Luman Fidei encyclical letter

  • Thread starter Thread starter Norwich12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And St. Bonaventure’s mystical view of the Universe is echoed by Teilhard de Chardin.
The Mass on the World by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
(written almost 100 years ago)

Fire Over the Earth
“In the beginning was Power, intelligent, loving, energizing.
In the beginning was the* Word*, supremely capable of mastering
and mounding whatever might come into being in the world of matter.
In the beginning there were not coldness and darkness: there was the Fire.
This is the truth.”
How similar to the first chapter of the Gospel of John (New American Bible), verses 1-5:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to
through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race
the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
 
Norwich12 said:
And St. Bonaventure’s mystical view of the Universe is echoed by Teilhard de Chardin.
The Mass on the World by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
(written almost 100 years ago)

Fire Over the Earth
“In the beginning was Power, intelligent, loving, energizing.
In the beginning was the* Word*, supremely capable of mastering
and mounding whatever might come into being in the world of matter.
In the beginning there were not coldness and darkness: there was the Fire.
This is the truth.”
How similar to the first chapter of the Gospel of John (New American Bible), verses 1-5:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to
through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race
the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
Click to expand...
I would not argue against either of the above texts [especially the latter] for basically they are theological expressions as distinct from philosophical musings.

God Bless
Paduard
 
On July 7 it will have been a year since I started this long thread – trying to understand the depths of Lumen Fidei. Thank you Paduard for your remarkable and faithful (name removed by moderator)ut.

Tomorrow I will be brave and make a comparison of two works a century apart.
The subject will be “TIME and SPACE.”

Blessings,
N12
 
TIME AND SPACE

Is there an echo from a century before in the Encyclical by Pope Francis LUMEN FIDEI?

Pope Francis:

In union with faith and charity, hope propels us towards a sure future, set against a different horizon with regard to the illusory enticements of the idols of this world yet granting new momentum and strength to our daily lives. Let us refuse to be robbed of hope, or to allow our hope to be dimmed by facile answers and solutions which block our progress, “fragmenting” time and changing it into space. Time is always much greater than space. Space hardens processes, whereas time propels towards the future and encourages us to go forward in hope.

(from the end of Section 57)
Teilhard de Chardin:

We might have been tempted to say: ‘Consciousness manifests itself indubitably only in man; therefore it is an isolated event of no interest to science.’
But no, we must correct this, and say rather: ‘Consciousness manifests itself indubitably in man and therefore, glimpsed in this one flash of light, it reveals itself as having a cosmic extension and consequently as being aureoled by limitless prolongations in space and time.’
This conclusion is big with consequences; but I cannot see how it can be denied if sound analogy with the rest of science is to be preserved.
(from the Pensees, a collection of the thoughts written in French by Teilhard (probably early in the 20th century) –This selection above is from section 8 of the work “The Presence of God in the World.”
From my limited reading of Teilhard, he uses (IMO) the analogies of “one flash of light……cosmic extension….prolongations in space and time” to signify the Incarnation and Transfiguration of the Cosmic Christ as the center of the Universe.
 
I think that, before we can proceed efficiently, we should think upon what exactly is meant by “space” as used in the expression - “fragmenting” time and changing it into space.

Paduard
 
You ask good and profound questions Paduard.

I do not know what that Teilhard a century ago, or what our wise Pope a year ago
Meant by the term “SPACE.”

Was space a physical measurement (like the space behind a statue);
or a spiritual quality – or a lack of spirit ?

What do the 14000 readers think ?
 

To try to answer Paduard’s. question of ‘What is Space?’
I have copy pasted a middle paragraph from a long article entitled “Space”
from the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia.
It was written a century ago – a few years before Einstein’s theory of relativity was first published in English in 1920.​

Philosophers cannot be satisfied with mathematical space, an abstract construction useful for theoretical purposes, for they wish to arrive at the real space of nature. Nor can they restrict themselves to the popular notion, for their task is precisely to purify the data of common sense from all the extraneous factors modifying them and giving rise to latent contradictions. But in their efforts to discover pure and real space, they have sometimes arrived at the most perplexing results; so that many philosophers, while not subscribing to the doctrines of Kantian criticism, consider the idea of space as hopelessly contradictory, as a purely illusory fancy. To recall all the successive explanations of the nature of real space given by the great philosophers it would be necessary to go through the history of philosophy; but, leaving aside the complete negation of extension, all the doctrines, from Hesiod (cf. Aristotle, IV Phys., vi, 213b) to our day, fluctuate between the idea of absolute space, a real substance independent of the bodies it contains, and purely relative space, a mental fiction based on the real extension of material bodies. The most radical expressions of these two conflicting views are those of Newton and Clarke, on the one hand, who consider space as the sensorium of God, and on the other, of Leibniz, who asserts that there is no space independent of extended bodies, and reduces it to “the order of co-existing things”.
 
Norwich12 said:

To try to answer Paduard’s. question of ‘What is Space?’
I have copy pasted a middle paragraph from a long article entitled “Space”
from the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia.
It was written a century ago – a few years before Einstein’s theory of relativity was first published in English in 1920.​

Philosophers cannot be satisfied with mathematical space, an abstract construction useful for theoretical purposes, for they wish to arrive at the real space of nature. Nor can they restrict themselves to the popular notion, for their task is precisely to purify the data of common sense from all the extraneous factors modifying them and giving rise to latent contradictions. But in their efforts to discover pure and real space, they have sometimes arrived at the most perplexing results; so that many philosophers, while not subscribing to the doctrines of Kantian criticism, consider the idea of space as hopelessly contradictory, as a purely illusory fancy. To recall all the successive explanations of the nature of real space given by the great philosophers it would be necessary to go through the history of philosophy; but, leaving aside the complete negation of extension, all the doctrines, from Hesiod (cf. Aristotle, IV Phys., vi, 213b) to our day, fluctuate between the idea of absolute space, a real substance independent of the bodies it contains, and purely relative space, a mental fiction based on the real extension of material bodies. The most radical expressions of these two conflicting views are those of Newton and Clarke, on the one hand, who consider space as the sensorium of God, and on the other, of Leibniz, who asserts that there is no space independent of extended bodies, and reduces it to “the order of co-existing things”.
Click to expand...
All that Norwich 12 seems very wooly to me. I don’t think for one moment the encyclical was referring in any sense to space in astronomical terms. We can only guess, unless anyone else has better ideas.

Personally the only thing I can think of relates to people splitting up their future time into categories - in other words making spaces, And some spaces incudes some time for God. Thing against this is that the future never comes - everything except the instant present - resides in the past.

God Bless
Paduard.
 
Thank you Paduard – you always bring me back to the Encyclical. Here is the most difficult section to understand (IMO):
Encyclical 1 : Lumen Fidei = The Light of Faith
End of section 57

Consolation and strength amid suffering

In union with faith and charity, hope propels us towards a sure future, set against a different horizon with regard to the illusory enticements of the idols of this world yet granting new momentum and strength to our daily lives. Let us refuse to be robbed of hope, or to allow our hope to be dimmed by facile answers and solutions which block our progress, “fragmenting” time and changing it into space. Time is always much greater than space. Space hardens processes, whereas time propels towards the future and encourages us to go forward in hope.
(my explanations)
  1. In union with faith and charity, hope propels us towards a sure future …. yet granting new momentum and strength to our daily lives.
ROMANS 5:5 (NAB) and a hope which will not let us down, because the love of God has been poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit which has been given to us.
  1. …set against a different horizon with regard to the illusory enticements of the idols of this world
Material treasures on earth.
  1. Let us refuse to be robbed of hope, or to allow our hope to be dimmed by facile answers and solutions which block our progress**….*
*Robbed of hope by discouragement and depression leading to despair

**Easy solutions-- whether errant philosophies or simplified theologies blocking spiritual growth
  1. “fragmenting” time and changing it into space.
I think “space” does not mean interstellar space or even a compartment in our daily lives to do another activity.

**I conclude that Pope Francis was using the word “space” to be equivalent to a “gap” in spiritual progress. **

To be continued……
 
For spiritual reflection and growth —

Journey of the Mind into God

THE MIND’S ROAD TO GOD

Saint Bonaventura: 1221-1274
(from crossroadsinitiative.com)

**CHAPTER TWO

OF THE REFLECTION OF GOD IN HIS TRACES IN THE SENSIBLE WORLD
**
3. Therefore, man, who is called a “microcosm,” has five senses like five
doors, through which enters into his soul the cognition of all that is in
the sensible world. For through sight enter the transparent (“sublimia”),
luminous, and other colored bodies; through touch the solid and terrestrial
bodies; by the three intermediate senses the intermediates, as by taste the
aqueous, by hearing the aerial, by odor the vaporous–all of which have
something of a humid nature, something aerial, something fiery or warm, as
appears in the smoke which is freed from incense.
There enter then through these doors, not only simple bodies, but also
composite, mixed from these. But since by sense we perceive not only these
particular sensibles, which are light, sound, odor, savor, and the four
primary qualities which touch apprehends, but also the common sensibles,
which are number, magnitude, figure, rest, and motion, and since everything
which is moved is moved by something, and some are self-moved and remain at
rest, as the animals, it follows that when through these five senses we
apprehend the motion of bodies, we are led to the cognition of spiritual
movers, as through an effect we are led to a knowledge of its causes.
  1. As far as the three kinds of things are concerned, this whole sensible
    world enters into the human soul through “apprehension.” The external
    sensibles, however, are what first enter the soul through the five doors of
    the senses. They enter, I say, not though their substance, but through
    their similitudes. These are first generated in the medium, and from the
    medium are generated in the organ and pass from the external organ into the
    internal, and from there into the apprehensive power. And thus the
    generation of the [sensible] species in the medium and from the medium into
    the organ and the reaction of the apprehensive power to it [the species]
    produce the apprehension of all those things which the soul apprehends from
    without.
View attachment 20291

CHRIST THE REDEEMER
 
This is proving to be a very difficult expression to analyse and the encyclical contains no footnotes relating to the passage. Obviously we cannot ask the Pope to explain the matter; so in the meantime we are surrounded by guesses.

Regarding the use of the word ‘time’ itself, I found the intro in the Collins Dictionary reads as follows:- *"(a) the continuous passwage of potentiality in the future, through the present, to a state of finality in the past". * The use of the word potentiality may be of interest.

As also is the sub-section on ‘time dilation’; which is not particularly astronomical, but scientific - it reads “the principle predicted by relativity that time intervals between events in a system have larger values measured by an observer moving with respect to the system than those measured by an observer at rest with respect to it”. Would that imply that human inflate intervals, whereas God does not?

regards
Paduard
 
TIME DILATION

From an article on emc2-explained.info/Time-Dilation

“That the flow of time is constant is seemingly obvious and this has been the prevailing view for almost all of human history. Sir Isaac Newton, when he wasn’t dodging falling apples, certainly thought time was constant. He gave us the idea of a “clockwork universe”, in which it would be possible to know not only all of the past but all of the future if only we could say where every particle was, in what direction each particle was moving and at what speed. This model assumed, not unreasonably, that time flows at an ever constant rate. As brilliant as Newton was, he was, much to everyone’s surprise, wrong.
In 1905 Albert Einstein published his Special Theory of Relativity. This work considered time not as a single constantly flowing entity, but as part of a much more complex system, linked with that of space itself. This is called space-time. Because space and time are part of the same entity it’s impossible to move in space without moving in time. Time, for anything moving, changes.”

“One of the most amazing consequences of special relativity is that any moving clock slows down relative to a stationary observer. There are many different types of clock, such as digital watches, clockwork clocks, atomic clocks and even our own biological clocks. They are all equally affected by the same principle, namely: moving clocks run slow:
If moving clocks run slowly why don’t we notice? The are two reasons for this:
We are going far too slowly for any noticeable change to take place.
Even if we go at high enough speeds to bring about a large slowing down of local time we wouldn’t notice because our own body clocks would also be running just as slowly.
The speed of light is 300,000km per second (186,300 miles per second). It isn’t until we get to speeds that are a large fraction of the speed of light that any change in the flow of time becomes apparent. What’s more, the effect grows in magnitude very rapidly at speeds very close to that of light.”

**“This slowing down of clocks due to high speeds is called time dilation and has a precise mathematical relationship.” **

“So, when we move, at whatever speed, time slows down relative to a stationary observer. Note that for the occupants of a rocket travelling at very high speeds time would still seem to pass normally. However, if they could see out to an Earth-bound clock it would appear, to them, to be running too quickly. If an Earth-bound observer could see a clock inside the rocket it would appear to be running too slowly. This is why the theory is called “relativity”, it is because time is relative to whoever is observing it at a particular speed.”
 
Norwich12 said:
TIME DILATION

From an article on emc2-explained.info/Time-Dilation

“That the flow of time is constant is seemingly obvious and this has been the prevailing view for almost all of human history. Sir Isaac Newton, when he wasn’t dodging falling apples, certainly thought time was constant. He gave us the idea of a “clockwork universe”, in which it would be possible to know not only all of the past but all of the future if only we could say where every particle was, in what direction each particle was moving and at what speed. This model assumed, not unreasonably, that time flows at an ever constant rate. As brilliant as Newton was, he was, much to everyone’s surprise, wrong.
In 1905 Albert Einstein published his Special Theory of Relativity. This work considered time not as a single constantly flowing entity, but as part of a much more complex system, linked with that of space itself. This is called space-time. Because space and time are part of the same entity it’s impossible to move in space without moving in time. Time, for anything moving, changes.”

“One of the most amazing consequences of special relativity is that any moving clock slows down relative to a stationary observer. There are many different types of clock, such as digital watches, clockwork clocks, atomic clocks and even our own biological clocks. They are all equally affected by the same principle, namely: moving clocks run slow:
If moving clocks run slowly why don’t we notice? The are two reasons for this:
We are going far too slowly for any noticeable change to take place.
Even if we go at high enough speeds to bring about a large slowing down of local time we wouldn’t notice because our own body clocks would also be running just as slowly.
The speed of light is 300,000km per second (186,300 miles per second). It isn’t until we get to speeds that are a large fraction of the speed of light that any change in the flow of time becomes apparent. What’s more, the effect grows in magnitude very rapidly at speeds very close to that of light.”

**“This slowing down of clocks due to high speeds is called time dilation and has a precise mathematical relationship.” **

“So, when we move, at whatever speed, time slows down relative to a stationary observer. Note that for the occupants of a rocket travelling at very high speeds time would still seem to pass normally. However, if they could see out to an Earth-bound clock it would appear, to them, to be running too quickly. If an Earth-bound observer could see a clock inside the rocket it would appear to be running too slowly. This is why the theory is called “relativity”, it is because time is relative to whoever is observing it at a particular speed.”
Click to expand...
What an excellent response Norwich 12.

Using your figures does that mean that, what we call, the fleeting present - only lasts 186,300ths of a second? Or is it slightly shorter than this allowing for whatever reduced speed is involved for the present to form within the immediate cognition.

Best Wishes,
Paduard.
 
Thank you Paduard for the scholarly attempt to compare human and God time.

The grand old English 18th century hymn “O God our Help in Ages Past”
(words by Isaac Watts)
may have the answer about earth time and eternal time:
Code: 
    The 4th verse:

   " A thousand ages, in thy sight, 
    are like an evening gone; 
    short as the watch that ends the night, 
    before the rising sun."
 
Norwich12 said:
Thank you Paduard for the scholarly attempt to compare human and God time.

The grand old English 18th century hymn “O God our Help in Ages Past”
(words by Isaac Watts)
may have the answer about earth time and eternal time:
Code: 
    The 4th verse:

   " A thousand ages, in thy sight, 
    are like an evening gone; 
    short as the watch that ends the night, 
    before the rising sun."
Click to expand...
Yes profound hymn Norwich 12.

Illustrates that for God all past, present and future is as one. Only God knows of what we call the future; not even the Angels & Saints - for they are restricted in the same way as we are i.e. to the present and that past, although not exactly to the same degree.

Paduard.
 
The truth of the eternal time was described eloquently in the 4th Century by St. Augustine.

Here is the CITY OF GOD, Book XI, Chapter 21 as presented in the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia.

(the first half of the chapter)

“For what else is to be understood by that invariable refrain, And God saw that it was good, than the approval of the work in its design, which is the wisdom of God? For certainly God did not in the actual achievement of the work first learn that it was good, but, on the contrary, nothing would have been made had it not been first known by Him. While, therefore, He sees that that is good which, had He not seen it before it was made, would never have been made, it is plain that He is not discovering, but teaching that it is good. Plato, indeed, was bold enough to say that, when the universe was completed, God was, as it were, elated with joy. And Plato was not so foolish as to mean by this that God was rendered more blessed by the novelty of His creation; but he wished thus to indicate that the work now completed met with its Maker’s approval, as it had while yet in design. It is not as if the knowledge of God were of various kinds, knowing in different ways things which as yet are not, things which are, and things which have been. For not in our fashion does He look forward to what is future, nor at what is present, nor back upon what is past; but in a manner quite different and far and profoundly remote from our way of thinking. For He does not pass from this to that by transition of thought, but beholds all things with absolute unchangeableness; so that of those things which emerge in time, the future, indeed, are not yet, and the present are now, and the past no longer are; but all of these are by Him comprehended in His stable and eternal presence. Neither does He see in one fashion by the eye, in another by the mind, for He is not composed of mind and body; nor does His present knowledge differ from that which it ever was or shall be, for those variations of time, past, present, and future, though they alter our knowledge, do not affect His, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. James*1:17 Neither is there any growth from thought to thought in the conceptions of Him in whose spiritual vision all things which He knows are at once embraced. For as without any movement that time can measure, He Himself moves all temporal things, so He knows all times with a knowledge that time cannot measure. And therefore He saw that what He had made was good, when He saw that it was good to make it.”
 
Reading through part 1, I would pick out the following to highlight.

For not in our fashion does He look forward to what is future, nor at what is present, nor back upon what is past; but in a manner quite different and far and profoundly remote from our way of thinking.

In my opinion this accords with both the spiritual ‘profoundly remote’] and the scientific ‘as discussed already’].

Paduard
 
Thank you Paduard – St.Augustine was really modern in his interpretation of the Timelessness of God.

Here is a pertinent excerpt about the Sacrifice of the Mass as it appeared in an article from the Diocese of Charleston.
The Sacrifice of the Mass is Timeless
by Father Bryan Babick, SL.L.

I have previously argued that the Mass unites the Last Supper, the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection all-in-one. The Paschal Mystery must stand outside of time because the events of which it is composed are those through which Jesus anticipates, battles and defeats death itself. In defeating death, Jesus beats it as a final end for us. As such the Last Supper anticipates, the Crucifixion enters into, and the Resurrection conquers Christ’s death and therefore the confines of time itself.

Since the Mass perpetuates the Paschal Mystery in time, it follows that the Mass stands outside of time because it presents anew the memorial of those events that live in eternity. This is why Mass is repeated every day except Good Friday itself. The events that are unique in and overcome history must constantly be re- presented so that they can be experienced in every generation.

Christ’s Paschal Mystery is unique because it conquers death, which nothing else can do. Since the Mass is not a repetition, but and entering into and re-presentation of the Paschal Mystery, it takes Christ’s work and applies it to the present on behalf of the future. Defeating death never runs out because such a victory must continually be commemorated if we hope to survive its effects through the victory of the Cross.

Thus the Mass does not re-crucify Christ. It perpetuates His one sacrifice that stands outside of time. God cannot be killed and when His humanity died in the Person of Jesus Christ on Good Friday such an event must break through the confines of time if God is truly eternal and infinite. The one Sacrifice of Christ is continually offered because its merits can continue to be experienced until He chooses to return in glory.

As eternal, the Mass requires the absolute best of what we have and are. Some of its elements cannot change based upon the whims of contemporary culture because it supersedes any one given time, or place in re-presenting the fact that death has no more power over those nourished by it. We must always hear the tales of God’s intervention in history recorded in history and we must always repeat Christ’s actions. They are, after all, timeless.

View attachment 20484

Crucifixion, by Salvador Dali 1954
 
Norwich12 said:
Thank you Paduard – St.Augustine was really modern in his interpretation of the Timelessness of God.

Here is a pertinent excerpt about the Sacrifice of the Mass as it appeared in an article from the Diocese of Charleston.
The Sacrifice of the Mass is Timeless
by Father Bryan Babick, SL.L.

I have previously argued that the Mass unites the Last Supper, the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection all-in-one. The Paschal Mystery must stand outside of time because the events of which it is composed are those through which Jesus anticipates, battles and defeats death itself. In defeating death, Jesus beats it as a final end for us. As such the Last Supper anticipates, the Crucifixion enters into, and the Resurrection conquers Christ’s death and therefore the confines of time itself.

Since the Mass perpetuates the Paschal Mystery in time, it follows that the Mass stands outside of time because it presents anew the memorial of those events that live in eternity. This is why Mass is repeated every day except Good Friday itself. The events that are unique in and overcome history must constantly be re- presented so that they can be experienced in every generation.

Christ’s Paschal Mystery is unique because it conquers death, which nothing else can do. Since the Mass is not a repetition, but and entering into and re-presentation of the Paschal Mystery, it takes Christ’s work and applies it to the present on behalf of the future. Defeating death never runs out because such a victory must continually be commemorated if we hope to survive its effects through the victory of the Cross.

Thus the Mass does not re-crucify Christ. It perpetuates His one sacrifice that stands outside of time. God cannot be killed and when His humanity died in the Person of Jesus Christ on Good Friday such an event must break through the confines of time if God is truly eternal and infinite. The one Sacrifice of Christ is continually offered because its merits can continue to be experienced until He chooses to return in glory.

As eternal, the Mass requires the absolute best of what we have and are. Some of its elements cannot change based upon the whims of contemporary culture because it supersedes any one given time, or place in re-presenting the fact that death has no more power over those nourished by it. We must always hear the tales of God’s intervention in history recorded in history and we must always repeat Christ’s actions. They are, after all, timeless.

View attachment 20484

Crucifixion, by Salvador Dali 1954
Click to expand...
Excellent article Norwich 12.

In my opinion it backs up much of what was originally discussed many pages back concerning the Eucharist etc. For myself I would use slightly different terminology to describe the reality of the Sacrifice of The Mass; but would depart in no way from the basics of what Fr.Bryan has laid out so well.

Paduard
 
Further to my post above, and after reflecting upon the ever-present life of Christ in the Sacrifice of the Mass and the dual “realities” involved, combined with the connection of ‘hope’ with the distortion of ‘time-into-space’ etc., we could perhaps rightly examine the spiritual elements of our personal time-frame whilst we are prayerfully reflecting on the life/times/actions of our loved ones who have gone before us; and even on those who are already with us. Raising mention of a ‘personal time-frame’ would presumably involve a radical shift in our perception and understanding of the seemingly paradox of ‘time & space’ as raised in the encyclical. - And from that starting point - our prayer life in particular.

Thus, in my opinion the document is not only instructing us, but also asking that we take its words forward.

Paduard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top