Roger Lenaers, a Jesuit pastor in the diocese of Innsbruck, is busy preaching his version of atheist Christianity.
„Wie sieht dann dieses moderne und zwar zugleich christliche Gottesbild aus? Es muss atheistisch sein und daher eine Absage enthalten an alles, was mit dem Gott-in-der-Höhe zu tun hat. Und das ist kein leichtes Unternehmen, denn das Glaubensbekenntnis und die Bibel und die Liturgie und die ganze Moral und die ganze Kirchengeschichte sind voll von Gott-in-der-Höhe”, meint er.
What does this modern and at the same time Christian image of God look like? It must be atheist and therefore contain a denial of everything that has to do with God-on-High. And that is no easy task, because the profession of faith and the Bible and the liturgy and all of morality and the whole history of the church is full of God-on-High, he said.
He wants make it clear that this is to simply an extreme statement of apophatic theology, but a rejection of everything Christianity and Judaism have ever said about God:
“Wenn die Bibel dann nicht mehr als Wort Gottes gelten kann, ist sie Menschenwort und ist sie nicht länger unantastbar, unfehlbar”, meint er schließlich.
„When the Bible can no more be valued as the Word of God, it is a human word and is no longer sacrosanct, infallible,” he said in conclusion.Weder der Papst noch die Bischöfe können sich für den Jesuiten übrigens “Wortführer Gottes” nennen. Auch ihre Worte sind nur “Menschenworte, ohne aus sich bindende Kraft zu haben”. Ihr Lehramt sei “eine Illusion”.
Weder der Papst noch die Bischöfe können sich für den Jesuiten übrigens “Wortführer Gottes” nennen. Auch ihre Worte sind nur “Menschenworte, ohne aus sich bindende Kraft zu haben”. Ihr Lehramt sei “eine Illusion”.
Neither the Pope nor the bishops can by the way be called for the Jesuits as the “spokesmen of God.” All their words are only “human words, without any binding power in themselves.” Their teaching office is “an illusion.”
I hope that this belief (or rather unbelief) is uncommon even among the Jesuits, although my optimism may be mistaken.
Lenaers’ preaching is the sort of thing that drives believing Catholics into joining schismatic groups like the Society of Pius X.
A self-proclaimed atheist is a Jesuit and a pastor of a church, a priest in good standing in the Roman Catholic Church, but those who want to have the Tridentine liturgy are beyond the pale and are driven in schism.
The most charitable interpretation is that the good Jesuit is just stupid and thinks that metaphors are meant to be taken literally – “Jesus can’t be the Lamb of God; he doesn’t have four feet and wool, so we can’t believe in him!” Or perhaps Linaers is like the Soviet cosmonaut who came back to earth and reported that he didn’t see God in the sky, and that therefore God must not exist.
And as to the hierarchy’s toleration of Christian atheism – the Jesuits are influential, and will remain influential long after they have given up the last vestiges of Christianity.
PS
Lenaers is active in the group Wir Sind Kirche, and even some of their members express doubts about things that he has said, such as
Man kann die Botschaften, die sie enthalten (die mythologischen Formulierungen unseres Traditionsgutes: Jesus als Sohn Gottes, Jungfrauengeburt, Auferstehung, Himmelfahrt, Anm.MH), herausschälen und sie so formulieren, dass sie nicht mehr kollidieren mit der richtigen Grundintention der Modernität, dass es keine übernatürliche Welt gibt.“
One can dig out the message that these (the mythological formulations of our tradition heritage: Jesus as the Son of God, the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and so forth) contain and formulate them so that they no longer collide with the correct fundamental intention of modernity, that there exists no supernatural world.
Lenaers, or Bultmann-Light, suffers from the fundamental narcissism of German intellectuals who have not noticed that about 99% of the world has a strong sense that the supernatural realm exists, and that Pentecostalism is the fastest growing form of Christianity. Someone should tell Lenaers that Modern Man does not equal German University Professor.
A self-proclaimed atheist is a Jesuit and a pastor of a church, a priest in good standing in the Roman Catholic Church, but those who want to have the Tridentine liturgy are beyond the pale and are driven in schism.
And as to the hierarchy’s toleration of Christian atheism – the Jesuits are influential, and will remain influential long after they have given up the last vestiges of Christianity.
A self-proclaimed atheist is a Jesuit and a pastor of a church, a priest in good standing in the Roman Catholic Church, but those who want to have the Tridentine liturgy are beyond the pale and are driven in schism.
And as to the hierarchy’s toleration of Christian atheism – the Jesuits are influential, and will remain influential long after they have given up the last vestiges of Christianity.
This is the fundamental problem with Catholicism; it strains gnats and swallows camels. The fact that a serious academic and a noted (and alledgedly orthodox) theological stickler like Benedict sees fit not to discipline either this Jesuit nor the president of the German bishops’ conference who denied the fundamental dogma that Christ bore God’s anger at human sin on the cross tells me…
1. Benedict is not what his supporters claim him to be
2. The Church is in far deeper trouble than anybody realizes.
That is tragic! Unfortunately the quality of Catholic clergy dropped astonishingly. In my homecountry Brazil, for example, the clergy is almost entirely taken over by a heresy called Liberation Theology, which is pure communism disguised as Christianity. There are priests who say Our Lord Jesus Christ was the first communist and read passages from the Bible from the Marxist perspective: the Exodus, for example, is “the struggle of the oppressed classes (Hebrews) against the domination of the ruling classes (Egyptians), using Marxist jargon, aiming the establishment of a “classless society”. For decades this plague caused the departure of millions of people from the Church. The Vatican has always turned a deaf ear.
I ask:
Why don’t he leave the church?
Because the church pays HIS BILLS!!
Judith, the Vatican long ago ceased caring about the faithful and, instead, focuses on its own power, prestige and intellectual fashion. Most of the bishops, I believe, are no different than the “false shepherds” that Ezekiel condemned (see chapter 34). I also believe that God will judge and condemn most of the “leaders” of the church for abandoning their committment and abandoning the faithful.
” the fundamental dogma that Christ bore God’s anger at human sin on the cross ”
Substitutionary atonement is not the required interpretation of the Cross. Only one theory among many. Our biggest Catholic challenge is our soteriology. Google Rene Girard for a revelation.
The death od Our Lord on the cross was propitiatory and merited forgiveness of sin. That’s certain. What’s theoretical is how this worked. I agree with the position of Anselm (if I’m not mistaken) that it was the depth of love Christ had and expressed in accepting crucifixion that gave his sacrifice that merit. The problem with Bishop Zolitsch’s statements is that they denied that Christ’s death was propitiatory IN ANY SENSE. It was rather “an act of solidarity with suffering humanity”. That’s how I read it, and again, I buy Anselm’s theory, and heard it on internet TV ( I speak Dutch which is similar enough to German that I think I understood). Yet , who gets his wrist slapped by the Vatican? Bishop Zolitsch? Nein, nein. Cardinal Schoenberg for publiaclly criticizing a Cardinal the informed public sees as a rascal, and (if I’m not mistaken) questioning mandatory celibacy inthe Latin Rite. Ach! I guess we can see what’s held to be of first importance by our leaders. As they say in Dutch “Wat jamer! – What a pity!
Father Michael, you are more “spot on” than you realize.
The Jesuit priest’s comments reflect a disturbing trend throughout Christianity: ignorance about the Old Testament’s fundamental meaning. Christ’s death can only be seen in terms of the OT’s demands for atonement and redemption by blood. Otherwise, how does Christ’s death fulfill the OT’s sacrificial system? Yet how many Christians — let alone Catholics, let alone Jesuits — fully understand that? How many Christians have studied the Torah even in lay Bible studies?
” I agree with the position of Anselm (if I’m not mistaken) that it was the depth of love Christ had and expressed in accepting crucifixion that gave his sacrifice that merit.”
That was Bernard’s spin on Anselm. Neither he nor Abelard could quite swallow Anselm as few people can any more. I say it again, we need to revisit our soteriology. It has worked a number on a mulltitude of souls.
J’ai beaucoup appécié ce livre intelligent, très documenté… et très pédagogique.
Enfin, voici quelqu’un qui présente clairement le message de l’évangile.
Les interprétations des siècles passés sont critiquées sans méchanceté.
On voit bien, grâce à ce théologien, comment une religion a pris le pouvoir sur le message de Jésus.
Les règles du Vatican ont pris le pas sur l’Esprit de Dieu !
De nouvelles communautés avancent dans le sens présenté par Roger LENAERS.
Rendons grâce au Dieu Père révélé par Jésus.
The weeked I read similar article but this one is 100 times more interesting.