Metaphysical idealism and Catholic beliefs

[StJosephPrayForUs]

Hello all, God bless you and St. Joseph protect us.

Is there anything in metaphysical idealism (like the kind of George Berkeley, or Bernado Kastrup, or anyone else similar) that is against the Catholic faith? Particularly, is it inherently against anything we believe concerning the Incarnation of Christ, or transubstantiation in the Eucharist. Those two things I would like answered especially.

This is not a debate about whether said ideas are true or not, I only want to know if there is any possible contradiction between them and our Faith. Thank you for your time.

 

[Mythicalbio]

I think it works. Berkeley didn’t deny it. Try Christian idealism YouTube

 

[Jshy]

Kyle Alander ( Christian idealism) believes the essence and energies distinction . He is a palamite panenthiest. I was a follower of his but now I think I realize this is quite contrary to catholic teaching. He believes what Bernardo kastrup does but a Christian twist to it . He believes that once we are born we become dissociated ( localization) and then once we die ( we are just loosing dissociation ) what this means is our consciousness is broadened and we become one big consciousness again together. Now where he differs from kastrup is that kastrup will say that we are God . And that God has Dissociative identity disorder (Something like multiple personality Disorder). And when We die we loose that disorder… now Kyle would say this is true for his view as well . He will say once we die we loose DID ( dissociative identity disorder ) And we become One universal big God consciousness again. Except The difference being that he will say we are not the essence of God only the energies . So we will never be omnipotent , omnipresent ( though I don’t see how you won’t be as a big universal consciousness) , omniscient and such. Basically we go back to being Gods Lesser consciousness Or Kyle would call it radiating consciousness. But this brought up so many questions and problems for me and I fear is heretical to catholic doctrine . Especially since it involves the essence and energies distinction , and seems against dogma . That we all become one mind not separated until we get our bodies back. I also wonder why we would go in and out of Dissociation anyways … but After speaking to Jimmy Akin , the church teaches matter does exist . It’s not just a thought or we are in God’s imagination . It’s actually fundamental just like spirit . I think kyle is smart for going off of Bernardo because his view is the best idealist view I have ever heard. But it’s not compatible with Christianity. Kyle tried to fit it with Christianity and he used palamite panenthiesm to do so, which is also very smart , but palamite panenthiesm is wrong from my understanding and has problems with Catholicism when it comes to the beatific vision and essence And much more .so yes there seems to be problems with this view . I would study Edward Feser in Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle. The view called hylemorphic Dualism . I think it’s called … keep researching and seeing if whatever you look into is compatible with the infalible doctrines of the church .

 

[Mythicalbio]

Yes, I would disagree with his version of idealism too. I don’t hold the distinction, and it is not necessary to hold it to be an idealist. Kyle is probably in error, but not all idealism is.

Where does the Church teach matter is fundamental, that excludes it from being the thoughts of God? I am beginning to study Aquinas also. Ed Feser is good.

 

[Jshy]

ST. EUGENIUS I 654 (655)-657 ST. VITALIANUS 657-672

(ADEODATUS 672-676)

COUNCIL OF TOLEDO XI 675*
Creed of Faith (especially concerning the Trinity and the Incarnation) *

535 Dz 284 -Likewise we believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of one substance, but we do not say that the Virgin Mary gave birth to the unity of the Trinity, but only to the Son, who alone assumed our nature in the unity of His person. Also, we must believe that the entire Trinity accomplished the Incarnation of the Son of God, because the works of the Trinity are inseparable. However, only the Son took the form of a servant (cf. Ph 2,7) in the singleness of His person, not in the unity of His divine nature; in what is proper to the Son, not in what is common to the Trinity; and this form was adapted to Him for unity of person so that the Son of God and the Son of man is one Christ, that is, Christ in these two natures exists in three substances; of the Word, which must refer to the essence of God alone, of the body, and of the soul, which pertain to true man.

Then 285 starts with this :
“He has therefore, in Himself the twofold substance of His divinity and our humanity.” - Excerpt from the Creed of Faith, Council of Toledo XI 675 A.D.

THE VATICAN COUNCIL 1869-1870 - Ecumenical XX (on Faith and the Church)

SESSION III (April 24, 1870) Dogmatic Constitution concerning the Catholic Faith *

3002 Dz 1783 [ The act of creation in itself, and in opposition to modern errors, and the effect of creation] . This sole true God by His goodness and “omnipotent power,” not to increase His own beatitude, and not to add to, but to manifest His perfection by the blessings which He bestows on creatures, with most free volition, “immediately from the beginning of time fashioned each creature out of nothing, spiritual and corporeal, namely angelic and mundane; and then the human creation, common as it were, composed of both spirit and body” [Lateran Council IV, see n. 428; can. 2 and 5]

 

[Jshy]

II. “BODY AND SOUL BUT TRULY ONE”

364 The human body shares in the dignity of “the image of God”: it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit: 232 Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day. 233
*** 365The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body:234 i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature**.

CCC 355 "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is “in the image of God”; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created “male and female”; (IV) God established him in his friendship.

CCC
327 The profession of faith of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) affirms that God "from the beginning of time made at once (simul) out of nothing both orders of creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal, that is, the angelic and the earthly, and then (deinde) the human creature, who as it were shares in BOTH ORDERS , being composed of spirit and body."187

So while the body and soul are one substance . The matter and form are said to be two substances I guess in a analogues way to show that matter is real and ontologically separate but The matter joined to the form ( become a body) is only part of one substance . I would have to study more deeply into this because Adeodatus Infallibly defined Christ’s natures as twofold substances ( one divine and one human). So therefore human is a single substance but then he says that it’s compiled of three substances ( word , body and soul) the body and soul being human and the word being divine … so while human is a single substance or substantial form. And the matter ( body) is part of this… I guess he is speaking analogously about matter and body being two substances that equal one to show that matter is something real ontologically and When it forms into the body it then becomes one substance which is part of the substantial form … I’ll have to look more into to this but that seems to be my philosophical analysis of the texts.

 

[Mythicalbio]

I also have to study more, since it all hinges on what is meant by substance. Idealist don’t deny matter, they say it is a more like a mode of God’s mental activity. So we can have a body and soul, they wouldn’t deny it. But if the Church requires faith in matter, that would be absurd to me, since matter can never be seen or detected, and what we describes as it is ultimately our own mental experience. To posit matter as some separate mass is literally an act of faith, so I don’t know. I wish there were more Catholic theologians who were idealist, I’m gonna keep digging.

 

[Jshy]

It’s infallibly defined that body and soul make up the human being . It even says theses things are different substances( Christ in these two natures exists in three substances; of the Word, which must refer to the essence of God alone, of the body, and of the soul, which pertain to true man.)

So it can’t be monism which idealist are .

But 285 starts with this :
“He has therefore, in Himself the twofold substance of His divinity and our humanity.” - Excerpt from the Creed of Faith, Council of Toledo XI 675 A.D.

So my take from this is that Thomas Aquinas is correct that there is only one substance ( human soul) which includes the body ( matter ) as a part of its substance. But matter ( body) itself before it is joined to the form ( soul) in other words before it becomes a body, it is of a separate substance . But like I said idk I have to talk to highly trained catholic philosophers on this. It’s pretty clear though the church sees matter as being ontologically real. And hylomorphism is the best explanation for the church’s teachings and dogmas . That’s why Thomism makes way more sense than idealism. The soul makes the body alive and is not meant to separated because the Matter ( body) is part of the form ( soul ) the soul makes the matter into the body. It gives shape to us and makes us alive , when you take away the body or die then the soul dies with it . But in the case of a human we have intellect and will do we have spiritual properties to our soul . So we are also spiritual beings . We are called rational souls . Animals are only sensory souls and plants of vegetative souls. And angels And demons are pure spiritual souls. . Thomas was a realist . He said that the forms were in the things themselves. So when your looking at a dog your actually seeing is a Dog soul That’s what one looks like . Just like how A wedding ring is the form of a circular ring but the matter is gold . The form makes the matter into the ring . The gold turns into a ring because of the form that the matter is given .

 

[Jshy]

Also here is a infallible definition of the metaphysics of thomism/ hylopmorphism :
COUNCIL OF VIENNE 1311-1312

481 [The soul as a form of the body]. Furthermore, with the approval of the above mentioned sacred council we reprove as erroneous and inimical to the Catholic faith every doctrine or position rashly asserting or turning to doubt that the substance of the rational or intellective soul truly and in itself is not a form of the human body, defining, so that the truth of sincere faith may be known to all, and the approach to all errors may be cut off, lest they steal in upon us, that whoever shall obstinately presume in turn to assert, define, or hold that the rational or intellective soul is not the form of the human body in itself and essentially must be regarded as a heretic.

 

[Mythicalbio]

Welp, I guess I’ll have to look at different philosophy then. Ultra-realism or something, like Jacob Boehme, symbolic realism, I don’t know. It certainly precludes monism. I don’t get it but it must be for a reason.

 

[Jshy]

What’s wrong with Hylemorphic dualism ? And moderate realism .