On Neo-Gnostic Ideologies

The great constant in human life, as we live our life stories out in history, is the search to understand the meaning of our lives. The constant temptation is the attempt to assign a meaning to the world of reality rather than discover such meaning as is accessible to our understanding. To discover meaning requires patience and persistent effort--and humility. But life is ultimately short and man tends to be impatient. Throughout history there have been repeated attempts to legislate--as it were, by an act of our will--the meaning of existence: to make the meaning of existence to be what we want it to be rather than humbly submit to such meaning as we may be able to discover.

The urge to follow our will in assigning meaning to existence has become the defining note of modern ideologies, described by Eric Voegelin as neo forms of the ancient gnostic current of thought. The motivation may vary. At times the motivation may be simple despair of achieving certainty in our lives in a disordered world. At other times this urge to will a meaning into existence may be motivated by rage at injustice or, demonically, a will to power. As modern man has rejected traditional Christian faith, he finds himself more and more a prey to ideologies that promise heaven of one sort or another in this life. That promise has become the common currency of American politics, certainly and overtly on the Left, but sometimes more subtly on the Right as well.

Today at the traditionalist Catholic site, One Peter Five, there's a post that discusses this aspect of modern life from a traditionalist Catholic perspective. Unfortunately, the title--Currentism: The Perennial Lie--uses an awkward neologism, but as you'll see the author is speaking of Neognostic ideologies. I'm offering some excerpts below because it may help some to orient themselves in these confusing times in which the Left appears to be riding high in their attempt to propagate the "perennial lie" and to dominate and shape reality to their own desires. As the author maintains, these efforts always lead to tragedy and suffering if not checked, and yet the appeal of the perennial lie to many--as well, also, to those who seek personal power--is undeniable.

Be Careful What You Read at "The Catholic Thing"--It May Not Be Catholic

Today the editors at the well known site The Catholic Thing

Editor in Chief: Robert Royal
Senior Editor: Brad Miner 

Managing Editor: Hannah Russo
Associate Managing Editor: Emily Rowles 

Contributing Editors: Rev. James V. Schall, S.J., Mary Eberstadt, Hadley Arkes, George J. Marlin, Rev. Gerald E. Murray, Ralph McInerny (RIP), Michael Novak (RIP), Anthony Esolen, David Warren, Howard Kainz, Rev. C.J. McCloskey, Randall Smith, Rev. Bevil Bramwell, O.M.I.

saw fit to publish an article by Fr. Robert P. Imbelli, Eucharist and New Creation. Who is Imbelli?

Following his graduation from Yale, Imbelli continued his teaching at St. Joseph's Seminary as a professor of systematic theology.[1] Leaving St. Joseph's, Imbelli continued his teaching at the Maryknoll School of Theology. Finally in 1986, he was given a leadership position as Director of the Institute of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry at Boston College. In 1993, he stepped down from this position and has remained an associate professor of theology.

In addition to teaching, Imbelli has been a prolific contributor to journals and magazines like Commonweal, America and L'Osservatore Romano. He also edited and contributed to a book, Handing on the Faith: the Church's Mission and Challenge, in 2006.[1] In addition to his frequent articles, he maintains an almost daily updated blog on Commonweal.

Imbelli is also the author of Rekindling the Christic Imagination: Theological Meditations for the New Evangelization.

The reference to "the Christic Imagination" is a dead giveaway that we're dealing here with a Teilhardian. "The Christic" is the title of an article that Teilhard de Chardin wrote near the end of his life. If you take a glance at it you'll get a flavor for Teilhard's Gnostic, non-Christian, cosmogony. In it you'll find such gems as:

It is Christ, in very truth, who saves,

— but should we not immediately add that at the same time it is Christ who is saved by

Evolution?

Another Attempted Defense of Ratzinger's Orthodoxy

Sandro Magister has published a second blog in which a writer attempts to defend Ratzinger's orthodoxy against Antonio Livi's initial critique of Ratzinger: Why Ratzinger Is Not a Heretic. As in the case of the first defense of Ratzinger that Magister published, this defense is written by a person who is not a professional, philosopher: Francesco Arzillo, "an administrative magistrate of Rome who is also an esteemed author of works of philosophy and theology." While avoiding addressing the specifics of Livi's critique of Ratzinger--which revolve around Ratzinger's concept of faith--Arzillo attempts to portray Ratzinger's views as substantially identical to those attributed in Acts to St. Paul in his address to the Greeks at the Areopagus. This metaphor has a certain significance. Paul's address at the Areopagus is regarded as a model for the Church's outreach to non-believers and an expression of the Church's natural theology, so Arzillo is using this metaphor to suggest the same regarding Ratzinger: not only is Ratzinger to be viewed as a bulwark against heretics but he's a model for outreach to non-believers. As we will see, however, Ratzinger's attempts to assimilate Paul's views to his own simply don't work. Arzillo begins his defense by quoting a number of passages from an address Ratzinger gave in Paris as Benedict XVI.