49252Re: Zander & Co and the Splendor of Truth (was: Helmut Zander - The Biography )
- Jan 23, 2012Oh, thanks for the heads-up Jean-Marc. I read my first ever Catholic communication only about a week ago, by following the links in Frank's SCR Steiner Catholicism lectures to the Oath Against Modernism. But it's heavy going; thanks for the jump-in. I see: in 32 he denies the freedom of the individual to determine the moral law herself. So PoF would be anathema!
He quotes Newman:
"As Cardinal John Henry Newman, that outstanding defender of the rights of conscience, forcefully put it: "Conscience has rights because it has duties""
Actually, as the FT puts it:
"The most dramatic difference between Newman and Benedict involves the role of conscience in the life of a Catholic. What should a Catholic do when individual conscience and papal teaching are at variance? Newman wrote that conscience must always be the final arbiter. If he were to make an after-dinner toast, he wrote, "I shall drink to conscience first and to the Pope afterwards." A person who fails to follow conscience, he wrote, "loses his soul". For Benedict, however, allowing conscience to be the final arbiter of moral behaviour is to invite moral relativism."
Benedict has decided that Newman meant the opposite to what he wrote. Papal authority, says Benedict, is not in opposition to conscience "but based on it and guaranteeing it". In other words, the voice of conscience for a Catholic is the voice of God; and, in truth, the voice of the Pope is the voice of God, since he is God's representative on earth."
Newman was opposed to such an all-embracing view of papal infallibility. He agreed that conscience needed guidance, but that papal teaching itself required the authorisation of the entire faithful before it could be said to be authentic Christian doctrine."
The last sentence is interesting. Similarly to Newman above, Steiner pointed out that, before the dogma of infallibility, doctrine was defined only after collegiate agreement, that those involved had ascertained represented all members of the church.
Newman also said that Christianity needed a new revelation:
"Hitherto the civil power has been Christian. Even in countries separated from the Church, as in my own, the *dictum* was in force, when I was young that 'Christianity was the law of the land'. Now, everywhere that goodly framework of society, which is the creation of Christianity, is throwing off Christianity. The *dictum* to which I have referred, with a hundred others that followed upon it, is gone, or is going everywhere; and *by the end of the century, unless the Almighty interferes it will be forgotten*", Investiture speech, May 12, 1879, Rome.
Which, as we know, was what Steiner aimed to bring with the new revelation, from the new aspect that the 'countenance of God' had taken as archangel Michael got promoted and began the resurrection of the intelligence that had fallen to earth. Which process is just beginning :).
Steiner has this interesting passage on Newman:
"During the time of one of the later Crusades there was living in a monastery in Italy a young monk, who was remarkably gifted and who devoted himself to a special study of the knowledge that came not in writings, but handed on by word of mouth from early Christian times, For such knowledge continued to live on for a long time as tradition, notably in some of the monasteries. An older monk would, for instance, impart it to a younger when they were alone together; and the young monk of whom I am speaking learned a great deal of early Christian knowledge in this very way. He then left Italy and joined the Crusade. He fell ill in Asia Minor, and while he was being tended, met a still older monk who had been initiated into the Mysteries of Christianity. As a result of this meeting, an intense longing was awakened in the young man to come to a real knowledge and understanding of the deeper Christian Mysteries, Then he died, out there in the East. And he was born again in our age, born again as a person in whom the forces that came from his earlier incarnation worked strongly and showed themselves in the following remarkable way. As I said just now, when one begins to speak on the ground of initiation knowledge about practical matters of life, it is really no more than can be expected if people turn it to ridicule. Nevertheless, it is absolutely necessary that this should be done in our day; and the time will come when we shall have the perception to see that things which are discerned spiritually can be spoken of as historical fact with the same directness and assurance with which we speak of the facts of external science. The personality of whom I speak is none other than Cardinal Newman. Follow the course of his life from youth upwards; look at the knowledge he possessed, read his own words. You cannot, I think, fail to see that in Cardinal Newman we have a strong personality imbued with a Christianity that is different from the Christianity of his environment. You will understand why he wanted to get away from the intellectual type of Christianity that he found around him, and dreamed of another kind of consciousness such as had been possessed by the first disciples of the Risen Christ, Follow his life further, note the significant words that he uttered at the time of his investiture, when he declared that there can be no salvation for religion, unless man receives a new revelation. Ponder it all, and it will grow clear to you that this earnest seeking is born of a deep and powerful longing that had come over from former lives on Earth. The man sensed the presence and impulse of those spiritual forces of which I spoke in the second part of my lecture. He felt if but dimly that it might be possible in our day, by undergoing special development, to attain a new initiation knowledge to receive a new revelation, And yet he himself ultimately accepted for his understanding of Christianity a tradition! I need not tell you whither his search led him; you can read the story for yourselves. He strives to reach through the "gloom" to a "light" that is beyond, but remains all the time within the cloud. A deeper knowledge of his being reveals to us that Newman was not really to blame for this, rather was he in this respect a sacrifice, a victim of his age, a victim of the Ahrimanic forces as I named them just now. These Ahrimanic forces had an extraordinarily strong influence on Cardinal Newman; they fell upon him and took captive his power of thought, which was consequently unable to develop freely and find its way into spirituality. For he who would today unfold his life in freedom must first of all be free in his thinking, must liberate his power of thought from the bondage of the brain."
The Pope continues:
"Were this autonomy to imply a denial of the participation of the practical reason in the wisdom of the divine Creator and Lawgiver, or were it to suggest a freedom which creates moral norms, on the basis of historical contingencies or the diversity of societies and cultures, this sort of alleged autonomy would contradict the Church's teaching on the truth about man."
So moral norms have been the same in every society and in every period?
He states the natural law doctrine of the Middle Ages (which still makes sense):
"The judgment of conscience is a practical judgment, a judgment which makes known what man must do or not do, or which assesses an act already performed by him. It is a judgment which applies to a concrete situation the rational conviction that one must love and do good and avoid evil. This first principle of practical reason is part of the natural law; indeed it constitutes the very foundation of the natural law, inasmuch as it expresses that primordial insight about good and evil, that reflection of God's creative wisdom which, like an imperishable spark (scintilla animae), shines in the heart of every man. But whereas the natural law discloses the objective and universal demands of the moral good, conscience is the application of the law to a particular case; this application of the law thus becomes an inner dictate for the individual, a summons to do what is good in this particular situation. Conscience thus formulates moral obligation in the light of the natural law: it is the obligation to do what the individual, through the workings of his conscience, knows to be a good he is called to do here and now. The universality of the law and its obligation are acknowledged, not suppressed, once reason has established the law's application in concrete present circumstances. The judgment of conscience states "in an ultimate way" whether a certain particular kind of behaviour is in conformity with the law; it formulates the proximate norm of the morality of a voluntary act, "applying the objective law to a particular case".105"
and this from Summa Theologiae:
"Precisely because of this "truth" the natural law involves universality. Inasmuch as it is inscribed in the rational nature of the person, it makes itself felt to all beings endowed with reason and living in history. In order to perfect himself in his specific order, the person must do good and avoid evil, be concerned for the transmission and preservation of life, refine and develop the riches of the material world, cultivate social life, seek truth, practise good and contemplate beauty."
Lots of the Encyclical is subtly reasoned; some agrees with PoF:
" Rational reflection and daily experience demonstrate the weakness which marks man's freedom. That freedom is real but limited: its absolute and unconditional origin is not in itself, but in the life within which it is situated and which represents for it, at one and the same time, both a limitation and a possibility"
And there are concise, profound statements of a morality that should obtain in society, and is often doesn't:
"In the political sphere, it must be noted that truthfulness in the relations between those governing and those governed, openness in public administration, impartiality in the service of the body politic, respect for the rights of political adversaries, safeguarding the rights of the accused against summary trials and convictions, the just and honest use of public funds, the rejection of equivocal or illicit means in order to gain, preserve or increase power at any cost all these are principles which are primarily rooted in, and in fact derive their singular urgency from, the transcendent value of the person and the objective moral demands of the functioning of States."
But, of course, in the end, the Church knows best:
"In order to justify these positions, some authors have proposed a kind of double status of moral truth. Beyond the doctrinal and abstract level, one would have to acknowledge the priority of a certain more concrete existential consideration. The latter, by taking account of circumstances and the situation, could legitimately be the basis of certain exceptions to the general rule and thus permit one to do in practice and in good conscience what is qualified as intrinsically evil by the moral law. A separation, or even an opposition, is thus established in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid in general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final decision about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called "pastoral" solutions contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to justify a "creative" hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept."
"In forming their consciences the Christian faithful must give careful attention to the sacred and certain teaching of the Church. For the Catholic Church is by the will of Christ the teacher of truth. Her charge is to announce and teach authentically that truth which is Christ, and at the same time with her authority to declare and confirm the principles of the moral order which derive from human nature itself ""
"Leo XIII appealed to the "higher reason" of the divine Lawgiver: "But this prescription of human reason could not have the force of law unless it were the voice and the interpreter of some higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be subject". Indeed, the force of law consists in its authority to impose duties, to confer rights and to sanction certain behaviour: "Now all of this, clearly, could not exist in man if, as his own supreme legislator, he gave himself the rule of his own actions".
As do the clergy of the 'Magisterium':
" We have the duty, as Bishops, to be vigilant that the word of God is faithfully taught.My Brothers in the Episcopate, it is part of our pastoral ministry to see to it that this moral teaching is faithfully handed down and to have recourse to appropriate measures to ensure that the faithful are guarded from every doctrine and theory contrary to it."
I first saw this word 'Magisterium' in connection with 'The Ancient of Days' in Phillip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy. What I recall happening in the book is that the old man comes down from the sky in his crystal chariot and blows away as dust in the wind. It's actually a v. good book, an atheist's manifesto that declares the very opposite of the Encyclical: there's no need for a divine world order to exist for a moral one to.
This is interesting in relations to Der Staudi's institution:
" It falls to them, in communion with the Holy See, both to grant the title "Catholic" to Church-related schools,179 universities,180 health-care facilities and counselling services, and, in cases of a serious failure to live up to that title, to take it away."
The contents of the encyclical in general speaks of a duonomy of body and soul, without an independently understood spiritual component (or higher Self), beyond the sense of 'essence', that is meant in the passage above. 869 is alive and well!
--- In email@example.com, "jmn36210" <jmn36210@...> wrote:
> If you want to see for yourself, what stands behind Zimmermann's
> Jesuitic smokescreen - 'Veritatis Splendor' is worthwhile reading
> Veritatis Splendor [The Splendor of Truth] is an encyclical
> by Pope John Paul II - promulgated on August 6, 1993.
> And if you just can't wait finding the magic keyword of sorts,
> jump to Chapter II - # 32.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "ted.wrinch"
> <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
> > "We must consider such profound aspects if we wish to understand
> correctly why in the August number of Stimmen der Zeit (Voices of the
> Age) the Jesuit priest Zimmermann draws attention to the fact that one
> of the recent decrees of the Holy Office in Rome prohibits Roman
> Catholics from obtaining absolution if they read or possess theosophical
> writings or participate in anything theosophical. The Jesuit priest
> Zimmermann interprets this decree in his article in Die Stimmen der Zeit
> by stating that it applies, above everything else, to my Anthroposophy,
> and that those who wish to be considered true Roman Catholics must not
> occupy themselves with anthroposophical literature. He quotes one of the
> main reasons for this, namely, that Anthroposophy differentiates between
> body, soul and spirit, and thus teaches a heresy opposed to the orthodox
> belief that man consists of body and soul."
> > The Mission of the Archangel Michael, 1919
> > T.
> > Ted Wrinch
> > --- In email@example.com, "Frank Thomas Smith"
> fts.trasla@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Racism! Racism! Jean Marc is prejudiced against the Catholic race!
> Burn him at the stake.
> > > Frank
> > >
> > > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "jmn36210"
> <jmn36210@> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > There are 16 pages of black-and-white photographs in H. Zander's
> 500+page book.
> > > Interestingly, to the Roman Catholic theologian[Ph.D., Catholic
> Theology, in 1995],
> > > historian, and Professor of Religious Studies in the Faculty for
> Catholic Theology
> > > at the University of Fribourg - that he is, a picture of Rudolf
> Steiner's complete
> > > sculptural Master-piece obviously was uncalled for...
> > >
> > > (snip)
> > >
> > >
> > > > Wow! Aren't you glad that there are academics and expert
> historians of
> > > > this caliber
> > > > around?
> > > > I mean this Catholic theologian, born in 1957, who was also
> awarded a
> > > > Ph.D.
> > > > in Political Science, back in 1987 - is now making a quantum leap
> > > > forward
> > > > in the domain of facial recognition and physiognomy?!?
> > >
- << Previous post in topic