FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: De Lubac, Von Balthasar, and Catholic Thought
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Here is an interesting article, and I was wondering what other fishies, better familiar with these matters than myself, think about it. Meditations on the Tarot, a Journey into Christian Hermeticism is featured in the article, not in a positive light (-I seem to remember seeing this book discussed somewhere here, just don't remember the general consensus.)
Roger Buck and his new book has a positive mention in a the comments, which I thought very nice!
Here's  the first part:

Quote:Cardinal Marx’ Seminary Received Only One New Seminarian in 2016
March 21, 2017
Sidebar  Browse Our Articles & Podcasts
OnePeterFive Rebuilding Catholic Culture. Restoring Catholic Tradition.

A Dubious Influence: De Lubac & Von Balthasar’s Effect on Catholic Thought
H. Reed Armstrong H. Reed Armstrong March 30, 2017 0 Comments
(Image: From left to right, Henri de Lubac and Hans Urs von Balthasar)

Editor’s note: The author of this essay is, according to his own words, “not a certified academic, let alone theologian. These thoughts are simply the opinion of a Catholic artist who, having studied the deprivations of ‘Modern art,’ is concerned about the current state of the Catholic Church and how the same alien, even diabolical influences seen in art, seem to have crept  into the Church since the Second Vatican Council.”

As reported in the New Oxford Review online edition of February 22, 2017, the superior general of the Society of Jesus has said that all Church doctrine must be subject to discernment.

In an interview with a Swiss journalist, Father Arturo Sosa Abascal said that the words of Jesus, too, must be weighed in their “historical context,” taking into account the culture in which Jesus lived and the human limitations of the men who wrote the Gospels.

In an exchange about Church teaching on marriage and divorce, when questioned about Christ’s condemnation of adultery, Father Sosa said that “there would have to be a lot of reflection on what Jesus really said.” He continued:

At that time, no one had a recorder to take down his words. What is known is that the words of Jesus must be contextualized, they are expressed in a language, in a specific setting, they are addressed to someone in particular.

Father Sosa explained that he did not mean to question the words of Jesus, but to suggest further examination of “the word of Jesus as we have interpreted it.” He said that his new process of discernment should be guided by the Holy Spirit.

When the interviewer remarked that an individual’s discernment might lead him to a conclusion at odds with Catholic doctrine, the Jesuit superior replied: “That is so, because doctrine does not replace discernment, nor does it [replace the] Holy Spirit.”

The views held by Fr. Sosa did not spontaneously generate out of a vacuum.

At the time of the Second Vatican Council (Oct. 1962–Dec. 1965), leaving aside the traditionalists faithful to the vision of Pope Pius XII and his predecessors, the Church split between “Conservative” and “Progressive” factions led by the speculative theology of leading contemporary Catholic thinkers. The progressives, at the closing of Vatican II in 1965, began publication of a scholarly journal titled Concilium featuring the writings of Yves Congar, Hans Küng, Johann Baptist Metz, Karl Rahner S.J., and Edward Schillebeeckx. among others. In contrast, a group of the more conservative modern thinkers, including Joseph Ratzinger, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Henri de Lubac, Walter Kasper, Marc Ouellet, Louis Bouyer and others, founded a counterpart journal in 1972, called Communio.

While the writings of the progressives such as Hans Küng, Schillebeeckx, and especially Karl Rahner S.J. have had a heavy influence on contemporary Catholic thought, in order to understand the quote above by the Jesuit Superior General, one must look also to the so-called “conservative” Jesuit theologian, Henri de Lubac S.J. and the ex-Jesuit Hans Urs von Balthasar for the ultimate demolition of pre-Vatican II theology.

Henri de Lubac, who went on to be Cardinal under Pope John Paul II in 1983, had earlier come under suspicion of the pre-Vatican II authorities (Holy Office) and, although not specifically named, was known to be the promoter of the heretical ideas denounced in the encyclicals Mystici Corporis (1943) and Humani Generis[1] (1950) of Pope Pius XII.

These following words of the Pope, taken from Mystici Corporis, “There is… a false mysticism creeping in, which, in its attempt to eliminate the immovable frontier that separates creatures from the Creator that falsifies the Sacred Scriptures”[2] were directed in response to de Lubac’s yet unpublished essays; these had spread especially among his colleagues at the Jesuit Theologate, La Fourvière, and they were summed up in his controversial book, Surnaturel published in 1943. The thesis of these essays was that all men, according to their very nature, possessed one supernatural end with the graces sufficient to attain the Beatific Vision without need of the added gratuitous graces obtained through sacramental incorporation into the Mystical Body of Christ.

In June of 1950, as de Lubac himself said, “lightning struck Fourvière.”[3] He was removed from his professorship at Lyon and his editorship of Recherches de science religieuse, and he was required to leave the Lyon province. All Jesuit provincials were directed to remove three of his books – Surnaturel, Corpus Mysticum and Connaissance de Dieu – because of “pernicious errors on essential points of dogma.”

In 1962, well after the death of Pius XII, de Lubac wrote the book Teilhard de Chardin: The Man and His Meaning,[4] extolling the writings of the pantheist paleontologist whose notes he had studied along with his colleagues at La Fourvière. De Chardin himself had been censured and stripped of his teaching position already in 1925 for denying Original Sin and the existence of Hell. His writings are still officially proscribed,[5] but remain, however, immensely popular today among Jesuits and even within some of the highest ranking circles of the contemporary Roman Catholic Church.

Following the above-mentioned books, in 1979–1981 de Lubac wrote an enthusiastic book on the 12th-century monk and mystic Joachim da Fiore, entitled La Posterité Spirituelle de Joachim de Flore.

While this book, written in French, and as yet untranslated into English, remains relatively unknown to the general readership, most “conservative” commentators speak favorably of it as a denunciation of secular utopian dreams.

Joachim da Fiore’s dream was, however, anything but materialistic. His vision was that there existed a divinely inspired historical progression, as noted by the German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: “From the Church visible to the Church of the spirit. From the historic Gospel to the eternal one. Not “anti-” but “trans-Catholic.”[6]

According to Joachim, salvation history was divided into three periods: the Old Testament or age of the Father with its rigorous Mosaic law; the New Testament as the age of the Son embodied in the Roman Sacramental Church founded on Peter; and a final age of the Holy Spirit, a “tempus amplioris gratiae,” a time of universal convergence and freedom from the law, symbolically identified with St. John the Evangelist, “the apostle of love.”[7]

In this vein, de Lubac’s book speaks, enigmatically but more or less favorably, of an 1884 speech to the College de France by the Polish historian of Slavonic literature (occultist Martinist and Freemason) Adam Mickiewicz, on his vision of the future Church:

“Christmas. At St. Peter’s in Rome, the Pope says Mass surrounded by tired old men. Suddenly in their midst a young man dressed in purple enters: it is the Church of the future in the person of [St.] John. He tells the pilgrims that the times are fulfilled… He calls the head of the apostles by name (Peter) and tells him to leave the tomb … (He comes forth).… The cupola of the Basilica cracks open and splits and Peter goes back into his tomb having given his place to John. The faithful pilgrims die under the ruins… Peter has died forever. The Roman Church is finished, its last faithful are dead. ….They (a group of attending Polish peasants according to Mickiewicz) shall open this cupola to the light of heaven so that it looks like that pantheon of which it is a copy: so that it may be the basilica of the universe, the pantheon, the pan cosmos and pandemic, the temple of all spirits; so that it gives us the key to all of the traditions and all of the philosophies.”[8]

“An ecumenism without boundary stones, with a total opening to the future, still within the Church of Christ, moved to enlarge itself without ceasing to be the immortal dream of remaining Catholic.”[9] (emphasis in original)

This passage clearly relates to Joachim’s historical vision, taken up by Hegel and the pantheistic Freemasons Friedrich Schelling and Gotthold Ephraim Lessing wherein, prior to the end of the world, there would be a final immanent “Age of the Holy Spirit” composed of absolute freedom wherein all would have direct access to the guidance of the “Holy Spirit” without the necessity of recourse to the doctrinal or moral teachings of Holy Mother Church.

Is this not what Fr. Sosa is proposing?

The rest is here:

http://www.onepeterfive.com/a-dubious-in...c-thought/
Meditations on the Tarot is interesting but it's not recommended by me unless you have some background in esoteric thought. It's not appropriate for average Catholics who have never explored things like Tarot, New Age or Hermetic thought. Better to leave it alone.  It, like much in esoteric circles, is very subjective, steeped in symbolism and speculation and is not all that grounded. It's interesting but somewhat dangerous. It reminded me of Aleister Crowleys stuff or , Golden Dawn literature only with a Christianized face rather than a Kabbalistic one.

I do agree with Roger Buck that the book could be a great stepping stone to Catholicism if they are steeped in hermetic and new age ideas.


Personally I was brought to to further explore Christianity through stuff like John Main's Moment of Christ , Thomas Mertons Journals and some of the more Eastern( Hindu not Orthodox)  characters like some of Mertons disciples and that guy that had a Christian ashram in India. I can't think of his name. It was all highly unorthodox in many ways but they were all bridges to orthodox expressions of the Christian faith. Another book was All Saints put out by ultra liberal Orbis Books.

People can be brought to the mystery of Christ in many ways. Had I only been exposed to stuff like 19th century papal encyclicals, abstract scholastic theology or old world pious handbooks like The Glories of Mary or Croisset's book on the Sacred Heart I'd probably never had considered Christianity, I'd have been thoroughly put off. God works in mysterious ways to draw each of us. He can even use something like Meditations on the Tarot
You're absolutely right that God works in mysterious ways.  As someone who came out of evangelical protestantism, through Anglicanism, to Orthodoxy on the way to Catholicism, with side trips between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy into Marxist atheism, Hinduism, and studying astrology, the Tarot, and I Ching,
(04-01-2017, 12:19 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: [ -> ]Had I only been exposed to stuff like 19th century papal encyclicals, abstract scholastic theology or old world pious handbooks like The Glories of Mary or Croisset's book on the Sacred Heart...

as an Anglican, I would have likely skipped the detours and Orthodoxy, and come straight to Catholicism!

Of course, I was only 18  when the Council ended. By the time I had left Anglicanism and begun my detours, the 'smoke of Satan' had entered the Church, and the 'mysterious process of auto-demolition' had begun (not my words, but those of HH Pope Paul VI). By the time I reached Orthodoxy, at 28, the process was advancing inexorably. I can only thank God, that when I was about 30, I discovered those 'papal encyclicals, (books on) abstract scholastic theology (and) old world pious handbooks'! They led me straight to Catholicism, despite my many meanderings on the way.

I was received into the Church at 33 and have now been Catholic for almost 36 years. I've never regretted it and give thanks to God and the Holy Mother that they brought me home!
(04-02-2017, 04:55 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]You're absolutely right that God works in mysterious ways.  As someone who came out of evangelical protestantism, through Anglicanism, to Orthodoxy on the way to Catholicism, with side trips between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy into Marxist atheism, Hinduism, and studying astrology, the Tarot, and I Ching,
(04-01-2017, 12:19 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: [ -> ]Had I only been exposed to stuff like 19th century papal encyclicals, abstract scholastic theology or old world pious handbooks like The Glories of Mary or Croisset's book on the Sacred Heart...

as an Anglican, I would have likely skipped the detours and Orthodoxy, and come straight to Catholicism!

Of course, I was only 18  when the Council ended. By the time I had left Anglicanism and begun my detours, the 'smoke of Satan' had entered the Church, and the 'mysterious process of auto-demolition' had begun (not my words, but those of HH Pope Paul VI). By the time I reached Orthodoxy, at 28, the process was advancing inexorably. I can only thank God, that when I was about 30, I discovered those 'papal encyclicals, (books on) abstract scholastic theology (and) old world pious handbooks'! They led me straight to Catholicism, despite my many meanderings on the way.

I was received into the Church at 33 and have now been Catholic for almost 36 years. I've never regretted it and give thanks to God and the Holy Mother that they brought me home!


Indeed that's all part of the mystery. What inspires one person doesn't not inspire others. That's why there are so many expressions of the same faith and that many are not mutually exclusive.