| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 482 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 478 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Google, Yandex
|
| Latest Threads |
Fr. Ruiz: Renewal of the ...
Forum: Rev. Father Hugo Ruiz Vallejo
Last Post: Stone
Today, 04:56 AM
» Replies: 15
» Views: 1,165
|
Interview with the Editor...
Forum: The Recusant
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:15 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 111
|
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:03 AM
» Replies: 37
» Views: 3,501
|
Last Sunday after Penteco...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:57 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 11,640
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Twen...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 10:30 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 90
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Feas...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 10:27 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 115
|
The Catholic Trumpet: Whe...
Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 07:06 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 94
|
Bishop appointed by Commu...
Forum: Socialism & Communism
Last Post: Stone
11-22-2024, 04:57 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 94
|
Dr. Marian Horvat: The Tw...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
11-22-2024, 04:52 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 113
|
German [District] Superio...
Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
Last Post: Stone
11-22-2024, 04:48 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 135
|
|
|
| Defeating Modernism at the Root Level |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-20-2024, 08:32 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- No Replies
|
 |
Defeating Modernism at the Root Level
Mary, Destoyer of All Heresies blog | October 1, 2023
Defeating Modernism requires addressing the root cause. The root cause of Modernism according to St. Pius X is the exaltation of agnostic philosophy over natural and supernatural revelation. Philosophy - the art of reasoning about created things - in this era is based on false ideas about nature. Science is treated today as the faith once was; and where science opposes faith the faith is summarily subjected to it, even within the Church:
Quote:...faith occupies itself solely with something which science declares to be unknowable for it. Hence each has a separate field assigned to it: science is entirely concerned with the reality of phenomena, into which faith does not enter at all...
...but it is quite different with regard to faith, which [in the Modernist system] is subject to science...
How did this displacement of theology, long regarded as the Queen of sciences occur? When did this happen? I would caution the reader to tread carefully over the next few paragraphs as the ideas expressed there may be both unsettling and for some, impossible.
As St. Pius X traces in his analysis of the "compendium of all heresies" (Modernism), it is the doctrine of evolution that underpins the agnosticism of the Modernist. Enough ink has been spilt confuting the heresy of so-called theistic evolution; what I propose here is the examination of the seminal theological event that made the theory of evolution inevitable as the dominant cosmological theory even among churchmen.
Evolution attacks creation. Creation as divine revelation explains it to us simply could not have occurred. Therefore, the Book of Genesis - the sure foundation upon which all Sacred Scripture rests - is either in error or speaks only in poetic and symbolic style.
The first attack on the divinity of Genesis happened long before Darwin. It occurred in the early 17th century when three Roman Pontiffs (Paul V, Urban VIII, and Alexander VII) all condemned Galileo's heliocentric theory as formally heretical. The Church had always held that the earth was at rest in the center of cosmos as the theater of redemption in which God became incarnate of the Virgin Mary. The rest of the heavenly bodies rotated around the earth as Genesis 1,14 reveals. To this, Saint Robert Bellarmine testifies
Quote:"Second. I say that, as you know, the Council [of Trent] prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers. And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally (ad litteram) that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe. Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators."
- Letter to Foscarini, 1615
Evolution could not have gotten off the ground - at least as regards the theology of the Church - except first that faith in Genesis had been wounded by the heliocentrists. They - long before the evolutionists - accused the Church of error as regards the interpretation of the first chapters of Genesis. If the Church was wrong about so foundational a matter as the cosmological makeup of the universe, how could she be trusted with the weightier matters of Biblical interpretation?
However, Saint Robert Bellarmine points out a dogmatic hermeneutic here; where there is common agreement by the Church Fathers, there is no freedom to oppose their interpretation. This decree from Trent is renewed at Vatican I:
Quote:"The complete books of the old and the new Testament with all their parts, as they are listed in the decree of the said council [Trent] and as they are found in the old Latin Vulgate edition, are to be received as sacred and canonical.
These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their Author, and were as such committed to the Church.
Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy Mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture.
In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers."
- Decree of the Vatican Council, 1869-1870
Here we face an immovable object; the Church formally forbids interpreting the Word of God against the consensus of the Fathers, which St. Robert says were agreed about the geocentric cosmological model. No Fathers ever considered that the earth rotates around the sun, especially as an insignificant and obscure planet in some remote location in the galaxies. The teaching was so firmly established that three Popes condemned the idea that earth rotates around the sun as heresy. In his 1885 book The Pontifical Decrees Against the Doctrine of the Earth’s Movement and the Ultramontane Defence of Them Rev. William W. Roberts argues that the Church exercised her charism of infallibility in the condemnations of heliocentrism. These condemnations occurred prior to Vatican I when Papal infallibility was defined, but the condemnations have never been retracted - nor could they be without destroying the integrity of the ecclesiastical magisterium.
A brief explanation about the science is perhaps helpful. As shocking as it may sound to the reader, there is no proof that the earth rotates the sun, nor is moving at all despite the claims that it is hurtling through space at a rate of 66,000 miles per hour while rotating at a speed of 1,004 miles per hour at the equator. All the experiments conducted to prove the motion of the earth failed. Albert Einstein developed two (opposing) theories of relativity to save the heliocentric system which at the end of the day simply renders the issue a 'tie': all motion is relative according to Einstein, and we cannot know whether the earth moves or the planets and stars do. And now the latest evidence from James Webb's telescope have scientists, astronomers, and cosmologists scrambling for explanations as what they previously held as fact is thrown into chaos.
They simply do not know all that they say they know and most people have blindly accepted what they say as though it were an article of faith.
Back to the roots of Modernism: it was this frontal assault by Galileo (utilizing the system distilled from others by Fr. Nicholas Copernicus) on the Church's authoritative interpretation of Genesis that resulted in his censure. Following Galileo others advanced the heliocentric theory each asserting that he found conclusive evidence for it. Finally the Catholic Church permitted the investigation of the heliocentric model in the late 19th century but never formally retracted the condemnations of Paul V, Urban VIII, and Alexander VII. The enemies of the Church used the Galileo affair as a battering ram against her as they do to this day. They accuse her of being anti-science, a position that is laughable now as the Church is infected with Modernism from head to foot. Just say the name "Galileo" and watch modern churchmen apologize profusely, back peddle with haste, and explain how we have now "repented" for the "unjust treatment" of Galileo Galilee.
This idea prevails to the present moment: the Church was wrong for 18 centuries in her authoritative interpretation of Genesis. The problem with this perception is that it contradicts the twice defined dogma of patristic biblical interpretation; it undermines the authority of previous Supreme Pontiffs who acted uniformly in condemning heliocentrism as heresy; and it opens the door for the Church to be accused on multiple fronts for false teaching based on anti-scientific exegesis.
Modernism wounds divine and Catholic faith with a malignantly inspired skepticism about the truth of revelation. It attacks the first words of Sacred Scripture in order to topple all that follows. It assumes a role above the science of divinity in order to criticize and ridicule it. But Modernism itself is condemned by the Church in the encyclical Pascendi Domenici gregis promulgated by Pope Pius X in 1907. It may surprise the reader to learn that St. Pius X is not quoted even once in the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II. John Paul II famously apologized for the Galileo affair explaining that "theologians had erred" in concluding that heliocentrism was formal heresy.
It is easy to be intimidated by Modernists today who reign in the Church Militant as the Arians did in the 4th and 5th centuries. They laugh in your face if you suggest the Catholic Church was right to condemn heliocentrism as heresy. They mock and scoff at the very idea that science could be wrong about anything. Yet until the churchmen - you and I - start to stand up for our faith as the martyr-Saints always have in the face of a world that is under the dominion of the devil, the false beliefs of the world will not only dominate profane thinking but continue to wound the faith of the Catholic Church.
Evolution must be confuted in our apologetics; but that is all activity above the ground level. To remove the roots of Modernism, we must believe what the Church has always taught and recover the teaching of the holy Fathers as regards our central place in the cosmos. This task is not for the faint of heart or those who desire the esteem of the world.
|
|
|
| Archbishop Viganò: Homily for the Feast of the Chair of St. Peter in Rome - January 18, 2024 |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-18-2024, 10:15 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- Replies (1)
|
|
Deus, qui beato Petro Apostolo tuo,
collatis clavibus regni cælestis,
ligandi atque solvendi pontificium tradidisti:
concede; ut, intercessionis ejus auxilio,
a peccatorum nostrorum nexibus liberemur.
Praised be Jesus Christ.
Today the Church in Rome celebrates the feast of the Chair of Saint Peter, with which the authority that Our Lord conferred on the Prince of the Apostles finds in the Chair its symbol and ecclesial expression. We find traces of this celebration since the third century, but it was in 1588, at the time of the Lutheran heresy, that Paul IV established that the feast of the Chair qua primum Romæ sedit Petrus would take place on January 18, in response to the denial of the presence of the Apostle in the City of Rome. The other feast for the Chair of the first Diocese founded by St. Peter, Antioch, is celebrated by the universal Church on February 22.
Let me point out this important aspect: just as the human body develops antibodies when disease arises, so that it can be defeated when it is infected; so too the ecclesial body defends itself from the contagion of error when it occurs, affirming with greater incisiveness those aspects of dogma threatened by heresy. For this reason, with great wisdom, the Church proclaimed Truths of the Faith at certain times and not before, since those Truths were hitherto believed by the faithful in a less explicit and articulated form and it was not yet necessary to specify them. The sacred Canons of the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea respond to the Arian denial of the divine nature of Our Lord, and are echoed by the splendid compositions of the ancient liturgy; the denial of the sacrificial value of the Mass, transubstantiation, suffrages, and indulgences are answered by the sacred Canons of the Council of Trent, and along with them also the sublime texts of the Liturgy. Today’s feast responds to the anti-papal denial of the foundation of the Diocese of Rome by the Apostle Peter, a feast that was desired by Paul IV precisely in order to reiterate the historical truth contested by Protestants and to strengthen the doctrine that derives from it.
The heretics and their neo-modernist followers, who have infested the Church of Christ for the past sixty years, act in the opposite way. And where they do not brazenly deny the Catholic Magisterium, they attempt to weaken it by being silent about it, omitting it, and formulating it in such a way as to make it equivocal and therefore acceptable even by those who deny it. This is exactly how the heresiarchs of the past also acted; this is how the innovators acted at Vatican II; and this is how those who, in order not to be accused of formal heresy, seek to cancel those “immune defenses” with which the Church had endowed herself, so as to make the faith fall into error and infect those defenses with the plague of heresy. Almost everything that the Mystical Body had wisely developed over the centuries – and particularly during the second millennium of the Christian era – growing harmoniously like a child who becomes an adult and strengthens himself in body and spirit, has now been willfully obscured and censured, with the deceptive excuse of returning to the primordial simplicity of Christian antiquity, and with the unspeakable purpose of adulterating the Catholic Faith in order to please the enemies of the Church.
If you take the Montinian Missal, you will not find explicit heresies in it; but if you compare it with the traditional Missal, you will find that the omission of so many prayers composed in defense of revealed Truth was more than enough to make the Reformed Mass acceptable even to Lutherans, as they themselves admitted after the promulgation of that fatal and equivocal rite. To confirm this, even the feasts of the Chair of St. Peter in Rome and Antioch have been combined into one, in the name of that cancel culture that the modernist sect adopted in the ecclesiastical sphere well before the woke Left appropriated it in the civil sphere.
Today we celebrate the glories of the Papacy, symbolized by the Cathedra Apostolica that the genius of Bernini artistically composed on the altar of the apse of the Vatican Basilica, which is dominated by the alabaster window depicting the Holy Spirit and guarded by four Doctors of the Church: Saint Augustine and Saint Ambrose for the Latin Church, Saint Athanasius and Saint John Chrysostom for the Greek Church. In the original project, which has remained intact through the centuries, the Chair was located above an altar, which the devastating fury of the innovators did not spare, moving it between the apse and the baldacchino of the Confession. Yet it is precisely in the architectural unity of altar and chair – which today has been deliberately erased – that we find the foundation of the doctrine of the Primacy of Peter, which is founded on Christ, He who is the lapis angularis, just as the altar of sacrifice, which is also a symbol of Christ, is made of stone.
We celebrate the Papacy in a historical phase of grave crisis and apostasy, which has risen even to the level of the Throne on which Peter first sat. And while our hearts are broken in contemplating the ruins caused by the devastation of the innovators to the detriment of so many souls and the glory of the divine Majesty; while we implore from Heaven a light that will allow us to understand how to combine Our Lord’s promise Non prævalebunt with the steady stream of heresies and scandals spread by the one whom Providence has inflicted on us at the head of the ecclesial body as punishment for the sins committed by the Hierarchy in these decades; while we see the division between those who deluded themselves that they still had a Pope segregated in the Monastery and the schism in the Dioceses of Northern Europe with their wicked synodal journey strongly desired by Bergoglio, we remember the prophecy of Leo XIII of happy memory, who wanted to insert in the prayer of the Exorcism against Satan and the apostate angels those terrible words that at the time must have sounded almost scandalous, but that today we understand in their supernatural sense:
Ecclesiam, Agni immaculati sponsam, faverrimi hostes repleverunt amaritudinibus, inebriarunt absinthio; Ad omnia desiderabilia ejus impias miserunt manus. Ubi sedes beatissimi Petri et Cathedra veritatis ad lucem gentium constituta est, ibi thronum posuerunt abominationis et impietatis suæ; ut percusso Pastor, et gregem disperse valeant.
Terrible enemies have filled the Church, bride of the immaculate Lamb, with bitterness, they have poisoned her with absinthe; they have laid their wicked hands on all desirable things. There where the See of Blessed Peter and the Chair of Truth was established to enlighten the nations, there they have placed the throne of their abomination and impiety, so that by striking the Shepherd they might also scatter the flock. These are not randomly written words: they were written after Leo XIII, at the end of Mass, had a vision in which the Lord granted Satan a period of time of about a hundred years to test the men of the Church. They echo the message of the Blessed Virgin at La Salette, fifty years earlier: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist,” and precede by little more than a decade that third part of the Secret of Fatima in which, in all likelihood, Our Lady predicted the apostasy of the Hierarchy with the Second Vatican Council and the liturgical reform.
Every believer down the centuries has been able to look to Rome as a beacon of truth. No Pope, not even the most controversial popes in history like Alexander VI, ever dared to usurp his sacred Apostolic Authority in order to demolish the Church, adulterate her Magisterium, corrupt her Morality, and trivialize her Liturgy. In the midst of the most shocking storms, the Chair of Peter has remained unshaken and, despite persecution, it has never failed in the mandate conferred on it by Christ: Feed my lambs. Feed my sheep (Jn 21:15-19). Today, and for ten years now, feeding the lambs and sheep of the Lord’s flock is considered as a “solemn foolishness” by the one who now occupies the Throne of Peter, and the command that the Lord has given to the Apostles – Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you (Mt 28:19-20) – is seen as deplorable “proselytism,” as if the divine mission of the Holy Church were comparable to the heretical propaganda of sects. He said so on October 1, 2013; January 6, 2014; September 24, 2016; May 3, 2018; September 30, 2018; June 6, 2019; December 20, 2019; April 25, 2020, and again just a week ago on January 11, 2023. And here collapses the last, gasping vestige of what was Vatican II, which made “mission” [missionarietà] its watchword without understanding that in order to proclaim Christ to a paganized world it is necessary first of all to believe in the supernatural Truths that He taught the Apostles and that the Church has the duty to guard faithfully. Watering down Catholic doctrine, silencing it, and betraying it in order to please the mentality of the age is not the work of Faith, because this virtue is based on God who is the Supreme Truth; it is not a work of Hope, because one cannot hope for the salvation or help of a God whose revealing authority and saving love one rejects; it is not a work of Charity, because one cannot love Him whose very essence is denied.
What is the vulnus that has struck the ecclesial body, making possible this apostasy of the leaders of the Hierarchy, to the point of causing scandal not only in Catholics, but also in the people of the world? It is the abuse of authority. It is believing that the power connected with authority can be exercised for the very opposite purpose of that purpose which legitimizes authority itself. It is taking God’s place, usurping His supreme power to decide what is right and what is not, deciding what can still be said to people and what is to be considered old-fashioned or outdated in the name of progress and evolution. It is to use the power of the Holy Keys to loose what ought to be bound and bind what ought to be loosed. It is not to understand that authority belongs to God and to no one else, and that both the rulers of nations and the prelates of the Church are all hierarchically subjected to Christ the King and High Priest. In short, it is separating the Chair from the altar, the authority of the Vicar and the Regent from that of the One who makes that authority sacred, ratified from above, because He possesses its fullness and is its divine origin.
Among the titles of the Roman Pontiff, there recurs, along with Christi Vicarius, also that of Servus servorum Dei. If the first has been disdainfully rejected by Bergoglio, his choice to retain the second sounds like a provocation, as his words and his works demonstrate. The day will come when the prelates of the Church will be asked to clarify what intrigues and conspiracies may have led to the Throne one who acts as the servant of Satan’s servants, and why they have fearfully assisted his excesses or made themselves accomplices of this proud heretical tyrant. Let those tremble who know and yet are silent out of false sense of prudence: by their silence they do not protect the honor of the Holy Church, nor do they preserve the simple from scandal. On the contrary, they plunge the Bride of the Lamb into ignominy and humiliation, and drive the faithful away from the Ark of Salvation at the very moment of the Flood.
Let us pray that the Lord will deign to grant us a holy Pope and holy rulers. Let us implore Him to put an end to this long period of trial, thanks to which – like every event permitted by God – we are now understanding how fundamental it is instaurare omnia in Christo, to recapitulate everything in Christ; how hellish – literally – is the world that rejects the Lordship of Christ, and how much more infernal is a religion that strips itself with contempt of its royal garments – robes dyed with the Blood of the Lamb on the Cross – to become the servant of the powerful, of the New World Order, of the globalist sect. Tempora bona veniant. Pax Christi veniat. Regnum Christi veniat.
And so may it be.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
January 18, 2023
Cathedra sancti Petri Apostoli, qua primum Romae sedit
|
|
|
|
| Full and Active Participation: Capitulation to Modernism |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-18-2024, 06:48 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- No Replies
|
|
Full and Active Participation: Capitulation to Modernism
Mary, Destroyer of All Heresies blog [Emphasis in the original] | January 4, 2022
Why did the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum concilium) promulgated by Pope Paul VI at the Second Vatican Council emphasize "full and active participation" by "all the people" as the number one priority for reforming the liturgy?
Quote:In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else; for it is the primary and indispensable source from which the faithful are to derive the true Christian spirit; and therefore pastors of souls must zealously strive to achieve it, by means of the necessary instruction, in all their pastoral work. (SC #14)
This reference is not without precedent; in fact, St. Pius X promulgated a similar clause in his 1903 motu proprio on sacred music Tra le sollecitudini:
Quote:It being our ardent desire to see the true Christian spirit restored in every respect and preserved by all the faithful, we deem it necessary to provide before everything else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple, in which the faithful assemble for the object of acquiring this spirit from its indispensable fount, which is the active participation in the holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church.
The differences in emphasis are striking; in 1903 it was for the sanctity of the temple. In 1963, it was for "full and active participation of all the people." These differences lay chiefly in the attitude towards the synthesis of all heresies, Modernism, and the reforms inspired by them.
The purpose of the liturgical reform was to focus on subjective experience after some Churchmen conceded to the rationalist-atheists that God could never be the direct object of science or history. This was especially urgent in lands conquered by the communists. Therefore, stripped of the witness of external signs and even nature itself, they were dependent on subjective experience to justify religion. This Pope John Paul II made the crusade and purpose of his entire life, attempting to synthesize St. Thomas and modern philosophy, primarily under the broad heading of personalism.
The particular school of personalism Father Karol Wojtyla subscribed to was the phenomenology of Scheler, Heidegger, and Husserl. He believed that by locating the experience of the divine in man, he could justify the Gospel in a new way not dependent on history, Tradition, or objective authority. Hence, the top priority identified in Sacrosanctum Concilium, “full and active participation” was intended to discretely replace the definition of faith as intellectual assent to that which God has revealed to a subjective experience of the divine. All of this is condemned by St. Pius X in his encyclical On the Doctrines of the Modernists, Pascendi Dominici gregis. A few quotes are provided below:
Quote:Modernists place the foundation of religious philosophy in that doctrine which is usually called Agnosticism. According to this teaching human reason is confined entirely within the field of phenomena, that is to say, to things that are perceptible to the senses, and in the manner in which they are perceptible; it has no right and no power to transgress these limits. Hence it is incapable of lifting itself up to God, and of recognising His existence, even by means of visible things. From this it is inferred that God can never be the direct object of science, and that, as regards history, He must not be considered as an historical subject. (#6)
But when Natural theology has been destroyed, the road to revelation closed through the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. (#7)
But let us see how the Modernist conducts his apologetics. The aim he sets before himself is to make the non-believer attain that experience of the Catholic religion which, according to the system, is the basis of faith. (#35)
How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the [first] Vatican Council. We shall see later how, with such theories, added to the other errors already mentioned, the way is opened wide for atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true. (#14)
If Pope John Paul II did not adopt this very error as the basis for his phenomenology and did not apply these errors in his official doctrinal corpus, how else can we explain quotes like this?
Quote:It must first be kept in mind that every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God’s Spirit, achieved a deeper religious experience. Handed on to others, this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions.
In every authentic religious experience, the most characteristic expression is prayer. Because of the human spirit’s constitutive openness to God’s action of urging it to self-transcendence, we can hold that “every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person.
- Address to the Members of the Roman Curia, 22 Dec. 1986, n. 11; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 5 Jan. 1987, p. 7.
Let's summarize. According to the philosophical agnosticism of the Modernists, God could not be the direct object of science, nor of history. This left churchmen with the only option to locate the divine in human experiences. The error here should be obvious: God is the object of the queen and mistress of all sciences, the science of divinity; He is the object of all history as He is its author and chief actor. To capitulate to the Modern error of agnosticism is to surrender to a false paradigm which the Second Vatican Council refers to as "modern man." This modern man rejects the entire supernatural order; places all the miracles of revelation in the category of myths; and sees in the God-man, Jesus Christ our Lord a mere human figure totally beholden to the requirements of his own epoch as a first century Jewish itinerant preacher. Any capitulation to such paradigmatic nonsense is to open the doors wide for atheism, as St. Pius X solemnly condemns in Pascendi gregis.
The old liturgy with its reliance on the objectivity of human and divine knowledge, the transcendence of its heavenward gaze and communion with the Triune God and His Saints was totally unsuited for modern man who rejected what he could not experience subjectively in himself. While these efforts to accommodate so-called modern man with a liturgy better suited to the false paradigm of philosophical agnosticism seemed imbued with a certain human empathy, they were and always will be doomed to fail. God is the primary object of science - all science, the supreme science being theology. God is no less the Lord of all profane sciences as the Creator of the material world; He is no less the object of true history as its originator, consummator and Lord.
This explains the contemporary preoccupation with 'getting everyone involved' in the Novus Ordo liturgy. The incessant noise, activity, and overutilization of laymen in liturgical functions is all required to foster authentic subjective religious experiences - not only as a way to concretize Catholic faith but the only way, seeing all external revelation and natural theology is excluded, or at least made optional.
Hence, we have the current campaign of Pope Francis and his Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments to stamp out the old Mass. The old Mass isn't promoting this anthropocentric religion; it isn't focused on man and subjective experiences, but on the transcendent Divinity. The Mass of All Ages gives absolute credibility to the God Who is the direct object of science and history; it mediates supernatural graces through the offering of the Son to the Father in propitiation for the sins of the living and the dead. It is not difficult to surmise why the partisans of the New Theology wanted to obliterate every vestige of Catholic Tradition, especially in liturgy.
Where does this anthropocentric religion with its focus on human experiences lead us? According to St. Pius X, straight to atheism. And the precipitous and tragic decline in the Western Catholic Church would appear to corroborate this.
Finally, a clarification of the legitimate role of experience in Catholic religious praxis. As we noted from St. Pius X's motu proprio on sacred music above, the words active participation (Latin: participatio actuosa) should be considered without any negative connotation when we use the philosophy of St. Thomas and not the modern agnostic philosophies. This Scholastic philosophy of St. Thomas was in fact recommended by St. Pius X in Pascendi as a sure bulwark against the collection of heresies converging in Modernism. It fully acknowledges that God is the primary object of both science and history and as such places no exaggerated or strained emphasis on human religious experience. But stripped of Scholastic philosophy's sure foundation and left naked with only subjective experience as a guide, the role of active participation takes on a dangerous urgency which leads eventually to a loss of faith, apostasy, and atheism.
These key philosophical differences emerge from different attitudes towards the theories purported by profane science. For St. Thomas, theology is the Queen of sciences; for the modern philosophers, theology is only speculation about subject matter that cannot be finally and certainly known. The first major cleavage between profane science and the Church's magisterium occurred during the novel proposition by Galileo of Copernicus' heliocentric theory. This controversy fatally separated the profane sciences from the science of divinity as the former rejected the latter's conclusions; moreover, this opened wide an entire theater of polemical war against the Church's philosophical moorings which culminated in the super-heresy of Modernism, inasmuch as Modernism is utterly dependent on the theory of evolution. The collection of grotesque errors one may find in the literature of Teilhard de Chardin amply illustrates the bizarre lengths one may extend in order to synthesize Catholic religion with the theories of modern science unmoored from traditional Catholic philosophy.
For liturgy, the object must ever be the Transcendent Divinity; this object must be regarded as absolute, real, concrete, tangible, and accessible through the mediation of the Catholic Church. No amount of condescension to so-called modern man in new theories of liturgy can ever hope to replace the system of worship which came not from men, but from God. The focus on men and their experiences may have been inspired by a well-intended pathos, but in the end, it redirects men away from the Transcendent Good and toward their own weaknesses.
About this, Fr. Johannes Dormann, S.T.D. writes
Quote:A comparison of the principles of knowledge in Cardinal Wojtyla's [Pope John Paul II] New Theology with those of classical theology makes the fundamental differences clearly come to light. In classical theology, God is the material and formal object of theology.
In the New Theology of Cardinal Wojtyla, the object is man. The diametrical opposition is manifest.
Through the confusion of nature and grace in the axiom of universal salvation, the traditional "dualism" is entirely eliminated. The traditional distinctions of the natural and supernatural knowledge of God, of natural and supernatural revelation, of natural reason and supernatural faith, of natural and supernatural theology, no longer apply. The virtue of faith, which is constitutive for the process of justification, is no longer required for salvation...
- Quote taken from Pope John Paul II's Theological Journey to the Prayer Meeting of Religions in Assisi, Part 1, pages 121-123, © 1994 by Angelus Press
The urgency and necessity in preserving the Traditional Roman Rite is not a matter of personal taste, preference, or attachment; it is the divinely provided bulwark against Modernism, as discussed in the Ottaviani Intervention of 25 September 1969:
Quote:...the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The canons of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery.
The experiment of philosophical personalism applied to liturgy has had a 50 year run; there is ample data to make a judgment on the suitability of such reforms and to weigh their impact on the Church. God is and always will be the highest object of any true science, and sound philosophy will always validate this. Every effort to appeal to men who reject the God of history by directing their attention to their own subjective experiences will end up failing in the Church's divinely appointed mission of saving souls through the preaching of the Gospel, of which the most profound proclamation is the Holy Sacrifice of the [tradtional] Mass.
|
|
|
|
| Israel Awards the World’s First Regulatory Approval for Cultivated Beef |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-18-2024, 06:33 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
Aleph Farms: Israel Awards the World’s First Regulatory Approval for Cultivated Beef
greenqueen.com [slightly adapted, not all hyperlinks included] | January 17, 2024
Israeli-cultivated meat producer Aleph Farms has received the world’s first regulatory approval for cell-cultured beef, marking a milestone in the alternative protein sector.
This makes Israel – still in the middle of regional conflict – only the third country to greenlight cultivated meat, paving the way for Aleph Farms to introduce its Black Angus Petit Steak to diners soon.
Israel’s Aleph Farms has become the first company in the world to earn regulatory approval for cultivated beef, after the Israeli Ministry of Health (IMOH) issued a ‘no questions’ letter for its consumer brand Aleph Cuts in December – akin to an FDA ‘No Questions’ letter in the US. It allows the producer to market its products – currently priced similarly to premium conventional beef – in the country, with plans to roll out at restaurants and, eventually, retailers.
With the greenlight, Israel joins a very short list of countries to allow the sale of cultured meat – only Singapore (Eat Just in 2020) and the US (Upside Foods and Eat Just in 2023) have done so. But these approvals were all done for cell-based chicken products, meaning Aleph Farms is the first company permitted to sell cultivated beef.
“This announcement marks a critical leap in the global race to make the meat that people love, that’s also better for our climate, biodiversity, and food security,” said Bruce Friedrich, founder and president of alternative protein think tank the Good Food Institute (GFI). “We’re thrilled consumers in Israel will soon join those in the US and Singapore as being among the first to be able to purchase these delicious products.”
Robert E. Jones, president of Cellular Agriculture Europe and co-founder of the Global Cellular Agriculture Alliance shared this statement with Green Queen: “I have sent heartfelt congratulations to our member company, Aleph Farms, on this exciting news. It is great to see more geographies approve cultivated meat and, equally important, to see more types of cultivated animal proteins entering the market. Israel, the Netherlands, Singapore, the United States, and the U.K. have made early investments to build complementary protein ecosystems, and the dividends are now paying off.”
Aleph Farms’ cultured meat costs the same as premium beef
The decision brings an end to a process a year-and-a-half in the making, when Aleph Farms filed its initial submission to the health ministry, following a pre-submission consultation. The company worked closely with the Food Risk Management Department, led by co-founder Dr Ziva Hamama, to ensure “full compliance with safety standards” for these novel proteins.
“This regulatory approval grants us permission to produce and market our product in Israel, subject to specific directions for labelling and marketing provided by the Israeli Ministry of Health, and the completion of Good Manufacturing Practices inspection for our pilot production facility,” explained Yifat Gavriel, the company’s regulatory affairs chief.
The first product to be unveiled is Aleph Farms’ cultivated thin-cut Petit Steak, which was first introduced in April with the Aleph Cuts brand. The hybrid meat product comprises non-modified, non-immortalised cells of a premium Black Angus cow named Lucy, alongside a plant protein matrix made of soy and wheat. Apart from the starter cells derived from one of the cow’s fertilised eggs, there are no other animal-sourced components (such as fetal bovine serum, or FBS) in the cultivation process or final product.
The controlled and traceable process is carried out in an aseptic production environment, which – the company states – increases transparency and significantly reduces contamination risks. Plus, there’s no presence of antibiotics in the process.
Once the requirements mentioned above (labelling and mark-of-facility inspection) are fulfilled, we will introduce Aleph Cuts to diners, offering exclusive tasting experiences curated in collaboration with select partners. “At first, the product will be available in select restaurants,” Yoav Reisler, senior marketing and communications manager at Aleph Farms, told Green Queen. “Afterwards, it will become available at foodservice and retail locations.”
On the cost question, he revealed: “At the time of our soft launch, Aleph Cuts will be priced similarly to premium conventional beef. We are taking various steps to drive economies of scale and achieve price parity with more of the conventional beef market within a few years from launch.”
No doubt, making it a hybrid product helps too, as this is the path some envision cultivated meat to enter the market (Dutch producer Meatable is taking this approach too). “Hybrid products will allow the cultivated market the chance to build and become normalised with consumers, while also – importantly – generating the revenues and business necessary to keep dollars flowing into the space, so scale can be further achieved,” one alt-protein investor told Green Queen in December.
Cultured meat needs to reach production costs of $2.92 per pound to be price-competitive with conventional meat. But while companies have managed to cut manufacturing costs by 99% in less than a decade, McKinsey analysis estimates that it will still take until 2030 for these proteins to reach parity. “Of common animal proteins, beef delivers the highest value in global markets, so by focusing on cultivated beef, we are able to shorten the timeline to price parity,” explained Reisler.
Israel’s need – and support – for cultivated meat
“The entire Aleph team has united in strength and determination to deliver no matter what during these difficult times in Israel. We are excited to carry this resilience forward in the form of innovation in agriculture and food security,” said Aleph Farms co-founder and CEO Didier Toubia.
It’s a milestone for a country that has long been supportive of alternative proteins – and for good measure, given the nation’s battle with food insecurity: government figures show that 16% of Israeli families and 21% of children did not have adequate access to safe, nutritious food in 2021. Among families with children, 19% experienced food insecurity, and 8.5% suffered from severe insecurity.
As cultivated meat doesn’t rely on livestock agriculture, huge swathes of farmland, or vast amounts of water, the benefits are as important for climate change as they are for food security. This is especially true for beef, which emits more greenhouse gas emissions than any other foodstuff. It’s a meat loved by Israelis, who eat 19.6kg of it per year and are expected to consume over 29kg annually by 2029.
But uniquely, Israel is known to be one of the most vegan-friendly countries in the world. According to a 2017 survey (the latest data available), 5% of its citizens identify as vegans and 8% as vegetarians. At the same time, 23% expressed a desire to cut their intake of meat.
This explains Israel’s support for alternative proteins, which “stands out globally”, according to Alla Voldman, VP of strategy and policy at GFI Israel. “Three out of the first eight cultivated meat companies worldwide are Israeli. 15% of global investments in the field are allocated to Israeli-cultivated meat companies,” she noted.
This ecosystem includes the world’s largest cultivated meat consortium, which Aleph Farms is a part of. A three-year project to scale up production and drive down costs of cultivated meat, it received funding to the tune of 66 million NIS ($18M).
“We believe that the robust presence of cultivated meat companies, fermentation, and plant-based, coupled with advanced academic research, entrepreneurship, industry, and unique consumer market, provide Israel with an opportunity to lead the field forward,” Voldman added. “This strengthens our ability to provide value to countries worldwide in an era of climate and food security crises.”
Toubia added: “We believe that addressing joint challenges like food security is the best way to ensure the prosperity of the Middle East and other parts of the world that rely heavily on massive food imports, especially in Asia.”
But the incidence of veganism be a catalyst for the success of a fellow alt-protein pillar in cultivated meat? “I’m not sure it’s one of the most significant markers,” Reisler said. “Aleph Cuts are animal-based products, as the original source of animal cells is a cow. However, many vegetarians and vegans may call Aleph Cuts vegetarian-friendly and vegan-friendly, as the product is not harvested from an animal carcass and there is no slaughter involved in the production.” [As noted above, the starter cells for Aleph Farm’s beef steaks are sourced from the fertilised eggs of a cow, and as such, cultivated meat isn’t usually regarded as vegan-friendly – for an ethical take, this is a good read.]
What’s next for Aleph Farms after regulatory approval?
Aleph Farms’ regulatory approval in Israel is a huge win – but it isn’t stopping there. The company has filed for clearance in Singapore, Switzerland, the UK and the US, and is advancing its applications in other markets too. “Entrance to Asia (via Singapore) and the Middle East (via Israel) is currently our main focus. We expect to receive positive indications from the Singapore Food Agency soon,” confirmed Reisler.
Pressed on the progress with these applications – particularly in the UK, as there is talk about a bilateral deal to fast-track approval for Aleph Farms – he told Green Queen: “We maintain a dynamic, ongoing channel of communication with those regulatory agencies as part of our review process. They have been receptive in regard to our production and process development, and have shown appreciation for our methodological science-based approach to ensuring the safety of our process and product.”
The company is simultaneously pursuing a kosher certificate for its facility from local rabbinate authorities too. This is key for a company based in Israel and catering to a large Jewish population, which eats kosher food as directed by the Torah. There are encouraging signs for Aleph Farms here, with Israel’s chief rabbi David Lau declaring last January that its non-FBS steak could be considered kosher and akin to eating a vegetable (parve).
As it awaits decisions from other regulators globally, its approval in Israel could be a precursor for things to come. “2024 stands to be a landmark year for the advancement of regulatory pathways and commercialisation of cultivated meat,” claimed Gavriel.
Meatable is expecting a green light for its cultivated pork from Singapore this year, and France’s Vital Meat claims it’s the frontrunner to be the first European startup to be approved in the city-state. Meanwhile, Australia’s Vow Food is in the middle of a consultation process after its cultured quail was cleared as safe to eat by the bilateral Food Standards Australia New Zealand in December.
“There’s still work ahead of us to continue to scale up, meet consumer expectations and move toward the mainstream. However, I think on the technology side, the scientific side, in terms of process development, early industrialisation and regulatory compliance, we have made a huge leapfrog, and I’m quite happy to see that,” Toubia told Green Queen founding editor Sonalie Figueiras on the Green Queen in Conversation: Cultivated Meat Pioneers podcast in September. “The industry is really on the verge of going to market and starting initial acceptance.”
Following a $105 Series B round in 2021, Aleph Farms has raised a total of $118M in funding – Toubia has outlined the company’s aim to reach $1B in revenue by 2030. This will be helped by its manufacturing advancements over the last couple of years. In February 2022, it moved to a 65,000 sq ft plant in Rehovot, Israel, which increased its capacity by six times to be able to initially produce 10 tonnes of cultivated steak annually. Last year, it announced the acquisition of another manufacturing facility in Modi’in, Israel, alongside a new manufacturing agreement with ESCO Aster in Singapore (the world’s only approved industrial manufacturer for cultured meat).
“With its global leadership in cellular agriculture, Israel continues to push for greater regional integration and economic collaboration, which will be crucial for stabilising the region,” said Toubia. “We believe that addressing joint challenges like food security is the best way to ensure the prosperity of the Middle East and other parts of the world that rely heavily on massive food imports, especially in Asia.
“Now more than ever, Aleph Farms remains committed to making the world a better place.”
|
|
|
|
| Shaman performs pagan ritual over World Economic Forum leaders at Davos Summit |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-18-2024, 06:28 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- No Replies
|
|
Shaman performs pagan ritual over World Economic Forum leaders at Davos Summit
A woman introduced as Chief Putanny from the Yawanawá tribe of the Amazon did not disclose
the meaning of the ‘prayer’ and 'blessing' she performed over some of the world’s most powerful leaders.
![[Image: WEF-shaman.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/WEF-shaman.png)
Emily
Mangiaracina
Wed Jan 17, 2024
DAVOS, Switzerland (LifeSiteNews) — An Amazonian shaman on Wednesday performed a pagan ritual over a panel after the members discussed “Climate and Nature” at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) 2024 meeting in Davos, Switzerland.
[twitter]https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1747697153252692315[twitter]
After a discussion on how to “enable a net-zero, nature positive” future, a woman introduced as Chief Putanny from the Yawanawá tribe of the Amazon gave a brief address asking for help in “healing the planet.” She presented herself as representing “the voice of nature” and “the voice of the forest” and concluded, “When we are all united in our hearts and thoughts, our Mother Earth will listen to us.”
She proceeded to engage in what appeared to be a pagan ritual “blessing,” rubbing her hands together and reciting a “prayer” before blowing air on the head of each panelist.
The panelists and Chief Putanny then joined hands to the applause of their audience and received a standing ovation from a few individuals, most notably former U.S. vice president and climate alarmist Al Gore.
It was only relatively recently, in 2005, that women were permitted to undergo initiation as a spiritual leader, or shaman, of the Yawanawá. According to Vivejar, an online information resource on Brazil, the tribe believes that “the shamans are guardians of the tribe’s knowledge, from medicine to arts, and they learn the magic secrets with the spirits.”
Another webpage devoted to the Yawanawá admits that “Shamanic power is ambivalent since it simultaneously enables the capacity to cure and to provoke illnesses,” and that “accusations of sorcery and poisoning among the Yawanawá occur both between and within groups, provoking periodic social tensions that may give rise to fissions.”
Publicly available information on the spirituality of the Yawanawá is relatively limited and tends to describe their religious rituals rather than the spiritual beliefs underlying such rituals. For example, multiple sources point out that during certain healing ceremonies, Yawanawá shamans ingest Ayahuasca, a psychoactive concoction often used in the Amazon region during spiritual practices.
In a 2004 work titled “The Anthropology of Assault Sorcery and Witchcraft in Amazonia,” Neil L. Whitehead and Robin Wright points out that “ … given the self-improvement motivations that have brought so many into a popular understanding of shamanism, two defining aspects of shamanism in Amazonia — blood (i.e., violence) and tobacco — have simply been erased from such representations.”
The authors confirm with many anecdotes that shamanism has traditionally been used to inflict death and suffering on enemies as well as to heal. They go so far as to assert that “ritual practices of curers are intimately linked to the assaults of shamanic killers and cannot be understood apart from them.”
The WEF does not officially endorse a particular religion or spirituality but hosts “ecumenical” panels during its annual meetings involving participants of different religions.
Last year, a WEF speaker revealed during a “Keeping the faith” panel discussion that he was told not to use the words “God,” “faith,” and “religion” during his talk.
The panel participants in this year’s “Climate and Nature” discussion included International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva; atmospheric scientist Katharine Hayhoe; Ingka Group CEO Jesper Brodin; André Hoffmann, the vice chairman of the drug company Roche Holding; and World Bank Group president Ajay Banga.
|
|
|
|
| World Health Organisation Head: Global Compliance Needed For Next Pandemic |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-18-2024, 06:21 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
World Health Organisation Head: Global Compliance Needed For Next Pandemic
modernity.news | 17th January 2024
“Very narrow national interests should not come in the way”
In an appearance at the globalist World Economic Forum in Davos, the Director General of the World Health Organisation urged that global cooperation will be needed during the next pandemic, and that “national interests” hinder compliance.
In a session titled “Disease X,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus stated that in order to be “better prepared” and “to understand disease X,” the WHO’s ‘Pandemic Agreement’ needs to be adopted globally.
“This is about a common enemy,” Tedros continued, adding “without a shared response, we will face the same problem as COVID.”
He explained that the decline for the legislation is May of this year and member states are negotiating between countries to implement it.
“This is a common global interest, and very narrow national interests should not come in the way,” he continued, adding “of course national interests are natural, but they could be difficult and affect the negotiations.”
Tedros also declared that COVID was “the first disease X, and it could happen again.”
Here is the full exchange:
[...]
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis' Message to the 2024 WEF Meeting in Davos |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-17-2024, 04:17 PM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Messaggio del Santo Padre al Presidente Esecutivo del “World Economic Forum”, 17.01.2024
Taken from here. [Emphasis mine]
Pubblichiamo di seguito il Messaggio che il Santo Padre Francesco ha inviato al Prof. Klaus Schwab, Presidente Esecutivo del World Economic Forum, in occasione del meeting annuale in corso a Davos, in Svizzera, dal 15 al 19 gennaio 2024:
Messaggio del Santo Padre
To the Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum
This year’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum takes place in a very troubling climate of international instability. Your Forum, which aims to guide and strengthen political will and mutual cooperation, provides an important opportunity for multi-stakeholder engagement to explore innovative and effective ways to build a better world. It is my hope that your discussions will take into account the urgent need to advance social cohesion, fraternity, and reconciliation among groups, communities, and states, in order to address the challenges before us.
Sadly, as we look around, we find an increasingly lacerated world, in which millions of persons – men, women, fathers, mothers, children – whose faces are for the most part unknown to us, continue to suffer, not least from the effects of prolonged conflicts and actual wars. These sufferings are exacerbated by the fact that “modern wars no longer take place only on clearly defined battlefields, nor do they involve soldiers alone. In a context where it appears that the distinction between military and civil targets is no longer respected, there is no conflict that does not end up in some way indiscriminately striking the civilian population” (Address to Members of the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See, 8 January 2024).
The peace for which the peoples of our world yearn cannot be other than the fruit of justice (cf. Isaiah 32:17). Consequently, it calls for more than simply setting aside the instruments of war; it demands addressing the injustices that are the root causes of conflict. Among the most significant of these is hunger, which continues to plague entire regions of the world, even as others are marked by excessive food waste. The exploitation of natural resources continues to enrich a few while leaving entire populations, who are the natural beneficiaries of these resources, in a state of destitution and poverty. Nor can we disregard the widespread exploitation of men, women and children forced to work for low wages and deprived of real prospects for personal development and professional growth. How is it possible that in today’s world people are still dying of hunger, being exploited, condemned to illiteracy, lacking basic medical care, and left without shelter?
The process of globalization, which has by now clearly demonstrated the interdependence of the world’s nations and peoples, thus has a fundamentally moral dimension, which must make itself felt in the economic, cultural, political and religious discussions that aim to shape the future of the international community. In a world increasingly threatened by violence, aggression and fragmentation, it is essential that states and businesses join in promoting far-sighted and ethically sound models of globalization, which by their very nature must entail subordinating the pursuit of power and individual gain, be it political or economic, to the common good of our human family, giving priority to the poor, the needy and those in the most vulnerable situations.
For its part, the world of business and finance now operates in ever broader economic contexts, where national states have a limited capacity to govern rapid changes in international economic and financial relations. This situation requires that businesses themselves be increasingly guided not simply by the pursuit of fair profit, but also by high ethical standards, especially with regard to the less developed countries, which should not be at the mercy of abusive or usurious financial systems. A farsighted approach to these issues will prove decisive in meeting the goal of an integral development of humanity in solidarity. Authentic development must be global, shared by all nations and in every part of the world, or it will regress even in areas marked hitherto by constant progress.
At the same time, there is an evident need for international political action that, through the adoption of coordinated measures, can effectively pursue the goals of global peace and authentic development. In particular, it is important that intergovernmental structures be able effectively to exercise their functions of control and guidance in the economic sector, since the achievement of the common good is an objective beyond the reach of individual states, even those that are dominant in terms of power, wealth and political strength. International organizations are also challenged to ensure the achievement of that equality which is the basis of the right of all to participate in the process of full development, with due respect for legitimate differences.
It is my hope, then, that the participants in this year’s Forum will be mindful of the moral responsibility that each of us has in the fight against poverty, the attainment of an integral development for all our brothers and sisters, and the quest for a peaceful coexistence among peoples. This is the great challenge that the present time sets before us. And if, in the pursuit of these goals, “our own days seem to be showing signs of a certain regression”, it remains true that “each new generation must take up the struggles and attainments of past generations, while setting its sights even higher… Goodness, together with love, justice and solidarity, are not achieved once and for all; they have to be realized each day” (Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum, 34).
With these sentiments, I offer my prayerful good wishes for the deliberations of the Forum, and upon all taking part I willingly invoke an abundance of divine blessings.
From the Vatican, 15 January 2024
|
|
|
|
| The Utterly New Way of the Second Vatican Council |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-17-2024, 06:55 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
The Utterly New Way of the Second Vatican Council
Mary, Destroyer of All Heresies blog | August 19, 2024
The Vatican II document styled Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen gentium presents us with a novel vision of the Church as "a sacrament of salvation" and "sign of the unity of mankind."
Factor in LG's teaching that "elements of sanctification exist in [non-Catholic] assemblies" and that the "Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church", you have an ecclesiology so far from traditional doctrine as to represent an entirely new conception of what it means to be 'Church.' but don't take my word for it, here is Pope John Paul II:
Quote:"Entrusting myself fully to the Spirit of truth, therefore, I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in an utterly new way, quite unknown previously, thanks to the Second Vatican Council..."
So, LG is establishing ways the Catholic Church is related by degree to non-Catholic religious bodies first with the 'separated brethren' (another conciliar novelty) but then astonishingly to Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism. Therefore we have lost the dogma of Extra ecclesia nula salus completely which has given way to an amorphous, invisible 'church' that includes all humanity - and this too, John Paul II teaches with shocking audacity:
Quote:...The opening made by the Second Vatican Council has enabled the Church and all Christians to reach a more complete awareness of the mystery of Christ, "the mystery hidden for ages" in God, to be revealed in time in the Man Jesus Christ, and to be revealed continually in every time.
...Accordingly, what is in question here is man in all his truth, in his full magnitude. We are not dealing with the "abstract" man, but the real, "concrete", "historical" man. We are dealing with "each" man, for each one is included in the mystery of the Redemption and with each one Christ has united himself for ever through this mystery.
...this is "each" man, "the most concrete" man, "the most real"; this is man in all the fullness of the mystery in which he has become a sharer in Jesus Christ, the mystery in which each one of the four thousand million human beings living on our planet has become a sharer from the moment he is conceived beneath the heart of his mother."
- Pope John Paul II, Redemptor hominis, 1979
"...utterly new way, quite unknown previously..."
"...to reach a more complete awareness of the mystery of Christ..."
"...with each one Christ has united himself for ever through this mystery."
"...this is 'each' man ...in all the fullness of the mystery in which he has become a sharer in Jesus Christ..."
Astonishing what you see when you isolate the novel phrases.
And the result?
Quote:"Two months after the event, in a Christmas speech to his Cardinals published in the Vatican’s L’Osservatore Romano, John Paul said,
“The day of Assisi, showing the Catholic Church holding hands with our brothers of other religions, was a visible expression of [the] statements of the Second Vatican Council.”
The interfaith event at Assisi was thus described by John Paul II not as a tragic misrepresentation of Vatican II, but as the glorious realization of its teaching. Pope John Paul II went on to celebrate the inter-religious prayer meeting at Assisi as a new direction for the future, “The event of Assisi” he said, “can thus be considered as a visible illustration, an exegesis of events, a catechesis intelligible to all, of what is presupposed and signified by the commitments to ecumenism and to the inter-religious dialogue which was recommended and promoted by the Second Vatican Council.” Toward the end of the speech, the Pope urged his Cardinals to continue on the same new path, “Keep always alive the spirit of Assisi as a motive of hope for the future.”
- Pope’s Christmas Address to Roman Curia,” L’Osservatore Romano, January 5, 1987, pp. 6-7.
![[Image: assisi%2Bjp%2B2.jpg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XmyzeWUCoCc/Xz3XbKUboQI/AAAAAAAACvU/i0zRW5uqED0RbL14L2SCoirUAJnA5r8PQCLcBGAsYHQ/w471-h191/assisi%2Bjp%2B2.jpg)
John Paul II and various religious leaders, Prayer Meeting of Religions, Assisi, Italy 1986
And (get ready for it) for Pope John Paul II, the Holy Spirit is the inspiration behind these false religions!
Quote:"It must first be kept in mind that every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God’s Spirit, achieved a deeper religious experience. Handed on to others, this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions. In every authentic religious experience, the most characteristic expression is prayer. Because of the human spirit’s constitutive openness to God’s action of urging it to self-transcendence, we can hold that “every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person.”
- Address to the Members of the Roman Curia, 22 Dec. 1986, n. 11; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 5 Jan. 1987, p. 7.
All this is condemned by St. Pius X in his encyclical against Modernism:
Quote:"How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the Vatican Council. We shall see later how, with such theories, added to the other errors already mentioned, the way is opened wide for atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true."
- Pascendi gregis #14
Lumen gentium provides the basis for an "...utterly new way" of seeing the Church, "quite unknown previously..." thanks to the Second Vatican Council. John Paul II's vision of a Christ united with each man forever in which each man is already a "sharer in Jesus Christ" easily portends to a Church which is comprised of the entire human race.
In this universal church in which each man is united to Christ forever and in which "the Holy Spirit ... is mysteriously present in the heart of every person” there is no need for evangelical preaching, missionary work, or personal conversion. No, what is needed is dialogue between men of all religions in order to discover that consciousness which is being aroused in the Teilhardian march towards Omega Point - the consciousness that we are all already united to the God-Man and only lack the realization of it. This is the inescapable conclusion of the New Theology. This is why the Churches are emptying and the average Catholic is utterly confused as to what his Church teaches and what it means to be saved at all.
|
|
|
|
| Way to Pachamama paved by John Paul II |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-16-2024, 12:11 PM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- Replies (1)
|
|
Way to Pachamama paved by John Paul II
![[Image: jpiifeather.jpg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LMxovpBxKFM/Xbo3fzoyqcI/AAAAAAAAAWg/GQ8j3sDfRFYO-ZEj-oJRDfDnTd3vvg_3gCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/jpiifeather.jpg)
Mary, Destroyer of All Heresies blog | October 30, 2019
Long before the Amazon Synod and the Pachamama, this canonized Pope made the synod possible:
"If you see me traveling the length and breadth of the whole world in my efforts to meet with people of all civilizations and religions, it is because I have faith in the seeds of wisdom which the Spirit has planted in the conscience of all these various peoples, tribes and clans; from these hidden grains will come the true resource for the future of mankind in this world of ours."
- (John Paul II's speech to youth in Ravenna, May 11, 1986, quoted in Tutte le encicliche dei Sommi Pontefici, ed. dall'Oglio, p.1821).
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis: ‘I like to think of an empty hell’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-16-2024, 11:47 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope Francis: ‘I like to think of an empty hell’
Pope Francis said that although 'it's not dogma,' he likes to think hell is 'empty.' Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Lady of Fatima very clearly attest to the reality of hell, where the devil, his angels, and 'many' souls have gone.
![[Image: GettyImages-664476596-e1696257377267.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/GettyImages-664476596-e1696257377267.jpg)
Pope Francis
Photo by Chris Jackson/Getty Images
Jan 15, 2024
(LifeSiteNews) — In a Sunday interview on Italian television, Pope Francis said that he likes to think hell is empty. The statement reflects what Francis has said in numerous interviews previously on the subject, with famous atheist author Eugenio Scalfari in the left-wing newspaper La Repubblica.
In March 2015 Scalfari asked about people going to hell, and Pope Francis reportedly replied: “There is no punishment, but the annihilation of that soul. All the others will participate in the beatitude of living in the presence of the Father. The souls that are annihilated will not take part in that banquet; with the death of the body their journey is finished.”
Let’s take a look at Francis’ remarks yesterday. He said: “It’s not dogma, but my personal thing is, I like to think of an empty hell.”
Imagine I said I like to believe that cancer is just a myth, that no one suffers from cancer.
I couldn’t say that since it would make a liar out of the victims and the testimony of their suffering.
Hell is a reality according to Our Lord Jesus and the revelations of Our Lady of Fatima.
Those who say hell is empty make Jesus a liar and make a mockery of our faith, which teaches that the devil and his angels are in hell, and also those humans who reject Christ. Jesus also let it be known that Judas is in hell over and over again.
Matthew 7:13-14: “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few.”
Luke 13:23-28: “Someone asked him, ‘Lord, will only a few people be saved?’ He answered them, ‘Strive to enter through the narrow gate, for many, I tell you, will attempt to enter but will not be strong enough. After the master of the house has arisen and locked the door, then will you stand outside knocking and saying, ‘Lord, open the door for us.’ He will say to you in reply, ‘I do not know where you are from.’ And you will say, ‘We ate and drank in your company and you taught in our streets.’ Then he will say to you, ‘I do not know where (you) are from. Depart from me, all you evildoers!’ And there will be wailing and grinding of teeth when you see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God and you yourselves cast out.'”
Romans 9:27-28: “And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, ‘Though the number of the Israelites were like the sand of the sea, only a remnant will be saved; for decisively and quickly will the Lord execute sentence upon the earth.”
John 6:70-71: “Jesus answered them, ‘Did I not choose you twelve? Yet is not one of you a devil?’ He was referring to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot; it was he who would betray him, one of the Twelve.”
Matthew 26:24: “The Son of Man indeed goes, as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for that man if he had never been born.”
John 17:12: “When I was with them I protected them in your name that you gave me, and I guarded them, and none of them was lost except the son of destruction, in order that the scripture might be fulfilled.”
The reality of hell and the souls of many in it was confirmed by Our Lady at Fatima when she showed the three children the vision of hell. The children said they saw people in hell.
Quote:We saw something like a sea of fire. Plunged in this fire were the demons and the souls, as if they were red-hot coals, transparent and black or bronze-colored, with human forms, which floated about in the conflagration, borne by the flames which issued from it with clouds of smoke falling on all sides as sparks fall in great conflagrations without weight or equilibrium, among shrieks and groans of sorrow and despair that horrify and cause people to shudder with fear…
The devils were distinguished by horrible and loathsome forms of animals, frightful and unknown, but transparent like black coals that have turned red-hot. Frightened and as if we were appealing for help, we raised our eyes to our Lady who said with tenderness and sadness.
You saw hell, where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them God wishes to establish in the world the devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If they do what I will tell you, many souls will be saved, and there will be peace…
And in an interview from the 1950s with Father Riccardo Lombardi, an author who’d written a book questioning the existence of hell, Sister Lucia was asked about the possibility of an empty hell, and she told him, “No, Father, many are in hell.”
Sister Lucia had affirmed that three times for the priest, using the same term as Jesus to quantify the souls in hell: “Many.”
|
|
|
|
| Opus Dei - Trojan Horse of Liberalism in the Church |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-15-2024, 09:23 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- Replies (3)
|
|
OPUS DEI - TROJAN HORSE OF LIBERALISM IN THE CHURCH
PART I
Take from here. Emphasis in the original. Slightly adapted.
![[Image: AVvXsEhObPUxuxZQFoS0xZloxD2G98TzJFaw1t5P...=w442-h558]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhObPUxuxZQFoS0xZloxD2G98TzJFaw1t5PnqhUe33SvDGV7hQ_X7Q2q6UTTVSVgNuXgx51tKIw0XSS5GY1R2rsj4kLtu8AdM8IN9ZpLMrFqPglHbbuuRVP6-CLHELpQwTL7Rinu5D6gkcZmCMuiDyMR8WgdjJ3_rAjdUE98J2WIzFL_N7sencyPOBx9U_G=w442-h558)
“I am a secular priest: priest of Jesus-Christ, who loves passionately the world.” (José María Escriba y Albás, homily delivered at the University of Navarre, Pamplona, October 8 1967)
“He [José Maria] always encouraged you to ‘ love the world passionately’ (…) The earth, your Blessed Founder reminds us, is a pathway to heaven…” (Address of John Paul II to members of Opus Dei, January 12, 2002).
![[Image: AVvXsEhY--XNMjnty1X5juDSkApnGvCJJkcJXlM-...=w428-h504]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhY--XNMjnty1X5juDSkApnGvCJJkcJXlM-ZU13UKM_vLKXLNxlbVYBrFIzndN0tr4WxHTc9Px-5n5QZ2iNv9RuEOH9VcdmGGO5uedYUQYKEnAL15ET5sPApD3MgIc9MN3JmKPksMw_g_ki625_A_GHcgspnYgkM76t9zuFNZ2Z6UXAC79Q48MfARUsK7YD=w428-h504)
“Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, is the concupiscence of the flesh, and the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the Father, but is of the world.” 1 John 2:15-16
“Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God.” James 4:4
Introduction
In the following study I could have written about a plethora of contentious issues around which Opus Dei is associated: financial scandals, their overwhelming desire to gain power and influence over political and financial structures, their love of money, etc But these are secondary – certainly not necessarily trivial – issues, born out of the primary theological problems on which Opus Dei bases its pseudo-Catholic spirituality. The primary heresy of Opus Dei, I believe, over and above that of modernism, is liberalism and its attendant gnosis. On a purely superficial level, they may pronounce their faithful adherence to the dogmas but its liberalism tends to empty the dogmas of any real meaning. Although it is true that there is an inextricable link between modernism and liberalism, in a sense, the spirituality espoused by the “Work” (the commonly used term for “Opus Dei” among its members) is something even more insidious than the phenomenon of modernism (as generally understood in terms of “progression of doctrine”, etc). Modernists often cloak their errors or heresies under an opaque layer of ambiguity, but it is rare to see them hide their true spirit under such a thick layer of “conservatism”: pretensions of being fiercely loyal to the papacy and to the Church’s dogmas, and even occasionally, a faux and deceptive “traditionalism”. The reality is that Opus Dei, like Vatican II, advocates a liberal spirituality that calls for the full reconciliation between the Church with the principles of the Revolution, or in the words of Leo XIII, of attempting to reconcile “Christ and Belial” (Custodi Di Quella Fede, 1892). Therefore, while they outwardly preach a strict adherence to doctrine, with their liberal principles and radically lay-secular mentality they simultaneously undermine that which they claim to profess. Hence, Opus Dei can merely be seen as the (false) “conservative/right” flank in the Hegelian dialectic of the Conciliar Revolution, with the “left” flank comprised of figures like Rahner, Congar, Küng, etc.
The following statement by Tomás Gutiérrez Calzada, one of the heads of Opus Dei in Spain towards the end of the last century, encapsulates the problematic nature Opus Dei in the most concise manner possible; it is both an inadvertent admission of the core spirit which permeates the “Work” and a recognition that their opponents are not working on the basis of heterodoxy but are attacking their openly self-acknowledged liberalism: “we are attacked by the enemies of liberty” [1], or translated into plain English, “we are attacked by the enemies of liberalism”. Put another way, Mr Gutiérrez Calzada was not defending Opus Dei against its opponents on the basis of its orthodoxy (which it cannot claim) but on the basis of a self-acknowledged liberalism, otherwise he would have stated, “we are attacked by enemies of Catholicism”, or “by enemies of orthodoxy, by heretics, etc”. But he said no such thing. Therefore, they themselves are accurately aware of the novelty of their liberal spirit, even of the revolutionary nature of the Work, as we will progressively see over the course of this study. The “liberty” emanating from man’s divine like “human dignity” defended by Opus Dei and attacked by its opponents is the same that was officially promulgated at Vatican II and endorsed by the lodges, communists, and socialists around the world with enthusiastic applause during the course of the pseudo-Council and in the ensuing years. It is the “liberty” of religious freedom proclaimed by Dignitatis Humanae, which is the rightful inheritance of man now elevated to some kind of god-like ontological status, driving “Saint” John Paul II “The Great” – and ardent promoter of the Work – to ceaselessly praise and extoll man’s dignity as he criss-crossed the entire globe, simultaneously as the world’s Catholics continued falling ever further at accelerating speed into the abyss of universal apostasy. Christ the King thus dethroned by the newly emancipated “free” man and the promoters of “liberty” (among which Opus Dei holds a prominent place), Gaudium et Spes 12 could now boldly and confidently proclaim to a post-modern world that, “According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown.”
In this work, I have used the name for the man known to the world as “Saint Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, Marquis of Peralta” as it appears in his baptismal certificate: José María Escriba y Albás. One would think that José María wanted to hide the fact that he was the carrier of a name of Jewish ancestry. Using his original name, “Escriba” is in part something of a symbolic gesture that demonstrates on the one hand, the duplicitous character of the “Work” and its “Founder”, and on the other, the very real possibility that Opus Dei may be a “Work” of crypto-Jewish origins. At the very least, in its resemblance with Freemasonry and certain gnostic themes of Jewish origin, it is already demonstrating that it is a close sibling to the secret society denounced by Leo XIII in Humanum Genus. In no way are we trying to denounce the Jewish race as such. If we were to do so, we would also have to denounce such eminent saints and mystics as St Teresa of Avila, St John of the Cross, and the Ven. María de Jesús de Agreda, author of the spiritual masterpiece, Mystical City of God. Our objection is with the fact that Escriba should have felt it necessary to hide his likely Jewish heritage, something which genuine Jewish converts such as Israel Zolli never felt it necessary to do.
All translations from the French are mine; those in Spanish also except for a couple of cases where I was unable to find the original Spanish text.
Escriba proudly boasted of passionately loving the world, and encouraged his followers to do likewise, a love pointed to by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II as if it were a sign of virtue, indeed “a pathway to Heaven”.
St Louis Marie-Grignion de Montfort on the other hand asked that in the Mystery of the Crowning with Thorns of the Holy Rosary we humbly ask God through the intercession of the Queen of Heaven for the grace to bear “a great contempt for the world”. These are two irreconcilable spiritualities opposed to each other as much as the Heavenly City is to the Earthly one.
May this work serve to illuminate consciences during these calamitous times, a small contribution for the reinstatement of Christ the King as rightful Lord with dominion over the universe and each individual soul.
Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam!
December 8, 2023, Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Patroness of Spain
A Jewish branch of Freemasonry?
“Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves.” (Matthew 10:16)
Since its earliest beginnings, a cloud of suspicion has hung around the mysterious origins of Opus Dei, never fully explained satisfactorily, and on the orthodoxy of Opus Dei; illustrative of the opaqueness surrounding the “Founder’s” life; even to this day, there are questions on something which should be so clear and straightforward – particularly for a “canonized” “saint”! – as the specific details on the attainment of his theological degrees. [2] October 2, 1928 is the official “date” offered by the official hagiography of the “Work”, i.e. Opus Dei, for when Escriba allegedly received the heavenly inspiration to found Opus Dei. There are signs that a Catholic movement known as “Opus Dei” was not active until the early thirties, but in any case, it was not long before Opus Dei was accused of being a Jewish branch of masonry – such a serious charge is hardly the type of accusation that one would expect to be levelled against a nascent religious movement, and therefore it stands to reason that it must have been a well-founded one. In post-civil war Spain, an investigative military tribunal was set up to fight against the influence of Freemasonry and communism, and proceedings were eventually brought before Opus Dei in 1941 due to signs that, as the author of Opus Judaei recounts, “under the name of Opus Dei a Jewish branch of masonry was hidden.” [3] That Opus Dei was under investigation by a military tribunal against masonry in Franco’s Spain are not merely unfounded rumours spread by the declared enemies of the “Work”, but is even admitted by the “Founder’s” official biographers, such as Salvador Bernal in his work Mons. Escrivá de Balaguer: “They accused Opus Dei of being a ‘Jewish branch’ of the masons, or ‘a Jewish sect in contact with masons.’ ” [4]
There was great opposition among many Spanish Catholics to the Work since its earliest days. Barcelona, perhaps paradoxically, which had just suffered under the extreme anti-religious and atheistic regime of the “Republicans” during the Civil War (and hence celebrated their liberation in 1939 with all the greater fervour), was now converted into one of the most prominent centers where Opus Dei’s purported connection with masonry and the duplicitous nature of the “Father” were denounced before the relevant authorities. [5] According to another of the Escriba’s official biographers, Dominique Le Tourneau, the governor of Barcelona gave the order to have Escriba arrested once he set foot within the area of his jurisdiction. [6] An ambassador friend of Escriba warned him that his own life was in danger should he travel to the region. [7] Even the Carmelite nuns of the city got wind of the duplicity surrounding Escriba and his Work, and the good nuns promptly set about publicly burning the copies they could get hold of Escriba’s 999 maxims known as Camino (“the Way” – his way, not Christ’s, of course). [8]
Meanwhile in Madrid, according to Bernal, “the gravity of the situation was reaching a climax where associates of the Work were accused of being ‘masons.’ ” [9] One of the oratories which the Work opened in Madrid was said to have been adorned with masonic and Kabbalistic signs. [10] The rumours of Opus Dei’s heterodoxy did not stay confined within Spanish territory but travelled at least as far as the corridors of the Vatican itself: the Dominican Fr Severino Alvarez, Dean of the Faculty of Canon Law at the Angelicum in Rome in 1950 told of the accusations which had been levelled against the Work in the Holy Office itself. [11] The key importance of Camino in Escriba’s spirituality (inseparably united with the cult status of the “Founder”) is demonstrated by the confession of a member, who admitted that, “from the 60’s onward, I saw no other gospel than Camino, and no other prophet than Josemaría Escrivá.” [12] As we will see, none other than Giovanni Battista Montini/Paul VI incorporated Camino in his spiritual life, while Escriba’s right hand man, “Blessed” Álvaro del Portillo admitted after the “Founder’s” death that Camino reflected the modernist spirituality later endorsed at Vatican II.
The well-known obsession of Opus Dei and the “Father” with secrecy makes the sect akin to all secret societies, which, by definition, must zealously guard their secrets and plans of action. Therefore, just in this respect alone, Opus Dei shares an important affinity with Freemasonry, for which, together with its obvious quest to increase its power, money, and influence, have led many to describe the sect as “ecclesiastical freemasonry”. The “Father’s” obsession with secrecy was even admitted by Antonio Pérez, who intimately knew Escriba and was for a time his personal secretary: “The Father was always greatly concerned about maintaining secrecy. This made him apply in these subjects the same strategy as in internal matters, that is, that only a few at the very top were aware of them and negotiated them with those directly responsible.” [13] Camino, the reference work par excellence for Opus Dei members, has numerous references about the necessity to maintain a strict secrecy (e.g. numbers 639, 654, 840, and 970). Daniel Artigues in his 1971 book titled, El Opus Dei en España said regarding the Work’s notorious obsession with secrecy that, “this concern for discretion, as Opus Dei members describe it, this cult for secrecy, as claimed by its adversaries, is one of the essential characteristics of the Work.” [14] The culture of secrecy even reaches the point of not being obliged to tell potential members of their duties once they are incorporated into Opus Dei. According to the “Catechism of the Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei”, 2003 edition, no. 67: “In order for incorporation to be valid, a virtual intention to take up the corresponding duties is sufficient, even if there is no actual forewarning at the moment of incorporation.” [15] Which is to say, at the moment of entering the Work, Opus Dei is under no obligation to tell new members of all their duties and of its spiritual outlook; information which – like in any sect – is instead transmitted little by little dropwise to the new adepts as they progress through their gnostic “illumination” or “initiation” in order to prevent a wholesale initial rejection.
Against the culture of secrecy which surrounds gnostic sects like Opus Dei, the abbé Emmanuel Barbier, in his 1910 work Les Infiltrations Maçonniques dans l’Église (“Masonic Infiltrations Inside the Church”, pp. 249-250) said that the only path available to the genuine Catholic, who is a “son of the light”, even if external circumstances would seem to require it, is a firm repudiation of secrecy:
“The Catholic is a son of the light. Simple common sense indicates that if, under the pretext of moving more freely or surely towards one’s goal, he seeks dark and secret paths, he will fatally find, one day or another, that he walks side by side with the children of darkness at the risk of being led astray by those in a labyrinth of which they alone know its secrets….However, even then, the principle of Catholic action remains unchanged: it is to carry on in clear transparency. Anything else is an illusion….One must be blind not to see that any occult organization is a fertile terrain for infiltrations [of the kind] that we must dread so much.” Emmanuel Barbier further reveals that, according to a note recorded in “Acta S. Sedis” documenting the renewed denunciation against secret societies, particularly Freemasonry and other anti-clerical societies, issued by the Holy Office on 18 May 1884, “the prohibitions of the Church concern all secret societies, regardless of whether or not they require an oath; because they are societies contrary to natural law.” (ibid, p 251)
Another important characteristic of the “Work” which assimilates it to a gnostic sect such as Freemasonry is its tendency towards “elitism”, driving its associates to view themselves as members of a perfect Church of the elect – neo-Jansenists or neo-Calvinists, if you will –, and the more fanatically so the more they are inwardly “illuminated” by the gnostic teachings of the “Father”. At the very least, there is a tendency towards spiritual pride that inclines members of the Work to view their apostolate and their liberal, lay spirituality with an air of superiority and pride over the other charisms and religious orders of the Church; they thus represent the “upper echelon” of the Church joining non-believers around the world in the construction of the “Earthly City” – not the “Catholic City”! Point number 16 in Camino points its readers to set themselves apart from the rest of the “crowd” – which in those days would have been a Catholic majority, this was still 30’s Spain – in a state of prideful superiority, so that they can set their sights on the highest goals: “You – turning towards the mediocre? But if you have been born to be a leader!” Escriba himself seems to have taken this “spiritual” maxim particularly to heart: besides his megalomaniac ambitions for the Work, he himself lobbied at least two times for the “post” of bishop during Pius XII’s papacy, refused both times at least in part due to questions about his psychological state.
The Spanish former numerary María Angustias Moreno, who suffered with heroic patience the unspeakable slander directed by Opus Dei against her for her efforts at unmasking the sect, thus says regarding the gnostic elitism of the Work: “...as soon as one arrives, they inculcate ceaselessly that being in the Work is something marvellous, the best and grandest thing in the world. Something which, as a natural consequence, leads to viewing others from a pedestal: one begins to be illumined on the great mysteries, being chosen among thousands to form part of a perfect body [of believers]; the rest - what a pity! - they remain there below surrounded by the darkness of error...By the fact of being in the Work, one will always be correct....Because the 'Father' is never wrong, and in the Work everything goes through the 'Father'; 'you must pass everything through my mind and my heart', Escrivá told directors numerous times.” [16] The slander suffered by Moreno is such a serious offence revealing the true “face” of Opus Dei that it deserves to be described in some more detail. For writing El Opus Dei – Anexo a una Historia, an exposé of Opus Dei from the perspective of a former numerary, a group of priests which included the vice-postulator for the “beatification” cause of “Saint” “Josemaría Escrivá” (one Don Benito Badrinas Amat), travelled around the country warning a group of former members who had publicly shown their support for Moreno to keep away from her because she was a notorious “lesbian”. In today’s current climate this “charge” might be worn as a badge of honour, but in the Spain of 1977 in which this public campaign of defacement and slander took place, such a charge could easily ruin one's social reputation and prospects for employment. María Angustias describes the exchange that took place when Rafael Moreno, her brother, confronted one of the priests responsible for the public campaign of calumny: “Rafael Moreno intervened by asking whether he [the priest] believed that in the name of God, in order to save or defend any kind of ‘thing’, slander could be justified; to which the priest replied by shrugging his shoulders:…‘it depends…’ ” [17]
In their calumny against María Angustias, were these priests justifying their vile crime and sin on the basis of “el apostolado de la mala lengua», described in Camino 850, a phrase which could be roughly translated as “the apostolate of the insult” or quite simply as, “the apostolate of calumny” (“mala lengua” literally means, “bad tongue”). Escriba in point 850 of Camino says next: “Cuando te vea ya te diré al oído un repertorio.” That is, “Next time I see you I will tell you secretly an entire repertoire.” (Apparently, Escriba thought it important to always have ready at hand the appropriate insult against whomever stood in his way or by whom in his inflated pride he felt offended in some way…) These bad priests could also have interiorly justified their evil actions on the basis of Camino, no. 387, calling his followers to show: “Holy intransigence, holy coercion, and holy shamelessness [desvergüenza]” (An unholy trinity which “St” “Josemaría” describes in the same point as, “The standard of holiness that God asks of us [!].”)
And like all sects of the gnostic variety, not only is the Work concerned with maintaining its affairs and doctrine with a perfect and scrupulous secrecy, it demands of its associates, not merely obedience, but a blind obedience which has nothing to do with the Christian concept and, as the sad experience of sects so often demonstrates, is invariably the source of the worst imaginable abuses: psychological, spiritual, and even occasionally, physical ones. Thus maxim number 941 of Camino reads: “Obedience…, a sure path. – BLINDLY OBEYING the superior…, path of holiness. – Obedience in your apostolate…, the only way: because, in a work of God, the [correct] spirit must be to obey or [otherwise] leave.” Interestingly but not surprisingly, the official English version uses a somewhat softer translation, calling for “unreserved obedience”, while the Spanish is unequivocal in its call to “obedecer ciegamente”, literally, “to obey blindly”. Other points in Camino are designed to engender an attitude of blind, unthinking obedience towards superiors: “That critical spirit…is a great hindrance.” (no. 53)”, and “Who are you, to deny the sound judgment of your superior?” (no. 457)
The Spaniard Mariano Sánchez Covisa wrote a letter in early 1992 titled El caso Escrivá, warning Catholics of good faith within the Work about the true nature of Opus Dei. Significantly, he stated that he was basing his letter on Leo XIII’s call in the encyclical Humanum Genus to unmask the deception of masonry: “It must be known that Opus Dei, which name is an esoteric translation for [the occult practice of] Theurgy, is a secret Jewish branch of masonry, with an enormous economic and financial network, and holding a powerful political influence in Spain as well as abroad…Opus Dei is not a type of masonry, it is masonry.” [18] Salvador Bernal, Escriba’s official biographer recounts the “Father” describing how he overcome the difficulties during his early apostolate in strangely cryptic terms that cannot fail to raise an eyebrow in the reader: “What can a creature that must carry out a mission do, without means, or enough experience, knowledge, virtue, or anything else? He must go to his mother and his father, go to those who have the means, ask friends for help… That is what I did in the spiritual life. But of course, with discipline, carrying the compass.” (Nowhere here does he mention having recourse to God in the midst of whatever difficulties he was facing.) [19]
The somewhat eerie-looking official symbol or emblem of Opus Dei certainly deserves careful scrutiny. First of all, the mere sight of this “crucifix” induces a certain sense of unease with one’s sensus catholicus informing us that something appears amiss with what purports to be a representation of the Christian symbol par excellence. What exactly do we find there? A Christ-less “cross” – really, two intersecting lines in the form of a Latin cross – with a rose at the bottom; one would think we are dealing here with the rose-croix of Rosicrucianism, which also refers to the 18th degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. The rose in the work’s official emblem is not merely some stylistic feature placed there for its aesthetic effect, but is a sign featuring prominently throughout the Work’s visual imagery. The “logo” of Rialp, Opus Dei’s official publishing house is none other than a rose, while the rose also features prominently in the entirely new Marian shrine of Torreciudad, entirely built out of the Work’s own coffers and criticized for the suspected huge squandering of financial resources that its construction involved.
Multiple esoteric meanings can be ascribed to the rose, and at least in the opening discourse of the Zohar, the major text of the Jewish Kabbalah, the rose designates the Shekinah, the female “aspect” of the God-head (Ein-sof), the divine presence itself of the Knesset Yisrael or “the community of Israel”. Certainly, everything points to the Work’s emblem as having to do more with the Kabbalah and the Shekinah than with anything related to Christ’s redemption at the cross. Opus Dei is formally known as the Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei. Upon some investigation one comes upon the surprising – and unsettling – finding that both the reference to “Holy Cross” and “Opus Dei” in the official name despite their ostensible Catholic meanings can also be interpreted in an esoteric-gnostic sense. According to the Jewish historian Cecil Roth, author of Historia de los Marranos (“History of the Marranos”), “Holy Cross” was a code name used by the Marranos (crypto-Jews) to evade persecution: “In Barcelona, if a Marrano said, ‘let us go to the Church of the Holy Cross’, he was referring to the secret synagogue called by that name.” [20] When it comes to “Opus Dei”, the “Work” of alchemy (which has very clear gnostic-Hermetic and Kabbalistic roots) was traditionally known as the magnum opus, the great Work, and what is greater than the “Work of God – the Opus Dei”?
According to the official hagiography, Escriba was inspired to found the “Priestly Society of the Holy Cross” during the celebration of holy Mass, on the date of February 14, 1943. After Mass, he wrote the name for his new society: “Societas Sacerdotalis Sanctae Crucis” eventually constituted for the purpose of ordaining priests for the Prelature of Opus Dei, while drawing on his notebook on the page for February 14, the Feast of St Valentine, its new symbol: a “cross” perfectly circumscribed by a circle. (February 14, 1930, is also coincidentally the “official” date marking the founding of the “women’s” section of Opus Dei.) I believe that we should take careful notice of this date, all the more so considering that the official hagiography which is only loosely concerned with actual facts here takes pains to highlight two points: the date of this alleged “inspiration”, and the “Feast” corresponding to that date, namely, St Valentine. This loose concern with facts is particularly true for the somewhat opaque early beginnings of Opus Dei, so that there is good reason to ascribe a given date of such significance with symbolic rather than factual meaning. Now, if we consider all the strange details of the emblem of Opus Dei (and its official name, “Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei”) which “coincidentally” bear a striking connection to several gnostic or Kabbalistic themes, together with the gnostic character of the Work and its theology, it is difficult to believe that the name Valentinus associated with the given date is purely coincidental. St Valentine is of course the universally known Catholic saint whose feast day is celebrated on February 14. But, as it turns out, the gnostics also celebrate what can be considered their “patron” saint, “Saint” Valentinus – the founder of the important Valentinian Gnostic sect of classical antiquity – on the same day as that for the Catholic St Valentine. It has been argued that the major gnostic systems developed after Valentinian gnosticism in some manner or other represent “offshoots” of the ancient Classical system (in accordingly modified form, evidently); the gnosis of the Silesian Jacob Boehme which ascribes a significant role to Sophia in its gnostic theology probably serves as a good example.
Valentinian theology, moreover, provides an adequate exegesis that accounts for the un-Christian looking “cross” constituting the Work’s emblem, and also accounts for many aspects of Escriba’s opaque theology – particularly that which relates to the Kabbalistic doctrine of coincidentia oppositorum, or coincidence of opposites, of which we will have more to say on later. For the moment, we will simply say that, having read what follows from a “homily” by a modern neo-gnostic “cleric”, Escriba’s heterodox sounding statement in his landmark homily from October 8, 1967, calling on his followers to unite heaven and earth in their hearts, and other scattered statements expressing a similar idea, can finally be clearly interpreted. The “Rev. Steven Marshall” of the Ecclesia Gnostica in his “homily” delivered for the “Day of the Holy Valentinus”, describes the cross as “a particularly apt symbol for the divine marriage.” This is the “divine marriage” of opposites symbolically represented in Valentinian gnosticism by the “bridal chamber” (and which we believe is implicitly taught in John Paul II’s gnosis known as the “Theology of the Body”). Continuing, he describes the importance of the “cross” in the gnostic tradition, particularly as it relates to the doctrine of coincidentia oppositorum:
“Indeed, there are more references to the cross as a holy symbol in the Gnostic literature, a symbol of transcendence and union, than exists in the entire canon of the Bible. The horizontal bar of the cross represents the pairs of opposites in the world, the marriage in the world. The vertical bar of the cross represents the union of the below with the above, the celestial or heavenly marriage of the Gnostic bridechamber. We must perfect the vertical union, before the horizontal union can be truly realized. Through union of the above and the below, the outer and the inner, we can become united with all living souls. As expressed so beautifully in one of our occasional collects, “...until we awaken to our true estate in Thee, and living in unity and concord attain to Thy Gnosis in which there is no division or separateness, but only unity with Thee and through Thee with all other souls.” [21]
For Escriba, the vocation of every man (and not just the Christian) as image and likeness of God is to be Christ himself, “not just another Christ, but Christ Himself”. (Christ is Passing by, no. 104) In this universal call for holiness to live out the divine live in the midst of the world, a call which includes pagans and non-believers (the “People of God” defined according to Vatican II) is the seed for the pan-ecumenist and non-confessional, lay character that defines the Work. This sense of gnostic, universal “divine filiation” is the foundation of its spirituality: “The founder, enriched by this special sense of his divine filiation, infused this truth into every aspect of the Work's spirituality….The reality of one's divine filiation came to inform the entire spirit of Opus Dei and the life of piety of each of its members, leading them to the authentic freedom of the children of God.” [22]
Escriba in a spiritual meditation that he gave in 1963 described that in the midst of the most mundane of circumstances, simply walking through the streets of Madrid on October 16, 1931, he had an experience of spiritual illumination that led to his full understanding of his ontological relationship with God: “When God sent me those blows back in 1931, I didn't understand it… Then suddenly, in the midst of such great bitterness, came the words: ‘You are my son’ (Ps 2:7), you are Christ. And I could only stammer: Abba, Pater! Abba, Pater! Abba! Abba! Abba! Now I see it with new light, like a new discovery... You've led me, Lord, to understand that…to find the Cross is to identify oneself with Christ, to be Christ, and therefore to be a son of God.” [23]
Therefore, first of all, Escriba associates himself in relationship to Christ, not as alter Christus, but as ipse Christus. Secondly, the “cross” (the gnostic “cross”, that is) is the symbolic representation denoting one’s ontological identification with Christ (that is, an equality relating to the innermost being). That this union with Christ is not merely one of likeness or participation in God’s supernatural life is made clear by Ernst Burkhart and Javier Lopez, the two official theologians of the Work who have written a three volume series titled Vida Cotidiana y Santidad En La Enseñanza de San Josemaría, (“Ordinary Life and Holiness in the Teaching of Saint Josemaría”) outlining the “Father’s” theology in detail. In volume two, the authors cite the modernist Jesuit Émile Mersch to underscore the point we have just made: “The Lord has revealed that between the Incarnate Word and the Christian there is something more than a union of love, even though it is ardent; there is something more than a relation of likeness, no matter how accurate it might be; there is something more than dependence, in spite of the fact that it is complete….There is a physical union, we might say, as long as we do not put this word at the same level as simple natural unions. It is a real union in any case, an ontological union.” [24]
This is therefore the gnosis revealed in the Work: each and every single man, regardless of whether they accept Christ (cf John 1:12), is ipse Christus, and is accordingly called to sanctify and be sanctified by the world in this capacity. The gnostic “cross” of Opus Dei’s official emblem is the reminder or representation that this ontic status is the rightful inheritance of its members. The circle circumscribing the gnostic “cross” according to one interpretation represents the world, so that the Work’s members are called to act as “Christ” (represented by the “cross”) in the world, a world which equally can be conflated with Christ himself. The ontological separation between the self, the world, and Christ thus becomes blurred and eschatological hopes and aspirations are thus increasingly “immanentized”.
What we can know about the activities of Opus Dei since its early years, but even more importantly, the teachings of the “Founder” and the radically lay, liberal, and modernist spirituality of the Work do absolutely nothing to dispel suspicions of some kind of collaboration between Opus Dei and international Freemasonry. Of the radically liberal spirituality of the Work we will have much more to say later, but for the moment let us see with a very remarkable and revealing example relating to Mario Conde (the Spanish multi-millionaire who presided over the bankruptcy of the important Spanish bank Banesto), what kind of connections Opus Dei sees fit to have with Freemasonry in practice, despite statements here and there by its associates condemning masonry.
As always, when trying to decipher liberals’ and modernists’ statements, it is imperative to look even more carefully at their actions, which is the most reliable hermeneutic key in order to look past their commonly practiced obfuscation, opaqueness, and ambiguity. In an interview of the Italian journalist Fabio Andriola with the Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy, the lawyer Virgilio Gaito, Andriola asked him: “What are the relations between you [i.e. the Grand Orient] and the so called ‘Catholic masonry’’ ‘I think’, Gaito replied, ‘that Opus Dei has a very vast universal vision… This Mario Conde…[who] today has the honour of appearing in the headlines is a famous representative of Opus Dei and he is also in the board of directors of a certain company whose head is the former Grand Master Di Bernardo.’ ” [25] So from this we know unequivocally that Conde at the time of the interview was a “representative of Opus Dei”, which could in principle mean anything from being a so called “co-operator” to a numerary, while it is very strongly suggested that Conde had some kind of very close relationship with Freemasonry. It must be born in mind that Gaito is here making the Opus Dei – Freemasonry connection relating to a single individual (Mario Conde) in the context of the wider question posed by journalist Gaito on the relations between “Catholic masonry” and Freemasonry (here presumably referring to the Grand Orient).
This very close relationship between Conde and Freemasonry is further and unequivocally confirmed by the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Spain, Mr Gabaldón, who in a conference from 2012 stated that, “…while the businessman [Conde] is in a latent phase, he continues collaborating with the lodge whenever he can and on many occasions he teaches and gives talks [on masonry] to the brethren that are going to join the association.” Lest any confusion arise about Conde’s current “latent” status within the Lodge, Mr Gabaldón takes care to clarify that it was simply a measure taken during the judicial investigations into Banesto’s corrupt dealings: “When he realized what was coming upon him he decided to ‘descend into sleep-mode’ to avoid this way being expelled from the lodge.” [26]
REFERENCES
1. Opus Judaei – Jose Maria Escriba, Colombia, by “Alfonso Carlos de Borbón”, p 133.
2. LOS ESTUDIOS ACADÉMICOS DE SAN JOSEMARÍA ESCRIVÁ Y ALBÁS, Claretianum, vol. XLIX, 2009, Giancarlo Rocca.
3. Opus Judaei, p 132.
4. Mons. Escrivá de Balaguer, Salvador Bernal, p. 280, Rialp publishing house.
5. Opus Judaei, p 132.
6. D. LE TOURNEAU, L’ Opus Dei, P.U.D.F., Paris 1984.
7. Opus Judaei, p 132, note no. 198.
8. Sodalitium, Oct-Nov 1996, “Encore sur L’Opus Dei”, by abbé Curzio Nitoglia, p 58, ref. no. 3.
9. Bernal, p 249.
10. Opus Judaei, p 132.
11. Ibid., p 186.
12. Ibid., p 93.
13. Ibid., p 18.
14. Ibid., p 16.
15. Original Spanish text: “Para que la incorporación sea válida, es suficiente la intención virtual de asumir las obligaciones correspondientes, aunque no haya una advertencia actual en el momento de la incorporación.” Extracted from Lo Que Pasó a Ser el Opus Dei, by “Bruno Devos”, Chapter 11: De La Discreción al Secretismo. Available from https://opus-info.org/index.php/De_la_di...ite_note-6
16. El Opus Dei, Anexo a una Historia, María Angustias Moreno, p 61.
17. María Angustias Moreno, La Otra Cara del Opus Dei, Chapter II: “Desprestigio como estilo de defensa” (I).
18. Opus Judaei, p 145.
19. SALVADOR BERNAL, Monseñor Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer. Apuntes sobre la vida del Fundador del Opus Dei; Rialp, Madrid 1980, 6ª ed., pp. 199-200. While it is true that the Spanish original “llevando el compás” could also be translated as “keeping the beat” (a phrase sounding oddly out of place in the context, and which in any case suggests someone directing the “beat”), perhaps we are dealing here with the ambiguous duplicity of someone winking his eye to those “in the know”…
20. Opus Judaei, p 175.
21. “A Homily for the Day of the Holy Valentinus” by Rev. Steven Marshall: The Mystery of Divine Love http://gnosis.org/ecclesia/homily_Valentinus.htm
22. Blessed Josemaria Escriva – Founder of Opus Dei, Bulletin, September 1999, New York, pp 6-7.
23. Ibid, p 7.
24. Vida Cotidiana y Santidad En La Enseñanza de San Josemaría, Rialp, (2011) Vol. II, p. 85.
25. Sodalitium, Oct-Nov 1996, “Encore sur L’Opus Dei”, by abbé Curzio Nitoglia, p 58, ref. no. 4.
26. “Mario Conde sigue dando clases en la masonería”, Diario de León, 18 DE MAYO DE 2012.
|
|
|
|
| 'Pope Francis is not introducing new ideas; far from it, he is building on the New Theology' |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-14-2024, 08:46 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- No Replies
|
|
A New Theology, Another Christ?
Mary, Destroyer of Heresies blog [emphasis mine]| November 7, 2015
As the march of Modernist Evolutionism continues "forward," the explicitness of Teilhardian metaphysics and theology emerges with increasing boldness. John XXIII spoke of it in his opening address to Vatican II; Paul VI approved of it in Gaudium et Spes; John Paul II audaciously announced that evolution was "more than a hypothesis;" Benedict XVI hailed the resurrection of Christ as a "mutation;" and now Francis outdoes them all and refers explicitly to Teilhard de Chardin in a magisterial document:
Quote:"83. ...all creatures are moving forward with us and through us towards a common point of arrival, which is God, in that transcendent fullness where the risen Christ embraces and illumines all things. Human beings, endowed with intelligence and love, and drawn by the fullness of Christ, are called to lead all creatures back to their Creator.
243. At the end [i.e., at the Final Judgment], we will find ourselves face to face with the infinite beauty of God (cf. 1 Cor 13:12), and be able to read with admiration and happiness the mystery of the universe, which with us will share in unending plenitude. Even now we are journeying towards the sabbath of eternity, the new Jerusalem, towards our common home in heaven. Jesus says: “I make all things new” (Rev 21:5). Eternal life will be a shared experience of awe, in which each creature [Spanish: cada criatura], resplendently transfigured, will take its rightful place and have something to give those poor men and women who will have been liberated once and for all.
244. In the meantime, we come together to take charge of this [common] home which has been entrusted to us, knowing that all the good which exists here will be taken up into the heavenly feast. In union with all creatures [Spanish: con todas las criaturas], we journey through this [earthly] land seeking God…. Let us sing as we go. May our struggles and our concern for this planet never take away the joy of our hope." (Laudato Si)
If anyone doubts that this is the Nouvelle Theologie condemned by Pius XII in Humani Generis, please post your objections here. This is another theology which, in the final analysis, offers the world "another Christ" (2 Cor. 11:4) whom we have not received, and in whom faith is futile. Teilhard's Christic or Cosmic Christ is not the Christ of Catholic Faith.
Quote:"However, this Agnosticism is only the negative part of the system of the Modernist: the positive side of it consists in what they call vital immanence. This is how they advance from one to the other. Religion, whether natural or supernatural, must, like every other fact, admit of some explanation. But when Natural theology has been destroyed, the road to revelation closed through the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. Hence the principle of religious immanence is formulated." Pope St. Pius X, ON THE DOCTRINES OF THE MODERNISTS
Pope John Paul II taught that Christ has united Himself with each man forever, and that each man is a "sharer in Jesus Christ, the mystery in which each one of the four thousand million human beings living on our planet has become a sharer from the moment he is conceived beneath the heart of his mother (RH #13)." The union he speaks of has nothing to do with Gospel preaching, contrition, repentance, faith, or baptism. This is Teilhard's Cosmic Christ.
Quote:"Christ the Lord indicated this way especially, when, as the Council teaches, "by his Incarnation, he, the Son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man". The Church therefore sees its fundamental task in enabling that union to be brought about and renewed continually. The Church wishes to serve this single end: that each person may be able to find Christ, in order that Christ may walk with each person the path of life, with the power of the truth about man and the world that is contained in the mystery of the Incarnation and the Redemption and with the power of the love that is radiated by that truth. Against a background of the ever increasing historical processes, which seem at the present time to have results especially within the spheres of various systems, ideological concepts of the world and regimes, Jesus Christ becomes, in a way, newly present, in spite of all his apparent absences, in spite of all the limitations of the presence and of the institutional activity of the Church." Pope John Paul II, Redemptor hominis
And where will each person find Christ? In himself!
Quote:"...that we may be like those "violent people of God" that we have so often seen in the history of the Church and still see today, and that we may consciously join in the great mission of revealing Christ to the world, helping each person to find himself in Christ, and helping the contemporary generations of our brothers and sisters, the peoples, nations, States, mankind, developing countries and countries of opulence-in short, helping everyone to get to know "the unsearchable riches of Christ", since these riches are for every individual and are everybody's property." Pope John Paul II, Redemptor hominis
In a devastating analysis, Father Johannes Dormann draws a startling conclusion about the theology of Karol Wojtyla:
Quote:"A comparison of the principles of knowledge in Cardinal Wojtyla's [Pope John Paul II] New Theology with those of classical theology makes the fundamental differences clearly come to light. In classical theology, God is the material and formal object of theology. In the New Theology of Cardinal Wojtyla, the object is man. The diametrical opposition is manifest. Through the confusion of nature and grace in the axiom of universal salvation, the traditional "dualism" is entirely eliminated. The traditional distinctions of the natural and supernatural knowledge of God, of natural and supernatural revelation, of natural reason and supernatural faith, of natural and supernatural theology, no longer apply. The virtue of faith, which is constitutive for the process of justification, is no longer required for salvation since all men are are a priori redeemed and justified.
...The Cardinal's New Theology provides an extensive foundation for interreligious dialogue: the "Church of the living God" (p. 17) unites all men. Universal salvation is the common basis. The concepts of revelation and faith are not proper to the Catholic religion. All religions contain genuine revelation. The faith encompasses all "believers" in all religions. Genuine faith is faith in humanity. But "revelation," which is offered to man in Christ," thus the Christian faith is for Cardinal Wojtyla the faith in which the "mystery of man," "existence in Christ," is "enlightened" once and for all. This "offer" is thus by no means necessary for salvation, nor is it exclusive or binding. There is also revelation, faith and the experience of God in other religions. On the basis of religious liberty, interreligious dialogue as a brotherly exchange of religious experiences for the sake of mutual enrichment is the primrose path towards universal religious harmony."
Father Johannes Dormann, Sacred Theology Doctor, Director, of the Institute for Missionwork and the Study of Religions at Wilhelms-University, Munster, Westphalen, Germany. Quote taken from Pope John Paul II's Theological Journey to the Prayer Meeting of Religions in Assisi, Part 1, pages 121-123, © 1994 by Angelus Press
The most troubling doctrinal assertion of Redemptor hominis is the emphasis on the Incarnation at the expense of the Passion and priestly sacrifice of Christ on the cross. In the encyclical, the Pope uses the word 'redemption' 37 times; the word 'justification' is never used. Men are not redeemed by the Incarnation, although this is the unmistakable theme of RH. They are redeemed by the priestly sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Yet Pope John Paul II finds the basis for a formal union of each man with the divine person of Christ simply by the fact that Christ became man and men exist "in Christ". The encyclical claims this union without faith, baptism, or even the willingness of each man. Therefore the priestly sacrifice of Christ is reduced to a "sign of God's love" for man, instead of the means whereby men are redeemed and by which men can be saved by grace through faith.
This error is also metaphysical in that the break with classical soteriology is no doubt based on Wojtyla's evolutionism. For the Pope, the Incarnation is a peak of evolutionary development, about which some theologians (not Wojtyla) conjectured that spirit evolves from matter (Teilhard, Rahner). Therefore, Christ's Incarnation effects an actual change in human nature which now "exists in Christ" (Dormann).
The total break with the soteriology of the preconciliar era is clear. And there is no new penetration of theological insights at work here, but an attempt to synthesize modern scientific theories and hypotheses with the Deposit of Faith.
Quote:"God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us...by the Son, his Word, who became man and was born of the Virgin Mary. This act of redemption marked the high point of the history of man within God's loving plan. God entered the history of humanity and, as a man, became an actor in that history..."
Clearly here he calls the incarnation the efficient cause of the redemption. If men are redeemed by the Incarnation, and formally united to Christ forever, and "exist in Christ," then what remains? For them to arrive at this awareness of being united to Christ forever in their consciousness. Hence, the requirement for dialogue with men of all religions, who too, are united to Christ albeit in ignorance.
St. Pius X, in Pascendi:
Quote:"Hence, Venerable Brethren, springs that ridiculous proposition of the Modernists, that every religion, according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. Hence it is that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. Hence the law, according to which religious consciousness is given as the universal rule, to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and to which all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church, whether in its teaching capacity, or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy or discipline." Pope St. Pius X, ON THE DOCTRINES OF THE MODERNISTS
Pope Francis is not introducing new ideas; far from it. He is building on the New Theology suppressed by Pope Pius XII with remarkable patience and consistency. The universalism increasingly explicit in Pope Bergoglio's doctrine is fully developed by John Paul II. Its primary metaphysic is evolutionary; its philosophy is existentialist; its theology is nondogmatic; its Christ is the Evolver, the Christic of Teilhard de Chardin. It is difficult not to conclude that this is indeed another Christ "whom we have not received" (2 Corinthians 11:4).
Quote:"Entrusting myself fully to the Spirit of truth, therefore, I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in an utterly new way, quite unknown previously, thanks to the Second Vatican Council..." Pope John Paul II, Redemptor hominis
|
|
|
|
| “The real revolution there happened under John Paul II, not Francis..." |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-14-2024, 08:21 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- No Replies
|
|
John Paul II the Revolutionary?
Mary, Destroyer of Heresies blog [emphasis mine] | September 27, 2017
“The real revolution there happened under John Paul II, not Francis, which hasn’t really yet been understood,” said [Archbishop Vincenzo] Paglia.
Quote:NB: A brief summary of the positions held by Archbishop Paglia. On 26 June 2012, Pope Benedict XVI named him President of the Pontifical Council for the Family and raised him to the rank of archbishop.
In February 2013, he noted in an interview that homosexual couples should be safe from unjust discrimination in countries where homosexual acts are illegal. He later said that he was not suggesting a change in church doctrine and that he was restating the official teaching of the Church.[...]
On 15 August 2016, Pope Francis named him President of the Pontifical Academy for Life and Grand Chancellor of the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, later renamed the John Paul II Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences.
Apologists for recently canonized Pope John Paul II scrambled to defend the late Pontiff for the apparent exploitation of the Pontifical Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family that bears his name. A closer look at the rationale utilized by the current leadership of the Institute may raise eyebrows. However, the stunned reaction might not be at the audacity of their claims, but the coherence of their explanations.
Let’s unpack this.
Archbishop Paglia taps into one of Pope John Paul II’s most ubiquitous themes: consciousness, or “awareness” of the Church:
Quote:The Institute “couldn’t just stay like it was,” Paglia said, because of changes “both in the awareness of the Church and also the social, cultural and anthropological conditions of the world.”
About which awareness Pope John Paul II taught in his inaugural and programmatic encyclical:
Quote:"Entrusting myself fully to the Spirit of truth, therefore, I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in an utterly new way, quite unknown previously, thanks to the Second Vatican Council..." Redemptor hominis
It couldn't stay like it was because in the Wojtylian universe, all things are evolving. Who could forget the way the international media leaped upon his address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on 22 October 1996 when he affirmed
Quote:“…some new findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than an hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.”
Surely this is at least ‘an’ explanation of the Pope’s reliance on the novel theory of a “living Tradition” from which he found the missionary Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre wanting in his ‘deficient’ understanding of Tradition (see: motu proprio Ecclesia Dei Adflicta).
Next, Archbishop Paglia explains that John Paul II’s revolution “hasn’t really yet been understood.”
This is evident in the two ways to perceive the pontificate of Karol Wojtyla. The overwhelmingly popular vision of John Paul II is the crusading evangelist, traversing the globe to proclaim the Gospel of Christ to all men while collaborating with world leaders to bring down the Iron Curtain. The other way is to actually examine his words and deeds against the backdrop of Catholic Tradition, which yields some unwelcome if not disturbing conclusions.
The dominant theme of John Paul II’s long pontificate was that by His incarnation, Christ has united Himself to each man forever. He found this novel understanding of the Gospel in Vatican II’s Gaudium et spes (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World) #22, which is erstwhile known as “the mystery of man.” Through this mystery – completely unknown in Catholic Tradition before 1965 – Christ "reveals man to man himself.” This revelation is that each and every man is formally, ontologically, and eternally united to the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. Thus, Archbishop Paglia can also wink,
Quote:“You have to remember that before [Familiaris Consortio], it wasn’t that the divorced and remarried just couldn’t get Communion, it was they were practically excommunicated and expelled. They were outsiders. After John Paul, everybody was inside the house … I can’t just send them out on the terrace!”
“Everybody was inside the house” of course refers to the new ecclesiology of Vatican II’s Lumen gentium where the Church and mankind are dangerously conflated in ambiguous language. This idea is buttressed by the Pope's doctrine of universal union of each man with Christ via the Incarnation.
Now, if everybody is inside the house, who can be excluded from the supper table? Thus, Pope Francis is announced as the authoritative interlocutor of this revolution of John Paul II’s that hasn’t really been understood yet:
Quote:He [Paglia] said that Pope St. John Paul II began the “revolution” in the Church for Communion for the divorced and remarried, and that Pope Francis is carrying this on as the saint’s “best interpreter.”
In the vision of an evolving cosmos in which each man is united to Christ forever, the very idea of church is in flux. How can we mere laymen ever hope to apprehend such exalted ideas without Pope Francis pulling away the veil that the consciousness of the Church was not ready for prior to his Pontificate?
Nor are we to set aside Pope Wojtyla’s bizarre understanding of each religion being a vehicle for union with God and inspired by the Holy Spirit:
Quote:It must first be kept in mind that every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God’s Spirit, achieved a deeper religious experience. Handed on to others, this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions. In every authentic religious experience, the most characteristic expression is prayer. Because of the human spirit’s constitutive openness to God’s action of urging it to self-transcendence, we can hold that “every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person” (Address to the Members of the Roman Curia, 22 Dec. 1986, n. 11; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 5 Jan. 1987, p. 7).
Perhaps it is overlooked by Pope John Paul II that St. Pius X condemned this idea 80 years earlier:
Quote:“Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true." Pascendi Dominici gregis
This vision of all men, in all religions united eternally with Christ in an evolving cosmos has of course, certain implications about which the Pope draws very specific conclusions:
Quote:Assisi Prayer is a "visible illustration, an exegesis of the events, a catechesis, intelligible to all, of what is presupposed and signified by the commitment to ecumenism and to the interreligious dialogue which was recommended and provided by the Second Vatican Council." (Christmas address of the Pope to the Cardinals and members of the Curia on 22 December, 1986, L'Osservatore Romano, 5 January 1987, page 7)
But can we draw such a conclusion as Archbishop Paglia’s based simply on the general themes of Pope John Paul II’s theology and praxis? Has he really done anything revolutionary in the field of Catholic doctrine pertaining to the sacrament of matrimony? If you ask those who studied his novel ‘Theology of the Body’, the answer will be a profound yes:
Quote:George Weigel has described Theology of the Body as "one of the boldest reconfigurations of Catholic theology in centuries." He goes on to say it is a "kind of theological time bomb set to go off with dramatic consequences, sometime in the third millennium of the Church." Weigel believes that it has barely begun to "shape the Church's theology, preaching, and religious education" but when it does "it will compel a dramatic development of thinking about virtually every major theme in the Creed." [Weigel, George (October 1999). Witness to Hope (First ed.). Harper Perennial. pp. 336, 343, 853. ISBN 0-06-018793-X.]
Those taking offense at Pope Francis’ teaching in Amoris laetitia because of a perceived opposition to the doctrine laid down by John Paul II in Familiaris consortio should take a deep breath and a long look at the late Pope’s entire body of doctrine. While others trifle with rearranging the furniture inside the house, John Paul II set in motion the wholesale replacement of the entire foundation.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: IMG_4057.jpeg]](https://exsurgedomine.it/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/IMG_4057.jpeg)
![[Image: AVvXsEjhYhBLtllRjtWrsmt5nfB336ef0lUi68qI...Nk4Zg=s320]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjhYhBLtllRjtWrsmt5nfB336ef0lUi68qILTzlFSSmF7Go1zreYmjsCfc6IHNuK53IQwJ1fydYrya0kYyXeYfETnKKi5H1CRdnZy4tpucUHvbXoTSLcFsB3ShjN4052IQzuIHKvZ9X5_a-bcbXZo_Yy8n_AxsHV2Kc8fWbOzgJMJ2kuzZAfmkJhNk4Zg=s320)
![[Image: jp2wit10.jpg]](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4d2fDfoJgVQ/WcxKPiSbYMI/AAAAAAAAALs/mDoM25VgJocNkAeH3qixnt-Plw2aifpHgCLcBGAs/s320/jp2wit10.jpg)
