who argue against it are not authorities, any who criticize it are not scientific; so they say to intimidate and scare off critics and jam the theory down people’s throats by the tyranny of authority. So it is not only links that are missing, but proofs and unprejudiced approaches and scientific methods that are missing. Despite hot denials, evolution is accepted on “faith” and faith alone.

Now their faith in Piltdown man is gone. Their words about him are false, their wisdom turned out to be folly. “The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.” But, “The word spoken by Jehovah endures forever.”—1 Cor. 3:19; 1 Pet. 1:25, NW.

Would Christ Have Proclaimed a “Marian Year”?

CHRIST JESUS while on earth kept God’s law perfectly. He therefore had due respect for his foster father and his mother, for God’s law required that he honor them. But were he present today would he proclaim a “Marian Year” as did his claimed vicegerent, the pope of Rome?

A “Marian Year”? Yes, the New York Times, September 27, 1953, reported that on September 8, which, incidentally, is claimed to be the birthday of Mary, the pope issued his twenty-fifth encyclical, which he termed “Fulgens Corona,” that is, the “Radiant Crown,” wherein he designated 1954 as a “Marian Year” in that it was to be devoted to veneration of Mary.

In this encyclical the pope called upon all Christians, Catholics and non-Catholics alike, to make the year one of special prayer. Among the many things for which they were to pray, three were particularly stressed: the peace of the world, the unity of the church, and freedom for the church in totalitarian lands. No world pilgrimages were to be made to Rome, as this was but a “Little Holy Year”; however, every Catholic church was to be a shrine, with special emphasis on churches named after Mary and shrines where she is said to have appeared, such as that at Lourdes, France.

And why did the pope designate 1954 as a Marian year? Because it is the hundredth anniversary of the promulgation of the dogma of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, which, according to the opening paragraph of this encyclical, holds “that the Most Blessed Virgin Mary at the first moment of her conception was by a singular grace and privilege of the omnipotent God in virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved from all stain of original sin.”

SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT?

Whether or not Christ Jesus would have proclaimed a Marian year would first of all depend upon whether Mary was conceived without sin or not. As Christians we, of course, accept God’s Word as our authority. Do we find anything therein supporting the dogma under question? We do not. Even the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, page 675, admits that “no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.” Is it not strange that a dogma, the