew or Aramaic) it should date — and this is very important — from before 70, as after this date using these languages would have been useless or dangerous. If even one of the Gospels had been written before 70, the witnesses of Christ's life, miracles, death and Resurrection being still alive would guarantee the authenticity of the account. They indeed would not have let the deception go on if the facts supposed to have happened among them (Luke 1:1) had not taken place. On the other hand, if those four Gospels originated after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70, all possible oversights, mistakes, forgeries (even well intended), intended additions or omissions may be considered. That is why the exegetes' discussion on both the date and the original language of the Gospels prove so contentious. On these issues depend, indirectly but certainly, the degree of trust the Gospels can be granted. Evidence Based on Archaeology and Papyrology Let's go back to the results of the archaeological or philological "excavations" and the hunt for clues that have proved so fruitful to the supporters of historicity and early dating (before or well before 70). Let's first consider (A). Which documents did survive? Some 25 years ago, Fr. Jose O'Callaghan, S.J. identified a papyrus written in Greek which was found in the cave Number 7 in Qumran, the "7Q5," as being a fragment of St. Mark's Gospel (6:52-53) and another papyrus from the same cave as being a fragment of 1 Timothy (1 Tim. 4:1b). Nobody supporting the late dating has ever credibly questioned the fact that these caves were closed in 68 A.D., dating therefore their content from earlier than this date. Beside these manuscripts lay their container: a broken jar bearing the letters RWM which, according to the well-known Hebraist J.A. Fitzmyer, represent the City of Rome and were clumsily written by a Jew at the time. It has been observed in the other Qumran caves that a name written on a jar meant its provenance and/or to whom it belonged. St. Irenaeus, disciple of St. Polycarp who was himself a disciple of Christ's Apostles, stated in his Against Heresies (III,1,1) that St. Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome. Therefore the Dead Sea Manuscripts support tradition and early dating. The first reaction of theologians was to hide this discovery and not tell anything about it, but when, twenty years later, the German Protestant papyrologist Carsten P. Thiede brought the manuscript out and declared it to be authentic in The Earliest Gospel Manuscript, (Paternoster Press, 1992), the outcry against its authenticity was enormous. Mackey’s comment: For more, see my articles: Carsten Peter Thiede on dating of New Testament (2) Carsten Peter Thiede on dating of New Testament | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu and: Carsten Peter Thiede has discovered the true site of Luke’s Emmaus (2) Carsten Peter Thiede has discovered the true site of Luke's Emmaus | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Professor Ceruti-Cendrier continues: Meanwhile a scientific symposium on 7Q5 took place in Eichstatt in Bavaria in 1991 and confirmed the coincidence of its text with Mark 6:52-53. Several eminent papyrologists like H. Hunger, S. Darius and Orsolina Montevecchi (Honorary President of the International Association of Papyrologists) agreed to date this papyrus in 50; twenty years, at most, after the Resurrection. However a great majority of the exegetes still disagree. Let's add that Carsten P. Thiede (RIP 2004) — an internationally known papyrologist — in Jesus according to Matthew, has since studied three small fragments coming from one codex. The fragments had been donated to Oxford's Magdalen College and display various phrases from St. Matthew's Gospel. Having analyzed them he [is] convinced that this papyrus did not appear after 70 but probably around 50. Philologists Affirm Early Dates of Origin of the Gospels Concerning the philological research (B), two specialists thoroughly analyzed the language of the Gospels: Fr. Jean Carmignac, one of the greatest experts in biblical studies in the world, and recognized as foremost in the knowledge of the Qumran Hebrew (of Jesus' times), and Claude Tresmontant lecturer for the Institut de France who taught for a long time in the Sorbonne University. Mackey’s comment: For more, see my article: Fr Jean Carmignac dates Gospels early (3) Fr Jean Carmignac dates Gospels early | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Professor Ceruti-Cendrier continues: Tresmontant is the author of an Old Testament Hebrew-to-Greek (Septuagint) dictionary. (The Septuagint was translated in the third — second century B.C.) They both demonstrated that the Greek language used in the Gospels (all four of them for Tresmontant, the three Synoptic ones for Carmignac who did not consider St. John's) was translated from Hebrew or Aramaic. They both consider the whole of the Gospels (excluding the Preface to St. Luke's) and not just fragments introduced into a Greek text. They both provide tens (may be hundreds) of proofs. Fr. Carmignac, in La Naissance des Evangiles Synoptiques, points out Semitisms of thought, vocabulary, syntax, style, composition, transmission, translation and even multiple Semitisms. For each case, he supplies many examples. As for Tresmontant's demonstration, let's just give a few samples of it: In Luke 9:51, the Greek text reads: "He fixed his face to go to Jerusalem," which makes no sense in Greek or in English but proves to be a Hebrew expression frequently used in the Old Testament meaning "He firmly decided." Tresmontant gives many such examples and idiomatic expressions. He also points out the following passage in St. John (5:2) — St. John's text being regarded as the latest, most scholars dating it from the very end of the 1st century — "There is in Jerusalem, next to the Ewes Gate a pool called Bezatha". Why would the present tense be used if the city had not existed for a long time? And what about Matt. 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2, Luke 19:41-44, etc., in which Jesus predicts the destruction of Jerusalem? (Many "late-date" exegetes doubt that Jesus made this prediction.) How is it that the Evangelists — or at least one of the Evangelists — have not specified, if the city was already destroyed, that this so-called prophecy was in fact achieved? "A discreet and shy forger" as Tresmontant ironically puts it. Let's by the way observe J.A.T. Robinson, an Anglican exegete, who was perfectly convinced of the non-historicity of the Gospels, until he noted this complete absence of reference to the end of Jerusalem as an already accomplished historical fact. He declared therefore the impossibility of dating the Gospels later than 70. Carmignac also explains a few "nonsenses" found in the Gospels: in Mark 5:13 the reference to a herd of about two thousand pigs has been generally regarded as a mythical construction (gathering two thousand pigs being virtually impossible). But Fr. Carmignac explains that in Hebrew only consonants are written and the same word differently pronounced acquires a different meaning. The written Hebrew word for "about two thousand," if read with other vowels, means "by packs." So "The herd jumped from the cliff into the sea by packs." The Hebrew underpinning the text makes it clear and probable while proving its own presence. Fr. Carmignac gives many more such examples and even explains some of the apparent discrepancies in some Gospels compared to others. As he translated the Synoptic Gospels from Greek to Qumran Hebrew, he stated quite firmly that they had first been written in Hebrew or Aramaic, then in Greek, so easily had he accomplished this translation. Many other philologists also uncovered the way the Semitic language underpins the Greek language used in the Gospels. Fr. Carmignac noted many of them in the past. Since I published my book, several people wrote to me indicating contemporary philologists who had made similar discoveries. However, I have been unable to find their writings. They have not been published in books or journals. It has been said that publishers do not even reply to these authors. They are not mentioned on television or radio programs or in the print media. It seems that few philologists have heard of them and that those who have remain silent about them. Other Indications of Sound, Early-Date Biblical Historicity Let's come to (C). Nearly every day new clues are found indicating that the Gospels were originally written close to the time of Jesus. As noted above, based largely on speculation, many exegetes continue to assert that the Gospels were written after A.D. 70 by authors who never knew Jesus, any of the Apostles or any other eyewitnesses to Jesus. However, it seems impossible that any such late-date author could write without making mistakes on the location, the animals, the plants, the sharing of powers, the various sects and other minute details by which archaeological excavation confirm that the Evangelists were stating the truth. The absence of such errors strongly indicates that the Gospels were written close to the time of Jesus. Vittorio Messori, in his books Hypotheses sur Jesus and Il a souffert sous Ponce Pilate, gives many examples confirming this matter. Here are just a few: (a) In 1968, archaeologists commissioned by the Israeli Government excavated in Giv'at ha Mitvar, north of Jerusalem, the remains of a young man, five and one-half feet tall, dating from the 1st century, who had been crucified and whose tibiae had been broken. (b) A stone found a few years ago, notifying non-Jews that they were not allowed inside the temple reserved to the Jews, is written in the same three languages as the placard hung to the cross: Hebrew, Latin and Greek. And (c) A family grave dating back to Jesus' time was uncovered in a graveyard where leading citizens were buried. It contained the remains of a certain Simon of Cyrene's parents. Could this be mere coincidence? Madame Genot-Bismuth, a non-Christian Professor of Ancient and Medieval Judaism in the Sorbonne-Nouvelle University (Paris), is positive that the person who wrote St. John's Gospel was a direct witness of his account as the details he gives fit so exactly with the results of her own archaeological excavations in Jerusalem. There are also all sorts of comforting hints. Fr. Pierre Courouble revealed that Pilate speaks Greek in St. John's Gospel (18:29 and 19:22) as a foreigner, making mistakes and Latinisms, whereas the remainder of the Gospel is grammatically perfect. Who would have remembered this long after the facts? (It is equally possible that Pilate's original sentences in bad Greek appeared as such in an original Semitic text.) On another matter, why does St. Mark tell us that Jesus, during the storm he is about to calm, was inside the stern, sleeping on the cushion" and not "at the stern" (where he would have interfered with the maneuvering of the boat)? The answer was found when the wreck of a boat of Jesus' time was discovered in the Genesareth Lake in 1986 showing on its rear deck a covered shelter in which a man could lie (Bonnet-Eymard). Gino Zaninotto, a teacher and specialist of ancient languages, provided a list of codices indicating that St. Matthew's Gospel was written eight years after the Ascension of the Lord; St. Mark's, eleven years; St. Luke's, fifteen years; and St. John's, thirty-two years after the same event. The oldest of these codices dates from the 9th century and, according to Michel van Esbroeck from Munich University, the source of this information might be still older. From where do these precious dates come? Why were they disclosed in 836 during the Synod of Jerusalem attended by the three Melchite Patriarchs from Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem? Why has this research field been so far ignored? Here we reach the biggest mystery of today's Christian exegesis — with the exception of Orthodox exegesis: All these discoveries testify that our faith is not in vain, that it rests upon real historic facts and should be welcomed with a relevant enthusiasm; instead, they are met with silence or worse. Giulio Firpo, professor at Chieti University (Italy), undertook an exceptional investigation of the Gospels of Christ's childhood. He studied hundreds of documents such as writings from Antiquity and from modern times, inscriptions, coins and various papyruses. Based on Firpo's findings, we can be quite confident that the Gospel accounts of Christ's childhood are authentic. For instance, who knows nowadays that there were numerous censuses at the end of the 1st century B.C.? But who has heard of this extraordinary scholar's book Il problema cronologico della nascita di Gesu. [The chronological problem of Jesus' birth]? Why has it not been published in English and other languages? A Catholic University Denies Scholars Access to Early-Date Evidence Fr. Carmignac left all his writings to the Institut Catholique de Paris by will, comprising sixteen boxes full of manuscripts and documents together with their inventory and classification. After his death they were brought to this university by his secretary, Mlle. Demanche. Nobody asking for it has been allowed to consult these archives and Fr. Carmignac's publisher, M. de Guibert, has not been allowed to publish his posthumous works. The successful Italian weekly magazine Il Sabato made this story public with Thiede's discoveries and the ensuing polemics. Strangely enough, it closed down a little later. The direction and philosophical orientation of the international monthly magazine Thirty Days, that was publishing the same articles, changed at the same time. Mackey’s comment: For more on this scandalous situation, see my article: Fr Jean Carmignac dates Gospels early. Part Two: Institut Catholique de Paris ignores Carmignac (3) Fr Jean Carmignac dates Gospels early | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu (3) Fr Jean Carmignac dates Gospels early. Part Two: Institut Catholique de Paris ignores Carmignac | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu