This Gnosticism is in Neo-Platonism which is implicit in the Eastern Church Fathers and Eastern Orthodoxy which appears to reject part of the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation by rejecting that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son and this in part led to the Eastern Orthodox accepting of intrinsic evils such as contraception, divorce and other errors.

It seemed useful because of the length of the article to post with James' permission a email exchange we had that gives a overview a his important, but long piece:

Great article Jim. I agree with most of it.

 Good tracing back beyond even Ockham of Kant and Hegel to heretical
Neo-Platonism. I agree that Ratzinger was a Hegelian and Teihardian, but he was

 moving away from Kantianism from which comes Hegel both of which come from

 Ockham and as you traced all the way back to heretical Neo-Platonism.

 I think Ratzinger was a confused thinker attempting to get out of the Kant

 trap who never was able to get out of the H and T trap.

Ratzinger it appears too me was attempting to be a orthodox

Catholic despite deeply flawed philosophy whereas Francis

is not making a attempt to be orthodox.

In link below read where Ratzinger says one can't put praxis ahead of doctrine as

does Francis and the Marxist Hegelians.

 Please read the link below.

 Fred

 https://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/ratzrela.htm

 Fred,

 I agree. Ratzinger was trying to get out of the Kant trap, while

 rejecting Thomism, and this because of his surrender to reductive

 science. I read the piece you sent. It is so much like thousands of

 other pages he wrote - bouncing from one confused modern philosopher

 to another, juxtaposing them, and ending up with nothing. It draws

 forth the image of a man slushing through a swamp futilely searching

 for clean and refreshing water, while 200 feet away there is a hill

 offering an artesian spring of pure, living water. Most disturbing,

 however, is the fact that he always comes across as believing that all

 this is a necessary and worthwhile endeavor. There is not even any

 honest sign of desperation. That, to me, is what is really scary about

 him. He should be weeping and loudly crying out for help.

Jim

Here is a brief overview of Jim's treatise.

Gnosticism is pantheistic which rejects that God created everything out of nothing. It, also, believes we and creation are sparks of God and can return to be God with Gnosticism's secret knowledge.

This Gnosticism is in Neo-Platonism which is implicit in the Eastern Church Fathers and Eastern Orthodoxy which appears to reject part of the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation by rejecting that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son and this in part led to the Eastern Orthodox accepting of intrinsic evils such as contraception, divorce and other errors.  

Neo-Platonism was rejected and purified of its heretical elements by St. Thomas Aquinas which was and is in many non-Thomist scholars and even saints throughout Catholic history.

Gnosticism returned to Catholicism in our time as a strong force through Modernism specifically Hegelianism and Teilhard de Chardin's evolutionary teachings which were supported with some qualifications by Pope Benedict and without apparently any qualifications by Pope Francis.

Francis's Gnostic Teihardism means "Time is proposed... as being greater than God's Supreme Being... and Revealed Truth" so Francis's "mercy trumps" the Ten Commandments and all moral infallible teachings starting with allowing Communion for adulterers in it's evolutionary unfolding.

The piece is long so I advice unless you have time to skim or scan the piece first and then go back to it when you have time. It is well worth the effort.

Please pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

 "Teilhardian Evolution and the Amazon Synod: The Nest of the Antichrist":

http://rosarytotheinterior.com/teilhardian-evolution-and-the-amazon-synod-the-nest-of-the-antichrist/