Despite Vatican warning affirmed by JPII, others...

[Denise]

Senior Vatican officials celebrate Teilhard de Chardin

https://www.ncregister.com/news/teilhar ... -his-death

[MarieT]

very interesting article

Teilhard's writings are covered in Spirituality courses in seminaries in a positive way.

Just a quick outline on the disciplines of theology, philosophy and science otherwise this post will become way too long.

The philosopher and scientist's purpose is to look at meanings and attempt explanations based on evidence of enquiry and reason and particularly in the case of science: evidence.

Some great theologians such as Aquinas in the 1200's for instance, masterfully synthesized faith, theology with philosophy and science, bringing all disciplines into harmony by integrating Christian doctrine with philosophy and rational inquiry. His works were ground breaking, demonstrating that faith and reason are not opposed but complementary paths to truth.

Pope John Paul II, commented on the positiveness of faith and reason coexisting (if I'm not mistaken - its been years since i studied Teilhard's works and the encyclicals, but will look it up later as am time pressed now). I believe JP II said that he strongly supported science and religion working together in the pursuit of truth, rather that be in conflict. Fides et Ratio (faith and reason), 1988 encyclical, using "(they are ) 2 wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth." JP II believed that science and faith complement each other.

so on to the article....

Teilhard’s work “lies at the intersection of science, theology, and philosophy” and represents “a bold attempt to integrate cosmic evolution with a spiritual vision of the universe.” He described his thought as an “original synthesis” that challenges “traditional dichotomies between faith and reason, nature and spirit, time and eternity.”

That is the job of the philosopher to question and challenge....the article doesn't specifically state what the "traditional dichotomies" are......but so far, in the philosophical realm, teilhard would have to look at it in a way to challenge traditional beliefs so he could use philosophy to prove faith. This is something aquinas did. If one looks at the summa theologica, the great masterpiece, Aquinas always commences with something that has been suggested......gives the evidence, step by step, then at the end refutes (that contrary to faith). But the proposal that it might be a case is put initially before the investigation.

the "dichotomies" referred to could be for example the contrast between the supernatural (divine revelation and faith beliefs) versus the natural (reason depending on logic, evidence and natural observation).

Aquinas particularly argued for their harmony.

The “theory of evolution” was central to Teilhard’s thought, the cardinal went on, adding that he saw evolution not simply as a biological process, “but a cosmic movement that involves all of creation.” The French Jesuit believed that the universe “is animated by an inner force that pushes it toward the omega point, a term coined by Teilhard to indicate the pinnacle of evolution, where human and divine consciousness unite in harmony.”

He highlighted the 1962 monitum, but also correctly noted that Popes Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI each had some positive words to say about him (Benedict admired Teilhard’s creativity and theological insights, but maintained reservations about certain aspects of Teilhard’s work, particularly its potential ambiguities and deviations from orthodox doctrine.).

Using Pope Benedict's name in the article is interesting...admiration of Teilhard's insight, but then goes on to say Benedict had "reservations"...."ambiguities and deviations from orthodox doctrine."

Now if Pope Benedict believed that, then its beyond anyone's scope to refute that. Recall he was the greatest modern theologian, philosopher, spiritualist of modern time. Again the article does not specifically state what the "ambiguities and deviations from orthodox doctrine" were.

Cardinal de Mendonça went on to praise Prats for rereading Teilhard’s ideas “in the light of the challenges of the contemporary world” and for her ability “to dialogue with current issues, such as the ecological crisis, globalization and the search for spiritual meaning in the technological age.”

The church's role is to provide meaning within the changes, particularly globalization in the modern world.

Teilhard’s staunch advocates naturally reject such criticisms, but the spiritual dangers of Teilhard’s writings, ones that led to the Vatican’s monitum, remain for many just as valid today as they were then.

Further clarification needed, but indeed if the Vatican posed a Monitum, then it was for a reason.

But let us not forget that Faustina's Divine Mercy was banned, 3 popes forbid its reading (though the third was busy with Vatican II)....until John Paul II became Pope and reversed the ban, strongly enforcing it.

Having said that, I'm no expert on Teilhard's writings, but I have encountered them in past studies. We must follow the church's wisdom on this, but I disagree with the author of the article comparing Teilhard's situation with the synod on synodality. There is a stark difference from, using philosophy and science to prove faith versus the synod's wanting to change doctrine (not permitted) and using the evolving world as the excuse. The job of the bishops is to convene on how the faith can be presented in an ever changing "secular" world, not to change the faith to accommodate that "secular" world.

off to work.....blessed day for everyone.....sorry if this is rushed, tried to get the main points in.

[MarieT]

did i say "...or this post will become too long" lol

just quickly adding
there are things that science or philosophy cannot explain
but faith can

God chooses to reveal what is needed at a particular place and time (revelation) according
to His Divine plan.
Our role is to make sense of it in the light of the faculties we have been gifted.

Even philosophy states that a person has inherent qualities that lead them to "the good," but
it is faith that explains that a good God created us this way. (things go contrary when the person
rebels against their natural inherent natures.)