Skip to main content

When Francis talks about "Change" does it mean Nothing & Eternal Death?

The Vatican II school of the Nouvelle Theologie (New Theology) appears to be central in Francis's thinking.

This theology emphasizes becoming over being.

Francis says Cardinal Walter Kasper is "profound." The National Catholic Reporter called Kasper "the 'pope's [Francis's] theologian.'" His theology is one extreme example of this school of thought.

Kasper appears to not believe in being, but only in becoming because of his Hegelian philosophy.

The philosopher Thomas Stark said that one of Kasper's central beliefs is "historical process," that is man's historical becoming or change.

Remember that Francis's two favorite words are process and change.

In "German Idealism and Cardinal Kasper's Theological Project" for The Catholic World Report, Stark wrote:

"Kasper's...'spirit' that--Kasper himself says--is not identical to the third divine person, but is much more reminiscent of Hegel's absolute spirit, who in a historical process, synthesizing it's dialectical opposites in itself, develops into the whole."

Speaking of the less heretical theologians than Kasper and his disciple Francis who were members of Nouvelle theologie who believe in process or becoming and the dangers of this thinking, Fr. James McLucas, the former editor of the Latin Mass magazine, in a lecture said:

"It appears to emphasis the Person of Jesus, the Person of the Holy Spirit and the Person of the Father and the personal manner of each individual's sanctification as being created in the image of God."

"But here is the key. This is all true.We certainly need this emphasis. But personhood if it is not fully subjected to being and the objective nature of God, then personhood becomes often the vehicle for the substitution of man's becoming for God's being."

If one substitutes man's becoming for God's being then man is becoming nothing. Here is why:

If one believes in being, one believes a thing is a thing.

God is the fullness or total actuality of all things or being and is their creator. Our purpose or goal in life to go to God.

God is not a Kasperian "historical process" or change.

If one believes only in becoming without being, one believes nothing is becoming nothing or death.

G. K. Chesterton put it best:

"Most thinkers on realizing the apparent mutablility of being, have really forgotten their own realization of the being and believe only in the mutablility...It is only change."

"It would be more logical to call it nothing changing into nothing than to say (on this principles) that there ever was a moment when the thing was itself. St. Thomas maintains that the ordinary thing at any moment is something, but it is not everything it could be...While they describe a change which is really a change in nothing, he describes a changelessness which includes the change of everything."

"Things change because they are not complete, but their reality can only be explained as part of something that is complete. It is God." (The Dumb Ox)

If man goes to God who is Being Itseft then he receives the gifts of grace, truth and eternal life.

If men like Kasper and his disciple Francis substitutes man's becoming or change over and against God's Being or Changelessness then he gets nothing and eternal death.

The question needs to be asked since Francis's favorite word is change remembering what Chesterton said "it would be more logical to say it is nothing changing into nothing" which is what one gets if one is a disciple of Kasper:

Does Francis believe in nothing and eternal death according to G. K. Chesterton?

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of the Mary.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx "Exemption" Letter & Stated: "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary"

Today, the bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx " exemption" letter (21_8_Vaccine_Exemption_CCC_Fin...docx(20KB)) and stated that "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary":  COLORADO CATHOLIC CONFERENCE 1535 Logan Street | Denver, CO 80203-1913 303-894-8808 | cocatholicconference.org   [Date]   To Whom It May Concern, [Name] is a baptized Catholic seeking a religious exemption from an immunization requirement. This letter explains how the Catholic Church’s teachings may lead individual Catholics, including [name], to decline certain vaccines. The Catholic Church teaches that a person may be required to refuse a medical intervention, including a vaccination, if his or her conscience comes to this judgment. While the Catholic Church does not prohibit the use of most vaccines, and generally encourages them to safeguard personal and public health, the following authoritative Church teachings demonstrate the principled religious

Does Francis's "Right-hand Man" Parra have a "Sexual Predation against Seminarians, Adultery, and even a Deadly Sex Game...[that] 'might even be a Scandal Surpassing that of McCarrick'"?

  Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra with Francis Today, the Call Me Jorge website asked "What could be so important that Francis interrupted his weekly adulation [Audience] session?": Pope gets a phone call during the Audience. Haven’t seen this before. Then he quickly leaves and says he will be back. pic.twitter.com/npCuPzdnxP — The Catholic Traveler (@MountainButorac) August 11, 2021 It was Abp. Mons. Edgar Robinson Peña Parra, Substitute for the Secretariat of State, who was involved in the recent scandal of mismanagement during the acquisition of a € 300 million building in London. Still no word on what the phone call was about . [http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2021/08/what-could-be-so-important-that-francis.html] Who is Archbishop Edgar Robinson Peña Parra ? Parra according to the Catholic Herald is Francis's "right-hand man"[https://catholicherald.co.uk/roman-curia-the-popes-new-right-hand-man/] In 2019, Life Site News reported that Parra alleged

Might it be Good for all of us & for Francis to Read about the "Gruesome Death of Arius"?

  I have read the letters of your piety , in which you have requested me to make known to you the events of my times relating to myself, and to give an account of that most impious heresy of the Arians , in consequence of which I have endured these sufferings, and also of the manner of the death of Arius . With two out of your three demands I have readily undertaken to comply, and have sent to your Godliness what I wrote to the Monks; from which you will be able to learn my own history as well as that of the heresy . But with respect to the other matter, I mean the death, I debated with myself for a long time, fearing lest any one should suppose that I was exulting in the death of that man. But yet, since a disputation which has taken place among you concerning the heresy , has issued in this question, whether Arius died after previously communicating with the Church ; I therefore was necessarily desirous of giving an account of his death, as thinking that the question woul