Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Atilla SInke Guimaraes says Vatican II embraced Evolution

I just finished reading Guimaraes's book In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, third edition, 1997. In it he argues that the evolutionist conception underlies the New Theology of Vatican II:

"Several characteristics appear in the texts...that point to the evolutionist conception as the foundation of conciliar doctrine." p.201

"...the doctrinal substratum of conciliar ambiguity appears to be a new vision of the universe, of man, of the Church and of God Himself...there is a subjacent doctrine supporting ambiguity in the conciliar documents and that this doctrine is evolution." p. 202

"The Council is consistent in that it takes to the final consequences the premises of evolutionary ambiguity and hesitation; it concludes that the Church must always subject herself to a continuing reform." p. 202

"One may conclude that the underlying thought that oriented the Council, besides containing an evolutionist substratum in its texts and indicating a 'Copernican' transformation of the vision of the universe and man, adopts a specific concept of Church: a Church in continual reform which, in turn, presupposes or generates--depending upon how you look at it--a 'sinful Church'." p. 205

"Is not this conciliar view of the Church disorienting for a Catholic? How can one admit that she, the light of the world, may present her truth as wavering and ambiguous? How can one imagine that she...now shows herself to be hesitating in her dogma, unsteady in her morals, fragmented by contrasting opinions?" p. 206


Guimaraes' contention is very important in my view--I recommend that everyone at least read his book. He has identified a problem which Wolfgang Smith also brought to the world's attention in his Teilhardism and the New Religion, 1988, Tan in which the evolutionary construct of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin including his cosmic Christ and point Omega were said to influence the neo-modernists who eventually gained control of the Council. From everything I know including the change to a metaphorical interpretation of the first 12 chapters of Genesis contra 2 millennia of Sacred Tradition, these two astute writers would appear to have spoken rightly. JPH

No comments:

What/Where is the Roman Catholic Church?

In light of Traditional Catholic dogma/doctrine, how should the Second Vatican Council be viewed ? Is it consistent with Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and prior Magisterial teaching?

What explains the tremendous amount of "bad fruit" which has been forthcoming since the close of the Council in 1965? “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matt. 7:16)

This site explores these questions and more in an attempt to place the Second Vatican Council in proper perspective.