Did Teilhard Miss the Mark?

Dear Cynthia,

I am so taken by your keynote presentation “Enstatic Personhood and the Teilhardian Evolutionary Vision.” Please, can you comment on this “opinion” by Vigano. I do share his concern regarding the Global Elite and the New World Order. I appreciate that Teilhard missed the mark given the context of his place in time, together with his capacity.

My question: To what extent did Teilhard miss the mark? Ditto for Vigano. The “Truth” lies somewhere in between? Or does it?

See Vigano’s Considerations on the Great Reset and the New World Order

Thank you, and blessings.


Dear Anne,

I have already substantially shared my response in my recent blog post, “The Common Good as Good” (Part II, 9/1/21) . Archbishop Vigano’s response here represents an arch-Catholic-conservative version of the broader “conspiracy theory” virus that affects both ends of the political spectrum. Without wasting blood on useless arguments, I would merely reiterate here that the sheer amount of negativity, suspicion, paranoia, and alienation evident here is itself a lethal toxin being poured out onto our planet, all the more shockingly because it presents itself “in the name of Christ.”

Whatever became of “for God so loved the world”? Whatever became of “ But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control” (Galatians 5:22-3)? Whatever became of “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable–if anything is excellent or praiseworthy–think about such things” (Philippians 4:8).

As I laid this out in my  post, these “fruits” are not simply virtues, they are actual packets of healing energy, and our planet is starving for them right now. To add more gratuitous negativity to the already heavy weight our planetary pain body is now carrying is a crime against creation. Against incarnation. Frankly, I cannot understand how one can claim to be a follower of Christ while evidencing so little trust in the path he was pointing us on, or the personal cost at which he secured it for us all. 

The difference between Teilhard’s take and Bishop Vigano’s is  fundamental. As a scientist and man of faith, Teilhard lived by the mantra “Differentiation in unity.” He saw Christ at the helm of evolution, drawing human beings to an ever-greater degree of unity that would allow them to manifest, collectively, an even greater amplitude of consciousness and conscious love. Archbishop Vigano may decry “the World Order,” but it seems to me that the Church’s notion of “The Mystical body of Christ” is pointing to exactly the same idea: a unity in love that expresses itself in “harmonized complexity,” sustaining a whole that is vastly greater than the sum of its parts. 

But way more than doctrine, it’s a matter of trust. Teilhard knew and trusted Christ; knew and trusted his presence saturating his own heart, saturating the earth, leading humanity forward on a journey whose endpoint is in the fullness of love. I see no such trust in Archbishop Vigano’s writing; only a terror that if the barricade is breached, the whole castle of faith will be swept away. In that point, at least, I hope sincerely he is correct. This particular castle has long outlived its usefulness.