Restore DC Catholicism, Veritatis Gaudium

Veritatis Gaudium and Heretic Teilhard De Chardin


Veritatis Gaudium and Heretic Teilhard De Chardin


Teilhard de Chardin is one of the architects of the spiritual apostasy among the Catholic clergy.  After the expose on the heretic Chardin, listen closely to the expose on the “New Theology” and compare it with Veritatis Gaudium, Section 2, second paragraph.  “As I have had occasion to note, one of the main contributions of the Second Vatican Council was precisely seeking a way to overcome this divorce between theology and pastoral care, between faith and life. I dare say that the Council has revolutionized to some extent the status of theology – the believer’s way of doing and thinking”.

The priest in this video is doing a study on the Book of Revelations.  Notice at the 56:00 mark he speaks of the pit being opened and smoke coming out – smoke that obscures true doctrine.  The pit is blocked by a door to which God holds the key – the key given to the pope.  So in light of this, how may we view the “god of surprises”, “pastoral versus doctrinal”, etc?  Do we see the latest blasphemy of Cardinal Marx in a new light?

Read the full article below the Wikipedia article.


From Wikipedia:

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin SJ (French: [pjɛʁ tejaʁ də ʃaʁdɛ̃] (About this sound listen ); 1 May 1881 – 10 April 1955) was a French idealist philosopher and Jesuit priest who trained as a paleontologistand geologist and took part in the discovery of Peking Man. {It is ironic that the man, Alfred C. Kinsey, who wrote The Sexual Behavior of the Human Male in 1948 a book which launched the sexual revolution was written by a scientist whose field of study was the entomology, the study of bugs, like de Chardin he became an ‘expert’ in a field for which he was not trained.) He conceived the vitalist idea of the Omega Point (a maximum level of complexity and consciousness towards which he believed the universe was evolving) and developed Vladimir Vernadsky‘s concept of noosphere.

Although many of Teilhard’s writings were censored by the Catholic Church during his lifetime because of his views on original sin, Teilhard has been posthumously praised by Pope Benedict XVIand other eminent Catholic figures, and his theological teachings were cited by Pope Francis in the 2015 encyclical, Laudato si’. The response to his writings by evolutionary biologists has been, with some exceptions, decidedly negative.

Early years

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was born in the Château of Sarcenat at Orcines, close to Clermont-Ferrand, France, on 1 May 1881. On the Teilhard side he was descended from an ancient family of magistrates from Auvergne originating in Murat, Cantal, and on the de Chardin side he was descended from a family that was ennobled under Louis XVIII. He was the fourth of eleven children. His father, Emmanuel Teilhard (1844–1932), an amateur naturalist, collected stones, insects and plants and promoted the observation of nature in the household. Pierre Teilhard’s spirituality was awakened by his mother, Berthe de Dompiere. When he was 12, he went to the Jesuit college of Mongré, in Villefranche-sur-Saône, where he completed baccalaureates of philosophy and mathematics. Then, in 1899, he entered the Jesuit novitiate at Aix-en-Provence.

Teilhard was ordained a priest on 24 August 1911, at age 30.


From 1912 to 1914, Teilhard worked in the paleontology laboratory of the Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle in Paris, studying the mammals of the middle tertiary period. Later he studied elsewhere in Europe. In June 1912 he formed part of the original digging team, with Arthur Smith Woodward and Charles Dawson, at the Piltdown site, after the discovery of the first fragments of the (fraudulent) “Piltdown Man“. Some have suggested he participated in the hoax.[2][3] Marcellin Boule, a specialist in Neanderthal studies, who as early as 1915 had recognized the non-hominidorigins of the Piltdown finds, gradually guided Teilhard towards human paleontology. At the museum’s Institute of Human Paleontology, he became a friend of Henri Breuil and in 1913 took part with him in excavations at the prehistoric painted Caves of Castillo in northwest Spain.

In 1933, Rome ordered him to give up his post in Paris. Teilhard subsequently undertook several explorations in the south of China. He traveled in the valleys of Yangtze River and Sichuan in 1934, then, the following year, in Kwang-If and Guangdong. The relationship with Marcellin Boule was disrupted; the museum cut its financing on the grounds that Teilhard worked more for the Chinese Geological Service than for the museum.[citation needed]

During all these years, Teilhard contributed considerably to the constitution of an international network of research in human paleontology related to the whole of eastern and southeastern Asia. He would be particularly associated in this task with two friends, the English/Canadian Davidson Black and the Scot George B. Barbour. Often he would visit France or the United States, only to leave these countries for further expeditions.

World travels

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1947)

From 1927 to 1928, Teilhard based himself in Paris. He journeyed to Leuven, Belgium, and to Cantal and Ariège, France. Between several articles in reviews, he met new people such as Paul Valéry and Bruno de Solages, who were to help him in issues with the Catholic Church.

Answering an invitation from Henry de Monfreid, Teilhard undertook a journey of two months in Obock, in Harrar and in Somalia with his colleague Pierre Lamarre, a geologist, before embarking in Djibouti to return to Tianjin. While in China, Teilhard developed a deep and personal friendship with Lucile Swan.[5]

During 1930–1931, Teilhard stayed in France and in the United States. During a conference in Paris, Teilhard stated: “For the observers of the Future, the greatest event will be the sudden appearance of a collective humane conscience and a human work to make.” From 1932–1933, he began to meet people to clarify issues with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, regarding Le Milieu divin and L’Esprit de la Terre. He met Helmut de Terra, a German geologist in the International Geology Congress in Washington, D.C..

Teilhard participated in the 1935 YaleCambridge expedition in northern and central India with the geologist Helmut de Terra and Patterson, who verified their assumptions on Indian Paleolithic civilisations in Kashmirand the Salt Range Valley. He then made a short stay in Java, on the invitation of Dutch paleontologist Ralph von Koenigswald to the site of Java man. A second cranium, more complete, was discovered. Professor von Koenigswald had also found a tooth in a Chinese apothecary shop in 1934 that he believed belonged to a three-meter-tall ape, Gigantopithecus, which lived between one hundred thousand and around a million years ago. Fossilized teeth and bone (dragon bones) are often ground into powder and used in some branches of traditional Chinese medicine.[6]

In 1937, Teilhard wrote Le Phénomène spirituel (The Phenomenon of the Spirit) on board the boat Empress of Japan, where he met the Raja of Sarawak. The ship conveyed him to the United States. He received the Mendel Medal granted by Villanova University during the Congress of Philadelphia, in recognition of his works on human paleontology. He made a speech about evolution, the origins and the destiny of man. The New York Times dated 19 March 1937 presented Teilhard as the Jesuit who held that man descended from monkeys. Some days later, he was to be granted the Doctor Honoris Causa distinction from Boston College. Upon arrival in that city, he was told that the award had been cancelled.[citation needed]

Rome banned his work L’Énergie Humaine in 1939. By this point Teilhard was based again in France, where he was immobilized by malaria. During his return voyage to Beijing he wrote L’Energie spirituelle de la Souffrance (Spiritual Energy of Suffering) (Complete Works, tome VII).

In 1941, Teilhard submitted to Rome his most important work, Le Phénomène Humain. By 1947, Rome forbade him to write or teach on philosophical subjects. The next year, Teilhard was called to Rome by the Superior General of the Jesuits who hoped to acquire permission from the Holy See for the publication of Le Phénomène Humain. However, the prohibition to publish it that was previously issued in 1944 was again renewed. Teilhard was also forbidden to take a teaching post in the Collège de France. Another setback came in 1949, when permission to publish Le Groupe Zoologique was refused.

Teilhard was nominated to the French Academy of Sciences in 1950. He was forbidden by his Superiors to attend the International Congress of Paleontology in 1955. The Supreme Authority of the Holy Office, in a decree dated 15 November 1957, forbade the works of de Chardin to be retained in libraries, including those of religious institutes. His books were not to be sold in Catholic bookshops and were not to be translated into other languages.

Further resistance to Teilhard’s work arose elsewhere. In April 1958, all Jesuit publications in Spain (“Razón y Fe”, “Sal Terrae”,”Estudios de Deusto”, etc.) carried a notice from the Spanish Provincial of the Jesuits that Teilhard’s works had been published in Spanish without previous ecclesiastical examination and in defiance of the decrees of the Holy See. A decree of the Holy Office dated 30 June 1962, under the authority of Pope John XXIII, warned that “… it is obvious that in philosophical and theological matters, the said works [Teilhard’s] are replete with ambiguities or rather with serious errors which offend Catholic doctrine. That is why… the Rev. Fathers of the Holy Office urge all Ordinaries, Superiors, and Rectors… to effectively protect, especially the minds of the young, against the dangers of the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and his followers” (AAS, 6 August 1962).

The Diocese of Rome on 30 September 1963 required Catholic booksellers in Rome to withdraw his works as well as those that supported his views.[7]


Teilhard de Chardin has two comprehensive works, The Phenomenon of Man and The Divine Milieu.[10]

His posthumously published book, The Phenomenon of Man, set forth a sweeping account of the unfolding of the cosmos and the evolution of matter to humanity, to ultimately a reunion with Christ. In the book, Teilhard abandoned literal interpretations of creation in the Book of Genesis in favor of allegorical and theological interpretations. The unfolding of the material cosmos is described from primordial particles to the development of life, human beings and the noosphere, and finally to his vision of the Omega Point in the future, which is “pulling” all creation towards it. He was a leading proponent of orthogenesis, the idea that evolution occurs in a directional, goal-driven way. Teilhard argued in Darwinian terms with respect to biology, and supported the synthetic model of evolution, but argued in Lamarckian terms for the development of culture, primarily through the vehicle of education.[11] Teilhard made a total commitment to the evolutionary process in the 1920s as the core of his spirituality, at a time when other religious thinkers felt evolutionary thinking challenged the structure of conventional Christian faith. He committed himself to what the evidence showed.[12]

Teilhard made sense of the universe by assuming it had a vitalist evolutionary process.[13][14] He interprets complexity as the axis of evolution of matter into a geosphere, a biosphere, into consciousness (in man), and then to supreme consciousness (the Omega Point).

Teilhard’s unique relationship to both paleontology and Catholicism allowed him to develop a highly progressive, cosmic theology which takes into account his evolutionary studies. Teilhard recognized the importance of bringing the Church into the modern world, and approached evolution as a way of providing ontological meaning for Christianity, particularly creation theology. For Teilhard, evolution was “the natural landscape where the history of salvation is situated.”[15]

Teilhard’s cosmic theology is largely predicated on his interpretation of Pauline scripture, particularly Colossians 1:15-17 (especially verse 1:17b) and 1 Corinthians 15:28. He drew on the Christocentrism of these two Pauline passages to construct a cosmic theology which recognizes the absolute primacy of Christ. He understood creation to be “a teleological process towards union with the Godhead, effected through the incarnation and redemption of Christ, ‘in whom all things hold together’ (Col. 1:17).”[16] He further posited that creation would not be complete until each “participated being is totally united with God through Christ in the Pleroma, when God will be ‘all in all’ (1Cor. 15:28).”[16]

Relationship with the Catholic Church

In 1925, Teilhard was ordered by the Jesuit Superior General Wlodimir Ledóchowski to leave his teaching position in France and to sign a statement withdrawing his controversial statements regarding the doctrine of original sin. Rather than leave the Society of Jesus, Teilhard signed the statement and left for China.

This was the first of a series of condemnations by certain ecclesiastical officials that would continue until after Teilhard’s death. The climax of these condemnations was a 1962 monitum (warning) of the Holy Office cautioning on Teilhard’s works. It said:[23]

Several works of Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, some of which were posthumously published, are being edited and are gaining a good deal of success. Prescinding from a judgement about those points that concern the positive sciences, it is sufficiently clear that the above-mentioned works abound in such ambiguities and indeed even serious errors, as to offend Catholic doctrine. For this reason, the most eminent and most revered Fathers of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and of his followers.

The Holy Office did not place any of Teilhard’s writings on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of Forbidden Books), which existed during Teilhard’s lifetime and at the time of the 1962 decree.

Shortly thereafter, prominent clerics mounted a strong theological defense of Teilhard’s works. Henri de Lubac (later a Cardinal) wrote three comprehensive books on the theology of Teilhard de Chardin in the 1960s[24]. While de Lubac mentioned that Teilhard was less than precise in some of his concepts, he affirmed the orthodoxy of Teilhard de Chardin and responded to Teilhard’s critics: “We need not concern ourselves with a number of detractors of Teilhard, in whom emotion has blunted intelligence”.[25] Later that decade Joseph Ratzinger, a German theologian who became Pope Benedict XVI, spoke glowingly of Teilhard’s Christology in Ratzinger’s Introduction to Christianity:[26]

It must be regarded as an important service of Teilhard de Chardin’s that he rethought these ideas from the angle of the modern view of the world and, in spite of a not entirely unobjectionable tendency toward the biological approach, nevertheless on the whole grasped them correctly and in any case made them accessible once again. Let us listen to his own words: The human monad “can only be absolutely itself by ceasing to be alone”. In the background is the idea that in the cosmos, alongside the two orders or classes of the infinitely small and the infinitely big, there is a third order, which determines the real drift of evolution, namely, the order of the infinitely complex. It is the real goal of the ascending process of growth or becoming; it reaches a first peak in the genesis of living things and then continues to advance to those highly complex creations that give the cosmos a new center: “Imperceptible and accidental as the position they hold may be in the history of the heavenly bodies, in the last analysis the planets are nothing less than the vital points of the universe. It is through them that the axis now runs, on them is henceforth concentrated the main effort of an evolution aiming principally at the production of large molecules.” The examination of the world by the dynamic criterion of complexity thus signifies “a complete inversion of values. A reversal of the perspective”.

This leads to a further passage in Teilhard de Chardin that is worth quoting in order to give at least some indication here, by means of a few fragmentary excerpts, of his general outlook. “The Universal Energy must be a Thinking Energy if it is not to be less highly evolved than the ends animated by its action. And consequently … the attributes of cosmic value with which it is surrounded in our modern eyes do not affect in the slightest the necessity obliging us to recognize in it a transcendent form of Personality.”

Over the next several decades prominent theologians and Church leaders, including leading Cardinals, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI all wrote approvingly of Teilhard’s ideas. In 1981, Cardinal Agostino Casaroli, on behalf of Pope John Paul II, wrote on the front page of the Vatican newspaper, l’Osservatore Romano:

What our contemporaries will undoubtedly remember, beyond the difficulties of conception and deficiencies of expression in this audacious attempt to reach a synthesis, is the testimomy of the coherent life of a man possessed by Christ in the depths of his soul. He was concerned with honoring both faith and reason, and anticipated the response to John Paul II’s appeal: “Be not afraid, open, open wide to Christ the doors of the immense domains of culture, civilization, and progress”.[27]

Cardinal Avery Dulles, S.J., said in 2004:[28]

In his own poetic style, the French Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin liked to meditate on the Eucharist as the first fruits of the new creation. In an essay called The Monstrance he describes how, kneeling in prayer, he had a sensation that the Host was beginning to grow until at last, through its mysterious expansion, “the whole world had become incandescent, had itself become like a single giant Host”. Although it would probably be incorrect to imagine that the universe will eventually be transubstantiated, Teilhard correctly identified the connection between the Eucharist and the final glorification of the cosmos.

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn wrote in 2007:[29]

Hardly anyone else has tried to bring together the knowledge of Christ and the idea of evolution as the scientist (paleontologist) and theologian Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., has done. … His fascinating vision … has represented a great hope, the hope that faith in Christ and a scientific approach to the world can be brought together. … These brief references to Teilhard cannot do justice to his efforts. The fascination which Teilhard de Chardin exercised for an entire generation stemmed from his radical manner of looking at science and Christian faith together.

Pope Benedict XVI in his book Spirit of the Liturgy incorporates Teilhard’s vision as a touchstone of the Catholic Mass:[30]

And so we can now say that the goal of worship and the goal of creation as a whole are one and the same—divinization, a world of freedom and love. But this means that the historical makes its appearance in the cosmic. The cosmos is not a kind of closed building, a stationary container in which history may by chance take place. It is itself movement, from its one beginning to its one end. In a sense, creation is history. Against the background of the modern evolutionary world view, Teilhard de Chardin depicted the cosmos as a process of ascent, a series of unions. From very simple beginnings the path leads to ever greater and more complex unities, in which multiplicity is not abolished but merged into a growing synthesis, leading to the “Noosphere” in which spirit and its understanding embrace the whole and are blended into a kind of living organism. Invoking the epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, Teilhard looks on Christ as the energy that strives toward the Noosphere and finally incorporates everything in its “fullness”. From here Teilhard went on to give a new meaning to Christian worship: the transubstantiated Host is the anticipation of the transformation and divinization of matter in the christological “fullness”. In his view, the Eucharist provides the movement of the cosmos with its direction; it anticipates its goal and at the same time urges it on.

Pope Francis refers to Teilhard’s eschatological contribution in his encyclical Laudato si’.[32]

Evaluations by scientists

According to Daniel Dennett, “it has become clear to the point of unanimity among scientists that Teilhard offered nothing serious in the way of an alternative to orthodoxy; the ideas that were peculiarly his were confused, and the rest was just bombastic redescription of orthodoxy.”[33] Similarly, Steven Rose wrote that “Teilhard is revered as a mystic of genius by some, but amongst most biologists is seen as little more than a charlatan.”[34]

In 1961, the Nobel Prize-winner Peter Medawar, a British immunologist, wrote a scornful review of The Phenomenon Of Man for the journal Mind:[35] “the greater part of it, I shall show, is nonsense, tricked out with a variety of metaphysical conceits, and its author can be excused of dishonesty only on the grounds that before deceiving others he has taken great pains to deceive himself”. The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins called Medawar’s review “devastating” and The Phenomenon of Man “the quintessence of bad poetic science”.[36]

Sir Julian Huxley, the evolutionary biologist, praised the thought of Teilhard de Chardin for looking at the way in which human development needs to be examined within a larger integrated universal sense of evolution, though admitting he could not follow Teilhard all the way.[37] Theodosius Dobzhansky drew upon Teilhard’s insistence that evolutionary theory provides the core of how man understands his relationship to nature, calling him “one of the great thinkers of our age”.[38]

George Gaylord Simpson, however, felt that if Teilhard were right, the lifework “of Huxley, Dobzhansky, and hundreds of others was not only wrong, but meaningless”, and was mystified by their public support for him.[39] He considered Teilhard a friend and his work in paleontology extensive and important, but expressed strongly adverse views of his contributions as scientific theorist and philosopher.[40]

The philosopher Dietrich von Hildebrand criticized severely the work of Teilhard. According to this philosopher, in a conversation after a lecture by Teilhard: “He (Teilhard) ignored completely the decisive difference between nature and supernature. After a lively discussion in which I ventured a criticism of his ideas, I had an opportunity to speak to Teilhard privately. When our talk touched on St. Augustine, he exclaimed violently: ‘Don’t mention that unfortunate man; he spoiled everything by introducing the supernatural.'” [60] Von Hildebrand writes that Theihardism is incompatible with Christianity, substitutes efficiency for sanctity, deshumanizes man, and describes love as merely cosmic energy.

Influence on the New Age movement

Teilhard has had a profound influence on the New Age movement and has been described as “perhaps the man most responsible for the spiritualization of evolution in a global and cosmic context”.[61] New Age figure and self-described evolutionary biologist Jeremy Griffith described Teilhard as a “visionary” philosopher and a contemporary “truth-sayer” or “prophet”.[62]



Veritatis Gaudium Inspired By The Heretic Teilhard De Chardin

Teilhard de Chardin is one of the architects of the spiritual apostasy among the Catholic clergy.  After the expose on the heretic Chardin, listen closely to the expose on the “New Theology” and compare it with Veritatis Gaudium, Section 2, second paragraph.  “As I have had occasion to note, one of the main contributions of the Second Vatican Council was precisely seeking a way to overcome this divorce between theology and pastoral care, between faith and life. I dare say that the Council has revolutionized to some extent the status of theology – the believer’s way of doing and thinking”.

The priest in this video is doing a study on the Book of Revelations.  Notice at the 56:00 markk he speaks of the pit being opened and smoke coming out – smoke that obscures true doctrine.  The pit is blocked by a door to which God holds the key – the key given to the pope.  So in light of this, how may we view the “god of surprises”, “pastoral versus doctrinal”, etc?  Do we see the latest blasphemy of Cardinal Marx in a new light?

About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. vasheepdog94 says:

    He’s a really bad person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s