Hans Urs von Balthasar Part 1 by Karen Kilby

Complete videos are available on the St John's Timeline, which was relaunched in Autumn 2021. It comprises of over 200 full videos with improved subtitles from leading philosophers and theologians. You can subscribe for £22 (£15 concessions) per year. Institutional subscriptions are also available. stjohnstimelin...

[@Damiankilby]

Brilliant speaker.

[@77heraclitus]

A wonderful introduction. I appreciate the historical contextualization. Thank you!

[@gregbrougham1423]

I believe another influence on Balthasar was Erich Przewara who seems to be much neglected.

[@decluesviews2740]

Definitely true

[@kamilziemian995]

I don't understand while Balthasar is so highly valued?

[@martinmartin1363]

Von Balthazar’s teachings are based on the mystic he promoted Adrienne Von speyr and especially on her version of the decent into Hell by Jesus which is contrary to the council of Trent which says Jesus descended into the paradise of the bosom of Abraham the hell of waiting, and Bishop challenor wrote on this too, St. John of the cross warned of trusting in mysticism.

[@vivacristo1000]

The problem is that he left the Jesuit order because of that “mystic” who claimed that St Ignatius himself told her to tell him to leave the order. That same lady influenced his book on the speculation that hell is empty, which is a heresy.

[@crushtheserpent]

The essay by Ralph Martin called 'Balthasar and Speyr: First Steps in a Discernment of Spirits' details numerous red flags in their relationship. Worth reading.

[@linenonthehedgerow741]

The Nouvelle Theologians were condemned by Pope Pius XII in his Papal Encyclical Humani Generis. They were also condemned by Fr. Garrigou Legrange, as well as Cardinal Siri. It would be a mistake for any Catholic to think that the Nouvelle Theologians were respected Catholic academics and theologians.

[@InFideScientiam]

Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange was a key player in the "Manualist" tradition of Neo-Scholastic school. So, of course, he is going to "condemn" it. That's what the "Nouvelle" theologians were up against. That being said, Cardinal-Ratzinger himself would be considered a Nouvelle player. In fact, they are so respected that Ratzinger made de Lubac a Cardinal-Priest and said his work was precious and accurate. Ratzinger also loved Hans Urs von Balthazaar. These guys were all working together. What you leave out is that they turned "conservative," because people like Karl Rahner and Hans Kung wanted to take things too far. One thing you can thank people like de Lubac for is the renewed interest in "Patristics." That is the "re-sourcement" movement.

[@willbranson3216]

Bernard Lonergan was hailed as the "new Thomas Aquinas" by Time Magazine back in 1970. In retrospect, what ultimately did he contribute to our understanding of the Faith - aside from the catastrophic Winnipeg Statement of 1968 - something from which the Church has never recovered. Similarly, what did Von Balthasar contribute that was of value? Certainly, not the notion that it's reasonable to hope that all men are saved, because that's a refutation of Catholic (de Fide) dogma of predestination and reprobation, aside from being completely stupid.

[@Erdnussspass]

Will Branson there is no catholic dogma of predestination. On the contrary, that is a heresy, my friend.

[@willbranson3216]

@@Erdnussspass There certainly is. But you're getting "unconditioned predestination" (Calvinism) mixed up with "conditioned predestination" by failing to note that God, theologically, has an 'express' and a 'permissive' will, as a consequence of making rational creatures with freewill. Father Chad Ripperger will explain it below. And please read the post reproduced below and follow up by reading Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, available online for free. kzbin.info/www/bejne/bHKqYaiPmZ6UbKs There's a section on the meaning of Predestination [election] and its opposite Reprobation [non-election] in the reference manual for clergy: "Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma," pages 244-245 (1952) by Ludwig Ott. Because of length, the quote below only deals with Reprobation, but it's preceded by one on Predestination (election) in Ott's manual. (pages 242-243). Available online for free. Also note that the doctrine is "de Fide" [carved in stone]. Scary stuff! § 13. THE MYSTERY OF REPROBATION 1. CONCEPT AND REALITY OF REPROBATION: By Reprobation is understood the eternal Resolve of God's Will to exclude certain rational creatures from eternal bliss. While God, by His grace, positively co-operates in the supernatural merits, which lead to beatification, He merely permits sin, which leads to eternal damnation. Regarding the content of the resolve of Reprobation, a distinction is made between positive and negative Reprobation, according as the Divine resolve of Reprobation has for its object condemnation to the eternal punishment of hell, or exclusion from the Beatific Vision. Having regard to the reason for Reprobation, a distinction is made between 'conditioned' and 'unconditioned' (absolute) Reprobation, insofar as the Divine resolve of Reprobation is dependent on, or independent of the prevision of future demerits. GOD, BY AN ETERNAL RESOLVE OF HIS WILL, PREDESTINES CERTAIN MEN, ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR FORESEEN SINS TO ETERNAL REJECTION (De /fide.) The reality of Reprobation is not formally defined, but it is the general teaching of the Church. The Synod of Valence (855) teaches: fatemur praedestinationcm impiorum ad mortem (D 322). It is declared in Mt. 25, 41 : Depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels," and by Rom. 9, 22: "Vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction." 2. POSITIVE REPROBATION: a) Heretical Predestinationism exists in various forms! (the Southern Gallic priest Lucidus in the 5th century; the monk Gottschalk in the 9th century, according to reports of his opponents, which, however, find no confirmation in his recently re-discovered writings; Wycliffe, Huss, and especially Calvin), teaches a positive predetermination to sin, and an unconditional Predestination to the eternal punishment of hell, that is, without consideration of future demerits. This was rejected as false doctrine by the Particular Synods of Orange (D 200), Quiercy and Valence (D 316.322) and by the Council of Trent (D 827). Unconditioned positive reprobation leads to a denial of the universality of the Divine Desire for salvation, and of the Redemption, and contradicts the Justice and Holiness of God as well as the freedom of man. b) According to the teaching of the Church, there is a conditioned positive reprobation, that is, it occurs with consideration of foreseen future demerits (post et propter praevisa demerita). The conditional nature of Positive Reprobation is demanded by the generality of the Divine Resolve of salvation. This excludes God's desiring in advance the damnation of certain men (cf I Tim. 2, 4; Ez. 33, II ; 2 Peter 3, 9). St. Augustine teaches: "God is good, God is just. He can save a person without good works, because He is good; but He cannot condemn anyone without evil works, because He is just" (Contra Jul. III 18, 35). 3. NEGATIVE REPROBATION: In the question of Reprobation, the Thomist view favors not an absolute, but only a negative Reprobation. This is conceived by most Thomists as non-election to eternal bliss (non-electio), together with the Divine resolve to permit some rational creatures to fall into sin, and thus by their own guilt to lose eternal salvation. In contrast to the absolute Positive Reprobation of the Predestinarians, Thomists insist on the universality of the Divine Resolve of Salvation and Redemption, the allocation of sufficient graces to the reprobate, and the freedom of man's will. However, it is difficult to find an intrinsic concordance between unconditioned non-election and the universality of the Divine Resolve of salvation. In practice, the unconditioned negative Reprobation of the Thomists involves the same result as the unconditioned positive Reprobation of the heretical Predestinarians, since outside Heaven and Hell there is no third final state. 4. PROPERTIES OF REPROBATION: Like the Resolve of Predestination the Divine Resolve of Reprobation is immutable but, without special revelation, its incidence is unknown to men.

[@parmiggianoreggie-ano1832]

@@Erdnussspass I agree that the user above is misrepresenting von Balthasar (Balthasar never spoke about a “Reasonable hope”, and his book is not that cheesy theology that many “conservatives” want it to be) but it is also true that predestination is not an heresy. Double predestination is indeed heretical, but there indeed is a theology of catholic predestination.

[@andiamolireforexcrypto]

The fact that he was so influenced by Bart, this is not a problem? Bart was a universalist. This is not a problem, even in the least? Adrienne von Speyr was a semi-universalist influenced by her Protestantism. Was this not a problem? Von Balthasar emphasizes the minority of church fathers who were universalists. This is a balanced retrieving of the thoughts of the church fathers on such topics as salvation? WHO GIVES a SHIT about how cultured he was. The DEVIL is even more cultured. And yes, I swear ,so that must make me very uncultured, or does it?

[@parmiggianoreggie-ano1832]

St. Thomas was influenced by Aristotle, an heathen pagan! There is a way of engaging one’s thought with another figure without being lead to error. As St. Thomas has reconciled Aristotle to Catholic orthodoxy so did Von Balthasar with Barth. As St. Thomas had a very strong appreciation for Aristotle but wasn’t afraid to go against him when following is thought was not permissible, so did Balthasar with Barth. He had many reservations about Barth, and von Balthasar is one of the most staunch critics of Barth’s universalism, which he definitely rejects. You can have as many reservations on Balthasar as you like, but we have to be a fair judge and to not ascribe reasons that would condemn other authoritative figures in our Faith.

[@andiamolireforexcrypto]

@@parmiggianoreggie-ano1832 Balthasar will be declared one of the greatest threats to Catholic orthodoxy and most importantly the salvation of souls in the future. Those that support his theology of " a reasonable hope...." are destroyers of the faith. The harm he has done to Catholic evangelism is incalculable. That Balthasar rejects universalism is a distinction without a difference; he is a pragmatic universalist and like those who fall for his arguments a proponent of the hermeneutic of naivety. You will be judged for your lack of concern for the real threat to souls and your comfortable tolerance of Balthasar's ideas. Does Balthasar's fascination with a questionable mystic and that he was inspired by her private revelation not concern you? I have another more important question for you, explain to me how you understand God's Holiness in terms of His infinite Love, please.

[@crushtheserpent]

@@andiamolireforexcrypto I tend to agree with you but it is odd that arguably the greatest living Catholic evangelist, responsible for bringing large numbers of people into the Church, is a huge von Balthasar fan and massively influenced by him... that being Bishop Barron.

[@andiamolireforexcrypto]

@@crushtheserpent Bishop Barron has done a lot of good and recently nuanced his stance., but compared to previous evangelizers like Xavier, he pales. He is successful because of other solid influences in spite of Von Balthasar. I like Bishop Barron and wish him the best. He only gets better with time.