It is currently Sun May 19, 2019 3:32 pm

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
 Ratzinger Reader 
Author Message

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Ratzinger Reader
Hat tip to StCeciliasGirl for mentioning this excellent book (see her quote from it pertaining to Ratzinger and the liturgy), not that the "theology" expressed therein is traditional, but that it really shows Ratzinger was (is?) a Modernist:
Ratzinger (p. 262) wrote:
‘Ecumenical’ and ‘Catholic’ in their very etymology say the same thing. Therefore, to be a Catholic is not to become entangled in separatism, but to be open to the fullness of Christianity.
Wow, so, viz., Catholicism isn't the fullness of Christianity‽
Ratzinger wrote:
It was precisely this attitude which the fathers had to assert against the proposed text ["Schema Constitutionis Dogmaticae de Fontibus Revelationis" of the preparatory commission, which was rejected by a simple majority on Nov. 20, 1962, and replaced with a text that would become Dei Verbum]. The texts almost exclusively relied upon the Latin theology of the last hundred years in continuation of the fight against Modernism, and in so doing, these texts were obviously threatened by a narrowness in which the wide scope of Catholicism could scarcely be detected.
Wow, this is the hardest attack on scholasticism i've seen him ever give. Essentially, he's saying scholasticism (= Thomism; cf. Pascendi §45: "let it be clearly understood above all things that the scholastic philosophy We prescribe is that which the Angelic Doctor has bequeathed to us") isn't Catholic.

He concludes this section on how John XXIII accepted the "positive" schema that would become Dei Verbum over the "negative" one:
Ratzinger wrote:
It was a turning point, too, in the sense that, in contrast to Trent and Vatican Council I, the pope had rejected curial dominance and sided with the Council.
This section (pp. 259 ff.) makes it so obvious that John XXIII forged a new, "non-anti-Modernist" way. It also is the most interesting ∵ he discusses Pascendi, Pius IX's Syllabus, Humani Generis, and St. Pius X's Oath Against Modernism:
Ratzinger wrote:
This same [anti-Modernist] anxiety persisted until its last reverberation sounded in the encyclical Humani generis of Pius XII. This document pursued once more the line of thought of Pius IX and Pius X. The schemata of the theological commission, the first of which now lay before the fathers for consideration, breathed this same spirit.
Ratzinger wrote:
The same cramped thinking, once so necessary as a line of defence, impregnated the text and informed it with a theology of negations and prohibitions; although in themselves they might well have been valid, they certainly could not produce that positive note which was now to be expected from the Council.
"in themselves they might well have been valid"? He doubts a Magisterial document‽ And "cramped thinking"‽
Ratzinger wrote:
‘Pastoral’ should not mean something vague and imprecise, but rather something free from wrangling, and free also from entanglement in questions that concern scholars alone.
He's speaking of Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange and other Thomists, obviously. Apparently, the contents of St. Thomas's Summa "concern[s ] scholars alone"? Pascendi completely refutes this:
Pascendi wrote:
For amongst the chief points of their [the Modernists'] teaching is this which they deduce from the principle of vital immanence [related to the redefinition of truth as "conformitas mentis et vitae"]; that religious formulas, to be really religious and not merely theological speculations, ought to be living and to live the life of the religious sentiment.
Pp. 57 ff., his conception of salvation, is an excellent example of the Modernists' doctrine described by the above-quoted passage of Pascendi:
Ratzinger wrote:
it might have seemed like an escape to seek to simply explain redemption using the traditional vocabulary of theology, which was certainly once a verbal and conceptual expression of religious experience, but which today no longer reveals these experiences, so that its words have become, for a start, doctrinal formulae that must first be reopened to the experiences that they contain
(cf. Bp. Tissier's "Faith Imperiled by Reason: Benedict XVI's Hermeneutics")

Also, it's as if he hasn't even read Trent or Vatican I. Both are not mostly "written in a spirit of condemnation and negation", as Ratzinger says. They're both pretty balanced; they both have sections with anathema sits (the canons) and positive ones in prose (the chapters).

There's a section of Ratzinger Reader (pp. 131 ff.) where he extols the Enlightenment's worship of reason, just like we worship Logos, yet he doesn't mention the manifold errors of the Enlightenment: denial of original sin, naturalism, hatred of faith (since supposedly it contradicts reason), atheism, etc. His attack on relativism and pluralism (pp. 134 ff.) is very weak; he essentially sees relativism as a way to be ecumenical with the relativist/pluralist/pantheist sects, like those in India.

Ratzinger Reader has other sections on whether there's a "Ratzinger I" and a "Ratzinger II" (pp. 11 ff.), on the Magisterium and the bishops' relation to the pope (pp. 187 ff.), on extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (pp. 154 ff.), and on subsistit in (pp. 108-12). He says:
Ratzinger wrote:
the idea that the subsistit could be multiplied fails to grasp precisely the notion that is being intended. With the word subsistit, the Council wished to explain the unicity of the Catholic Church and the fact of her inability to be multiplied
Yet he continues:
Ratzinger wrote:
Although the Church is only one and ‘subsists’ in a unique subject, there are also ecclesial realities beyond this subject – true local Churches and different ecclesial communities.
"true local Churches", as if the Catholic Church is "multiplied" and exists outside Herself?
Ratzinger wrote:
the existence of an ecclesial reality beyond the one subject, reflects the contradictory nature of human sin and division
So, sin is in the Church Herself, not just in the individual members that comprise Her? The Church isn't one and holy‽

«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»:
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.

Modernism: modernism.
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic.

Sat Jun 15, 2013 11:29 pm
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 22 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.