Might Francis believe in the Eucharist in the Rahner Kantian sense? & Might Francis be a Radner Relativist?
Rahner and Relativism
Question: Pope Benedict has responded to his critics who claim that his letter about the origin of the sexual crisis among the clergy does not present the true picture. He attributes much of it to the relativism in modern European philosophy which caused a crisis in moral theology. Is this true and are there some specific examples besides the ones he gives?
Answer: In the last few months I have dealt with several of the causes of the present malaise in moral theology in the Catholic Church. This trend was exacerbated in the summer of 2019 by the wholesale sacking of the faculty at the John Paul II Institute at the Lateran University, which clearly taught John Paul’s view of sexual ethics. This was encapsulated in his teaching proclaimed in the Wednesday audience conferences during his pontificate known as the “Theology of the Body.” The movement to replace his teaching with what authorities called a broader view of problems connected to marriage also sought to root these in something besides systematic moral theology.
The general cause of the difficulties in moral theology can be traced to the teaching of Karl Rahner. Though he is not specifically named by many of those who reject moral absolutes, his thought is nevertheless behind the bad metaphysics applied to ethics which surrounds the current climate. - Homiletic & Pastoral Review [https://www.hprweb.com/contact/ask-a-question/]
[Theologian and physicist] Fr. Jaki speaks of Christ as the "greatest fact of history" and laments bitterly that some recent Catholic scholars write as if the narratives of His Nativity and Resurrection had "no strikingly factual character to them," though many with "at least the same intellectual credentials as the best of them" laid down their lives for the truth of those supposedly "mythical" events. Father demands to know "what remains of the Christian faith if it is no longer anchored in reverence for facts as demanded by Christ?" He grieves over "Aquikantian" theologians who fuse Aquinas and Kant. - PERTINACIOUS PAPIST [pblosser.blogspot.com/2009/09/only-one-choice-to-fight.html
Transcendental Thomism: Unlike the first three schools mentioned, this approach, associated with Joseph Marechal (1878-1944), Karl Rahner (1904-84), and Bernard Lonergan (1904-84), does not oppose modern philosophy wholesale, but seeks to reconcile Thomism with a Cartesian subjectivist approach to knowledge in general, and Kantian epistemology in particular. It seems fair to say that most Thomists otherwise tolerant of diverse approaches to Aquinas’s thought tend to regard transcendental Thomism as having conceded too much to modern philosophy genuinely to count as a variety of Thomism - Dr. Edward Feser [http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/10/thomistic-tradition-part-i.html]
[Fr. Robert] Spitzer, a student of the transcendental Thomism of Bernard Lonergan S.J., and also conversant with contemporary developments in science and mathematics, follows in the footsteps of Plato, Aristotle, Kant - The Catholic Thing [https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2016/03/19/the-afterlife-revisited/]
Fr. George Rutler in his 2017 Crisis article said Fr. Antonio Spadaro, and by implication Francis since both he and Spadaro are liberal Jesuits, "grew up in a theological atmosphere of... Transcendental Thomism [which] was Karl Rahner's attempt to wed Thomistic realism with Kantian idealism. Father Stanley Kaki, theologian and physicist, called this stillborn hybrid 'Aquikantianism.'"
(Crisis, "The Mathematical Innovations of Father Spadaro," February 22, 2017)
Both the liberal Jesuits: Spadaro and Francis it appears may be Rahner relativists, as are most Jesuits and all liberal theologians.
Rahner's "Foundation of Theological Study: A Sourcebook" says:
"The German Jesuit Karl Rahner (1904-1984) remains one of most influential theologians of the twentieth century."
(Foundation of Theological Study: A Sourcebook, https://booksgoogle.com>books)
Rahner was a disciple of Kant as Rutler said. Jaki, also, makes this clear in his books on Aquikantists.
Kant taught that one could only know the phenomena of the mind or ideas and not know reality. Jaki wrote:
"Kant, who begins with ideas and, as all the history of modern philosophy shows, never gets to reality."
(Chesterton: A Seer of Science, page 19)
Kant and those who follow him thought God was only a thought. Jaki quotes Kant and explains the citation:
"'God is not a being outside me but merely a thought within me.'"
"That man was his own God, if he needed one, was evidently Kant's conclusion."
(Angels, Apes and Men, page 10)
Rahner's Kantian philosophy lead him to deny the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Fr. Regis Scanlon, OFM, Cap., wrote:
"In 1966 the late Fr. Karl Rahner stated that 'one can no longer maintain today that bread is a substance, as St. Thomas and the Fathers of the Council (of Trent) obviously thought it was'. [Theological Investigations, page 307] For Rahner the 'substance' of a thing did not include its < material and physical> reality, but the 'meaning and purpose' of the thing.  [Karl Rahner, S.J.., p.307; Engelbert Gutwenger, "Transubstantiation,"
(Modern Misconceptions About The Eucharist, PDF, St. Patrick's Basilica > 2016/10, https://Basilica.ca, Provided courtesy of: Eternal Word Television Network)
Jaki thought the "archetype" figure of this type of philosophy which Rahner professed was "Lucifer":
"Kant who once wrote of himself: 'I am an Archangel!' and went on to state repeatedly: 'I am God.' The archetype for this self-enrichment was none other than Lucifer. If one looks for the source of the pride, the self-sufficiency... one merely has to look in the direction of the camp that still breeds Aquikantists... Aquikantists were overjoyed when the invocation of Saint Michael was dropped as a first step towards the new liturgy."
(Newman's Challenge, pages 76-77)
Remember Aquikantists, specifically Rahner, have totally influenced all liberal theologians and many, maybe most, conservative ones.
Pope John Paul II because of philosophical inadequacies had a relativist inter-religious dialogue blind-spot such as in the Assisi scandalous episode unlike Pope Benedict XVI. Scholar Fr. John Coleman S. J. wrote:
"John Hick's pluralist model is based on a Kantian epistemology that undermines, at the outset, any notion of a normative revelation of God in history... In Danielou's theology, the grace of Christ may mysteriously touch individuals outside Christianity but the other religions, their scriptures and rituals, remain purely human customs... Rahner did not make such a strict distinction... John Paul was closer to Rahner... Whereas Ratzinger had warned of the dangers of relativism in inter-religious dialogue." (Inter-Religious Dialogue: Urgent Challenge and Theological Land-Mine, PFD Australian Catholic University>au)
Rahner's influence has effected Francis as well as his inner circle, Catholic colleges, schools and children as well as youth catechism teaching books and their teachers who prepare them for the Sacraments.
Since all liberal Catholics and many conservative ones, knowingly or unknowingly, have been deeply influenced by Rahner's Kantian "theology," is it possible that the crisis in the Church, in large extent, is due to their unconscious and in some cases conscious disbelief in objective reality as well as objective "normative" revelation which leads to disbelief in the Eucharist and God.
Does this explain Francis's panicked reaction against Cardinal Robert Sarah's call for reverence at the Mass and the Holy Eucharist as well as his attacks on the Traditional Latin Mass?
Might Francis believe in the Eucharist in the Rahner Kantian sense?
Why do some Traditionalists want to pretend that the Amoris laetitia and Argentine Letter relativism of Francis is exactly the same as Benedict and John Paul who both believed in the Eucharist and objective morality despite both having major philosophical inadequacies?
Might Francis be a Radner relativist?
Paul C. Vitz, Professor of Psychology at New York University, in his book "Sigmund Freud’s Christian Unconscious" clearly states that Freud was a cocaine addict. I finished E. M. Thornton's book "The Freudian Fallacy." It shows in my opinion very effectively that Freudian Psychology of which our secular sexual society is formed is a fraud and drug fantasy.
After finishing "The Freudian Fallacy," I thought it destroyed Freud the scientist and his theories.
The Colombia University Press say that a "leading intellectual member of France's Freudian school" was a theologian named Michel de Certeau. [http://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-writing-of-history/9780231055758]
Francis considers him the most eminent modern theologian:
"For me, de Certeau is still the greatest theologian for today." (onepeterfive.com, March 8, 2016, "Pope Francis Reveals His Mind to Private Audience")
Rev. Dr. Federico Colautti, ITI, in a talk titled "Pope Francis: Understanding His Language and Mission (1-10-2015)," shows that de Certeau had "a great influence in the Pope's way of being open... [n]ot making faith of a museum":
"I discovered that one of the few quotes he [Francis] makes is from a theologian that I didn’t have a clue about. Maybe you haven’t heard of him—a certain Michel de Certeau. He’s a Jesuit too. I read a little bit about him and it seems this man was always searching. In different moments he studied psychoanalysis and modern philosophies... I can imagine that also this author had a great influence in the Pope’s way of being open and not being afraid of being challenged. Entering into this unsettlement. Not letting faith be a false security in the sense that you believe only in order to hold onto something, and you base your security on something that is not there. Not making faith of a museum—an expression that appears often in the discourses of the Pope —“the Church is not a museum,”... This preference for the periphery could have a relationship with this theologian Michel de Certeau." [https://iti.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/Pope_Francis_Language_and_Mission.pdf]
De Certeau in his greatest book "Heterologies" said:
"It is not Mr. Foucault who is making fun of domains of knowledge... It is history that is laughing at them. It plays tricks on the teleologists who take themselves to be the lieutenants of meaning. A meaninglessness of history." ("Heterologogies," Pages 195-196)
Historian Keith Windschuttle shows that the Francis's favorite modern theologian is a radical who thinks that there is no "access" to outside reality. Windschuttle wrote:
"Of all the French theorists... de Certeau is the most radical. He is critical of the poststructuralist Foucault for his use of documentary evidence and of Derrida for the way he privileges the practice of writing. For de Certeau, writing is a form of oppression... he argues... writing itself constitutes the act of colonisation..."
"Like both structuralist and poststructuralist theorists, de Certeau subscribes to the thesis that we have access only to our language and not to any real, outside world..."
"De Certeau claims that writing can never be objective. Its status is no different from that of fiction. So, because history is a form of writing, all history is also fiction." ("The Killing of History," Pages 31-34)
By Francis's greatest modern theologian's logic then Jesus Christ, true God and true man, who walked the earth during the reign of Pontius Pilate, is fiction.
The central doctrine of Catholicism, the Incarnation, is fiction.
Post Structuralists like de Certeau, more widely known as Postmodernists, believe all reality is fiction or "narrative."
They for the most part appear to change the "narrative" or story usually to compile with their leftist or liberal views on politics, sexual morality or whatever their pet Woke project happens to be:
If Francis is a disciple of de Certeau and Postmodernism, then what ultimately do he and these thinkers believe in?
Philosopher Stephen Hicks said:
The "Left thinkers of the 1950s and 1960s... Confronted by the continued poverty and brutality of socialism, they could either go with the evidence and reject their most cherish ideals - or stick by their ideals and attack the whole idea that evidence and logic matter..."
"Postmodernism is born of the marriage of Left politics and skeptical epistemology..."
"Then, strikingly, postmodernism turns out not to be relativistic at all. Relativism becomes part of a rhetorical political strategy, some Machiavellian realpolitik employed to throw the opposition off track..."
"Here it is useful to recall Derrida: 'deconstruction never had any meaning... than as a radicalization... within the tradition of a certain Marxism, in a certain spirit of Marxism.'" ("Explaining Postmodernism," Page 90, 186)
For Postmodernists like de Certeau, Derrida, Foucault and it appears Francis, if he is their disciple, falsehood or truth doesn't matter.
The only thing that matters is achieving power for their liberal ideology or group.
Instead of economic Marxism, the post-modernist in the 1970's focused on what de Certeau and other post-modernists termed "oppression" of groups.
Power not truth for groups such as women, gays, trans, workers and any sub-category of minorities was the new goal to achieving control.
Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.
Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.