Book Information

Destructio Dei
(Destruction of God)

Atila Sinke Guimarães

How the progressivist Church - using the systems of de Chardin, Rahner and von Balthasar - is changing the very notion of God

Destruction of God Destructio Dei

How is God - as Absolute, Transcedent and Personal - being denied today? Read this Volume to find out.

Nothing can be more important than the notion that we have of God, since the whole idea of adoring the One who creates and maintains everything in its being is the most basic concept of Religion. Through the centuries, the Catholic Church established her magnificent doctrine on God: He is One and Triune; He is Absolute, Transcendent and Personal.

Now, a New Theology comes saying the opposite. It confuses the Persons, and preaches a Relative, Immanent and Impersonal God. Was it condemned? It should have been, but it was not. Instead it has been largely supported by the religious authorites as an authentic fruit of Vatican II.

Learn about these errors and immunize yourself against them. Read the latest blast by Atila Guimarães in this fight that is become a War of Gods, a much more interesting topic than Star Wars.

Analyzes the novel systems of Rahner and von Balthasar on the Trinity

Below you will find the Introduction to Destructio Dei and the Table of Contents

Format: Paperback, 408 pp. (A-29)
Publication Date: December 2012   

Price: $20

Tradition in Action

Introduction to Destructio Dei

IThe hour has arrived to deal with the central part of this Collection: the fruits of the Council pertaining to the object of the Faith and the means by which the Faith is conserved and expands. This volume will start to examine the negation of Dogmatic Theology from the notion of the Triune God to the concept of the Sacraments. Everything analyzed in the previous Volumes constitutes a preparation for the theme that begins with this Volume.

What could be more fundamental in the Catholic Church than the very notion of God, the Incarnation of the Word and the Redemption of mankind? Did the Church not fight unceasingly to defend this doctrine against the heresies that arose during her History? Notwithstanding the importance of this matter, Progressivism does not hesitate to attack it.

What fruits did the Second Vatican Council produce in the realm of Dogmatic Theology?

By directly or indirectly denying certain fundaments of the Faith – as we saw in Volume VI – Vatican II opened the door to the most peculiar doctrines regarding orthodoxy and the most spurious from the viewpoint of their historical origin. Thus, for example, today we see as fruit of the Council the negation of God as an Absolute Being, the affirmation that the Persons of the Holy Trinity are mere “manners of subsistence” and not actual persons, and the argument that there is a bizarre feminine element inserted inside the Trinitarian Life – echoing the Jewish-Gnostic doctrine of the “eternal feminine.” (See Volume VIII, Fumus Satanae, Chap I.)

If someone were to think that these new doctrines are based on obscure theologians without any real influence over the Council and post-Council period, he would be gravely mistaken. Those who attack relevant parts of Dogmatic Theology, as we will show here, are among the greatest and more famous theologians. Some were the inspirers or the very architects of the official documents of Vatican II.

Hence, it is not rare to find in those conciliar documents traces of this or that progressivist doctrine, clearly defended by those theologians in their other works. The recent Popes have also given their support – sometimes discrete and other times ostensive, but all efficacious – in favor of these doctrines.


As often happens in other fields, the progressivists attack Dogmatic Theology at times directly, at times indirectly. Both types of attack are valuable for them. Attacking it directly, they tear down the ancient sanctuary of Catholic doctrine stone by stone. Attacking it indirectly, they try to erect in its place a doctrinal Pantheon to shelter all the “gods.”

The direct attack habitually employs strong methods. For the indirect, however, insidious tactics are applied, such as installing new doctrines alongside the traditional ones; then, some points of the traditional doctrine are emphasized, generally an exception to the rule that has some similarity with the new doctrine. Next, the emphasis is placed on the new doctrine, and the traditional one falls into oblivion; and finally, the new doctrine is presented exclusively, boldly affirming what the traditional doctrine initially condemned.

An easy to understand example of this method applied after the Council regards the dogma extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. First, the new doctrine of universal salvation was presented here and there in the theological arena; then, it was emphasized that God may save some souls of just men outside of the Church who are faithful to Natural Law – an exception to the rule that salvation exists only inside the Church.

Next, this exception was presented as coincident with the new doctrine of universal salvation and as a way to justify it, while the traditional doctrine fell into oblivion; and finally, the doctrine of universal salvation was presented exclusively, boldly affirming the opposite of the original dogma of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.

Thus, without much clamor, like the serpentine tubes of an exhaust pipe in a vehicle that reduces the sound of the explosions in the engine, the indirect attacks move through several changes of direction regarding Catholic orthodoxy. The silent movement of these attacks confers on them an equal or perhaps greater efficiency than the frontal assault.

This Volume will concentrate more often on the strategy of indirect attacks against Catholic Dogmatics in the progressivist effort to destroy Catholic truth since a large number of new doctrines have been introduced alongside the perennial truths of
our Holy Religion.

Catholic Dogmatics proceeds from the notion of three Persons in One God who is Absolute and Transcendent. Hence it is easy to distinguish when this doctrine is dealing with God or Creation, and, in the latter, when it is dealing with man, the synthesis of the universe and the object of the Redemption. For this reason, the exposition of Dogmatic Theology is set out in clear and distinct parts, that is, God the Creator, man who was
created, and the relations between One and the other, that is, the Incarnation, the Redemption, grace, the sacraments, and the good or bad use that men make of these benefits which brings them to Heaven or precipitates them into Hell.

On the contrary, the progressivist dogmatic proceeds from the suppositions that God is not absolute, but needs Creation to complete Himself, and that God is not transcendent, but immanent in creation, in man and in History. Consequently, the abyssal difference between God and men disappears and the different themes of Dogmatic Theology become intermixed, so that it becomes quite difficult to separate them and present distinct expositions. Creation and, in it, angels, man, society, history, evolution, etc., become part of the “divine life,” making it almost impossible to say which part is more important. This also makes it quite difficult to establish any hierarchy.

Thus, in principle, this new dogmatic theology can be focused from multiple angles without losing its “divine objectivity.” For this reason, some theologians present its order as focused on man; others on the community; others on love, and still others on history or evolution. All those subjects come to be, as it were, “divine” and are admitted as valid patterns of theology. Therefore, the progressivist dogmatic theology is difficult to reduce to a uniform presentation. Nevertheless, there is a unity and internal logic in it that one can discern and explain.

In an analysis of the destruction carried out against Catholic Dogmatic Theology, should the point of reference be the traditional doctrine of the Church, or should it be the unity of the progressivist doctrine? Each hypothesis has pros and cons.

If the first were adopted, the advantage would be the clarity in exposing the  progressivist goal to destroy the Catholic Faith. But the disadvantage would lie in having to present the progressivist doctrine broken into parts, which would make it
more difficult to be understood by the Reader.

If the second hypothesis were adopted, the pros and cons would be symmetrical but reversed: Clarity would be lost in presenting the topic and exposing the malice of the attack, but it would be easier to understand the unity and logic of Progressivism.

In this Volume VII, we will try to harmonize the advantages of both options by adopting the order of traditional Catholic Dogmatics as the reference point. But we will first dedicate one part, Chapter II, to exposing the progressivist doctrine so that the Reader may comfortably follow it through the further exposition of the matter.

Tradition in Action

Table of Contents



   1. Affirmations of the ‘Crisis of God’ and Examples of Adaptation to It
     A. The ‘Crisis of God’ and Secularization
     B. The ‘Crisis of God’ & Ecumenism
  2. Known Theologians Confirm the ‘Crisis of God’
     A. Marie-Dominique Chenu
     B. Yves Congar
     C. Henri de Lubac
     D. Karl Rahner
     E. Edward Schillebeeckx
     F. Hans Küng


   1. Warnings about the Method of Exposition
   2. Three Degrees of Ambiguity in the Progressivist Presentation
     A. First Degree: Orthodoxy in Form, a Few Flashes of a New Thinking
     B. Second Degree: Innovations in Doctrine, Attempts to Justify them with Orthodoxy
     C. Third Degree: the Radical Progressivist View: An Apparent Step Back from the Excesses
      Comparing Von Balthasar and Rahner
      Comparing Von Balthasar and Teilhard
  3. Progressivist Conception of One God in Three Persons
     A. Catholic Doctrine
     B. Progressivist Doctrine about God


  1. Analysis of Rahner’s ‘Anthropological Reduction’ Applied to the Trinity
     A. Observations on Rahner’s Method and Ours in this Analysis
     B. Rahner’s Thesis and its Order
     C. Central Thesis: The economic Trinity is identical to the immanent Trinity; consequently, the essence of God can be known by man through the existential experience of divine self-communication
     D. Fundaments for His Arguments
       1st Fundament: Created grace is identical to the uncreated grace proper to the internal life of the Trinity
       God to engender the Second Person; therefore, in Christ His human nature reveals His divine essence; in Him, the economic Logos is identical to the immanent Logos; consequently, the economic Trinity is identical to the immanent Trinity
         a. Major Premise of the 2nd Fundament: Only the Logos could have become incarnate, and not the other two Persons
         b. Minor Premise of the 2nd Fundament: Human nature is a necessity for the Logos since His Trinitarian origin
         c. Conclusions of the 2nd Fundament
           1st Conclusion: The human nature of Christ reveals His divine essence; in it the economic Logos is identical to the immanent Logos
           2nd Conclusion: Given that the economic Logos is identical to the immanent Logos, the economic Trinity is identical to the immanent Trinity
           1st Distinction: If the three Divine Persons united hypostatically with human nature in Jesus Christ
           2nd Distinction: If there are not three Persons in God
           3rd Distinction: If there is confusion among the divine Persons and it is impossible to know what is properly the existence of each one
             • If there is confusion in the three Persons considered in themselves1st Distinction: If the three Divine Persons united hypostatically with human nature in Jesus Christ
             • If there is confusion in the mission of the divine Persons
             • If there is confusion in the possibility of being sent
             • If there is confusion in the origin of the mission and in the effects of grace in the soul
             • If there is confusion regarding the visibility of the missions of the divine Persons
     E. Presentation of the Arguments
         1st argument: Given that created grace is equal to uncreated grace (1st fundament) and that in Christ the economic Trinity is identical to the immanent Trinity (2nd fundament), then the ‘God for us’ is the ‘God in himself.’ Therefore, God is no longer absolute, transcendent and abstract, but becomes relative, immanent and concrete or existential
         a. ‘God for us’ or the Negation of God as Absolute
         b. Immanent God or the Negation of God as Transcendent
         c. Concrete God or the Negation of God as Abstract
         2nd argument: Since God becomes existential, He must no longer be sought in Catholic Doctrine in an abstract and ‘mythic’ way, but rather found in the experience lived by each man and the ensemble of men. As a consequence, the experience that each one of us has of the divine selfcommunication is knowledge of the actual triune essence of God. From this also comes the consideration that the analysis of history reveals the actual Trinitarian life of God as it is in itself
         a. Catholic Doctrine would be mythic and wrong by not being existential
         b. God would be known in His very essence through each man’s experience and by history
         3nd argument: The economic Trinity is existentially known through the binomials of origin-future, history-transcendence, offering-acceptation, and knowledge-love. These binomials have unity in their first elements (origin-history-offeringknowledge) and this unity is truth. They also have unity in their second elements (future-transcendence-acceptation-love) and this unity is love. Consequently, truth is the economic Logos and love is the Spirit. This constitutes the proof that the economic Trinity is identical to the immanent Trinity
         Study of the Binomials
         Unity in the First Elements of the Four Binomials
           Knowledge or Truth
         Unity in the Second Elements of the Four Binomials
         The Unity of the Four Elements: Love
         d. Conclusions of the 3rd Argument
          1st Conclusion: The Logos and the Spirit are the two unities analyzed. This would be the economic Trinity
          2nd Conclusion: The economical Trinity is identical to the immanent Trinity
     F. General Conclusion
     G. Consequences
          1st Consequence: The three Divine Persons, as a matter of fact, are not persons, but manners of existence of God in history, which can be distinguished by the experiences man has of them
          2nd Consequence: All of Dogmatic Theology must be reformed; it must no longer be ordered based upon God, but upon man
     H. Conclusion of the Analysis
   2. Analysis of the ‘Theology of Love’
     A. Catholic Doctrine on Being and Existence in Man
     B. Philosophical Precisions, Difficulties of Language & Deliberate Confusions
      a. Ontological Precisions
      b. Difficulties of Language
      c. Deliberate Confusions
     C. Principal Errors about Being and Existing in Man
      b. Innate Knowledge or Inneism
      c. False Traditionalism
      d. Modernism
      e. Existentialism
      f. Intuitionism
     D. Von Balthasar’s ‘Theology of Love,’ Philosophical Presuppositions
      a.Philosophical-Theological Points of Balthasar’s Thesis
        a.a. Clear-cut Opposition to Scholastic Philosophy and the Defense of Existentialism
        a.b. Description of the Natural Reality
        a.c. Description of the Supernatural Reality
      b. Bibliographical Foundation
        b.a. Negation of Contingence
        b.b. Disinterested Love, a New Transcendental of Being
        b.c. Diligo, ergo Sum
        b.d. Being, World, Nature
        b.e. Absolute Love
        b.f. Because God is ‘for Me,’ He Is Absolute
        b.g. The God of My Enemy Is Different from My God
        b.h. Divine Love Is Confused with Human Love
        b.i. In Man-Woman Relations, the Anticipation of the Divine
        b.j. Evolution: Ordering of Nature toward the ‘Omega Point'
        b.k. Divine Love Is Attained by Hindu Abandonment or Reflecting on Evolution
        b.l. Supreme Love Is Disinterested Immolation for the Good of the Other
        b.m. In Man there Is No Innate Evil – Original Sin – but only an Evil Conditioned by External Circumstances
        b.n. God Reveals Himself to Man and Incorporates Him to His Being
        b.o. Human Existential Reality, Divine Existential Reality
        b.p. The Knowledge of God Is Man’s Assumption into the Process of Trinitarian Love
        a.q. Grace Has an Invincible Power that Obliges Man to Correspond to Divine Love
        b.r. Acceptance of God’s Action Is Made Passively, which Is the Existential Response to Grace
      c. General Critique of this System
        c.a. Tabula Rasa of Everything Prior to the Act of Love
        c.b. A New Non-Ontological ‘Ontology’
        c.c. Confusion between ‘Absolute Love’ & Human Nature
        c.d. The Fundamental Law of Ethics: Self-Immolation
        c.e. An Interior Divine Revelation that Incorporates Man into the Being of God
        c.f. A New Notion of Evil: Dogmatic and Moral Consequences
     E. Final Observations
      a. Objection: This Study of Ontology Is Outside the Theme of the Triune God
      b. Some Major Points of the ‘Theology of Love’
  3. A Word on the ‘Cosmogenesis’ of Teilhard de Chardin
  4. Conclusion on the Method Used in this Chapter


  1. Denial of God as an Absolute Being
     A. The ‘Divestment of God’
     B. The ‘God for’
  2. Denial of God as Transcendent
         Action of God Creating and Maintaining Man
         The Action of Grace
         On Created Grace
         On Uncreated Grace
     A. God Immanent in Man
     B. God as Immanent in Creation and History
      a. The Living God
      b. Other Progressivist Documents Promoting Immanence
        b.a. Divine Immanence in Creation
        b.b. Divine Immanence in the World and History
     C. God is the Future - Progressivism Merges with Judaism & Marxism
      a. God Above Us + God Ahead of Us: Synthesis of Progressivism, Judaism & Marx
      b. The ‘Horizon of Transcendence’ - God as Future
  3. Denial of a Personal God
     A. Brief History of the Notion of Person in the Catholic Sphere
     B. The Scholastic Conception of Person
      a. Scholastic Terminology
      b. The Scholastic Conception of Person
        1st Objection: Man is social by nature; therefore, he is essentially communicable
        2nd Objection: If the concept of person in God is relational, then there is no basis for the notion of a personal God regarding the One God
     C. The Progressivist Notion of Personm
      a. Definition
      b. Progressivist Terminology
        b.a. Conscience
          The Immanentist Notion of Conscience
          Scholastic Refutation of the Progressivist Notion
        b.b. Liberty and Dignity of the Human Person
        b.c. Integration with Others, Communion
        b.d. Participation
        b.e. Fulfillment of the Person
      c. The Progressivist Conception of Person
        c.a. To Be a Person Is to Enter into Relationships with Others and Move toward Forming a Single Whole
        c.b. Person, Liberty of Conscience & Religious Liberty
        c.c. Person, Communion, the ‘Civilization of Love’
        c.d. Person Participation, Socialization
        c.e. Other Consequences of the Progressivist Notion of Person
     D. Denial of the Personal God
      a. Denial of the Personal God to Move toward Buddhist Mysticism
      b. Denial of the Personal God, a Demand of Universal Evolution
      c. Denial of God, Consequence of Adaptation to Modern Philosophy
      d. The Holy Spirit Is the “We” in Person

Tradition in Action

Related Works of Interest

murky waters

Volume I

animus injuriandi I

Volume II

animus injuriandi2

Volume III

<table border=0 cellpadding=2 cellspacing=1 width=600>

Volume IV

animus delendi 2 guimaraes

Volume V

will he find fiath

Volume VI

destructio dei

Volume VII

fumus satanae

Volume VIII


Volume IX

volume 10

Volume X


Volume XI

homosexuality pedophilia catholic church

Special Edition

If you don't want to use PayPal and a credit card,
print an order form and pay with cash/check

Books  |  CDs  | Home  |  Contact Us  |  Donate

Tradition in Action
© 2002-   Tradition in Action, Inc.    All Rights Reserved