I completely don't understand - Jesuit Pierre Teilhard De Chardin and Pope Benedict

[Bookcat]

What the Church Teaches about the Universe - and the new creation:

scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm#VI

 

[FishyPete]

So I guess in summary, Pope Benedict in the recent past now/then would quote the best parts of the work of others, which wasn’t a commentary on the fact that he agreed with everything they said. Have I got it right?

 

[Bookcat]

So I guess in summary, Pope Benedict in the recent past now/then would quote the best parts of the work of others, which wasn’t a commentary on the fact that he agreed with everything they said. Have I got it right?

Yes that would be a rather true statement and understanding.

Correct.

 

[FishyPete]

Yes that would be a rather true statement and understanding.

Correct.

Thank you.

 

[CarmelJerome]

Further, for again a simpleton like me, how do I understand this?

In the words of Pope Emeritus Benedict:

“The Roman creed (and with it the Western creed in general) is more concerned with the history of salvation and with Christology. **It lingers, so to speak, on the positivistic side of the Christian story; it simply accepts the fact that to save us God became man; it does not seek to penetrate beyond this story to its causes and to its connection with the totality of being. **The East (Orthodox Christians), on the other hand, has always sought to see the Christian faith in a cosmic and metaphysical perspective, which is mirrored in professions of faith above all by the fact that Christology and belief in creation are related to each other, and thus the uniqueness of the Christian story and the everlasting, all-embracing nature of the creation come into close association. **We shall return later to discuss how today this enlarged perspective is at last beginning to gain currency in the Western consciousness as well, especially as a result of stimuli from the work of Teilhard de Chardin.**” (emphasis added).

Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal; Pope Benedict XVI; Benedict; J. R. Foster; Michael J. Miller (2010-06-04). Introduction To Christianity, 2nd Edition (Kindle Locations 953-959). Ignatius Press. Kindle Edition.

I don’t get what the Pope is saying here, where again he brings up Teilhard de Chardin? Does he mean we focus too much on the fact that Jesus saved us, and not on why God chose to become man? I don’t know…

The gospel does point beyond the redemption of the human race, to a redemption involving the whole of creation -- which we understand now includes uncountable galaxies and stars -- in which all of creation is restored to right order through the Incarnate Word, through the God-Man. While Man is the sole creature that God desired simply for himself, the human race, as recipient of the Incarnation and Redemption, has a vaster purpose linked to the whole from which God created us.

Failing to consider that whole in light of the faith and the teaching of the Church leads to a lessening and distortion of that very teaching; just as the redemption of the messiah was meant not just for Jews but for gentiles, not just for one people but for all, so the redemption of humanity involves all that mankind was created to care for.

 

[FishyPete]

The gospel does point beyond the redemption of the human race, to a redemption involving the whole of creation – which we understand now includes uncountable galaxies and stars – in which all of creation is restored to right order through the Incarnate Word, through the God-Man. While Man is the sole creature that God desired simply for himself, the human race, as recipient of the Incarnation and Redemption, has a vaster purpose linked to the whole from which God created us.

Failing to consider that whole in light of the faith and the teaching of the Church leads to a lessening and distortion of that very teaching; just as the redemption of the messiah was meant not just for Jews but for gentiles, not just for one people but for all, so the redemption of humanity involves all that mankind was created to care for.

Got it. Thanks!

 

[Memaw]

Indeed, understood and I totally agree with you.

But still, with such dramatic reaction to Jesuit Pierre Teilhard De Chardin all over the internet, it leaves me scratching my head… so Pope Benedict simply picked out ideas he had that were good then?

Along a similar vein, did you ever wish that the Pope took an hour or two, and took to the airwaves and said: “look people, this is exactly what you need to believe and follow, in point form, a-z. And this is what you need to avoid, in point form A-Z” - Something like that would help simpletons like me like you wouldn’t believe. The world is a confusing place, know what I mean?

It’s called The Catechism of the Catholic Church. Writings of those like T De C. are of not interest to me as I knew of all this in the 70’s. So he has been out of my radar ever since. Ask an apologist about what the Pope said of T.De C. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Pablopedro]

Along a similar vein, did you ever wish that the Pope took an hour or two, and took to the airwaves and said: “look people, this is exactly what you need to believe and follow, in point form, a-z. And this is what you need to avoid, in point form A-Z” - Something like that would help simpletons like me like you wouldn’t believe. The world is a confusing place, know what I mean?

That is the purpose of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no?

 

[Pablopedro]

It’s called The Catechism of the Catholic Church. Writings of those like T De C. are of not interest to me as I knew of all this in the 70’s. So he has been out of my radar ever since. God Bless, Memaw

Jinx

 

[FishyPete]

It’s called The Catechism of the Catholic Church. Writings of those like T De C. are of not interest to me as I knew of all this in the 70’s. So he has been out of my radar ever since. Ask an apologist about what the Pope said of T.De C. God Bless, Memaw

Yes, but Pope Benedict mentions him a lot, and in positive ways!

 

[Bookcat]

That is the purpose of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no?

and the Compendium! Issued by Pope Benedict XVI

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

"I entrust this Compendium above all to the entire Church and, in particular, to every Christian, in order that it may awaken in the Church of the third millennium renewed zeal for evangelization and education in the faith, which ought to characterize every community in the Church and every Christian believer, regardless of age or nationality.

But this Compendium, with its brevity, clarity and comprehensiveness, is directed to every human being, who, in a world of distractions and multifarious messages, desires to know the Way of Life, the Truth, entrusted by God to His Son’s Church." -Pope Benedict XVI

Buy it: shop.catholic.com/compendium-to-the-catechism-of-the-catholic-church.html

 

[Memaw]

One major theme of Teilhard de Chardin is to emphasize the entirety of the creation and universe. When he adventured in the wild, he said his Mass by using the earth as his altar.
I think that is where Pope Benedict comes from. He too, believes the entire creation and universe are one in God. That does not mean the Pope approves all Teilhard de Chardin’s work.

I would never attempt to put words in the Pope’s mouth. God Bless, Memaw

 

[glendab]

Hello Fishy. Thanks for the thread; it is a valid and needed discussion.

First off, I’d like to say in the quest to develop one’s personal spirituality, one should simply pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance and then use good common sense and any direction you may have about the “goodness” of certain authors. What I mean is there are known bad guys in the world of theology that from time to time some folks try to rehabilitate as if they’d done no disservice to the Church with their errors. Why bother to use them if their are literally hundreds of much worthier persons to trust with one’s own spiritual development?

I do think that we can all benefit and should use those who are given us by God through the Church to help us grow spiritually. For instance, many are drawn to the Montfort way, many are drawn to the Franciscan way, the Benedictine way, the writings of Catherine of Siena or perhaps those of Father Peyton or Mother Angelica, etc. The list could go on and on and on. Pick one that moves your heart when you read it and stick with that. Why force yourself to accept someone’s spirituality that seems problematic to you just because his stuff is spoken of by a Pope? This makes no sense to me. The Holy Spirit is in all of our hearts and is there to guide us to all truth just like Jesus said He would before He ascended to Heaven. God is good to His word. Read the good stuff not the iffy stuff and trust your own instincts. You could be the author of some of your own confusion.

But these are my opinions and I’m no expert on anything but some fried rice and greens which is getting cold so I have to go.

Good luck and God Bless. (I hope the debate on this very subject lengthens.)

Glenda

 

[FishyPete]

Hello Fishy. Thanks for the thread; it is a valid and needed discussion.

First off, I’d like to say in the quest to develop one’s personal spirituality, one should simply pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance and then use good common sense and any direction you may have about the “goodness” of certain authors. What I mean is there are known bad guys in the world of theology that from time to time some folks try to rehabilitate as if they’d done no disservice to the Church with their errors. Why bother to use them if their are literally hundreds of much worthier persons to trust with one’s own spiritual development?

I do think that we can all benefit and should use those who are given us by God through the Church to help us grow spiritually. For instance, many are drawn to the Montfort way, many are drawn to the Franciscan way, the Benedictine way, the writings of Catherine of Siena or perhaps those of Father Peyton or Mother Angelica, etc. The list could go on and on and on. Pick one that moves your heart when you read it and stick with that. Why force yourself to accept someone’s spirituality that seems problematic to you just because his stuff is spoken of by a Pope? This makes no sense to me. The Holy Spirit is in all of our hearts and is there to guide us to all truth just like Jesus said He would before He ascended to Heaven. God is good to His word. Read the good stuff not the iffy stuff and trust your own instincts. You could be the author of some of your own confusion.

But these are my opinions and I’m no expert on anything but some fried rice and greens which is getting cold so I have to go.

Good luck and God Bless. (I hope the debate on this very subject lengthens.)

Glenda

And here’s the problem then. Pope Benedict who I love dearly mentions this Jesuit by name so, with the Internet being a reality I look him up only to find out he’s been severely restricted by the church herself!

So even though our former Pope was just referring to parts of this man’s thoughts that he found agreeable, and didn’t mean to say he agrees with everything, me as a simple man became confused.

 

[SMA_12]

Along a similar vein, did you ever wish that the Pope took an hour or two, and took to the airwaves and said: “look people, this is exactly what you need to believe and follow, in point form, a-z. And this is what you need to avoid, in point form A-Z” - Something like that would help simpletons like me like you wouldn’t believe. The world is a confusing place, know what I mean?

Is the Catechism not a perfect source for exactly this?

 

[FishyPete]

ok here is my point - there are some high level Catholics like our Pope (Benedict) who speak well of him, and there are other high level Catholics who rip him to shreds! Going so far as to call him things I won’t repeat here! can you see my confusion?

How does the Church view this Jesuit today??? I wish there were clarity on these types of issues!

on the one hand the man is forbidden from his work being published and on the other hand his work is read in seminaries and mentioned. by our Pope (retired)

What gives? this is my question! ???

 

[Marie5890]

ok here is my point - there are some high level Catholics like our Pope (Benedict) who speak well of him, and there are other high level Catholics who rip him to shreds! Going so far as to call him things I won’t repeat here! can you see my confusion?

How does the Church view this Jesuit today??? I wish there were clarity on these types of issues!

on the one hand the man is forbidden from his work being published and on the other hand his work is read in seminaries and mentioned. by our Pope (retired)

What gives? this is my question! ???

(I’ve been lurking in this thread and would love clarification as well. From what I gather, I dont get the idea that BXVI has thrown TdC under the bus.

 

[JM3]

**My Question: **Why does Pope Benedict site his work and seems to praise him, even though he (Pierre Teilhard De Chardin) was silenced by the Church itself, which has to date not lifted the ban?

Is it because Pope Benedict finds some redeeming qualities in his “Cosmic Liturgy”?

This has totally and utterly baffled me!

Thoughts???

I don’t think it was a ban.

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFTEILH.HTM

For this reason, the most eminent and most revered Fathers of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and of his followers.

“After having consulted the Cardinal Secretary of State and the Cardinal Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which, by order of the Holy Father, had been duly consulted beforehand, about the letter in question, we are in a position to reply in the negative. Far from being a revision of the previous stands of the Holy See, Cardinal Casaroli’s letter expresses reservation in various passages—and these reservations have been passed over in silence by certain newspapers—reservations which refer precisely to the judgement given in the Monitum of June 1962, even though this document is not explicitly mentioned.”

vatican.va/roman_curia/pont_committees/eucharist-congr/documents/rc_committ_euchar_doc_20110215_50-testo-base_en.html

1. The Preparation of the Gifts also helps us realise we are involved in what is sometimes called a ‘cosmic liturgy’, that is, the movement of the whole of creation towards the ultimate eschatological goal of the glorification of God and the transformation of the world. The goal of the Eucharist is to begin here and now the ‘Christification’ of the whole cosmos so that it is taken up into the worship of God who will be ‘all in all’ as St. Paul writes (1 Cor 15:28). The fact that we use bread and wine, simple elements of creation, reminds us of the sacredness of creation. The world is not something indifferent, raw material merely to be utilized simply as we see fit. Rather, it is created by God and forms an essential part of the divine plan. Linked to humanity it is associated with our calling to be sons and daughters in the one Son of God, Jesus Christ (cf. Eph 1:4-12). The Eucharist has a cosmic character. Teilhard de Chardin has written beautifully of the Eucharist in terms of the ‘hymn of the Universe’.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html

Footnote 15 of this document;

(15)In late 1977, Marilyn Ferguson sent a questionnaire to 210 “persons engaged in social transformation”, whom she also calls “Aquarian Conspirators”. The following is interesting: “When respondents were asked to name individuals whose ideas had influenced them, either through personal contact or through their writings, those most often named, in order of frequency, were Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, C.G. Jung, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Aldous Huxley, Robert Assagioli, and J. Krishnamurti. “Others frequently mentioned: Paul Tillich, Hermann Hesse, Alfred North Whitehead, Martin Buber, Ruth Benedict, Margaret Mead, Gregory Bateson, Tarthang Tulku, Alan Watts, Sri Aurobindo, Swami Muktananda, D.T. Suzuki, Thomas Merton, Willis Harman, Kenneth Boulding, Elise Boulding, Erich Fromm, Marshall McLuhan, Buckminster Fuller, Frederic Spiegelberg, Alfred Korzybski, Heinz von Foerster, John Lilly, Werner Erhard, Oscar Ichazo, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Joseph Chilton Pearce, Karl Pribram, Gardner Murphy, and Albert Einstein”: The Aquarian Conspiracy. Personal and Social Transformation in Our Time, Los Angeles (Tarcher) 1980, p. 50 (note 1) and p. 434.

 

[FishyPete]

Case in point. Chardin saw our Lord’s cross as not so much a vehicle to pay for our sins but as a vehicle to further evolution oh the perfect human.

Seriously? So again see my confusion. And his view on original sin is something you need to read for yourself.

So again, my confusion sets in.

 

[FishyPete]

I don’t think it was a ban.

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFTEILH.HTM

vatican.va/roman_curia/pont_committees/eucharist-congr/documents/rc_committ_euchar_doc_20110215_50-testo-base_en.html

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html

Footnote 15 of this document;

The Church called him dangerous to read! And there is a ban on his publication!