Monday, 24 October 2011

Heythrop College - New Age incubator

Today I won't name a long list of Heythrop College (ex Maria Assumpta Centre) connections to the New Age. I will just concentrate on the latest one: the forthcoming "Sacred Foundations and Cosmograms" conference that will take place on 3-4 December 2011, organized as  "Gatekeeper Conference 2011".

First question: is Heythrop College Catholic ?
- Founded 1614 in Louvain (Belgium) for the education of English Jesuits.
- In 1926 the two faculties were reunited in a single campus at Heythrop in Oxfordshire.
- In the mid-1960s began admitting non-Jesuit staff and students.
It says on their website: Since 1970, it has been a College of the University of London, while retaining a modern Catholic ethos, and offers an educational experience that respects all faiths and perspectives.
Well. I guess the key word here is 'modern Catholic' ...

Second question is: how New Age is the conference
The answer is: VERY much!
To start with, its organized by the Gatekeeper Trust.
The Gatekeeper Trust was established, among others by Sir George Lowthian Trevelyan – who was also involved in the establishment of the Fildhorn Foundation and is called a father of the New Age Movement. 
He said:
"We are talking about the emergence of a different world view in our time. This is a phenomenon that is happening during your generation. It's the most curious, the most extraordinary thing. This is not somebody's thought out idea; this is not an intellectually conceived hope of improving society or anything like that. Something extraordinary is actually happening inside our thinking. There has really been a turn-about in the centre of human consciousness."
"We are co-creators of that which truly is the Body of Christ. This is the New Jerusalem. And the change of consciousness could come ‘in the twinkling of an eye’.
Right: different world view, co-creators, change of consciousness ...
doesn't that that not sound New Age enough ?
The speaker - Peter Dawkins - is also a founder member of Gatekeepers Trust as well as English founder of the Francis Bacon Research Trust. Since 1978 he has written on the Baconian-Rosicrucian philosophies and "Ancient Wisdom" teaching (Rosicrucianism is a philosophical secret society, said to have been founded in late medieval Germany by Christian Rosenkreuz. It holds a doctrine or theology "built on esoteric truths of the ancient past", which, "concealed from the average man, provide insight into nature, the physical universe and the spiritual realm). 
He is the Founder-Director of the Zoence Academy which runs a training course in Zoence (a Western equivalent of the Chinese feng shui).
I don't really know what there is that is Catholic in his biography. New Age full power. 
Then we have a list of speakers:
- Anthony Thorley (landscape zodiacs as sacred spaces)
- Marko Pogacnik (Earth healing work by 'Lithopuncture')
- Helen Raphael Sands (a journey through the elements)
- Louise Coe (feng shui consultant and inner alignment practitioner)
- Lucy Wyatt (trustee of Gatekeepers)

I am sorry, but I think I missed God in any of the speakers' descriptions ... I mean Jesus Christ, not the universe....

And all that under the umbrella of 2012 and Olympic Games ... One more thing - for New Agers the date 2012 is significant, they expect some planetary illumination and get so excited with the Olympics and they don't take it as a coincidence ...

So, back to the Catholic Heythrop College - still educating priests, nuns and catechists .... don't be surprise to see what you see afterwards in your parishes and communities ...
Back to the Gatekeeper conference, I wonder why they use the name of Maria Assumpta centre even though the building was sold to to current Heytrhrop College and has nothing to do witj Maria Assumpta ? I am sure they love it, it add nice Catholic credentials to those who dont know much about New Age Movement.

Please write to the College asking them to stop inviting those people or to change the name to New Age College ...

Thursday, 20 October 2011

Oath Against Modernism

On September 1, 1910 St. Pope Pius X issued Motu Proprio a document called Sacrorum Antistitum in which he provided the Church with an 'Oath Against Modernism'. Previously Pius X had defined Modernism as a heresy in his encyclicals Pascendi Dominici gregis of 1907, and Lamentabili Sane. The oath continued to be taken until July 1967 when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith rescinded it.
It is, however, still taken before priestly ordination by some clergy voluntarily and by certain confraternities
He explains what he is about in the first paragraph:
It seems to Us that it has not been ignored by none of the holy Bishops [Sacrorum Antistitum] that the class of men, the modernists, whose personality was described in the encyclical letter Pascendi dominici gregis, have not refrained from working in order to disturb the peace of the Church. They have not ceased to attract followers, either, by forming a clandestine group; by these means, they inject in the very veins of the Christian Republic the virus of their doctrine, by editing books and publishing articles in anonymity or with pseudonyms. By reading anew Our aforementioned letter, and considering it carefully, it is clearly seen that this deliberate movement is the work of the men that we described in it, enemies that are the more dangerous the closer they are; that abuse their ministry by offering poisoned nourishment and by surprising the less cautious; by handing a false doctrine in which the sum of all errors is enclosed. …


Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .

The following are the principal decrees or documents expressly directed against modernism.
  • The pope's address on 17 April, 1907, to the newly-created cardinals. It is a résumé which anticipates the Encyclical "Pascendi".
  • A letter from the Congregation of the Index of 29 April, 1907, to the Cardinal Archbishop of Milan with regard to the review "Il Rinnovamento". In it we find more concrete notions of the tendencies which the popes condemn. The letter even goes so far as to mention the names of Fogazzaro, Father Tyrrell, von Hügel and the Abbate Murri.
  • Letters from Pius X, 6 May, 1907, to the archbishops and bishops and to the patrons of the Catholic Institute of Paris. It shows forth clearly the great and twofold care of Pius X for the restoration of sacred studies and Scholastic philosophy, and for the safeguarding of the clergy.
  • The decree "Lamentabili" of the Holy Office, 3-4 July, 1907, condemning 65 distinct propositions.
  • The injunction of the Holy Office, "Recentissimo", of 28 August, 1907, which with a view to remedying the evil, enjoins certain prescriptions upon bishops and superiors of religious orders.
  • The Encyclical "Pascendi", of 8 September, 1907, of which we shall speak later on.
  • Three letters of the Cardinal Secretary of State, of 2 and 10 October, and of 5 November, 1907, on the attendance of the clergy at secular universities, urging the execution of a general regulation of 1896 on this subject. The Encyclical had extended this regulation to the whole Church.
  • The condemnation by the Cardinal-Vicar of Rome of the pamphlet "Il programma dei modernisti", and a decree of 29 October, 1907, declaring the excommunication of its authors, with special reservations.
  • The decree Motu Proprio of 18 November, 1907, on the value of the decisions of the Biblical Commission, on the decree "Lamentabili", and on the Encyclical "Pascendi". These two documents are again confirmed and upheld by ecclesiastical penalties.
  • The address at the (Consistory of 16 December, 1907.
  • The decree of the Holy Office of 13 February, 1908, in condemnation of the two newspapers, "La Justice sociale" and "La Vie Catholique". Since then several condemnations of the books have appeared.
  • The Encyclical "Editae" of 26 May, 1910, renewed the previous condemnations.
  • Still stronger is the tone of the Motu Proprio "Sacrorum Antistitum", of 1 September, 1910, declared:
  • by a decree of the Consistorial Congregations of 25 September, 1910. This Motu Proprio inveighs against modernist obstinacy and specious cunning. After having quoted the practical measures prescribed in the Encyclical "Pascendi", the pope urges their execution, and, at the same time, makes new directions concerning the formation of the clergy in the seminaries and religious houses. Candidates for higher orders, newly appointed confessors, preachers, parish priests, canons, the beneficed clergy, the bishop's staff, Lenten preachers, the officials of the Roman congregations, or tribunals, superiors and professors in religious congregations, all are obliged to swear according to a formula which reprobates the principal modernist tenets.
  • The pope's letter to Prof. Decurtins on literary modernism.

The statue of Pope St. Pius X
in St. Peter's Basilica

Prayer to St. Joseph by Pope St. Pius X

Glorious St. Joseph, model of all who are devoted to labor, obtain for me the grace to work in the spirit of penance in expiation of my many sins; to work conscientiously by placing love of duty above my inclinations; to gratefully and joyously deem it an honor to employ and to develop by labor the gifts I have received from God, to work methodically, peacefully, and in moderation and patience, without ever shrinking from it through weariness or difficulty to work; above all, with purity of intention and unselfishness, having unceasingly before my eyes death and the account I have to render of time lost, talents unused, good not done, and vain complacency in success, so baneful to the work of God. All for Jesus, all for Mary, all to imitate thee, O patriarch St. Joseph! This shall be my motto for life and eternity.