- Status
J
johnnykins
Guest
I always thought of him as eminently orthodox - I distrust the site you’ve provided. Take a look at this:ignatiusinsight.com/authors/vonbalthasar.asp
C
CathCentrist
Guest
I got the story from a link at Spirit Daily. I dont pay attention to sites, just the info and seeing if its true. What you gave me doesnt mean its NOT true. So basically I am at a stalemate so far as to find out the truth.
C
CathCentrist
Guest
I did some footwork at Amazon.com and sure enough, this man offers a forward on the book: Meditations on the tarot!
So what now? This Pope endorses a guy who was new age? The old Pope was gonna make him a Cardinal? Any further clarity would help, as for now, I see more scandal from my Church.
So what now? This Pope endorses a guy who was new age? The old Pope was gonna make him a Cardinal? Any further clarity would help, as for now, I see more scandal from my Church.
S
SLCFranciscan
Guest
I have no info except the thought that I hope that was not the case. There is enough New Age Sewage trying to seep into the church…We must fight this influence!
C
cheese_sdc
Guest
Why not check out the book in question from the library and read the intro yourself?
After reading this, I probably will read it, because now I’m curious.
It might be that the symbols contained in the Tarot have deeper meaning than we know.
It may be that there is something else in this world called “Tarot” than what we equate with a divination tool.
The “Tarot” (whatever he means by it) may have an older, more christian symbolism than we know.
I don’t know, but I’m willing to learn.
cheese
After reading this, I probably will read it, because now I’m curious.
It might be that the symbols contained in the Tarot have deeper meaning than we know.
It may be that there is something else in this world called “Tarot” than what we equate with a divination tool.
The “Tarot” (whatever he means by it) may have an older, more christian symbolism than we know.
I don’t know, but I’m willing to learn.
cheese
S
SLCFranciscan
Guest
I will have no part of the New Age. The Holy Father has spoken against this and that is good enough for me.
D
Dale_M
Guest
This is very strange. Hans Urs von Balthasar has a reputation for being conservative and orthodox, except for an unusual theory about Christ’s descent into Hell. He is regarded as one of the greatest theologians of modern times and a reading group which is tackling his 21 volume magnum opus was put together recently, advertised here at CAF
forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=130983&highlight=balthasar
Why von Balthasar would write a forward to an anonymous book on the Tarot is beyond my understanding. Perhaps he was a friend of the author? It seems rash to call von Balthasar “New Age” based upon this one forward, but I would be happy to learn more.
The magazine “First Things” has had numerous comments about him, and what I have read have been extremely positive.
E
Eileen_T
Guest
Does the book commend the Tarot, or condemn it? Anyone know?
G
Gabriel_Austin
Guest
Before referring to Urs v. Balthasar as a “new age” priest, you might to read whatever it is he wrote about the tarot. And whatever it is was not part of any major work.
C
Catholic_Action
Guest
You can see other perspectives about von Balthasar, a one time collaborator with the then Joseph Ratzinger, at catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0486.html and catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0486.html
And you can buy a book “The Principles of Christian Morality” co-authored by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Hans Urs von Balthasar and one Heinz Schurmann and published by Ignatius.
In short von Balthasar cannot fairly be called a New Age priest.
And you can buy a book “The Principles of Christian Morality” co-authored by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Hans Urs von Balthasar and one Heinz Schurmann and published by Ignatius.
In short von Balthasar cannot fairly be called a New Age priest.
C
Catholic_Action
Guest
And elsewhere on Catholic.com we see catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0102fea3.asp which sings the praises of von Balthasar the Theologian something that “This Rock” would not do for a New Age priest. The article says, for example-
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Way back in the 12th century, under King Henry II (husband of Eleanor of Aquitaine), there was a very bright young man named Thomas. Thomas was a high liver, a scholar, worldly, power hungry and ambitious. He became Henry’s Chancellor. They were great friends.
And then. . .Henry II decided that, in order to make things even better for him, he would petition the Pope to make this friend of his Archbishop of Canterbury. The ‘church’ had been making Henry’s life a little ‘difficult’; so Henry would get his best friend the top clerical job and rest assured that the same man who had made his secular life easier and pleasant would make his religious life the same.
And then the miracle happened.
Thomas became Archbishop of Canterbury. And. . .instead of wearing silk and satin. . . he put on sackcloth and hair shirts. Instead of living in pomp and splendor, he sold his goods. Instead of dining on rich food, he contented himself with poor and meagre fare. And instead of acquiescing to Henry’s will. . .Thomas became the most fiery speaker for God and became even more of a thorn in Henry’s side than the previous Archbishop!
You’ve heard of Thomas. St. Thomas. St. Thomas a Becket, who became a martyr for the faith. Who would have thought it?
And then. . .Henry II decided that, in order to make things even better for him, he would petition the Pope to make this friend of his Archbishop of Canterbury. The ‘church’ had been making Henry’s life a little ‘difficult’; so Henry would get his best friend the top clerical job and rest assured that the same man who had made his secular life easier and pleasant would make his religious life the same.
And then the miracle happened.
Thomas became Archbishop of Canterbury. And. . .instead of wearing silk and satin. . . he put on sackcloth and hair shirts. Instead of living in pomp and splendor, he sold his goods. Instead of dining on rich food, he contented himself with poor and meagre fare. And instead of acquiescing to Henry’s will. . .Thomas became the most fiery speaker for God and became even more of a thorn in Henry’s side than the previous Archbishop!
You’ve heard of Thomas. St. Thomas. St. Thomas a Becket, who became a martyr for the faith. Who would have thought it?
O
otjm
Guest
Meidtations on the Tarot, from what I have seen of it, takes the figures of the cards and forms a mediation concerning morality and Christianity.
To imply that any meditation thus based is evil is tatnamount to saying that anyone who did a meditation on evil was therfore evil. One does not relate to the other.
Tarot cards arose in Europe and they afre only an import to the US. People were way more familiar with them in Europe, and would more readily understand what each character or figure sttod for in Europe than they would in the US. von Balthazar was a European theologian and thus was writing much more to a European audience than a US audience.
He was not promoting New Age (which the Tarot cards are not; they existed long centurries b efore New Age hit the street). Itr isn’t a whole lot different than making a meditation on the characters in a Shakespear play; there were some real scoundrels in the plays too, but that would not mean that he was promoting being a scoundrel.
One needs to understaqnd that not all book reviewers have read the books they “review”; not all written material is honest, or even necessarily based on fact. It is not clear that the writer of the review even read the book; and she further attempts to indict von Balthazar by comments made by others about the book; not exactly the greatest sign of intellectual honesty.
To imply that any meditation thus based is evil is tatnamount to saying that anyone who did a meditation on evil was therfore evil. One does not relate to the other.
Tarot cards arose in Europe and they afre only an import to the US. People were way more familiar with them in Europe, and would more readily understand what each character or figure sttod for in Europe than they would in the US. von Balthazar was a European theologian and thus was writing much more to a European audience than a US audience.
He was not promoting New Age (which the Tarot cards are not; they existed long centurries b efore New Age hit the street). Itr isn’t a whole lot different than making a meditation on the characters in a Shakespear play; there were some real scoundrels in the plays too, but that would not mean that he was promoting being a scoundrel.
One needs to understaqnd that not all book reviewers have read the books they “review”; not all written material is honest, or even necessarily based on fact. It is not clear that the writer of the review even read the book; and she further attempts to indict von Balthazar by comments made by others about the book; not exactly the greatest sign of intellectual honesty.
J
Jaypeeto3
Guest
I read Tarot Cards for a short while in the late 1980s.
I wasn’t an expert at it, but I’ll tell you this,
it IS of the Occult, and if you have a healthy fear of the evil spirits, you will run far, far away from Tarot. Have nothing to do with it. I learned my lesson a long time ago.
God bless,
Jaypeeto3 (aka Jaypeeto4)
I wasn’t an expert at it, but I’ll tell you this,
it IS of the Occult, and if you have a healthy fear of the evil spirits, you will run far, far away from Tarot. Have nothing to do with it. I learned my lesson a long time ago.
God bless,
Jaypeeto3 (aka Jaypeeto4)
C
carl36
Guest
Since when did using playing-cards become a mortal sin?, the tarot was invented for playing card games and can still be used in that way. For divination, that is a sin against the first commandment , you can use an ordinary card-deck or a tarot card-deck or tea-leafs or what-ever.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
This article is wholly distorted.
The author of the article seems to think that von Balthasar subscribed to “Universal Salvation” because he said in one of his books, “…it is necessary for us to hope that all men are saved.”
I am sorry but hoping that all men are saved and actually saying that all men are saved are two totally different things.
Now this appeared in the fourth paragraph of this article. After reading that I gave up on the article because it was clear to me that the author was either very biased or did not know what she is talking about, or possibly both.
The author of the article seems to think that von Balthasar subscribed to “Universal Salvation” because he said in one of his books, “…it is necessary for us to hope that all men are saved.”
I am sorry but hoping that all men are saved and actually saying that all men are saved are two totally different things.
Now this appeared in the fourth paragraph of this article. After reading that I gave up on the article because it was clear to me that the author was either very biased or did not know what she is talking about, or possibly both.
O
otjm
Guest
It took you that long to figure it out? You are getting slow!
- Status