Pope praises Teilhard de Chardin

[KEVIN WILCOX]

Originally Posted by JReducation

First of all, I'll begin with the last sentence that I highlighted. It's offensive.
Second, let's go to the first sentence. How did you get the idea that Satan will sit at the right hand of God? That's not what Pope Benedict is saying.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Brother why are you so quick to take offense when none was intended?
To my knowledge there has been some discussion about Satan's conversion, and I believe it was Franciscan.

If "all things are reconciled to God" then we have one of the objections given to Fr de Chardin's theology: 'The synthesis of the Christian God on high and the Marxist God of the future is the only God we can henceforth adore in spirit and in truth' (Fr de Chardin)

[Earnest Bunbury]

Originally Posted by KEVIN WILCOX

"The Spirit of Jesus reconciles all things through himself to the Father...it's about goodness." And Satan will sit at the right hand of God and Hell shall be no more?
I think it's very Franciscan to be so charitable as to pray for Satan to be forgiven.

I have a new category for "reading into" statements that have in no way even come close to what was said or even alluded to: "leapism". Making gigantic "leaps" of conjecture past all bounds. It seems to show that a conclusion has, in the mind of one "leaping to conjecture", already made up ones mind and the facts discussed are only seen in light of one's preconceived understanding.

To correlate Creation with Satan is wrong. Your grand inference is grand illusion.

If "all things are reconciled to God" then we have one of the objections given to Fr de Chardin's theology: 'The synthesis of the Christian God on high and the Marxist God of the future is the only God we can henceforth adore in spirit and in truth' (Fr de Chardin)

This is why de Chardin is wrong. There is only one God, the Christian God. The Marxist God is one of the Marxists own making and is a false god. Is God not also the God of the future?

[JReducation]

Originally Posted by KEVIN WILCOX

Brother why are you so quick to take offense when none was intended?
To my knowledge there has been some discussion about Satan's conversion, and I believe it was Franciscan.

It is I who should apologize. I did not know that someone is praying for Satan's conversion. It's not us. I know that our holy Father Francis and Teresa of Avila both prayed for the salvation of Judas. This is the first the I hear about Satan's conversion, which is impossible. Satan's choice is made for all eternity. I wonder who actually prays for this.

If "all things are reconciled to God" then we have one of the objections given to Fr de Chardin's theology: 'The synthesis of the Christian God on high and the Marxist God of the future is the only God we can henceforth adore in spirit and in truth' (Fr de Chardin)

The Pope does not put it quite that way. Though in that particular chapter to which I refer people, he does speak about Maxism, but not kindly. Just the opposite. He points out the need for Jesus, by pointing to the evils and injustices in the world.

Once again everyone, I sincerely apologize to Kevin. I misunderstood.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

[JReducation]

Originally Posted by Earnest Bunbury

I have a new category for "reading into" statements that have in no way even come close to what was said or even alluded to: "leapism". Making gigantic "leaps" of conjecture past all bounds. It seems to show that a conclusion has, in the mind of one "leaping to conjecture", already made up ones mind and the facts discussed are only seen in light of one's preconceived understanding.

To correlate Creation with Satan is wrong. Your grand inference is grand illusion.

If "all things are reconciled to God" then we have one of the objections given to Fr de Chardin's theology: 'The synthesis of the Christian God on high and the Marxist God of the future is the only God we can henceforth adore in spirit and in truth' (Fr de Chardin)

This is why de Chardin is wrong. There is only one God, the Christian God. The Marxist God is one of the Marxists own making and is a false god. Is God not also the God of the future?

This makes me wonder, how one defines the "Marxist God." I've read Fr. de Chardin's work, many times and have seen sentences like this. But they do not define or unwrap the idea. It would be interesting to find what he understood the Marxist god to be. It never occurred to me to ask the question. I just read past those statements and blew them off as mistakes in his thinking and then proceeded to look for what was good in his anthropology. Fr. de Chardin was really more of an anthropologist than a theologian, even though he had extensive theological education. But he focused more on the other.

I'd love to find his definition for this term.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

[Earnest Bunbury]

Originally Posted by JReducation

This makes me wonder, how one defines the "Marxist God." I've read Fr. de Chardin's work, many times and have seen sentences like this. But they do not define or unwrap the idea. It would be interesting to find what he understood the Marxist god to be. It never occurred to me to ask the question. I just read past those statements and blew them off as mistakes in his thinking and then proceeded to look for what was good in his anthropology. Fr. de Chardin was really more of an anthropologist than a theologian, even though he had extensive theological education. But he focused more on the other.

I'd love to find his definition for this term.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I do pray that your health concerns are better and that you are doing well.

In his book "Trojan Horse in the City of God" Dietrich von Hildebrand makes note of this as de Chardin's fundamental flaw, his immanent view of God. Marx had no God in his views but de Chardin forces one in there through his pantheistic theology of "becoming", to a denigration of "being". The forward view of temporal redemption of Marx fits well with the inherent evolutionary redemption of creation that is pantheisticly conceived by de Chardin.

The God of Christianity is the God above, of pure act and not any potentiality. The "God" of Marx is one of becoming, of the "forward" as von Hildebrand puts it. The less than orthodox (mistakenly termed "leftist" Catholics) often talk of the "emerging" Church and of progressive views of theology, liberation theology and the Marxist regimes of Central America shows the similarity of this, and is part and parcel of a denigration of the transcendence of the true Christian view of divine revelation. Pantheism both elevates man to being part of God (in an impersonal absolute sense) and denigrates him by making man subordinate to that "impersonal absolute", the God that is creation and not the God of creation (a Personal Absolute).

The abyss between God and man becomes less pronounced and thus the need to work to cross that abyss is lessened. This brings God down to our level rather than trying to elevate ourselves to God by renouncing sin, in prayer and contemplation, and acceptance of grace which, thus, is a transformation in Christ of our being and is only in a temporal sense becoming. I know you already know this but the contrast between de Chardin and divine revelation is in how one comes to be redeemed, either spiritually or temporally. For de Chardin, it is temporally.

This temporal sense is a lesser reality and will pass away where we will be in the eternal moment of God which is eternity. De Chardin's view is of this moment is achieved through the temporal becoming, of an evolutionary process to God and not a transforming of our "being", our being in Christ. This colors all his works and writings as dangerous and I believe the Church thinks so too by its condemnation, rightly so, in my opinion.

[KEVIN WILCOX]

Originally Posted by JReducation

It is I who should apologize. I did not know that someone is praying for Satan's conversion. It's not us. I know that our holy Father Francis and Teresa of Avila both prayed for the salvation of Judas. This is the first the I hear about Satan's conversion, which is impossible. Satan's choice is made for all eternity. I wonder who actually prays for this.
The Pope does not put it quite that way. Though in that particular chapter to which I refer people, he does speak about Maxism, but not kindly. Just the opposite. He points out the need for Jesus, by pointing to the evils and injustices in the world.
Once again everyone, I sincerely apologize to Kevin. I misunderstood.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Dear Brother, obscurity and presumption are alive and established in my posts. Pray for me that this too shall pass. Forgive me.

[yosupman]

Amazing conversation!

[DrWeed]

Earlier this week, I had to go through some works written by Teilhard's admirers, then stumbled across this thread. Sad to say, if Pope Benedict is praising this guy, then either a) someone else wrote the speech for him, or b) we're in for a serious leadership crisis. Since this pope is really the only leader on the planet I have respect for, I prefer to believe A. If it's B, then it was an astounding example of bad judgment of a kind Benedict has never shown before, in the same league as JP II speaking positively of voodoo priests. There's simply no excuse for giving a nutbar like Teilhard a platform of any kind, or treating his ideas with any kind of respsect, because he spoke for the Devil.

Teilhard and his cult of followers are seriously deranged people who babble at length about "Cosmic Christs" and Jesus being the "Omega Point" of history and garbage like that. They hold numerous heretical doctrines, such as the belief that sin is a necessary part of our universes, because God's work is always incomplete and therefore imperfect; the Fall of Man was built into the very structure of an imperfect universe right from the beginning, not as a result of Satan tempting Adam, who is merely a literary device. Just this one belief is sufficent to earn Teilhard and all of his followers immediate excommunications ley sententiae; they shouldn't even be taking Eucharist, let alone serving in high positions in the Church. And this one belief is just the tip of a big iceberg of heretical doctrines they hold, in addition to a lot of mysticism which sounds very uplifting and all but is actually just babbling nonsense, with a lot of made-up jargon like "noosphere."

Technically, Teilhard and his followers haven't been formally excommunicated, but no one's supposed to be reading his books either, for very good reasons. In actuality, by virtue of their numerous rejections of Catholic theological and moral dogmas, they already excommunicated themselves long ago. They haven't been formally expelled from the Church, but they should have been, in the most humiliating way possible. They didn't threaten the money and power wielded by the corrupt wing of the Hierarchy, so like all of the other heretical movements of our time, they were allowed to do as they pleased.

To make matters worse, in his book "Hostage to the Devil," Malachi Martin goes into great detail about the case of a priest who was a big follower of Teilhard and turned out to be possessed. In the course of the exorcism process, one of that priest's colleagues discovered that he was possessed by the same demon. Both of them spouted a lot of the same nonsense that Teilhard's followers - such as John Haught and many others - also do today. Frankly, I don't want to touch that stuff with a ten-foot pole; it's a waste of time anyways, not when we have 2,000 years worth of orthodox philosophers and mystics to talk about. The fact that so many of our bishops and theologians read Teilhard instead of consulting that vast storehouse of knowledge speaks volumes about who they really serve.


-- Steve

[Julia Mae]

Originally Posted by Tradycja

Here it is on the Vatican website:

http://www.vatican.va/news_services/or/or_eng/text.html


On Friday afternoon, 24 July, the Holy Father celebrated Vespers with the faithful of Aosta, Italy, in the city's Cathedral. During his Homily, the Pope commented on a brief passage from the Letter to the Romans

We ourselves, with our whole being, must be adoration and sacrifice, and by transforming our world, give it back to God. The role of the priesthood is to consecrate the world so that it may become a living host, a liturgy: so that the liturgy may not be something alongside the reality of the world, but that the world itself shall become a living host, a liturgy. This is also the great vision of Teilhard de Chardin: in the end we shall achieve a true cosmic liturgy, where the cosmos becomes a living host. And let us pray the Lord to help us become priests in this sense, to aid in the transformation of the world, in adoration of God, beginning with ourselves.

I could not find this quote at this link. Could someone give me specific direction?

[Mike30]

This thread has been dead for three years now. Why resurrect it?

[Thomas Casey]

Please start a new thread.

CLOSED