Suscipe Domine Traditional Catholic Forum

The Church Courtyard => Traditional Catholic Discussion => Topic started by: Geremia on August 08, 2019, 06:49:44 PM

Title: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Geremia on August 08, 2019, 06:49:44 PM
Simone Weil (https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/philosophy-and-religion/philosophy-biographies/simone-weil#citationTrigger-437202) was a neo-Cathar (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm) whom John XXIII ("Oh yes, I love this soul!" (https://books.google.com/books?id=B1NOn1byLnEC&pg=PR12#q="O yes, I love this soul")) and Paul VI both considered important influences in their intellectual deformation.

Year of Three Popes p. 2 (https://archive.org/details/yearofthreepopes00hebb/page/2):
Quote
He [Paul VI] was theologically [de]formed by reading [Liberal] Maritain, [ecumaniac/Protestant] Congar, and [nature≡grace] de Lubac, and intellectually [de]formed by [Jansenist] Pascal, Bernanos, and [Jew-neo-Cathar] Simone Weil.

Weil wrote a letter circa 1940 in which "she spoke of her admiration for the Catharist (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm) movement and used the word adherence as opposed to curiosity" (Joseph Marie Perrin, O.P., Simone Weil As We Knew Her (https://isidore.co/calibre/#panel=book_details&book_id=7109) pt. 1, ch. 6, fn. 2).

Like the Cathars (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm), Weil
During this octave of the feast of St. Dominic, may he intercede for the extirpation from the Church of Modernism—the synthesis of all heresies, including those of the neo-Cathars and Albigensians!
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: gsas on September 10, 2019, 10:50:20 AM
The Cathars were right in many things.  To this day it is theologically unclear why the 13th century Church labelled them heretics, apart from political and financial reason.  The Cathars understood the relationship between Christ and incarnation / re-incarnation.  Also, there is no Biblical proof, that the "go forth and multiply" is not evil.  God handed Job over to the devil too, it is about as evil as that.  Some sacrificial practices and family practices of the Cathars are disturbing and abusive though.  Apart from the abuse, I can't find a theological reason why generally speaking the Cathars weren't correct.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: GloriaPatri on September 10, 2019, 11:19:42 AM
The Cathars were right in many things.  To this day it is theologically unclear why the 13th century Church labelled them heretics, apart from political and financial reason.  The Cathars understood the relationship between Christ and incarnation / re-incarnation.  Also, there is no Biblical proof, that the "go forth and multiply" is not evil.  God handed Job over to the devil too, it is about as evil as that.  Some sacrificial practices and family practices of the Cathars are disturbing and abusive though.  Apart from the abuse, I can't find a theological reason why generally speaking the Cathars weren't correct.

The Cathars were gnostics, believing that creation was the work of an evil demiurge (identified with the God of the OT) opposed to the good God of Jesus and the NT. They were heretics through and through.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: gsas on September 10, 2019, 03:21:07 PM
The Cathars were right in many things.  To this day it is theologically unclear why the 13th century Church labelled them heretics, apart from political and financial reason.  The Cathars understood the relationship between Christ and incarnation / re-incarnation.  Also, there is no Biblical proof, that the "go forth and multiply" is not evil.  God handed Job over to the devil too, it is about as evil as that.  Some sacrificial practices and family practices of the Cathars are disturbing and abusive though.  Apart from the abuse, I can't find a theological reason why generally speaking the Cathars weren't correct.

The Cathars were gnostics, believing that creation was the work of an evil demiurge (identified with the God of the OT) opposed to the good God of Jesus and the NT. They were heretics through and through.

I think the word heretic is too politically and financially tainted for the latest 1000 years.  Certainly, herecy is a big problem, but it can only be refuted by solid theological argument, and such theological argument has never been produced against the Cathars.  I can find plenty of problems with Gnosticism, many of which are pure inventions, never explained, thus squarely a herecy.  But the most popular Cathar theses, including the one you mention about the evil nature of creation has never been refuted.  In fact, Romans 20 with the universal frustration for the Hope, plus James' declaration of all material things controlled by the devil, plus the Revelations' account of Earth passing away in failure of that Hope, plus a few others, all are rather in support of the Cathar theses.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Davis Blank - EG on September 10, 2019, 06:59:54 PM
Heresy is refuted by authoritative declarations of the Church, any theological argument provided is additional and unnecessary.

Literally the first sentence of the Bible identifies that God created all things.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Daniel on September 10, 2019, 07:03:29 PM
But the most popular Cathar theses, including the one you mention about the evil nature of creation has never been refuted.
It's right there in the credo. "Factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium." i.e. God created the entire world, not just the spiritual stuff. Of course, you could reject the credo... but that's heresy by definition.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: gsas on September 10, 2019, 08:10:59 PM
Heresy is refuted by authoritative declarations of the Church, any theological argument provided is additional and unnecessary.

Literally the first sentence of the Bible identifies that God created all things.

I think the cathars didn't challenge whether God created everything but rather if the creation was evil or not.  In Genesis, God creates a good world, then it gets quickly evilized by us.  I think the cathar thesis is that there was no way for eve to run to from the constant fast talking of the serpent.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: gsas on September 10, 2019, 08:14:58 PM
But the most popular Cathar theses, including the one you mention about the evil nature of creation has never been refuted.
It's right there in the credo. "Factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium." i.e. God created the entire world, not just the spiritual stuff. Of course, you could reject the credo... but that's heresy by definition.

I think the cathar thesis doesn't challenge that, but rather the freedom of the serpent to talk eve deaf until she submitted.  To this very day, this is the standard method how evil people invite the devil into their victims.  And so since nobody is then immune, you get to equate evil with the whole creation.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: mikemac on September 10, 2019, 08:30:56 PM
gsas we genuflect during the Credo, Last Gospel and Angelus when the words “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” because of the infiltration of the Cathars.

https://semper-excelsius.com/2018/06/22/genuflection-last-gospel-mass/

Quote
Ever wondered why we make a genuflection during the Credo, Last Gospel and Angelus when the words “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” (Jn. 1:14) are being said?

The origin of this practice goes way back. In the 13th century, France was plagued by the heresy of the Cathars, often referred to the Albigensians. Amongst other things, the Cathars rejected the divinity of Jesus Christ and said He was only human. The saintly Louis IX, King of France, was so distraught over their false teachings that one day during Holy Mass at the royal chapel, he knelt in reparation during the words “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” at the last Gospel, since this phrase from the first chapter of St. John’s gospel is a radical testimony to the divinity of Our Lord, and thus a rejection of the Cathar heresy.

The genuflection of King St. Louis made such a profound impression upon all that attended, that soon the entire royal chapel and shortly afterwards the whole of France started making the genuflection. Finally the practice was instituted by the Holy See as an official part of the liturgy for the Universal Church.

You may want to read up on the heresy.

Albigenses
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm

Cathari
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03435a.htm
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Non Nobis on September 11, 2019, 03:48:02 AM
But the most popular Cathar theses, including the one you mention about the evil nature of creation has never been refuted.
It's right there in the credo. "Factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium." i.e. God created the entire world, not just the spiritual stuff. Of course, you could reject the credo... but that's heresy by definition.

I think the cathar thesis doesn't challenge that, but rather the freedom of the serpent to talk eve deaf until she submitted.  To this very day, this is the standard method how evil people invite the devil into their victims.  And so since nobody is then immune, you get to equate evil with the whole creation.

When Lucifer (Satan) was created, he too was good, the greatest of all the angels. When he fell the evil came from himself alone.  He (whom we now call Satan) went on to deceive Eve by his intellect, which was far more powerful than hers, and she could not have outwitted him. But the one thing she could have done was to pray for help from God. She accepted Satan's lie not only because her own intellect was weak, but I think because she WANTED the lie to be true - she wanted to be "as God".   She should have turned to God recognizing her own temptation, weakness, and confusion.

Everyone is capable of prayer. The devil cannot force our will, and our will can always turn to God in prayer.  We don't always turn to God - no one is immune to temptation, and we don't always pray - but it is possible for anyone. The devil has no power over God.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: gsas on September 11, 2019, 12:20:43 PM
But the most popular Cathar theses, including the one you mention about the evil nature of creation has never been refuted.
It's right there in the credo. "Factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium." i.e. God created the entire world, not just the spiritual stuff. Of course, you could reject the credo... but that's heresy by definition.

I think the cathar thesis doesn't challenge that, but rather the freedom of the serpent to talk eve deaf until she submitted.  To this very day, this is the standard method how evil people invite the devil into their victims.  And so since nobody is then immune, you get to equate evil with the whole creation.

When Lucifer (Satan) was created, he too was good, the greatest of all the angels. When he fell the evil came from himself alone.  He (whom we now call Satan) went on to deceive Eve by his intellect, which was far more powerful than hers, and she could not have outwitted him. But the one thing she could have done was to pray for help from God. She accepted Satan's lie not only because her own intellect was weak, but I think because she WANTED the lie to be true - she wanted to be "as God".   She should have turned to God recognizing her own temptation, weakness, and confusion.

Everyone is capable of prayer. The devil cannot force our will, and our will can always turn to God in prayer.  We don't always turn to God - no one is immune to temptation, and we don't always pray - but it is possible for anyone. The devil has no power over God.


I agree, and what is also very interesting is, that God, although omnipotent, made himself distant when Eve and the serpent talked.  Yes, Eve could have prayed to God, to bring Him into the discussion but she didn't. 

I still find a problem with blaming Eve's will.  We know for a fact from 1000's of cases for a 1000 years, that your will power/content is not any more immune to the devil than anything else about you, so it is not fair to question Eve's will. 

Eve though had the advantage of knowing God before meeting the devil, which most children today don't ever stand a chance to.  With the Church down to 2 % in every country + school curricula going atheist, the devil has his job easier, he doesn't even have to first smooth talk us about the non-existence of God. 

We are now double-Eves.

Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: gsas on September 11, 2019, 12:32:34 PM
Heresy is refuted by authoritative declarations of the Church, any theological argument provided is additional and unnecessary.

Literally the first sentence of the Bible identifies that God created all things.

It is ineffective to refute heresy by authority.  Only Jesus Christ Himself can do that.  But even He resorted to theological arguments, mainly the Book of Deuteronomy. 

When you use only authority and no theology in refuting heresy, you run the risk of not being able to tell apart heresy from political / financial wisecracking.  Plus even if it is heresy, the heresy may turn out correct and become theology, and vice versa.

Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Prayerful on September 12, 2019, 04:01:10 PM
Simone Weil (https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/philosophy-and-religion/philosophy-biographies/simone-weil#citationTrigger-437202) was a neo-Cathar (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm) whom John XXIII ("Oh yes, I love this soul!" (https://books.google.com/books?id=B1NOn1byLnEC&pg=PR12#q="O yes, I love this soul")) and Paul VI both considered important influences in their intellectual deformation.

Year of Three Popes p. 2 (https://archive.org/details/yearofthreepopes00hebb/page/2):
Quote
He [Paul VI] was theologically [de]formed by reading [Liberal] Maritain, [ecumaniac/Protestant] Congar, and [nature≡grace] de Lubac, and intellectually [de]formed by [Jansenist] Pascal, Bernanos, and [Jew-neo-Cathar] Simone Weil.

Weil wrote a letter circa 1940 in which "she spoke of her admiration for the Catharist (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm) movement and used the word adherence as opposed to curiosity" (Joseph Marie Perrin, O.P., Simone Weil As We Knew Her (https://isidore.co/calibre/#panel=book_details&book_id=7109) pt. 1, ch. 6, fn. 2).

Like the Cathars (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm), Weil
  • rejected the Old Testament, (Cathars rejected the Old Testament in part because they thought the material world and marriage, cf. Gen. 1:28: "be fruitful and multiply", are evil.)
  • was a dualist, (cf. #1 above.)
  • was a revolutionary, anarchist, and Trotskyite, (Cathars were also revolutionaries, being against oaths, the bedrock of feudalism and medieval society.)
  • starved herself to death, a "virtuous" act Albigenses/Cathars called the endura (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm#B).
During this octave of the feast of St. Dominic, may he intercede for the extirpation from the Church of Modernism—the synthesis of all heresies, including those of the neo-Cathars and Albigensians!

Blaise Pascal died under no condemnation of any sort. While Unigenitus later was to condemn a tendency which apparently blended Calvinism or a radical reading of St Augustine with a demotic Catholicism, the destruction of Port-Royal-des-Champs and those connected to the Arnaulds, which included Pascal, owes more to the malign influence of the Jesuits around Louis XVI. These proud men were made to look second rate and lax in the 'Provincial Letters' and so wanted pay-back.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Daniel on September 13, 2019, 07:26:00 AM
Scattered replies...

Eve wanted to acquire the unfitting knowledge of good and evil. That's why she ate the apple. The devil prompted her sin, but he did not cause her sin.

The turning of the will towards God is effected only by God's grace. So a good argument can be made that not everyone can always turn to God: if there's any disjunction between the set of persons to whom God gives grace and the set of all created persons, then not everyone can always turn to God. And there's evidence that suggests that this has at least sometimes been the case: was it not God who hardened Pharao's heart? This He did by withdrawing His grace, such that Pharao could not possibly turn to God.

The turning of the will away from God is, in some mysterious way, effected by the sinner. So it follows that if Eve ate the apple then this was consequent to her own sin of having turned away from God.

No amount of theological argumentation can refute a heresy. Because just because an argument is convincing--even irrefutable--that doesn't make it true. Theological argumentation can only show that a teaching does, in fact, seem to be a heresy--something incompatible with orthodox teaching. But no non-authority can ever definitively declare something to be heresy.

If the Church is Jesus, or, if at the very least the Church's authority is Jesus's authority, then the authority of the Church is no lesser than that of Jesus himself.

The only way that heresy can be correct is if orthodox teaching is incorrect. But if the orthodox teaching is declared through Jesus, and if Jesus is infallible and non-deceptive, then it seems that the orthodox teaching can never be wrong. So the heresy must be wrong.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Geremia on September 13, 2019, 02:32:48 PM
Blaise Pascal died under no condemnation of any sort.
His Provincial Letters was on the Index, though.
Title: Re: Cathar influence on John XXIII and Paul VI
Post by: Prayerful on September 13, 2019, 05:43:25 PM
Blaise Pascal died under no condemnation of any sort.
His Provincial Letters was on the Index, though.

Towards the end of his life, they were, but it did highlight an array of dubious Jesuit propositions, which were to be later condemned.