CHRIST, THE EXEMPLAR CAUSE OF CREATION, ELIMINATES THE POSSIBILITY OF EVOLUTION AND SUPPORTS TRADITIONAL TEACHING ON MARRIAGE
by Fr. Joannes Petrus
 |
| Teilhard de Chardin Apostle of Evolution |
Is Evolution the Foundation or Beginning?
In the early forties, Teilhard de Chardin, SJ, wrote: “Is evolution a theory, a system or a hypothesis? It is much more: it is a general condition to which all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must bow and which they must satisfy henceforth if they are to be thinkable and true.”2
In 1996, Pope John Paul II commented: “Today . . . new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge.”3
On the other hand, Pope Pius XII taught in an encyclical letter: “Some imprudently and indiscreetly hold that evolution, which has not been fully proved even in the domain of natural sciences, explains the origin of all things, and audaciously support the monistic and pantheistic opinion that the world is in continual evolution.”4
We are left wondering who is correct? How can we best resolve this difficulty? Answering these questions will reveal the difference between the Incarnate Word as the Christ and the “cosmic christ” proposed by Chardin. Thus, let us first turn our attention to the Incarnate Word of God, Jesus Christ, as He has been revealed to us; for He is the way, the truth and the life (Jn. 14:6), without Whom we can do nothing (Jn. 15:5). And from Him come the highest and most certain of arguments to dissipate all confusion and error. When one has the Christ, one has everything.
Christ Our Lord is “the first born of every creature.”
In turning to the Christ, as He has been revealed to us from above, we are starting with “the Beginning.” This is where God began His Plan for Creation, because in the order of things willed by God ad extra, Jesus Christ is first, and as St. Thomas Aquinas explains “Whatever is first in an order is the cause of everything which follows it.”5 St. Paul speaks of the Christ as “the firstborn of every creature: For in Him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, ... He is before all, and by Him all things consist. ... that in all things He may hold the primacy” (Col. 1:15-18). St. John says of the Christ: “Thus says the Amen, the faithful and true witness, who is the beginning of the creation of God” (Apoc. 3:14). When the Pharisees questioned Our Lord as to Who He was, saying: “Who art thou?” He responded: “The Beginning, who also speak unto you” (Jn. 8:25).
Listen to St. Francis de Sales: “ . . . the sovereign Providence, making His eternal purpose and design of all that He would produce, first willed and preferred by excellence the most amiable object of His love which is Our Savior; and then other creatures in order, according as they more or less belong to the service, honor and glory of Him.”6 St. Lawrence of Brindisi refers to Christ Our Lord as the foundation of all creation in such a way that if the edifice built on Him should ever need repairs, the reparation could be carried out on this same foundation without any change in the divine blueprint.7
 |
| I am the Alpha and the Omego. |
Christ is the Purpose of All Creation
Christ is also the Omega of all creation. In other words, He is also the purpose or final cause for all things are made. Thus, St. John reports Our Lord saying: “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end”
(Apoc. 22:13). St. Maximus the Confessor adds: “Christ is the blessed end for which all things have been created . . . the end for which God has willed all things and which is itself subordinated to nothing else . . . . It is for Christ . . . that all the ages exist. And all things contained within them have found in Christ the beginning and the end of their call to existence.”11 St. Francis de Sales adds: “Sacred Providence determined to produce all the rest of things, both natural and supernatural, for the sake of the Savior . . . . Thus all things have been made for this divine Man.”12 The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches: “the mystery of Christ casts conclusive light on the mystery of creation and reveals the end for which ‘in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’: from the beginning, God envisaged the glory of the new creation in Christ.”13
The Sacred Liturgy and the Primacy of Christ
The Sacred Liturgy also establishes Christ’s absolute primacy of place in all creation. At the blessing of the Paschal Candle on the Easter Vigil, the priest prays: “Christ yesterday and today; Beginning and End; Alpha and Omega; All times are His and all ages; To Him be glory and dominion through all ages of eternity. Amen.”14 Furthermore, we have the prayer at the minor elevation: “Through Him, with Him, and in Him [i.e., the Christ], be unto Thee, O God the Father almighty, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, all honor and glory, for all ages of ages. Amen.” There is also the poetic line from the hymn Auctor Beate Sæculi used in the Roman Breviary for Matins on the feast of the Sacred Heart in which the Christ is referred to as the world’s creator: “O Christ, the world’s Creator bright.”15 And, in addition, there are these telling lines penned by Prudentius prayed at vespers for the Transfiguration: “All ye who seek Christ, lift up your eyes to heaven; there ye may behold the token of His eternal glory. A certain brilliance we perceive that knows no ending, sublime, noble, interminable, older than heaven and chaos.”16
Christ’s Primacy is Universal and Absolute
From this we see how the Sacred Scriptures, Tradition and the Holy Liturgy speak with wondrous clarity that Christ is everything . . . . He is all in all, that His primacy is universal and absolute. Thus, St. Paul exclaims: “God hath highly exalted Him, and hath given Him a name which is above all names. That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth: and that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:9-11). St. Bernard adds: “‘The name’ says the Gospel, ‘given Him by the Angel before He was conceived in the womb.’ More precisely, the name by which the Angel called Him, not a name which the Angel gave Him. For this name is from all eternity. He is Savior by His own proper nature. This name is innately His, not given Him by any human or angelic creature.”17 Taken all together, the conclusion is obvious: there is no higher name, no higher word, no higher reason for all created things to which we can look than Christ Jesus. If, therefore, Chardin is correct in claiming that evolution is truly much more than a theory or hypothesis . . . if “it is a general condition to which all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must bow and which they must satisfy henceforth if they are to be thinkable and true,” then evolution must be found in Christ. Moreover, it must be intimately a part of Him—even through Him, with Him and in Him—to fulfill what Chardin has postulated so strongly. If, on the other hand, it is not found in Christ, not found to be intimately united to Him, then it is not possible in this Creation. The ancient saying of the Fathers comes to mind . . . “What is not taken up by Christ is not redeemed by Christ.” If evolution cannot be found in Christ, then it is not redeemable and should be discarded as a work of the spirit of antichrist.
Teilhard de Chardin’s “cosmic christ“ . . . the Great Evolver
For his part, Chardin claims that evolution can be found in Christ. In a discussion with Fr. Gabriel Allegra, OFM from 1942-1945, Chardin states “the vision of the Universe I have arrived at is not completely clear in all its details, but as a whole it fascinates me, and when I think that all things have as their beginning, center, and end le Grand Christ, I am literally dazzled.” 18 He then goes on to explain how he thinks the world is broken up into various epochs of “millions and billions of years,” claiming that we are now “in the era of the homo sapiens” but nevertheless man will continue to evolve or “develop in an ascending process toward totalization, which is the crowning of much effort and pain, the painful childbirth, as it were, of evolution . . . . Totalization, in turn, will lead toward ‘unanimazation,’ just as millions of years before now, the geological factors led to ‘hominization’. . . in this ascent man is both the axle and the spoke, and in both capacities he tends toward the Omega point, Christ, le Grand Christ.”19 For Chardin, therefore, Christ is “the great Evolver.”20 Thus, he concluded: “The great cosmic attributes of Christ, those which (particularly in St. John and St. Paul) accord him a universal and final primacy over creation, these attributes... only assume their full dimension in the setting of an evolution... that is both spiritual and convergent.”21 As one author dedicated to Chardin noted: “For Teilhard, Christ today is not just Jesus of Nazareth risen from the dead, but rather a huge, continually evolving Being as big as the universe. In this colossal, almost unimaginable Being each of us lives and develops in consciousness, like living cells in a huge organism. At various times, theologians have described this great Being as the Total Christ, the Cosmic Christ, the Whole Christ, the Universal Christ or the Mystical Body of Christ.”22
Various famous modern thinkers acknowledge and praise Chardin’s attempt at such a synthesis between Christ and evolution including Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, Archbishop of Vienna, who wrote in his book, Chance or Purpose, “Hardly anyone else has tried to bring together the knowledge of Christ and the idea of evolution as the scientist (paleontologist) and theologian Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., has done . . . . His fascinating vision has remained controversial, and yet for many it has represented a great hope, the hope that faith in Christ and a scientific approach to the world can be brought together.”23 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in his book The Spirit of the Liturgy wrote: “. . . against the background of the modern evolutionary world view, Teilhard depicted the cosmos as a process of ascent, a series of unions . . . . From here Teilhard went on to give new meaning to Christian worship: the transubstantiated Host is the anticipation of the transformation and divinization of matter in the christological ‘fullness.’ In his view, the Eucharist provided the movement of the cosmos with its direction; it anticipates its goal and at the same time urges it on.”24 As Pope Benedict XVI he added, preaching to the faithful of Aosti: “The role of the priesthood is to consecrate the world so that it may become a living host, a liturgy: so that the liturgy may not be something alongside the reality of the world, but that the world itself shall become a living host, a liturgy. This is also the great vision of Teilhard de Chardin: in the end we shall achieve a true cosmic liturgy, where the cosmos becomes a living host.”25 And just recently in the papal document, Ladauto Si, we read the following line, openly admitted in a footnote to be from Chardin: “The ultimate destiny of the universe is in the fullness of God, which has already been attained by the risen Christ, the measure of the maturity of all things.”26 Thus, elsewhere in the same document we hear things like this: “Teach us . . . to recognize that we are profoundly united with every creature as we journey towards your infinite light.” 27
The Incarnate Christ is not just the Omega but the Recapitulation of All Creation
As we have indicated above, in order for this position to be valid, we must be able to find evolution in the Incarnate Word, Christ Jesus, because He, as the Alpha and Omega, is the summation of all creation. He is not just the end or omega of all creation, but its Beginning, Center, and End. As Cardinal Pierre de Berulle taught, “This divine mystery [the Incarnation] is like the center of the created and uncreated world. It is the only place where God chose once and for all to contain and reduce to our level both the world and Himself, that is, His own infiniteness and the immensity of the whole universe.”28 In other words, Christ recapitulates all creation in Himself as explained by St. Irenaeus: “He recapitulated everything in Himself in order that, just as the Word of God has the primacy over the supercelestial, spiritual and invisible beings, He might also have it over visible and corporeal beings, assuming this primacy in Himself.”29
From the ancient thinkers to our own day, man is seen as a micro-cosmos of the macro-cosmos. Thus, St. Gregory the Great states: “Man has something in common with all levels of creation. He has existence in common with stones, life in common with trees, sensation in common with animals, intelligence in common with Angels. If, then, Man has something in common with all ranks of creation, in a certain sense all creation is summed up in Man.”30 This makes the God-Man Christ the Micro-Cosmos of the entire Universe. The angelic beings find themselves mirrored in His intellect and will, animals in His sensate or sensible soul, plants in His vegetative/nutritive soul, minerals in His bones. Humans find themselves modeled after Him as their prototype. In this way, He is the summation and re-capitulation of all creation. But, once again, can evolution be found in Christ? Is evolution a reality in God’s creation? If evolution is a real possibility, then all creation cannot just be making its way to the Christ, but it must be in and with and come through the Christ.
The Incarnate Christ is the Exemplar of Creation
St. Thomas Aquinas held the principle: that which is most perfect is always the exemplar of that which is less perfect.31 Christ, the “image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15, 2 Cor 4:4), the perfect micro-cosmos, is the exemplar cause of all creation (as well as its re-creation). He is its blueprint. In the prologue of St. John’s Gospel, we hear: “without Him was made nothing that was made . . . He was in the world, and the world was made by Him” (Jn. 1:3,10, cf. Heb. 1:2). Christ, therefore, is the universal prototype, foundation and blueprint of all creation; and “in Him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible” and in Him “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 1:16, 2:3). This is why the various ancient icons written about creation display the Christ present at each of the six Days of Creation.
Furthermore, this makes Christ, as the exemplar cause, the perfect Man. Using the writings of many Fathers like Jerome, Hilary, Cyril and Theodoret, St. Lawrence of Brindisi explains that man is made in the image of Christ, Who is both God and man, teaching: “Christ was first predetermined in the Divine Mind, as the Psalm says, ‘In the head of the book it is written of me,’ because He is ‘the firstborn of every creature.’ However, the Christ was determined, not according to divine nature, but human nature, because the Divine Mind before everything else conceived the form that the Word-to-be-Incarnate would receive. God, then, created the first man [Adam] in the image and likeness of that form. Accordingly, Scripture says that ‘in the image of God,’ namely of the Incarnation, i.e., Christ, Who is God, ‘He created him’ (Gen. 1:27). . . . Therefore, God created man in the image of God the Christ, namely, in that form and figure which had been predetermined for the Christ, the Son of God, before the formation of all the creatures, Whom St. Paul calls ‘the firstborn of every creature, in whom were created all things.”32 According to this Doctor, image refers to Christ even as man, even in His corporeal form, saying, “Christ Himself was the archetype of human nature.” In other words, Adam was made in Christ’s image, not just spiritually but even physically. The Catechism of the Catholic Church reports St. Peter Chrysologus’ teaching: “The first Adam was made by the last Adam, from whom he also received his soul, to give him life. . . .The second Adam stamped His image on the first Adam when He created Him. . . . The last Adam is indeed the first; as He Himself says, ‘I am the first and the last.’”33 Again, this is why various ancient icons display Christ Jesus making Adam. In Michelangelo’s now famous scene on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel of the creation of Adam, God the Father reaches out to give Adam life with His right finger while His left, in a mirror-like way, is pointing and resting on the Christ Child with His Blessed Mother (both of whom are still to come . . . who are in the mind of God, first in His intention). In this profound fresco, God is saying, “Adam, We are creating you in the image of the Christ . . . and we are creating you for the Christ.” Christ, therefore, is the Alpha and Omega of our human nature.
The mystic, Ven. Mary of Agreda, corroborates this truth: “On the sixth day, He formed and created Adam, as it were of the age of thirty-three years. This was the age in which Christ was to suffer death, and Adam in regard to His body was so like unto Christ, that scarcely any difference existed. Also according to the soul, Adam was similar to Christ. From Adam, God formed Eve so similar to the Blessed Virgin, that she was like unto her personal appearance and in figure. God looked upon these two images of the great Originals with the highest pleasure and benevolence, and on account of the Originals, He heaped many blessings, as if He wanted to entertain Himself with them and their descendants until the time should arrive for forming Christ and Mary.”34
The Second Vatican Council echoes this conclusion, stating: “only in the mystery of the Incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of Him Who was to come, (20) namely Christ the Lord. Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear. It is not surprising, then, that in Him all the aforementioned truths find their root and attain their crown. He Who is ‘the image of the invisible God’ (Col. 1:15), is Himself the perfect man.”35 The footnote (20) refers to a teaching of Tertullian: “The shape that the slime of the earth was given was intended with a view to Christ, the future man.”36
Finally, once again, the Holy Liturgy comes to our assistance with these poetic lines from the hymn Rex Sempiterne Coelitum in the Roman Breviary for Easter Matins:
“O Thou, the heavens’ eternal King, Creator, unto Thee we sing,
With God the Father ever One, Co-equal, co-eternal Son.
Thy hand, when first the world began, Made in Thine own pure image man,
And linked to Adam, sprung from earth, A living soul of heavenly birth.
And when by craft the envious foe Had marred Thy noblest work below, Clothed in our flesh, Thou didst restore, The image Thou hadst made before.”37
What is Perfect does not Evolve
Although more proofs could be added to these, we nevertheless have sufficient data from the Deposit of Faith to see an insurmountable obstacle to the Christ having any part with evolution. As the exemplar cause of all creation, He is the perfect man . . . the exemplar cause of all men. What is perfect does not evolve. St. Paul exclaims: “Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today, and the same for ever. Be not led away with various and strange doctrines” (Heb 13:8-9). Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever . . . perfect in every way. There is no room for any evolution here. If there is not evolution in Christ, then there cannot be evolution in creation (or its re-creation/redemption). If there is no room for evolution in the Exemplar, He cannot be Chardin’s “Evolver” and, what is more, there can be no evolution in man at all. For how can man have evolved from lower species during the so-called period of “hominization” when the first man Adam was made according to the image of the Christ, the perfect man, the prototype of Adam?
St. Thomas reaffirms this conclusion with his teaching on the first man, Adam: “In the natural order, perfection comes before imperfection, as act precedes potentiality; for whatever is in potentiality is made actual only by something actual. And since God created things not only for their own existence, but also that they might be the principles of other things; so creatures were produced in their perfect state to be the principles as regards others. Now man can be the principle of another man, not only by generation of the body, but also by instruction and government. Hence, as the first man was produced in his perfect state, as regards his body, for the work of generation, so also was his soul established in a perfect state to instruct and govern others.”38 Again, there is no room for evolution here, forcing us to conclude that evolution is one of the “strange doctrines” to which the Apostle refers.
Some today may object to this conclusion, claiming that there is indeed some development in the Christ such as that described in the Gospel of St. Luke: “And Jesus advanced in wisdom, and age, and grace with God and men” (2:52). Among others, Karl Rahner made a case for the “developing consciousness in Jesus . . . consciousness in Christ [that] realized itself only gradually during his spiritual history . . . a genuinely human spiritual history and development of the man Jesus.”39 Yet, we also know the Magisterium has infallibly condemned the proposition that “Christ did not always possess the consciousness of His Messianic dignity.”40 St. Bede summarizes the findings of the Fathers and Doctors to resolve this matter, teaching: “Christ progressed, not by the passage of time, receiving what He had not, but rather in manifesting the gift of grace that He had.”41 Again, there is no room for evolution here but only a full manifestation of what was already possessed from the beginning. As we profess in the Athanasian Creed: “Accordingly it is the right faith, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God is ... perfect God, perfect man.”42
Evolution is a Myth, a Fantasy, a Fable
When creation is considered, as it were, a book whose Author and Publisher is the Triune God, then every creature is expressed as a sentence or a word in this book. Then it becomes the task of human and angelic intelligence to read God’s thoughts, so to speak, from this book and co-operate with Him accordingly. The theme, the dominant idea that runs through each sentence . . . even each word, is the Word made Flesh, the Incarnate Word of God, Jesus Christ, because this Word says everything. This is why the Archangel says to Blessed Mary at the Incarnation, “No word will be impossible for God” (Lk. 1:37). Again, from all the evidence herein presented, one is forced to conclude that evolution is NOT a word contained within this book. It is not a potentiality that can be actualized. It is not spoken from this Word. It cannot be found in its theme. It is, therefore, a fantasy, a myth, a fable (cf. 2 Tim 4:4) . . . a “strange doctrine” the likes of which St. Paul warned us against so long ago. Rather, it is an attempt to replace the Christ, the Beginning, with another dawn, another genesis, another start, another foundation (another gospel, cf. Gal 1:9) so that a different ending can be embraced . . . most notably, one that fulfills the occult concept of a living, animate universe that is, as it were, “the body of God.” It is an attempt to make the Chardinian omega point possible wherein all things are gathered into one “totalization” and “unanimazation;” for in such an erroneous system, even universal salvation is possible for everyone as members of His Body, now the universe itself. Thus, Chardin himself claims: “Christ has a cosmic body that extends throughout the universe.”43
In an in-depth study of the occult, John Senior determined that its proponents tend to believe and act upon a number of fundamental principles or notions, key among them being: “The universe is one, single, eternal, ineffable substance. . . . The universe is taken to be a living man.”44 The coincidence here is remarkable and surely more than accidental.
One of Chardin’s Sources
To understand this better, it is important to expose just how Chardin himself describes whence his novel ideas came to him. In particular, in one of his early compositions, a piece entitled The Spiritual Power of Matter (dated August 8, 1919), he mentions what seems to be a dramatized account of a mystical experience through which he had recently passed. And significantly enough, Teilhard himself has appended this piece (along with another) to his confessions (his last book), entitled The Heart of Matter, in order to “express more successfully than I could today the heady emotion I experienced at that time from my contact with Matter.” He further explains: “The man [that is, Chardin himself] was walking in the desert, followed by his companion, when the Thing swooped down on him. Then, suddenly, a breath of scorching air passed across his forehead, broke through the barrier of his closed eyelids, and penetrated his soul. The man felt he was ceasing to be merely himself; an irresistible rapture took possession of him . . . . And at the same time the anguish of some super human peril oppressed him, a confused feeling that the force which had swept down upon him was equivocal, turbid, the combined essence of all evil and all goodness . . . . ’You called me: here I am,’ says the Thing; ‘I was waiting for you in order to be made holy,’ it went on to declare. ‘And now—I am established on you for life, or for death. . . . He who has once seen me can never forget me: he must either damn himself with me or save me with himself.’” To which Chardin replied: “O you who are divine and mighty, what is your name?”45 This self-admission of his own experience demonstrates that he was not really a scientist after all, but a sort of mystic; yet not one receiving enlightenment from above, but rather from below, as his own description clearly indicates.
A New Council of Nicaea to Deify Evolution
What is the result? Chardin made all dependent on evolution, making it the great Law . . . the only category of thought that is possible, the one universal truth. All is in motion, all is about progress . . . all is about becoming. Thus, he longed for a New Council of Nicaea where God’s union with His Creation would be redefined in order to deify evolution! Chardin wrote: “It seems we are now reliving after 1,500 years the great conflicts with Arianism—with the big difference that we are now concerned with defining the relations, not between Christ and the Trinity,— but between Christ and a universe that has suddenly become fantastically large, formidably organic and more than probably poly- human (n thinking planets—millions perhaps) [sic]. And if I may express myself brutally (but expressively) I see no valid or constructive way out of the situation except by making through the theologians of a new Nicaea a sub-distinction in the human nature of Christ between a terrestrial nature and a cosmic nature.”46 This is what Chardin learned from that THING in the desert!
No wonder, then, Chardin made the bold claim that evolution “is a general condition to which all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must bow and which they must satisfy henceforth if they are to be thinkable and true.” We have seen this is false since no evolution is found in Christ. Rather, it is only to the Christ, the Word, the Truth made flesh and revealed to us by the Apostles, and His Name that we must bow. It is only “through Him and with Him and in Him” that all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must submit if they are to be thinkable and true. John Senior helps us see where Chardin’s idea came from by providing us with yet another principle of the occult: “as all things were produced by the one word of one Being, so all things were produced from this one thing by adaptation.”47 Chardin formed another christ, such that all that exists in the beginning and the end is the evolutionary process deified, as he professed: “That, when all is said and done, [the evolutionary process] is the first, the last, and only thing in which I believe.”48
Sacred Scripture provides a Type for this very Error in the Golden Calf
The Holy Bible predicted Chardin’s ideas in the lives of the Israelites making their way through in the desert of Sinai, as King David relates in Psalm 105: “They made a calf in Horeb: and they adored the graven thing. . . . they changed their glory into the likeness of a calf that eateth grass . . .” (19-20). In making and worshipping the golden calf, an idol, these Israelites radically departed from the theme of creation’s book, the Word made flesh, by trying to write, as it were, “we are made in the image of beasts . . . because we came from the beasts; and we are, therefore, like the beasts. There is some equality between us.” We know the outcome. They proceeded to act like beasts, became beastly, and were consequently destroyed.
 |
| Adoration of the Golden Calf, Antonio Molinari, early 1700s |
St. Paul explains that Christ, the new Adam, is our goal and that, because of sin, man has fallen away from the perfection he possessed in the old Adam. Through sin man is deformed. Through sin, man falls further and further away from Christ. To regain our proper place, therefore, we seek to conform to Christ by restoring what was lost. Chardin, however, replaces the deformation caused by sin with the concept of evolution, claiming that creation started in a state of imperfection or deformation and is evolving and converging toward Christ as its Omega point. This does not coincide with the testimony of Divine Revelation. This does not harmonize with Christ as the Exemplar cause of all creation and as the perfect Man, in light of Whom Adam was made. Chardin’s conception of Christ does not coincide with the real Christ made flesh in the womb of the Virgin and revealed to us by God in the Deposit of Faith. This is something he openly admits: “The mystical Christ, the Universal Christ of St. Paul has neither meaning nor value in our eyes except as an expression of the Christ who was born of Mary and who died on the Cross.”49 For all these reasons, and surely many more than are given here, this doctrine of Chardin’s—what he called the “cosmic christ”—must be rejected as dangerous and harmful to the one true faith. In the end, it is nothing less than idolatry.
What is more, this effort of Chardin and his followers, is, de facto, an attempt to introduce a dualism in the Church, pitting the true Christ, the Exemplar, against Chardin’s “cosmic christ,” the Evolver. Let us recall how Pope Boniface VIII authoritatively declared in Unam Sanctam that anyone acting like Manichaeus in imagining “there are two beginnings . . . we judge false and heretical, because, as Moses testifies, not ‘in the beginnings’ but ‘in the beginning God created the heaven and earth’ (Gen. 1:1).”50 As we have noted and proved from even the limited data of the Deposit of Faith presented in this article, Our blessed Lord is the Exemplar and foundation of all creation. He declared to the Pharisees, He is “the Beginning.” Contrary to Christ’s own revelation, Chardin proposed another beginning.
Yet this dichotomy, this dualism, which Chardinianism has introduced into the Church has everything to do with the recent clashes regarding the authentic understanding of marriage and its proper practice. The topic will be addressed momentarily.
Holy Office warns of the dangers of Teilhard’s work
The Holy Office certainly concurred with this conclusion when it published the following admonition in the early 1960s:
AdmonitionAuthoritative Magisterial Teaching is Rooted in the Deposit of Faith
Several works of Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, some of which were published posthumously, are being edited and receiving considerable support.
Refraining from a judgment in that which concerns the positive sciences, it is quite evident that in philosophical and theological matters the mentioned works are filled with ambiguities and even serious errors that offend Catholic doctrine.
For this reason, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Fathers of the Supreme and Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the Superiors of Religious Institutes, Rectors of Seminaries and Directors of Universities, to protect minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers of the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and his associates.
Given at Rome, from the Palace of the Holy Office, on the 30th day of June, 1962. Sebastian Masala, Notary51
Now something needs to be said regarding the statements of the popes and prelates that place evolution, and the teaching of Chardin, in so favorable a light. It is true that each of these men has a place in the hierarchy of the Church . . . that they are in the line of authority established by God that descends from Heaven to earth. Nevertheless, that position or place in the hierarchy alone does not give every word, action or decision they make an immediate share in God’s authority. In order for this participation to happen, the particular words, actions, and decisions of these prelates must be somehow found in the “Book of the Incarnate Word.” In other words, they must have some pedigree, some genealogy, a Tradition that traces them back to Christ and His Apostles.
In every authoritative statement of the Church’s Magisterium, there is always a clear presentation of the tradition behind the teaching. For example, when defining the Immaculate Conception, Pope Pius IX spent the majority of his apostolic constitution tracing the doctrine back to the Scriptures and Tradition, through the Fathers, Doctors, and the Sacred Liturgy of the Church. Then, and only then, did Pope Pius make his immemorial and definitive infallible pronouncement. Pope John Paul II did likewise when he ruled on whether women could be ordained priests. (We hope the reader will appreciate that this method was humbly imitated and attempted in this little treatise.) This is what any prelate ought to do for any of his statements, regardless of his position, in order for them to witness with authority to the Book of the Incarnate Word. Yet Pope John Paul II presented no pedigree, no genealogy or Tradition in his statement on evolution. Is it not highly significant that he gave no references to the “new knowledge” and “series of discoveries” that “led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis”? What is more, he made no mention of the dogmatic and doctrinal statements of Pope Pelagius I, the Fourth Lateran Council, the First Vatican Council, Pope Leo XIII, and other authoritative Magisterial statements touching on the origin of man and the created universe, teachings which his remarks to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences plainly contradicted. Thus, the saying of Melchior Cano, the great Dominican theologian at the sixteenth-century Council of Trent, comes to mind: “Those who blindly and indiscriminately defend every decision of the supreme Pontiff are the very ones who do most to undermine the authority of the Holy See—they destroy instead of strengthening its foundations.”52 Since Pope John Paul II’s statement on evolution has no genealogy, we are safe in considering it to be merely the opinion of a pope at the time of his speaking to a gathering of modern scientists. He has in no way bound the Church. Nor was he speaking to the Church, but only to a group of scientists, many of whom did not even profess to be Catholic.
The Fallacy of Relative to Absolute
We include here at least one additional reason why the statements made by Chardin, and later adopted by various churchmen, are erroneous: namely, they succumb to the logical fallacy of relative to absolute. This fallacy attempts to argue that what is only true in some cases is in fact true in every case. This deception lies behind the admonition of Pope Pius XII that is quoted at the start of this treatise: “Some imprudently and indiscreetly hold that evolution, which has not been fully proved even in the domain of natural sciences, explains the origin of all things.”53
Consider two additional examples of this fallacious thinking in our present topic. First, the de fide teaching of the Church regarding the Hypostatic Union is stated in the Nicene Creed: “. . . the only-begotten Son of God . . . became flesh by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary: and was made man.” In this union of God and man in the second Person of the Holy Trinity, a single complete human nature was formed from the most pure blood of the Virgin Mary. In others words, the Hypostatic Union is not a union of the divine nature with ALL of humanity, and even less so with the universe itself.
Second, in and through this Hypostatic Union of the God-Man, the universe is in some way re-capitulated, and all men are able to be saved by way of grace, by being united to the Mystical Body of Christ. But the application is not universal as the occultists and some modern theologians would rashly pretend (among them ranks Edward Schillebeeckx and his followers who hold “there is no salvation outside the world” instead of the de fide “outside of the Church there is no salvation”54). Some angels fell and the majority of men are lost and eternally damned as the Scriptures clearly testify. Even in the future new heavens and the new earth, some parts will not be renewed, most notably hell itself. By analogy, just as only some certain particles of bread are transubstantiated into the Body of Christ, so also only some matter will be divinized in the new heavens and new earth. First among this divinized matter will be the bodies of the saints. Thus, stretching the Hypostatic Union and the Holy Mass to the limits of the universe to “divinize all matter” and save all men is logically erroneous and fallacious thinking. St. Maximus the Confessor concludes for us: “Since our Lord Jesus Christ is the beginning, middle, and end of all the ages, past and future, [it would be fair to say that] the end of the ages—specifically that which will actually come about by grace for the deification of those who are worthy—has come upon us in potency through faith.”55
Our Goal is not to evolve but “To Re-establish All Things in Christ”
Again, St. Paul explains that our task is not to evolve toward and into Christ but rather “to re-establish all things in Christ” (Eph. 1:10) by first entering into His Body, the Church (incorporation), and then by seeking total conformity to Him as the Head of the Church and exemplar of both our creation and re-creation. He is the foundation upon which we build anew. “Until we all meet into the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ; That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive but doing the truth in charity, we may in all things grow up in Him who is the Head, even Christ” (Eph. 4:13-15).
St. John of the Cross, in one of his ballads, poetically captures much of what we have concluded here when he has God the Father say to God the Son: “My Son, only Thy company contents Me, and when something pleases Me, I love that thing in Thee; whoever resembles Thee most, satisfies Me most, and whoever is like Thee in nothing, will find nothing in Me. I am pleased with Thee alone, O life of My life!”56
We have shown that evolution has no part in Christ—which means that it is not pleasing to God, and that He will have nothing to do with it! So, let “that mind be” in us “that was in Christ Jesus”—and let us join Our Lord in rejecting evolution so that we can restore the primacy of Christ as Creator, Redeemer, and King of the universe. Thus, St. Benedict in his holy rule encourages his monks: “In the first place, beg of Christ the Lord, the true King, by most earnest prayer, that He perfect whatever good thou dost begin...”57
The Use of Chardin’s Views in Our Times: new key to open new doors
Sad to say, the underlying philosophy chosen by many today, in an effort to promote new ways of thinking, can be shown to rely heavily on what Teilhard de Chardin produced and popularized, namely evolution and its resulting “cosmic christ.” He has shown how new progressive combinations and conclusions for the present, as well as new endings for the future, are possible— if only we have a different beginning! By embracing the “cosmic christ,” a new key becomes available to open new doors.
An example of this is found in this novel, but telling statement in the recent papal letter of Pope Francis: “As Christians, we are also called ‘to accept the world as a sacrament of communion, as a way of sharing with God and our neighbours on a global scale. It is our humble conviction that the divine and the human meet in the slightest detail in the seamless garment of God’s creation, in the last speck of dust of our planet.’”58
Traditionally, the seamless garment of Christ was the unity of the One Holy Catholic Faith and its believers, but now it is stretched to cover the whole of creation. Traditionally, the “sacrament of communion” was the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar, the Eucharist, but now it has been replaced by the entire world. Apart from falling into the fallacy of relative to absolute, this novel thinking is contrary to what we find in the Deposit of Faith, even as it was recently expounded by Pope Benedict XVI: “Saint Cyprian knew well that ‘outside the Church there is no salvation’, and said so in strong words;59 and he knew that ‘no one can have God as Father who does not have the Church as mother.’60 An indispensable characteristic of the Church is unity, symbolized by Christ’s seamless garment:61 Cyprian said, this unity is founded on Peter,62 and finds its perfect fulfillment in the Eucharist.63 ‘God is one and Christ is one’, Cyprian cautioned, ‘and His Church is one, and the faith is one, and the Christian people is joined into a substantial unity of body by the cement of concord. Unity cannot be severed. And what is one by its nature cannot be separated.”64 St. Thomas held the seamless garment “can be referred to the Mystical Body of Christ.”65 Cornelius a Lapide, SJ, taught the following allegorical meaning for this same Biblical image: “Christ’s seamless garment is the Church, which it is not lawful to rend; if you rend it, you will cause a schism.”66
Different Beginnings bring New Possibilities
Do you want a different conclusion from what the Church has always held? Want a different practice from what the Church has always done? Want a new key to open new doors? Then start with a new beginning! Start with another christ! Under the aegis of evolution, the Holy Mass becomes cosmic and the world is consecrated “so that it may become a living host”... even a sort of new “sacrament of communion.”67 With evolution, the seamless garment of Christ becomes the whole created order, the very cosmos itself to “the last speck of dust.” For Chardin and his adherents, if you want a new progressive way of looking at things in order to reach new progressive conclusions in conformity with current events, one only need posit a new beginning of things—one that is flexible, adjustable, uncertain and imperfect. And, as we have seen, Chardin did just that by proclaiming evolution to be the “general condition to which all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must bow and which they must satisfy henceforth if they are to be thinkable and true.”
A few more examples of this same pattern are clearly seen in other speeches and writings bandied about of late inside the Church. One proposition for the 2014 Synod on the Family reads: “respondents propose . . . public discussion . . .which could permit a re-reading of the concept of the natural law in a more meaningful manner in today’s world.”68 From president Napolitano of Italy speaking to Pope France, and quoting him in part, we hear: “We have been struck by the absence of all dogmatism, the distancing from ‘positions not touched by a margin of uncertainty,’ the call to ‘leave room for doubt’ characteristic of the ‘great leaders of the people of God.’ In your words, we have felt vibrate the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, as ‘rereading of the Gospel in the light of contemporary culture.’”69
With Chardin’s primacy of evolution as the beginning and highest of all things, such movement, uncertainty and distancing from what has always been held to be right, true, good and perfect is now possible. It not only allows one to violate the logical fallacy of relative to absolute but even proposes that the natural law— the heart of the Old Testament written on stone tablets, and the Gospel—the heart of the New Testament written in Christ’s very own blood, be re-read, re-formulated to fit modern man. It is a new key that opens a new door!
With this “cosmic christ” of Chardin so popularly acclaimed, is it so strange that many prelates, even Cardinals, are proposing that seemingly everyone, most notably divorced and remarried couples, can now go to Holy Communion? Or that everyone is saved as members of the world, including atheists!? With such new beginnings, why not allow or even welcome divorced and remarried couples into full unity and harmony with the Church? Why not appreciate the gifts that different non-traditional unions, even those of the same gender, have to offer? After all, are we not all progressing to the same totalization and unanimization in the “cosmic christ” ... “the omega point” of the universe? With Chardin’s new beginning, one can have any present combination he likes! With such novel teachings, and with propositions as these being so openly proposed and put into practice, we have, de facto, Chardin’s new Council of Nicaea!
 |
| The Wedding Feast at Cana |
Christ as the Exemplar Cause of Marriage answers these Difficulties
Our response is the same as the one given by St. Paul so long ago, namely “to re- establish all things in Christ” (Eph. 1:10). Let us, therefore, once again, return to Christ Jesus, Our Lord—revealed to us as the Exemplar Cause of all creation— our authentic “Christocentric key.” He enables us to respond accurately and truthfully to these strange propositions, especially as we focus our attention upon marriage. Since Christ is Creation’s masterpiece and blueprint, its foundation and cornerstone, then He will supply what is required to understand authentic marriage, for He Himself is the alpha and omega of all that marriage is and means. As St. Lawrence of Brindisi explained, if something of God’s creation needs repairing, we have the means to do so by returning to its Foundation! “Christ was willed as a foundation in such a way that if the edifice to be built on Him should ever need repairs, the reparation could be carried out on the same foundation without any change in the divine blueprint.”70
This beautiful truth alone gives a ready reply to Chardin, namely the same reply that was given to Job: “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest or who hath stretched the line upon it? Upon what are its bases grounded? or who laid the corner stone thereof... Wilt thou make void My judgment: and condemn Me, that thou mayst be justified?” (Job 38:4-6; 40:3). Since Chardin certainly was not present at the foundation of the world, he openly admitted to formulating his own system (which at least indirectly rejects the revelation given to us by God) in his discussion with Fr. Allegra, OFM (this was quoted above: “the vision of the Universe I have arrived at is not completely clear in all its details”). Yet, the revelation we have from the direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost, Who was most certainly present, is quite clear and wonderful to behold. It is this revealed creation that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church have marveled over and written about at some length. Yet, their work has been made all but void by modern men like Chardin and his followers.
Words about Marriage from the Exemplar
In speaking of marriage and divorce with the Pharisees, Christ said, “Have ye not read, that He Who made man from the beginning, made them male and female?” (Matt. 19:4). When questioning Him further about Moses allowing divorce, He taught: “Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not
so” (19:8). Marriage between man and woman is from the Christ, “the
Beginning” (Jn. 8:25), even from the foundation of the world! This makes Christ its blueprint and exemplar cause. And it is important to note that this is true not just for the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, which He instituted for members of His Body, the Church, but also for all marriage, as natural marriage is rooted in creation itself. Thus, the Catechism of the Catholic Churches states: “‘God Himself is the author of marriage’ . . . . [it] is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution . . .”71 The traditional Ritual of Marriage states: “The union of man and woman in Christian marriage is brought about by God and for the purposes of God.”72
The Foundation of Marriage is the Hypostatic Union
Bd. Columba Marmion summarizes the conclusions of the Scriptures and the Fathers in viewing the Hypostatic Union, the Incarnate Word, as a marriage between God and man. “The Fathers of the Church saw primarily in the ‘Canticle of Canticles,’ the symbol of that marvelous union which exists in Christ between the Word and human nature. The Word, the eternal Wisdom, is the Bridegroom; He chooses for Himself a spouse: a human nature. The immaculate and virginal womb of Mary is the nuptial chamber where this marvelous union was fashioned, an union so wonderful, so elevated, that it needed as artisan none other than the Holy Ghost Himself, so intimate that it is ratified by substantial Love. . . . An indissoluble union: once realized, it ceases not; death itself did not break it . . .”73
Upon this marriage, of God and man in Christ, are modeled all other spousal unions approved and ratified by God. Listen to Denis the Carthusian: “Christ has three brides, namely: a universal bride, who is the Church of all the elect, whom He began to wed at the beginning of the world by faith and charity; a particular bride, who is the holy soul, whom He weds daily by converting individuals to Himself by grace; a singular bride, who is the most blessed Virgin, whom He wed in the womb of His Mother. But the last two brides are contained in the first, as part is contained in the whole.”74 The relation between this Exemplar and its exemplatum (copy) in marriage between man and woman is brilliantly set forth by St. Paul in the fifth chapter of his letter to the Ephesians: “This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the Church” (5:32).
The reality of Christ and His Church as Bridegroom and Bride make marriage, even on the natural level, a type or image of this primordial union. As the Church, the Bride of Christ, is one, so the man has but one wife. As Christ and the Church are inseparably united, so the union of those lawfully married is perpetual and indissoluble. As Christ is the Head of the Church, the man is the head of woman. As the Church is subject to Christ, so the wife is obedient to her husband. Just as the Church is fruitful and brings forth spiritual children through Christ and His grace, so too the woman brings forth children through her husband. Just as Christ (in His incarnate nature) and the Church exist for the glory of God and salvation of souls and never willfully reject the faithful, so too man and woman (as husband and wife) exist for the procreation and formation of their children and never willfully prevent them. Christ and the Church are animated by one spirit, and so it should be with husband and wife. Christ never abandons the Church, and the Church can never be unfaithful to Christ; so married people must never be unfaithful to one another.
Consequently, if one were to propose that a couple not properly married could represent or exemplify this Bride and Bridegroom, most especially seen in their receiving Holy Communion, that would be to falsify the exemplar . . . to mislead others with a counterfeit. It would make it look as if everyone could be united to her and be saved without adhering to the seamless garment of faith. Of course, this becomes possible, when “the seamless garment” and Holy Communion are re-defined to fit the whole world, as has been recently done in Ladauto Si. However, according to the data gathered from the unchanging Deposit of Faith, such unions constitute an open affront to the Church, attacking her very foundation in the Incarnate Christ.
The New Adam and the New Eve
Furthermore, Christ, the New Adam, is also the mystical spouse to the Blessed Virgin Mary, the New Eve. St. Peter Chrysologus spoke of this mystery when he preached: “The messenger flies swiftly to the spouse, in order to remove every attachment to a human marriage from God’s spouse. He does not take the Virgin away from Joseph but simply restores her to Christ, to Whom she had been promised when she was being formed in her mother’s womb. Christ, then, takes His own bride; He does not steal someone else’s. Nor does He cause any separation when He unites His own creature to Himself, in a single body.”75 Alain de Lille summarized it this way: “He married the Virgin, not only in a union of spirits, but also in a union of natures. And so this Incarnation is called a marriage, because it was like a kind of marital union and joy unspeakable.”76 This marriage between the “new” Adam and Eve is also primordial . . . from the very foundation of the world. As we have noted above with Ven. Mother Mary of Agreda, they are the perfect “Originals” by which the first man and woman were made. And what is more, they were willed by God from the very beginning as the Popes have repeatedly indicated, for example Pope Pius IX taught: “From the very beginning, and before time began, the eternal Father chose and prepared for His only-begotten Son, a Mother in whom the Son of God would become incarnate and from whom, in the fullness of time, He would be born into this world. . . . God, by one and same decree, had established the origin of Mary and the Incarnation of the Divine Wisdom”77 This teaching has been repeated by Pope Pius XII,78 Vatican Council II,79 and by Pope Paul VI.80 This teaching is sometimes called the “dual primacy.” It is important to note that the concept of “decree” being expressed here comes from the Franciscan school wherein they explain that this particular decree for the “dual primacy” came in a succession of decrees, namely after the decree that there be a creation in general but before the decree for particular elements of creation, namely angels, men, animals, etc., . . . This means Jesus and Mary stand at the head of the Book of Creation.
From the beginning, God planned to send His Son, the New Adam to Mary, the New Eve.
Biblical Image of the Mosaic Ark of the Covenant exposes this Error
An image of these same erroneous conclusions is contained in the Sacred Scriptures in the form of a type. In the Old Testament, the marriage covenant between God and His chosen people was ratified on Mount Sinai through Moses receiving the Law, summarized in the Ten Commandments. This covenant, that is, the stone tablets, was then put into the Ark of the Covenant (cf. Exodus 25:10f., Heb. 9:3-5) made by human hands and it was placed in the Holy of holies of the Tabernacle. Later on, a golden jar of manna and the budding rod of Aaron were also placed within the Ark. This little house of gold foreshadowed the Virgin Mary, as indicated in the Litany of Loreto’s invocation “ark of the covenant.” St. Gregory the Wonder-worker said: “The most holy Virgin is truly the precious ark which received the whole treasure of sanctity.”81
 |
| Dagon, the fish-man, graphically depicts the idol "god" of the evolutionists. |
The law given to Moses was written on the stone tablets to indicate this law is embedded into the framework, the very bedrock, the very foundation of the world. These laws cannot be altered. Of course, one of them is the sixth commandment, which reads: Thou shalt not commit adultery. Yet, sad to say, some are claiming that this very same natural law, written in stone, must be re-read and adjusted to fit modern man and modern minds. The Philistines have returned. As noted above, a proposition for the 2014 Synod on the Family asks for “a re-reading of the concept of the natural law in a more meaningful manner in today’s world.”82
The Scriptures tell us that the Ark did not serve the purposes of the Philistines because what it symbolizes is immutable, incorruptible, even indestructible. What did happen, however, is that the Philistines brought God’s wrath upon themselves in the form of death and various plagues, most notably in their private parts for attempting such impiety. Unable to destroy the Ark, they ended up sending the sacred vessel back to the Israelites. But even the Hebrews died in large numbers because they did not approach the Ark in the divinely ordained manner. It is not out of place here to mention that the Hebrews would experience much division, plagues, death, and painful exile because of their failures in understanding and living even the natural law regarding marriage.
According to this historical type, the Ark and its contents will not serve the needs of evolution, symbolized by Dagon. The idol was miraculously knocked down, had its hands cut off, and was even beheaded! The message ought to be clear: evolution is a dead end! It is a useless idea! A thought without thinking! Since it is not contained in the Incarnate Word of God, a new “cosmic christ” had to be invented!
Using what we have gathered about Christ as the Exemplar, we can say such things happened because marriage is meant to be “a replica of the union of Christ and His mystic Spouse” the Church83 . . . which took place in the womb of Mary and was prefigured in the Ark of old. This primordial union established by God in Christ and His Church in one and the same decree from the foundation of the world, and later depicted in Adam and Eve, is indestructible. It cannot be altered nor should it be made to bow down to a different beginning to fit Chardin’s “cosmic christ.” “What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder” (Matt. 19:6). St. Paul fittingly adds: “If any man love not our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema” (1Cor 16:22).
Conclusion
Clearly, we are fulfilling the Sacred Scriptures in that many today “esteemed Him not” (Isa. 53:3), by seeking something outside His revealed and sacred Incarnate Word, Who is “the Beginning” and theme of all Creation. All these efforts we are witnessing at this moment, efforts of seeking approval, acceptance, or legalization—on any level—of false marriages and other shameful unions will not last but, rather, will fail miserably. We can only lament over how many souls will be lost because of this! Those who are trying to make things of the Philistines and their god Dagon fit into God’s created order are calling down upon themselves and the whole world the wrath of God. In the end, we know these modern-day Philistines will be forced to surrender back unharmed the sacred Ark, that is, true marriage, as established and ordained by God from the foundation of the world. On that day, true marriage will once again take its proper place in the Temple of God, in His Holy Church, and there will be peace.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, holy marriage, as it was IN THE BEGINNING, is now and will be forever. Amen.
1 XIV Ordinary General Assembly, The Vocation and Mission of the Family in the Church and the Contemporary World, Instrumentum Laboris, no. 40.
2 Chardin, The Phenomenon of Man, p. 219.
3 Pope John Paul II, Allocution presented before the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Oct 22, 1996.
4 Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, no. 5.
5 St. Thomas Aquinas, ST, III, 5, 1 in corp. and ad 3.
6 St. Francis de Sales, Treatise on the Love of God, II, 5. 7 cf. Pancheri, The Universal Primacy of Christ, p. 89.
8 Pancheri, p. 67.
9 ST, I, 41, 3 ad 4 emphasis added.
10 Pohle-Pruess, The Divine Trinity, pp. 157-8.
11 St. Maximus the Confessor, Ad Thalas, q. LX as quoted in Christ and the Cosmos, Bonnefoy, p. 265.
12 Treatise on the Love of God, II, 4 & 5.
13 Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 280.
14 1962 Missale Romanum.
15 Fr. Matthew Britt, OSB, The Hymns of the Breviary and Missal.
16 Dom Prosper Gueranger, OSB, The Liturgical Year, Time after Pentecost, Book IV, volume XIII, p. 279 emphasis added).
17 Sermon 2 on the Circumcision, cf. Matins for Holy Name of Jesus, Lesson ix, Roman Breviary.
18 Gabriel M. Allegra, O.F.M., My Conversations with Teilhard de Chardin on the Primacy of Christ, pp. 59-60.
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid., p. 81.
21 Catholicism and Science, 1946, IX, 189.
22 Louis Savary, Teilhard de Chardin’s The Divine Milieu Explained, Paulist Press, 2007, cf. author’s Foreward.
23 Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, Chance or Purpose, p. 141 - Teilhard de Chardin - Witness to Christ.
24 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 29.
25 Pope Benedict XVI, Homily for the Celebration of Vespers in Aosta, 24 July 2009.
26 Pope Francis, Laudato Si, No. 83 with footnote no. 53 stating “Against this horizon we can set the contribution of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin.”
27 Ibid., No. 246 prayer.
28 Cardinal Berulle, Discourse on the State and Granduers of Jesus, I, 2, p. 62.
29 St. Irenaeus, Adversus Hæreses, III, 16, 6.
30 St. Gregory the Great, Homily 29 on the Gospels, cf. Lesson ix for Matins of the Ascension, Roman Breviary. 31 cf. ST, III, 56, 1 ad 3
32 St. Lawrence of Brindisi on Creation and the Fall, Gen 1:27. 33 Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 359.
12 Treatise on the Love of God, II, 4 & 5.
13 Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 280.
14 1962 Missale Romanum.
15 Fr. Matthew Britt, OSB, The Hymns of the Breviary and Missal.
16 Dom Prosper Gueranger, OSB, The Liturgical Year, Time after Pentecost, Book IV, volume XIII, p. 279 emphasis added).
17 Sermon 2 on the Circumcision, cf. Matins for Holy Name of Jesus, Lesson ix, Roman Breviary.
18 Gabriel M. Allegra, O.F.M., My Conversations with Teilhard de Chardin on the Primacy of Christ, pp. 59-60.
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid., p. 81.
21 Catholicism and Science, 1946, IX, 189.
22 Louis Savary, Teilhard de Chardin’s The Divine Milieu Explained, Paulist Press, 2007, cf. author’s Foreward.
23 Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, Chance or Purpose, p. 141 - Teilhard de Chardin - Witness to Christ.
24 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 29.
25 Pope Benedict XVI, Homily for the Celebration of Vespers in Aosta, 24 July 2009.
26 Pope Francis, Laudato Si, No. 83 with footnote no. 53 stating “Against this horizon we can set the contribution of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin.”
27 Ibid., No. 246 prayer.
28 Cardinal Berulle, Discourse on the State and Granduers of Jesus, I, 2, p. 62.
29 St. Irenaeus, Adversus Hæreses, III, 16, 6.
30 St. Gregory the Great, Homily 29 on the Gospels, cf. Lesson ix for Matins of the Ascension, Roman Breviary. 31 cf. ST, III, 56, 1 ad 3
32 St. Lawrence of Brindisi on Creation and the Fall, Gen 1:27. 33 Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 359.
34 Ven. Mary of Agreda, Mystical City of God, Bk. I, pp. 126-127.
35 Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes, no. 22 emphasis added.
36 Tertullian, De carnis resurrectione 6: P.L. 2, 282.
37 Fr. Matthew Britt, OSB, The Hymns of the Breviary and Missal, emphasis added.
38 ST, I, 94, a3.
39 Karl Rahner, Theological Investigations, Vol. 5, “Dogmatic Reflections on the Knowledge and Self-Consciousness of Christ,” pp. 193-215.
35 Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes, no. 22 emphasis added.
36 Tertullian, De carnis resurrectione 6: P.L. 2, 282.
37 Fr. Matthew Britt, OSB, The Hymns of the Breviary and Missal, emphasis added.
38 ST, I, 94, a3.
39 Karl Rahner, Theological Investigations, Vol. 5, “Dogmatic Reflections on the Knowledge and Self-Consciousness of Christ,” pp. 193-215.
40 Pope Pius X, Lamentabili Sane, no. 35, Dz 2035. 41 cf. Cornelius a Lapide commentary for Luke 2:52. 42 Dz 40.
43 Chardin, Cosmic Life, 1916, XII, 58.
44 John Senior, The Way Down and Out, The Occult in Symbolist Literature, 1959, p. 39. 45 Wolfgang Smith, PhD, Teilhardism and the New Religion, Wolfgang Smith, p. 229-30.
46 Chardin, Letter to Andre Ravier SJ, 14 January 1955, Lettres Intimes, 452. 47 Senior, The Way Down and Out, p. 29.
48 Chardin, Christianity and Evolution, p. 99.
49 Chardin, The Divine Milieu, 1926-1927, IV, 105. 50 Dz 469.
51 cf. L’Osservatore Romano, July 1, 1962.
52 as quoted by George Weigel in Witness to Hope, p. 15.
53 Humani Generis, no. 5
54 ‘Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus’ is a dogmatic teaching of the Church which has been procalimed infallbily on numerous occassions, including but not limited to, Boniface VIII’s Unam Sanctam, the Fourth Lateran Council against the Albigensians, Eugene IV’s Cantate Domino, and Pius IV’s Ininuctum Nobis.
55 Ad Thalas. q. XXII as translated in On the Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, p. 117, emphasis and addition in the original.
56 St. John of the Cross, Romances, no. 9.2.
57 St. Benedict, Holy Rule of St. Benedict, prologue.
43 Chardin, Cosmic Life, 1916, XII, 58.
44 John Senior, The Way Down and Out, The Occult in Symbolist Literature, 1959, p. 39. 45 Wolfgang Smith, PhD, Teilhardism and the New Religion, Wolfgang Smith, p. 229-30.
46 Chardin, Letter to Andre Ravier SJ, 14 January 1955, Lettres Intimes, 452. 47 Senior, The Way Down and Out, p. 29.
48 Chardin, Christianity and Evolution, p. 99.
49 Chardin, The Divine Milieu, 1926-1927, IV, 105. 50 Dz 469.
51 cf. L’Osservatore Romano, July 1, 1962.
52 as quoted by George Weigel in Witness to Hope, p. 15.
53 Humani Generis, no. 5
54 ‘Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus’ is a dogmatic teaching of the Church which has been procalimed infallbily on numerous occassions, including but not limited to, Boniface VIII’s Unam Sanctam, the Fourth Lateran Council against the Albigensians, Eugene IV’s Cantate Domino, and Pius IV’s Ininuctum Nobis.
55 Ad Thalas. q. XXII as translated in On the Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, p. 117, emphasis and addition in the original.
56 St. John of the Cross, Romances, no. 9.2.
57 St. Benedict, Holy Rule of St. Benedict, prologue.
58 Ladauto Si, no. 9.
59 St. Cyprian, Epistles 4, 4 and 73, 21. 60 St. Cyprian, De unit., 6.
61 ibid., 7.
62 ibid., 4.
63 St. Cyprian, Epistle 63, 13.
64 St. Cyprian, De unit., 23 as quoted in Pope Benedict XVI, General Audience, June 6, 2007.
65 St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on St. John’s Gospel, no. 2429. 66 Commentary on John 19:23.
67 Pope Benedict XVI, Homily for the Celebration of Vespers in Aosta, 24 July 2009; Pope Francis, Ladauto Si, no. 9.
68 Instrumentum Laboris, no. 30 emphasis added
69 http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-address-to-italian-president-giorgio- napolitano, Nov 14, 2013.
59 St. Cyprian, Epistles 4, 4 and 73, 21. 60 St. Cyprian, De unit., 6.
61 ibid., 7.
62 ibid., 4.
63 St. Cyprian, Epistle 63, 13.
64 St. Cyprian, De unit., 23 as quoted in Pope Benedict XVI, General Audience, June 6, 2007.
65 St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on St. John’s Gospel, no. 2429. 66 Commentary on John 19:23.
67 Pope Benedict XVI, Homily for the Celebration of Vespers in Aosta, 24 July 2009; Pope Francis, Ladauto Si, no. 9.
68 Instrumentum Laboris, no. 30 emphasis added
69 http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-address-to-italian-president-giorgio- napolitano, Nov 14, 2013.
70 Pancheri, p. 89.
71 Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1603.
72 Allocution to the Bridal Couple, Weller Translation of the Rituale Romanum, Vol. 1, p.
582.
73 Bd. Columba Marmion, Sponsa Verbi, pp. 25-28.
74 Ennartio in cap. 3 Joannis, a. 10; Omnia Opera, 12:340B as quoted in Mary in the Middle Ages, Luigi Gambero, Ignatius, p. 311.
75 Sermo 140, 2; PL 52,576 as quoted in Mary and the Fathers of the Church, Luigi Gambero, Ignatius, p. 297.
76 PL 210, 77AB as quoted in Mary in the Middle Ages, Luigi Gambero, Ignatius, p. 188. 77 Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus, emphasis added.
78 Pope Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus, no. 40.
79 Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, no. 61.
80 Pope Paul VI, Marialis Cultus, no. 58.
81 St. Gregory the Wonderworker, PG, X, 1150 as quoted in Pohle-Preuss, Mariology, p. 26.
82 Instrumentum Laboris, no. 30.
83 Allocution to the Bridal Couple, Weller Translation of the Rituale Romanum, Vol. 1, p. 582.
72 Allocution to the Bridal Couple, Weller Translation of the Rituale Romanum, Vol. 1, p.
582.
73 Bd. Columba Marmion, Sponsa Verbi, pp. 25-28.
74 Ennartio in cap. 3 Joannis, a. 10; Omnia Opera, 12:340B as quoted in Mary in the Middle Ages, Luigi Gambero, Ignatius, p. 311.
75 Sermo 140, 2; PL 52,576 as quoted in Mary and the Fathers of the Church, Luigi Gambero, Ignatius, p. 297.
76 PL 210, 77AB as quoted in Mary in the Middle Ages, Luigi Gambero, Ignatius, p. 188. 77 Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus, emphasis added.
78 Pope Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus, no. 40.
79 Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, no. 61.
80 Pope Paul VI, Marialis Cultus, no. 58.
81 St. Gregory the Wonderworker, PG, X, 1150 as quoted in Pohle-Preuss, Mariology, p. 26.
82 Instrumentum Laboris, no. 30.
83 Allocution to the Bridal Couple, Weller Translation of the Rituale Romanum, Vol. 1, p. 582.
No comments:
Post a Comment