I had intended to write today about the translation error in the English version of the recent Synod’s final document.
However, over at The Catholic Thing, Robert Royal covers the issue well and says many of the same things I had intended to say, and he does so masterfully. I urge you to read his piece.
Royal also comments on the demotion of Card. Burke, saying:
There’s a double sadness here. Pope Francis clearly approved these moves – whether they were instigated by him personally or by advisers he listens to. But it’s precisely voices like Burke’s that he needs to keep around.
He’s already hearing plenty from often unreliable counselors like Cardinals Maradiaga, Marx, and Kasper. The last in particular seems more and more incoherent as he tries to explain precisely why marriage is indissoluble and yet those in a second sexual relationship – though not a marriage – may be absolved and return to receiving Communion. The only way that’s possible is if God repeals the Law of Non-contradiction. I don’t think that’s on his to-do list.
But there’s more and, I think, worse. I’m not especially given to conspiracy theories in sacred or secular contexts. But there’s some – let’s say – systemic problem within the Vatican that having a loyal truth-teller like Burke around helps to correct. The Catholic Monitor [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2018/11/fr-z-flashback-cdl-burke-fired-god.html]
There have been something like FORTY antipopes in the past 2000 years, and every one was contested in real time, and almost all were deposed and ejected whilst squatting upon the See of Peter. One of the reasons that the Antipapacy of Anacletus II is so unusual is precisely because he died naturally “in office” after an eight year usurpation. St. Bernard of Clairvaux was the man who went to Rome WHILE ANACLETUS was still alive, and methodically demonstrated to the clergy and the aristocracy of Rome that Anacletus II was an Antipope, such that after Anacletus II died and his “successor” Antipope Victor IV was “elected”, Antipope Victor IV quickly repented after TWO DAYS as Antipope and presented himself to the true Pope, Innocent II. Bernard of Clairvaux and others worked tirelessly and persistently to correct the situation, remove the Antipope and restore the true Pope to the Chair IN REAL TIME. If one listens to the irrational gibberish being spewed today by these intransigent “Fwanciss is Pope shuddup stoopid schismatic!” partisans, one would have to declare that St. Bernard of Clairvaux committed the MORTAL SIN of SCHISM for even daring to question the legal and ontological truth of the identity of the Vicar of Christ on earth. Even though St. Bernard was 100% correct, according to these people today who, if one didn’t know better might think that they belong to some sort of cult that revolves around the violation of the Law of Non-contradiction as its very creed, are arguing that he was in “mortal sin” for EVEN ASKING THE QUESTION. So, according to the “Fwanciss is Pope shuddup stoopid schismatic” set, St. Bernard of Clairvaux was BOTH an unrepentant mortally sinful schismatic, AND is a SAINT AND DOCTOR OF THE CHURCH. Yet another fat, juicy violation of the Law of Non-contradiction. Another attempted denial and upending of Reality itself. Remember folks, ONLY THE REAL COUNTS. ONLY THE REAL MATTERS. Anything that involves any violation of the Law of Non-contradiction is either a LIE or a FANTASY. - Ann Barnhardt [https://www.barnhardt.biz/]
I don’t mean the bloody red demon exorcist green-pea-soup satanism, though that certainly exists and is the true darker side of it, and I don’t mean the LARPy dress-up ackshually satanism of redditors. I mean in the worst sense, the Luciferian Freemasonic sense, where man thinks himself Godlike. This is beyond the idea that man sole measure of all things, but that man is also the creator of things. - Renowned statistician and scholar William Briggs
Ironically, Francis conservative Carl E. Olson shows the history of nominalism and it's implicit Lutheran connection to what Francis's most eminent modern theologian Certeau's nonimalism teachings ultimately are and implicitly why Francis's beloved Martin Luther noninalistic thinking helped bring about the present Certeau/Derrida WOKE "hyper-nominalism" of Joe Biden's transgender post-truth America and the world. - The Catholic Monitor
In January, renowned statistician and scholar William Briggs wrote that "Justice Anthony Kennedy Is A Satanist":
Anthony Kennedy, while sitting as a Supreme Court Justice, in an infamous ruling wrote, “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
This is satanism.
I don’t mean the bloody red demon exorcist green-pea-soup satanism, though that certainly exists and is the true darker side of it, and I don’t mean the LARPy dress-up ackshually satanism of redditors. I mean in the worst sense, the Luciferian Freemasonic sense, where man thinks himself Godlike.. This is beyond the idea that man sole measure of all things, but that man is also the creator of things...
... If Kennedy is right, you have no foundation, no basis at all, to prove me wrong. You may only disagree. Your disagreement means nothing. It is mere air. Especially if you are weaker than I, and it is dinner time.
As idiotic as this disproof is, it is valid because it relies on ideas we all have embedded into us, or we quickly learn, which are certain universal notions. It is that now we (especially the young) deny them. Or pretend to. It is the retreat from universalism that led to Kennedy and to us.
We can thank especially William of Ockham, he of the dull razor fame, for this. At the peak of Realism in philosophy, the glorious Middle Ages (an apt term), certain academic thoughts occurred to those impatient with the rigor of the schoolmen. Thoughts of doubt. Which became a mark of sophistication. Which, through the passing of years and encrustation of theory, led to the considered-brilliant solution: we are certain we can never be certain.
Anyway, Ockham was the father of nominalism, which is the denial of universals, and therefore of underlying fixed Reality. [https://wmbriggs.com/post/38845/]
If "nominalist" Justice Kennedy is a "satanist" then is Francis a "satanist," too?
The nominalist Michel de Certeau believed in all of the above.
In simple words, de Certeau's theology denies objective truth.
The Francis considers him the most eminent modern theologian. Francis said:
"For me, de Certeau is still the greatest theologian for today." (onepeterfive.com, March 8, 2016, "Pope Francis Reveals His Mind to Private Audience")
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 Pope's favorite modern theologian is a radical who thinks that there is no 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)
"According to this new approach to the Biblical narrative, the focal event of Christianity is not the incarnation, the crucifixion, or the resurrection of Christ, but the empty tomb. The Christian form of life is no longer associated with a place, a body, or an institution, but with a quest for a missing body: the missing body of the people of Israel, and mutatis mutandis the missing body of Jesus."
(Article by Johannes Hoff, "Mysticism, Ecclesiology And The Body Christ: Certeau's (Mis-) Reading of Corpus Mystium and the Legacy of Henri de Lubac" Page 87, Titus Brandsma Institute Studies In Spirituality, Supplement 24, "Spiritual Spaces: History and Mysticism in Michel De Certeau")
The nihilist theologian believes that the central truths of Christianity are about "absence" or nonexistence. De Certeau scholar Graham Ward wrote:
"For de Lubac the... Eucharist is not a sign of the presence of Christ's body, it is Christ's body... And yet Certeau... makes the Eucharist (as later the church and body of mystical text he treats) into substitutes, acts of bereavement, signs of absence." ("Michel de Certeau - in the Plural, " Page 511)
In other words, Francis's greatest modern theologian believes that the Eucharist is not the body of Christ present, he doesn't even believe it is a sign of the presence of Christ's body like some Protestants, but a sign of "absence."
Might de Certeau's influence on Francis be the reason he never kneels before the Eucharist, but kneels to wash the feet of those he like Certeau might consider oppressed?
For the most part, de Certeau appears to have gotten these ideas from the postmodernist Jacques Derrida.
The scholar Pablo Markin states that Francis "departs from...Thomistic positions" in his "close" following of apparent nominalist Marion's teachings in his encyclical Amoris Laetitia:
"Oltvai argues that Pope Francis, born as Jorge Bergoglio in Buenos Aires, Argentina, departs from the Thomistic positions of his predecessor, while adopting the notions of the face, the gaze and the other in his pontifical communication, such as in Evangelii gaudium and Amoris Laetitia. This stands close to the philosophical positions of not only Levinas, but also those of Marion, a French Catholic theologian, phenomenological philosopher and a student of [postmodernist Heideggerian] Jacques Derrida." [https://dgo.hypotheses.org/221]
The Pro Quest website showed that Francis's most important theologian and nominalist Derrida are close collaborators:
This article presents the connection between Michel de Certeau and Jacques Derrida on two key issues for both authors: the mystical and writing. Their positions and common grounds about desire, necessity and the ineffable are shown here through references to their main works. [https://www.proquest.com/docview/2089762984]
The Cairn Information site says that the top teacher Francis is a type of mystical tradition of nominalism:
The question of language enables us to make our way through the entire work. Quite early on, the mystical tradition appeared to Certeau as a particular writing, a language whose characteristics it was important to define. In doing so, he tore spirituality away from insolvable theological debates that it had become the prisoner of. At the same time, he encountered the radical questions posed to philosophy and theology by taking seriously how language functions, from the nominalist crisis to Wittgenstein and Derrida. [https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_RSR_161_0033--michel-de-certeau-and-the-question-of.htm]
Ironically, Francis conservative Carl E. Olson shows the history of nominalism and it's implicit Lutheran connection to what Francis's most eminent modern theologian Certeau's nonimalism teachings ultimately are and implicitly why Francis's beloved Martin Luther noninalistic thinking helped bring about the present Certeau/Derrida WOKE "hyper-nominalism" of Joe Biden's transgender post-truth America and the world:
Whereas St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) had taught that man can know the true, objective essence of things, Ockham denied it was possible. As Benjamin Wiker observed in Moral Darwinism (InterVarsity, 2002), Ockham believed that "when we use the word dog there is really no universal entity, essence or dog-ness that we perceive. Dog is merely a name we apply to particular things that happen to look alike. Hence, the name of his system, nominalism, for the Latin nomen, 'name.'"
In other words, nominalism is a philosophical system claiming that everything outside the mind is completely individual: Reality cannot be comprehended through the use of universal and abstract concepts but only through the empirical study of specific, individual objects. Historian and Benedictine monk David Knowles, in The Evolution of Medieval Thought, wrote that nominalism holds that "there is no such thing as a universal, and it is nonsense to speak of the thing known as present in an intelligible form in the mind of the knower."
[...]
Ockham went so far as to say that the Incarnation had value only to the extent God gave it value; God could have redeemed mankind just as easily by becoming a stone, tree, or donkey. If there is no common, or universal, human nature, the Incarnation was not so much about the Logos taking on human nature as it was about God working as he wishes, in a manner unrelated to any sort of logic or reason.
Because of the arbitrary nature of reality, man cannot know the essential nature of sin and grace. Thus, he has no way of knowing his state before God — outside of intuition and inner experience...
... Ockham went so far as to say that the Incarnation had value only to the extent God gave it value; God could have redeemed mankind just as easily by becoming a stone, tree, or donkey. If there is no common, or universal, human nature, the Incarnation was not so much about the Logos taking on human nature as it was about God working as he wishes, in a manner unrelated to any sort of logic or reason.
Because of the arbitrary nature of reality, man cannot know the essential nature of sin and grace. Thus, he has no way of knowing his state before God — outside of intuition and inner experience...
... Like a stream growing as it flows from a mountain into a valley, nominalism has helped shape modernity's view of God, man, and reality. Ockham's focus on empirical knowledge played a vital role in Luther and Calvin looking inwardly in search of faith. But it was not long before Enlightenment thinkers would cast aside the tenuous reality of self-enclosed faith and begin searching for data and evidence in a new way...
... What the Protestant revolt and later modernity had in common was that a subjective, individualistic view of reality turned into the essential basis of knowledge. The difference was in the object of focus. The Reformers looked to God, relying on intuitive, subjective experience. Later thinkers, relying on their own intuitive experiences, concluded that man is autonomous and God is unnecessary. The former resulted in Lutheranism, Calvinism and a host of splintering groups. The latter resulted in all sorts of nasty "isms": empiricism, positivism, moral relativism, and deconstructionism.
Summarized, the move toward subjective and intuitive knowledge, opposed to abstract and universal knowledge, led to increasingly radical philosophical propositions. G.W. F. Hegel, Immanuel Kant, and Karl Marx pushed the envelope of nominalist-indebted thought. German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) wrote, "There are no facts, only interpretations" — a sentiment echoed in the common contemporary refrain: "There is no truth, only opinions."
In the twentieth century, Jacques Derrida's work in deconstruction — which asserts that truth cannot be known and words lack real meaning — was a type of hyper-nominalism.[https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6802]
I had intended to write today about the translation error in the English version of the recent Synod’s final document.
However, over at The Catholic Thing, Robert Royal covers the issue well and says many of the same things I had intended to say, and he does so masterfully. I urge you to read his piece.
Royal also comments on the demotion of Card. Burke, saying:
There’s a double sadness here. Pope Francis clearly approved these moves – whether they were instigated by him personally or by advisers he listens to. But it’s precisely voices like Burke’s that he needs to keep around.
He’s already hearing plenty from often unreliable counselors like Cardinals Maradiaga, Marx, and Kasper. The last in particular seems more and more incoherent as he tries to explain precisely why marriage is indissoluble and yet those in a second sexual relationship – though not a marriage – may be absolved and return to receiving Communion. The only way that’s possible is if God repeals the Law of Non-contradiction. I don’t think that’s on his to-do list.
But there’s more and, I think, worse. I’m not especially given to conspiracy theories in sacred or secular contexts. But there’s some – let’s say – systemic problem within the Vatican that having a loyal truth-teller like Burke around helps to correct. The Catholic Monitor [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2018/11/fr-z-flashback-cdl-burke-fired-god.html]
There have been something like FORTY antipopes in the past 2000 years, and every one was contested in real time, and almost all were deposed and ejected whilst squatting upon the See of Peter. One of the reasons that the Antipapacy of Anacletus II is so unusual is precisely because he died naturally “in office” after an eight year usurpation. St. Bernard of Clairvaux was the man who went to Rome WHILE ANACLETUS was still alive, and methodically demonstrated to the clergy and the aristocracy of Rome that Anacletus II was an Antipope, such that after Anacletus II died and his “successor” Antipope Victor IV was “elected”, Antipope Victor IV quickly repented after TWO DAYS as Antipope and presented himself to the true Pope, Innocent II. Bernard of Clairvaux and others worked tirelessly and persistently to correct the situation, remove the Antipope and restore the true Pope to the Chair IN REAL TIME. If one listens to the irrational gibberish being spewed today by these intransigent “Fwanciss is Pope shuddup stoopid schismatic!” partisans, one would have to declare that St. Bernard of Clairvaux committed the MORTAL SIN of SCHISM for even daring to question the legal and ontological truth of the identity of the Vicar of Christ on earth. Even though St. Bernard was 100% correct, according to these people today who, if one didn’t know better might think that they belong to some sort of cult that revolves around the violation of the Law of Non-contradiction as its very creed, are arguing that he was in “mortal sin” for EVEN ASKING THE QUESTION. So, according to the “Fwanciss is Pope shuddup stoopid schismatic” set, St. Bernard of Clairvaux was BOTH an unrepentant mortally sinful schismatic, AND is a SAINT AND DOCTOR OF THE CHURCH. Yet another fat, juicy violation of the Law of Non-contradiction. Another attempted denial and upending of Reality itself. Remember folks, ONLY THE REAL COUNTS. ONLY THE REAL MATTERS. Anything that involves any violation of the Law of Non-contradiction is either a LIE or a FANTASY. - Ann Barnhardt [https://www.barnhardt.biz/]
I don’t mean the bloody red demon exorcist green-pea-soup satanism, though that certainly exists and is the true darker side of it, and I don’t mean the LARPy dress-up ackshually satanism of redditors. I mean in the worst sense, the Luciferian Freemasonic sense, where man thinks himself Godlike. This is beyond the idea that man sole measure of all things, but that man is also the creator of things. - Renowned statistician and scholar William Briggs
Ironically, Francis conservative Carl E. Olson shows the history of nominalism and it's implicit Lutheran connection to what Francis's most eminent modern theologian Certeau's nonimalism teachings ultimately are and implicitly why Francis's beloved Martin Luther noninalistic thinking helped bring about the present Certeau/Derrida WOKE "hyper-nominalism" of Joe Biden's transgender post-truth America and the world. - The Catholic Monitor
In January, renowned statistician and scholar William Briggs wrote that "Justice Anthony Kennedy Is A Satanist":
Anthony Kennedy, while sitting as a Supreme Court Justice, in an infamous ruling wrote, “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
This is satanism.
I don’t mean the bloody red demon exorcist green-pea-soup satanism, though that certainly exists and is the true darker side of it, and I don’t mean the LARPy dress-up ackshually satanism of redditors. I mean in the worst sense, the Luciferian Freemasonic sense, where man thinks himself Godlike.. This is beyond the idea that man sole measure of all things, but that man is also the creator of things...
... If Kennedy is right, you have no foundation, no basis at all, to prove me wrong. You may only disagree. Your disagreement means nothing. It is mere air. Especially if you are weaker than I, and it is dinner time.
As idiotic as this disproof is, it is valid because it relies on ideas we all have embedded into us, or we quickly learn, which are certain universal notions. It is that now we (especially the young) deny them. Or pretend to. It is the retreat from universalism that led to Kennedy and to us.
We can thank especially William of Ockham, he of the dull razor fame, for this. At the peak of Realism in philosophy, the glorious Middle Ages (an apt term), certain academic thoughts occurred to those impatient with the rigor of the schoolmen. Thoughts of doubt. Which became a mark of sophistication. Which, through the passing of years and encrustation of theory, led to the considered-brilliant solution: we are certain we can never be certain.
Anyway, Ockham was the father of nominalism, which is the denial of universals, and therefore of underlying fixed Reality. [https://wmbriggs.com/post/38845/]
If "nominalist" Justice Kennedy is a "satanist" then is Francis a "satanist," too?
The nominalist Michel de Certeau believed in all of the above.
In simple words, de Certeau's theology denies objective truth.
The Francis considers him the most eminent modern theologian. Francis said:
"For me, de Certeau is still the greatest theologian for today." (onepeterfive.com, March 8, 2016, "Pope Francis Reveals His Mind to Private Audience")
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 Pope's favorite modern theologian is a radical who thinks that there is no 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)
"According to this new approach to the Biblical narrative, the focal event of Christianity is not the incarnation, the crucifixion, or the resurrection of Christ, but the empty tomb. The Christian form of life is no longer associated with a place, a body, or an institution, but with a quest for a missing body: the missing body of the people of Israel, and mutatis mutandis the missing body of Jesus."
(Article by Johannes Hoff, "Mysticism, Ecclesiology And The Body Christ: Certeau's (Mis-) Reading of Corpus Mystium and the Legacy of Henri de Lubac" Page 87, Titus Brandsma Institute Studies In Spirituality, Supplement 24, "Spiritual Spaces: History and Mysticism in Michel De Certeau")
The nihilist theologian believes that the central truths of Christianity are about "absence" or nonexistence. De Certeau scholar Graham Ward wrote:
"For de Lubac the... Eucharist is not a sign of the presence of Christ's body, it is Christ's body... And yet Certeau... makes the Eucharist (as later the church and body of mystical text he treats) into substitutes, acts of bereavement, signs of absence." ("Michel de Certeau - in the Plural, " Page 511)
In other words, Francis's greatest modern theologian believes that the Eucharist is not the body of Christ present, he doesn't even believe it is a sign of the presence of Christ's body like some Protestants, but a sign of "absence."
Might de Certeau's influence on Francis be the reason he never kneels before the Eucharist, but kneels to wash the feet of those he like Certeau might consider oppressed?
For the most part, de Certeau appears to have gotten these ideas from the postmodernist Jacques Derrida.
The scholar Pablo Markin states that Francis "departs from...Thomistic positions" in his "close" following of apparent nominalist Marion's teachings in his encyclical Amoris Laetitia:
"Oltvai argues that Pope Francis, born as Jorge Bergoglio in Buenos Aires, Argentina, departs from the Thomistic positions of his predecessor, while adopting the notions of the face, the gaze and the other in his pontifical communication, such as in Evangelii gaudium and Amoris Laetitia. This stands close to the philosophical positions of not only Levinas, but also those of Marion, a French Catholic theologian, phenomenological philosopher and a student of [postmodernist Heideggerian] Jacques Derrida." [https://dgo.hypotheses.org/221]
The Pro Quest website showed that Francis's most important theologian and nominalist Derrida are close collaborators:
This article presents the connection between Michel de Certeau and Jacques Derrida on two key issues for both authors: the mystical and writing. Their positions and common grounds about desire, necessity and the ineffable are shown here through references to their main works. [https://www.proquest.com/docview/2089762984]
The Cairn Information site says that the top teacher Francis is a type of mystical tradition of nominalism:
The question of language enables us to make our way through the entire work. Quite early on, the mystical tradition appeared to Certeau as a particular writing, a language whose characteristics it was important to define. In doing so, he tore spirituality away from insolvable theological debates that it had become the prisoner of. At the same time, he encountered the radical questions posed to philosophy and theology by taking seriously how language functions, from the nominalist crisis to Wittgenstein and Derrida. [https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_RSR_161_0033--michel-de-certeau-and-the-question-of.htm]
Ironically, Francis conservative Carl E. Olson shows the history of nominalism and it's implicit Lutheran connection to what Francis's most eminent modern theologian Certeau's nonimalism teachings ultimately are and implicitly why Francis's beloved Martin Luther noninalistic thinking helped bring about the present Certeau/Derrida WOKE "hyper-nominalism" of Joe Biden's transgender post-truth America and the world:
Whereas St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) had taught that man can know the true, objective essence of things, Ockham denied it was possible. As Benjamin Wiker observed in Moral Darwinism (InterVarsity, 2002), Ockham believed that "when we use the word dog there is really no universal entity, essence or dog-ness that we perceive. Dog is merely a name we apply to particular things that happen to look alike. Hence, the name of his system, nominalism, for the Latin nomen, 'name.'"
In other words, nominalism is a philosophical system claiming that everything outside the mind is completely individual: Reality cannot be comprehended through the use of universal and abstract concepts but only through the empirical study of specific, individual objects. Historian and Benedictine monk David Knowles, in The Evolution of Medieval Thought, wrote that nominalism holds that "there is no such thing as a universal, and it is nonsense to speak of the thing known as present in an intelligible form in the mind of the knower."
[...]
Ockham went so far as to say that the Incarnation had value only to the extent God gave it value; God could have redeemed mankind just as easily by becoming a stone, tree, or donkey. If there is no common, or universal, human nature, the Incarnation was not so much about the Logos taking on human nature as it was about God working as he wishes, in a manner unrelated to any sort of logic or reason.
Because of the arbitrary nature of reality, man cannot know the essential nature of sin and grace. Thus, he has no way of knowing his state before God — outside of intuition and inner experience...
... Ockham went so far as to say that the Incarnation had value only to the extent God gave it value; God could have redeemed mankind just as easily by becoming a stone, tree, or donkey. If there is no common, or universal, human nature, the Incarnation was not so much about the Logos taking on human nature as it was about God working as he wishes, in a manner unrelated to any sort of logic or reason.
Because of the arbitrary nature of reality, man cannot know the essential nature of sin and grace. Thus, he has no way of knowing his state before God — outside of intuition and inner experience...
... Like a stream growing as it flows from a mountain into a valley, nominalism has helped shape modernity's view of God, man, and reality. Ockham's focus on empirical knowledge played a vital role in Luther and Calvin looking inwardly in search of faith. But it was not long before Enlightenment thinkers would cast aside the tenuous reality of self-enclosed faith and begin searching for data and evidence in a new way...
... What the Protestant revolt and later modernity had in common was that a subjective, individualistic view of reality turned into the essential basis of knowledge. The difference was in the object of focus. The Reformers looked to God, relying on intuitive, subjective experience. Later thinkers, relying on their own intuitive experiences, concluded that man is autonomous and God is unnecessary. The former resulted in Lutheranism, Calvinism and a host of splintering groups. The latter resulted in all sorts of nasty "isms": empiricism, positivism, moral relativism, and deconstructionism.
Summarized, the move toward subjective and intuitive knowledge, opposed to abstract and universal knowledge, led to increasingly radical philosophical propositions. G.W. F. Hegel, Immanuel Kant, and Karl Marx pushed the envelope of nominalist-indebted thought. German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) wrote, "There are no facts, only interpretations" — a sentiment echoed in the common contemporary refrain: "There is no truth, only opinions."
In the twentieth century, Jacques Derrida's work in deconstruction — which asserts that truth cannot be known and words lack real meaning — was a type of hyper-nominalism.[https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6802]
Hyper-nominalism is just another word for Modernism. Is Francis a Modernist (hyper-nominalist)?
Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia.
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.
Francis Notes:
– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:
“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)
Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]
– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html
– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html
– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html
– LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:
The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”
– On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:
“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”
– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:
“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.
Election Notes:
– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]
– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html
– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1
– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1]
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.
Pray an Our Father now for America.
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Comments