Hello Fishy.
I understand your angst over finding Ratzinger/Benedict using quotations from Chardin and finding something of redeemable value in some of the words he wrote. Keep in mind the daily walk of the man. During his days he read hundreds of thousands of pages of witness testimonies, transcripts, interviews, documents and all the other media sources regarding the priestly abuse scandals as well as having to interview them himself. A good chunk of his life’s works involved him looking into the darkest sides of human nature and at the person whose darkness wounded others. Think of this sort of like the photographer who needs to go to the darkroom to develop his pictures. The picture the Vicar of Christ needed was the clearest and he didn’t fear looking at the hediousness of it all. I am amazed when I think of this side of his life to have had to look into that darkness and not be taken under it sway. Christ was there with him the whole way and was his guiding light while he dealt with the filth of human nature towards the end of his career. It is no ordinary task to deal with that stuff and remain unscathed. Look at the stats on PTSD among those who work in the field of corrections and you’ll get an idea of what staring into the darkness of human nature and its acts can do. It destroys some to have to deal with it. Period. People get hurt by it and not just those who are it’s direct victims. He left behind this work to have some peace from it towards the end of his life. The wisdom of his decision to go may have said much about the toll dealing with the priestly scandals every day took on him.
Look at the things you find shocking in this light and see if you see what I mean. Darkness leaves a shadow on the things it touches and to dwell in the Light of Christ for the remainder of his days was his choice and his victory over the sins of others he had to deal with.
Glenda
Thanks, but…
OK - so I put some serious hours into actually READING Chardin’s works and his quotes.
Here are my findings - Man oh man was I wrong.
Put into context - with a healthy understanding that the man was a mystic, and a poet, and did veer off the deep end occasionally, and spoke a different language, and was human, and wasn’t a theologian, and made up words - the man was for the most part, almost - in the important part of his work and his core beliefs - almost just almost, orthodox.
As ususal, one should look at ALL the facts.
I have no problem now with Pope Benedict quoting him. Chardin had his dangerous faults because of flowery language and a too-strong passion for the bilogical, and there is his only downfall.
Bendict is clearly picking up the good in him, and adding to it - in the way only he (Benedict) can.
Is there danger in Chardin’s work - yes. Is it blatantly non-orthodox - I don’t think so.
)
)