The history of the Jesuits abounds with theologians, apologists, educators, missionaries, heroes, saints, and martyrs. Its very universality and influence made it a target for hostile infiltration, as exemplified in Adam Weishaupt, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Hans Kueng, Karl Rahner, and their ilk.
Romano Amerio (Iota Unum, 132) quotes Pedro Arrupe, General of the Jesuits at Vatican II, expressing the demand for pluralism in its most extreme form: “The Spirit satisfies man’s deep desire to reconcile the apparently contradictory demands of a fundamental unity and an equally fundamental diversity.” Hence the basis of thinking would be not identity but contradiction, so the Holy Ghost establishes a synthesis between incompatibles allegedly wished by the human heart. Essentially diverse demands cannot be reconciled at root level. At the same level, unity and diversity cannot co-exist. Arrupe seeks not “complete definitions, because they might lead to an aristocratic and involuted form” of catechesis. Truth is discovered in confused approximations, orthodoxy has a negative value, authentic catechesis follows mob rule. Here, as in the case of Christianity and Marxism, non-identical things and thoughts are viewed merely as differing aspects of the same object. Plurality of catechisms is wanted to satisfy the belief that all distinctions which specify doctrinal content can disappear in some essential sameness that dwarfs them all.
Cardinal Benelli told a group of religion instructors that religious teaching should “favor an objective meeting with other visions of life that should be known, evaluated, and, [possibly], integrated.” He sees no wrong needing rejection, but merely something to integrate. “The only way to teach the Catholic religion is to propose a way of living.” – not to propose divinely revealed truth. Benelli then empowers the student himself to “guarantee its validity, because he has already had experience of it.”
The new catechesis is search rather than doctrine, and evokes existential reactions rather than intellectual conviction. This promotes variety in catechisms at the expense of memorization. It presupposes partial revelation open to subjective individual completion. The Church’s original methods continued through its catechisms (Trent, Bellarmine, Peter Canisius, St. Pius X) are thus dropped. Rather than teach, the Church guides the searchers to their own conclusions. Even Socrates knew the truth, which he drew out of his pupils.
Modern educational theorists scorn memorization as mere parroting, whereas it is the foundation of all culture, eminently suited to catechesis, seen as efficient communication of knowledge. According to an Ecuadorian bishop “catechesis consists not so much in what is heard as what is seen in the person catechizing.” This makes truth perceived by the intellect less than personal experience, and binds the Gospel to its preacher’s excellence rather than to its own intrinsic merits. This makes of a catechist an actor or poet with power to move minds. Catechesis is not the art of moving rhetoric. If it were, divine truth would not be received in the absence of rhetorical skill.