THE SYNOD AND THE PROBLEM KARL RAHNER: THE GREAT “SORCERER'S APPRENTICE”
In his final keynote address at the Synod of Bishops, the Holy Father proposed as the right path to follow a middle way, summarizing and harmoniously combines the values in the two factions, unnaturally they separate and opposing …
to open the video click on the image on CTV
John Cavalcoli OP
It is remarkable that in commenting on the climate of the discussions at the synod in a recent speech the Holy Father had reassuring words against excessive alarmism, hinting at the beginning of his speech, as a normal thing in these circumstances, and with even tone of praise, the ongoing confrontation of ideas and certain legitimate contrasting views, of ideas and opinions.
In the course of the speech the tone of the Supreme Pontiff has passed from the initial seriousness a cautionary bonhomie, showing that if certain contrasts can be normal and constructive, other, deeper, touching the doctrine and morals, the peace and unity of the Church and obedience to the Pope, can not be approved and must be removed to take away a truly Catholic and common, despite the diversity and plurality of opinions and legitimate pastoral choices, but in the light of Christ and in accordance with the teachings of the Church. The Holy Father Francis is listed first in the streets do not follow and then, at the end, showed the right way.
The wrong ways seem to be reduced to two, each with a multiplicity of aspects, that, a leg vedere, together constitute a unilateral choice, we could say partial, ideological and extremist, of one side of the truth against the other, rather than tune it and temper it with each other in a wise and necessary synthesis, that captures the totality of the true and the good, so that one side, isolated, absolute and opposed to the other, itself becomes false and destructive, and one that should be balanced mutual complementarity, becomes hostility and mutual exclusion.
It is not difficult to recognize in the description of the Holy Father two parties that especially since the immediate post-Council contend so fierce, conceited and obstinate a privilege which in reality they don't have, but it is only the Successor of Peter, which is to be supremely and exclusively true faith, the true Catholicism and the true Church.
The opposition between these two parties can be represented simply as a contrast between the too indulgent and too demanding. The Pope uses an image evangelical extremely effective: the temptation to turn the stone into bread to break a long-fasting, heavy and painful [cf. LC 4,1-4] and also to turn the stone into bread and throw it against the sinners, the weak and the sick [cf. GV 8,7] ie to turn it into “unbearable burdens” [LC 10, 27].
On one hand, so here's "The temptation of doing good destructive”, that in the name of mercy deceptive bind up the wounds and cure them without first medicarle; that treats the symptoms and not the causes and roots. It is the temptation of “gooders”, fearful of and also the so-called “liberals and libertarians”. The temptation to come down from the cross, to please people, and not to stay, to fulfill the will of the Father; to bow to worldly spirit instead of purifying and bend to God's Spirit. … The temptation to neglect the Deposit of Faith, but do not consider themselves guardians of the owners and masters”. And’ clear allusion to the modernists and rahneriani.
On the other, "The temptation of stiffening hostile, that is, the desire to close in the written, letter, not be surprised by God, the God of surprises, the spirit; within the law, in the certainty of what we know and what we still need to learn and achieve. From the time of Jesus, is the temptation of the zealots, of the scrupulous, thoughtful and of so-called — today — Traditionalists and also of intellectualists. The temptation to ignore the reality of using a language and a language of meticulous sanding so many things to say and do not say anything! They called them conventional, I believe, these things…”. Instead, here the reference to Monsignor Lefèbvre and its followers.
The Holy Father proposed as a straight path to follow a via media, summarizing and harmoniously combines the values in the two factions, unnaturally they separate and opposing, excluding the extremes: Tradition and Scripture, continuity and progress, preservation of the necessary: what remains, and change in contingent: what passes; mercy and justice, firmness and flexibility, unity and pluralism, openness to new, and loyalty to one's identity, doctrine and pastoral, freedom and obedience, historicity of man and immutability of dogma.
The line that is growing among the synod fathers, we can therefore say that it is, as might be expected, confirmation of the traditional doctrine of the unchanging Gospel and the Church, that certainly will be confirmed at the time in the words of the Holy Father, although we can imagine or hope that the Church will find new applications of the law in accordance with the requirements, prospects and to the needs of the families of our time.
From the comments critical of the Pope However, you can not not take action or not take notice of the synod of a dark shadow of hostility to the bright prospects emerging evangelical, which are the subject of the records and the encouragement of the Pope. It is, in my opinion, suggestion of the dark, charmer and left rahnerismo, that fifty years from now hovers in the Church, ammorbandone now subtly and insidiously the atmosphere, one kind of smog that makes the air unhealthy.
The rahnerismo is a problem still unsolved, despite repeated reports of illustrious and wise pastors and scholars, including several cardinals, over the past fifty years. The evidence of the heresies of Rahner, the great sorcerer's apprentice, emerged in this long period of investigation, have long been publicly available to verify or look objective and dispassionate.
For this you do not understand why should persist an undeserved reputation, that just makes the damage to the Church, and has repercussions disastrous in the field of moral, the pastoral care of Catholics and costume. This reputation has all the appearance of a reputation is not authentic, that is based on a true science, but artificially constructed by dark powers, who work objectively for the destruction of the Church.
A disturbing sign of this is given by the ideas that are appearing between the Synod Fathers, ideas by the Pope rightly try again, and which had already been criticized by the now famous group of cardinals, who recently published a book: Remain in the truth of Christ [see which] in which, professing their fidelity to the Magisterium of the Church, recalled the fundamental values and essential household, expressing the belief that the Church, applying justice and mercy, should maintain the current law regarding the treatment of irregular.
The obstacle to solving the problem is still persistent Rahner are serious prejudice and illusion, last MORI, that Rahner was a theological genius far superior to San Tommaso Aquino, a bold explorer of the depths of the Christian mystery and then the discoverer of a theology much more advanced, consistent with the spirit of Vatican II, theology that would work out a new vision of faith, Catholicism and Church, suited to modern culture, using the resources of modern philosophy from Descartes to Heidegger. However, vero ad onor, is not too difficult, for those who know the storyShe theology, recognize in huge projects and enterprise rahneriani, acts to impress the gullible with a prodigious production journalism, that touches all aspects of the Christian life, a giant as smart and impudent revival of modernism in his time already condemned by St. Pius X.
It should also be alert to recognize that the heresies of Rahner, First, we must clearly from a scoreboard in turn free from rahnerismo, unfortunately rare thing today, because now Rahner almost everywhere you purchased the fame of the great if not the sole and undisputed master of our tEmpo. Criticize Rahner seems to many an expression of a petty mind, envious, closed and outdated, almost not even take into account. For others it seems shocking thing, intolerable and almost sacrilegious, or deserving of contempt or severe measures.
They accuse critics of Rahner's ignorance, while the real ignorant are rahneriani, that you are not bothered to personally deal with his difficult texts, and perhaps speak of Rahner hearsay or have some leggiucchiato his pious mystical elevation in an anthology of spirituality or one of those explanatory presentations of modern theology, so superficial as naive do-gooders. Those who like the undersigned has read all the works of Rahner during 30 years of studies and consultations with experts, familiar with the cunning of this man who always deftly mixes the real and fake and sweet poison propina not everything at once in a single work — you find immediately! —, but in small doses scattered in various books, it is only by connecting them to each other that you have the true and complete picture of imposture, a powder’ as the diligent investigator in the criminal investigation comes into possession of evidence only neatly putting together the scattered details, that, individually, seem insignificant.
To understand, therefore, Rahner, then it is clear that not just the material fact of having read it for thirty years, then if you proceed with partiality, fanatical subjection or eyes lined with prosciutto. Even many of his followers have spent a lifetime around their tutelary deity. To understand who is Rahner, the following conditions moral and theoretical: exclusive and selfless love for the truth, rectitude of intention, modesty in formulating interpretative hypotheses, acceptance of the positive aspects, honesty, prudence and humility intellectual, interest in the salvation of souls, possession of a good philosophy and theology (St. Thomas Aquinas and his school) and absolute respect for the Church's magisterium.
At the risk of going through a papal, I dare say that the last condition is the decisive one, and that includes all the others. And’ here that the rub rahneriano, as the rahneriani want to give to understand, scrambling, that their darling reflects the teachings of the Church and the Second Vatican Council.
There is, however, to rely on the criticism made by Rahner lefevriani, either because they do not know how to recognize the good sides of the theologian and is why, if they identify some of his heresy, accused of heresy and the Council, thus demonstrating that you have seriously misunderstood, because they think the Council would suffer the heresies of Rahner.
The fact is that the most outspoken and defiant rahneriani, who know that it is untenable thesis of fidelity to the Magisterium of Rahner, so they do not scruple to follow the style of their master with impudence and threatening tone, similar to those of Luther, accuses the Church, also to reconcile, to be retracted and intimate to update and welcome to his early theology, if you do not want to stay on the edge of the historical evolution of human progress.
From official reports and authoritative comments, that we hear about what you are saying to the synod and the same aforementioned words of the Pope, it is evident that between the synod fathers is emerging from the shadow left Rahner, with its peculiar vision of man and moral: every man is in God's grace, tends to Dio, is in communion with God, so it is good and you save. God has mercy on everyone and not punish anyone. The sin, act as a single categorical and has no particular importance, however, because it is canceled by the inevitable presence of grace - at the same time just and sinner — and all the fundamental option exists for at least atematica and transcendental God. Human acts or particular dogmatic concepts are uncertain things, changeable and relative, that have no importance. The important thing is the pre-conceptual experience of faith - the’ “encounter with Christ” —, they all have, even non-Catholics and atheists.
So this is not to condemn errors or sins, but simply to promote what is positive in all (“scaling principle”). The distinction between licit or illicit unions of couples, regular or irregular does not matter. The fact is that we are all still journeying towards God, we know or do not know (“anonymous Christianity”). There is no contrast or a prohibited, but only the different, which therefore must be respected; then you should not be condemned as evil or false what is simply different.
We need not doubt that the Pope will follow this movement of ideas at the right time and the correct, as has already begun to make. But it still remains the basic problem that, until it's resolved, the hurt and distress will rise again for the whole Church, as an undigested food remains in the stomach. Until it is expelled, the torment remains.
Fontanellato, 22 October 2014
Click below to listen to a Marian hymn of the folk tradition