FROM GIOVANNI CAVALCOLI TO DONALD TRUMP: « I SODOMITI HAVE LOST ". THE GAY LOBBY Denounce Theologian DOMINICAN FOR WHAT NOT TOLD, BUT THE BODY FOR THE US ELECTORAL VOTE WITH WHAT HAS DELIVERED

.

"Make no mistake: neither fornicators, born idolatry, nor adulterers, ne prostitutes, born sodomiti, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, not cursed, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God " [The Cor 6, 9-10]

.

.

.

.

PDF print format

.

Lying shamelessly and extrapolating from each other what to them only interested, ma, what is worse, knowing thereby to alter the facts, then to lie, the suscittibili High Priests from the “church dogma” LGBT, They have sued on the basis of nothing Dominican theologian Giovanni Cavalcoli within these terms: "The National Association against discrimination by sexual orientation publishes a press release about the famous Cavalcoli Father sentences spoken to Radio Maria: "The words spoken on Radio Maria, according to which the earthquake would be a divine punishment for civil unions, He has provoked embarrassment and dissent from Vatican. in many, including bishops and cardinals, They rushed to disavow the idea of ​​vengeful God and to apologize for earthquake victims. No One, however, He wanted to address the crux of the matter, even asking excuse to LGBT people ' [see text WHO]. These hyper-ideologized, on the pretext of discrimination on sexual orientation, aim of fact, and devilish way, to take away the freedom of thought, of speech and expression to anyone not consider sodomy as a wonderful thing. This in fact to which they are intended, It is to establish, by enforcing legislation, a dictatorship of gender, before which, the old Italian fascist regime, would be a comparison of the novel genderisti dictators nothing but the pious Dame Confraternity of Charity of St. Vincent de’ Paoli.

.

.

.

While in the past days four noisy Catholic lobbyists They raged on Dominican theologian with the same style in which American lobbyists raged on running for president of the United States of America, in one and in the other case the village It voted by showing not only their dissociation from lobby, but by showing that the thought of lobby Bankruptcy is a thought that only represents their unreasonable closing in themselves, but not the feeling of real people.

.

The various ecclesiastical that in the case of John Cavalcoli have launched the indignant criticism and fierce, however, in a climate of hyper-mercy to all that is not cattolico [cf. My previous article, WHO], only represent themselves, not the people of God, Instead it has approved and endorsed the Dominican theologian, in defending even by telematic magazines and blogs Catholics with whom both he and I had over and over again hard by questioning the theological and ecclesial level; first ahead of everyone in the defense of John Cavalcoli was the historian Roberto de Mattei.

.

To read the entire article click

WHO

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

They say the island of Patmos Fathers

.

FROM THE CRICKET TEOLOGANTE OF THE SANT'ANSELMO DOMINICAN THAT ENHANCES SCHILLEBEECKX

.

Speaking only on the purely theological level, ever on the human, should be 'noted that this academic, doctrinally speaking, It is a kind of antithesis of the legendary King Midas that changed everything he touched into gold. At its opposite, Andrea Grillo, like a kind of Re Mirda, everything theologically and doctrinally touches turns to shit, because clearly and fundamentally flawed in its thinking from the mother of all heresies: Modernism.

.

.

.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

Dear Father Ariel.

My bishop sent me years ago at St. Anselm in Rome to the specialization. I do not even finished the first half, because after attending a series of lectures given by Prof.. Elmar Salmann and dal prof. Andrea Grillo, I told the bishop that I did not go, since in no quell'ateneo he was taught theology and Catholic sacramental. The bishop did not take it, He dismissed from the post of master of ceremonies, but he accepted my decision. By reading this article by Professor. Cricket [ed see WHO], I boast that my final decision. What do you think?

Letter Signed

 

 

 

Andrea Grillo She is an intellectually unpleasant man, as are practices of the people of haughty disposition. We have also recently seen, through the way in which he debated with the Vatican Rai Aldo Maria Valli, It is known to all - even to his colleagues offline with him - as a loving man with a delicate and elegant expressive style [link the debate, WHO].

.

I find it unpleasant Andrea Grillo not as a person, because as a person is not at all unpleasant, quite the opposite! I find it unpleasant on a purely theological level, as I find unpleasant all those theologasters last fifty years who do not speak of God and the mysteries of the Faith, but of political and clerical fenomenologie. Take as an example among many article reported by our reader Priest [cf. WHO], analyze it and then tell: where is that, How many times, the manner in which Andrea Grillo, speaking of his clerical-political phenomenology a sacrament as Holy Orders, He mentioned only in passing God, or the Word of God, the Son consubstantial with the Father that the Sacrament of the set for the perpetuation of the living and holy Memorial? Once he mentions - and inappropriately - so: "The" presence of Christ "come out of the historical opposition between" transubstantiation "and" consubstantiation ' ". And this amounts to read the concept of “presence of Christ” not a metaphysical dimension, but how political problem to solve, into effect the supreme dogma of that dialogue opened by destroying false ecumenism, what is protestantizzando the Church from within, thanks to Pony Trojan as Andrea Grillo. Therefore, so much more intellectually honest, You should do this academic sociologist or expert ecclesial phenomenology, or better still: ecclesiastical, But no theologian sacramentary liturgical, given that many of the sacraments and how many live there as we celebrate them for mystery of grace, They have relationship with them far, which it is a relationship of faith, a mystical relationship, not a relationship clerical, political and phenomenological.

.

Speaking only on the theological level, ever on the human, should be 'noted that this academic, doctrinally speaking, It is a kind of antithesis of the legendary King Midas that changed everything he touched into gold. At its opposite, Andrea Grillo, like a kind of Re Mirda, what theologically and doctrinally touches turns to shit, because clearly and fundamentally flawed in its thinking from the mother of all heresies: Modernism. And always avoid any misunderstanding I repeat: "Everything theologically and doctrinally touches", because only this is referred to the expression of mirdiano mutely gold of the truth of faith, in the shit of heresies. Indeed, then as it regards all other rest, this man is definitely the most worthy and exemplary citizen of the Italian Republic, the person most beautiful, the most faithful husband to holy matrimony, the most commendable father family model of this world and so to follow. In fact - I repeat - I do not contest the person, nor his undoubted human and moral qualities, what context is only his theological heterodoxy, to which I have applied the most appropriate word: "Shit". Because heresy remains and is that for every good Catholic: the worst crap out of Satan, Prince of corruption and forgery, the one who changes the true into false and false into true.

.

Andrea Grillo is worthy pupil of the Benedictine monaco German Elmar Salmann [cf. WHO], which is' the merit of having protestantized during three decades of its rule the St. Anselm Pontifical Athenaeum. Suffice it to recall just - and I remember him many more -, that when Elmar Salmann held between 2010 and the 2011 courses in preparation for the doctorate at this university, It used to dabble in defining Blessed Pius IX as "a mental case", citing in support of these ideas the Jesuit James Martin, which results have been a distinguished historian, however, not a psychiatric specialist in psychosomatic disorders papal personality. And quoting the four volumes published by the historian Jesuit opposed to the beatification of the Pope [cf. WHO e WHO] - that do not have the "truth of faith" but opinions of a scholar -, the good Benedictine stated how the clinical psychiatric case of Pius IX "has placed his medal on his chest inventing a new dogma », in a clear allusion to the dogma of papal infallibility.

.

Sneers Teutonic-romanofobi fully understood, considered to be the head and mouth in question, besides the fact that the modernist adoring students court of miracles salmanniana, advised - obviously critical level, is intende! - the reading of two works of the heretic Hans Küng, among which: Infallible? A question. After that, the sacred fire luteran-Teutonic Salmann Elmar proceeded forward and knocked down the Holy Pontiff Pius X, which - and I quote - "with his Feeding of Dominic's Sheep, He tried to hinder progress and scientific speculation, while the Protestant exegetes did wonders on philosophical research plan, theological and biblical ". It said this is worth remembering that between the beneficiary of such limited public pearls of wisdom salmanniana, was present as well as the listener renowned journalist Giuliano Ferrara, It is not that just be devoid of excellent memory.

.

This is man, or rather the tiny heretical who put in the chair at St. Anselm his Modernist court of miracles, Andrea Grillo included, with this logical consequence: within those walls, today can not even approach what theologically and doctrinally is Catholic. Suffice to say that the exchanges between the St. Anselm and Waldensian theological faculty range from the pseudo-ecumenical idolatry and real prostration Protestants, to the point that the evangelical pastor Paul Rich has long been a guest professor at the pontifical university.

.

This is to say that if a Catholic, for its sum misfortune, approached in such an environment poisoned and poisoning, radically corrupted because peppered with modernism and protestantismi, It would be burned at the stake by the members of heretical court of miracles settled inside by Elmar Salmann, sculettanti including many monks who threw languid glances at various students, because heresy - to paraphrase my Brother Polish Darius Oko [cf. WHO e WHO] ―, often becomes omoeresia, with all the nubifrossing universal that follows in the Church, And it came without much circumlocution I explain in my book 2011.

.

Very it would have to write modernist sull'eretico Andrea Grillo, that ingenuity of the great modernists of the caliber of Ernesto Buonaiuti, endowed with a considerable intellect, But unfortunately the contrary of science and used wisdom, It has nothing, because now we have become even mediocre heresy. And that Theologizing cricket is a modernist, is out of the question, not because I say, but because they feel his writings, its non-Catholic ideas on the Eucharist, the Sacrament of Orders, the Sacrament of Marriage, or more generally on dogmatic sacramental. Not to speak of ecumenism, the enhancement of inter-communion with Protestants, hypothesis on holy orders to women, the second Catholic marriage, to follow along with all the devastating corollary that has led to the collapse of the various Lutheran and Anglican aggregations. Because with their liberal ideologies replaced the old dogmas of the faith, their exasperated feminism, their “women priests”, their picturesque “bishop” married lesbians who adopt children with their spouse [cf. WHO], in facts, much-admired Theologian luterani, they only got the result to empty their churches, long it has been more empty than Catholic ones, where it happens to come to profess faith in the Church, "one holy catholic and apostolic Church" their many exiles, in particular Anglicans. For if the Theologizing cricket He was a Catholic theologian rather than a teologista ideological, should first remind himself that in Symbol of faith Nicene Creed, we do not profess faith in “multiplicity of churches”, we continue to profess: "I think the Church one, holy catholic and apostolic Church " [Εἰς μίαν, Ἁγίαν, Καθολικὴν καὶ Ἀποστολικὴν Ἐκκλησίαν]. Because the Word of God Incarnate, through Blessed Apostle John, It exhorts us to be perfect in one [cf. GV 17, 23], not in the multiplicity and fragmentation of “churches”. Therefore, the only ecumenism that we can conceive of a Catholic, It is the one that aims to bring the separated brothers in the unity of the Church "a, holy catholic and apostolic Church ", certainly not to confer on them the rank of heretical schism “reform” and their heresiarch Luther the rank of “reformer”.

.

Nonetheless, the Theologizing cricket It never fails to insist so open today, no longer subliminal, than it would in his opinion should be discussed on the admission of women to holy orders, while aware maliciously that this speech was closed forever with a pronouncement of St. John Paul II, that referring to what has been stated by very conciliar Blessed Paul VI - and not by “old Church” Saints Popes Pius X and Pius V -, reiterated that the Church "It does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination" [see document, WHO]. Affirmation to which the Theologizing cricket retorts with low alloy defining it as sophistry: "A declaration of" no "authority" [see full article, WHO]. A quel point, the Theologizing Cricket, playing more on the legal and theologically, he claims: "Non irreformability of Priestly ordination that, in a longer perspective, ecclesial authorities could recognize tomorrow to have the authority to extend the ordination also the woman. For the text of the 1994 And definitively held, but not in an absolute way. Only until the Church deems to have that authority in 1994 It decided to exclude. Lacking the requirements of "infallibility", the document is only relatively irreformable ".

.

Unfortunately, this player at all skilled, playing for your dome with the fallibile and l’infallible, It takes no account of the Gospel and especially the life of the Incarnate Word of God, precisely that before which, The Popes, They affirmed that the Church "does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination". Simple the reason why the Church does not recognize this authority, because those who live a dimension of faith christocentric rather than politicocentrica, knows well that Christ, with the women, He had no problems of any kind, as they had subjects them Jews, even more than the Mosaic Law, the chicanery rabbinical. Think about the kind of scandal often aroused by Christ who allowed women to approach and even touch; in a society faced with a law that does not even allow themselves to fathers, touching their daughters, but above conversely, not to mention the meticulous criteria of separation between men and women, the relative purity rituals and so on. These things which, the Christ, He could not care less. So why ever, instituting the priesthood and the Eucharist, He not chose as women priests? And what kind of women, They were close to Christ God! Starting from Mater Dei, born without the stain of original sin. Because instead he chose Judas who betrayed him, Peter who denied him three times, and others that, before the ill-parade, as recounted in the Gospel of the Passion: «Then all the disciples, forsook him, they fled»? [cf. Mt 26,56]? Why not choose that extraordinary figure of Mary Magdalene, who followed him to the cross and that came first in the morning to the tomb? Probably, the Word of God, did not choose women because it was not yet a Christian adult, there was not yet the “reform” big “reformer” Luther by which we can now witness the grotesque carnival of “bishop” lesbians who strut with miter and pastoral; there was not yet the interpreters of theologians after the Council advocates of their staff Council egomenico, but most had not been developed hermeneutics of rupture and discontinuity from the Bologna School of Dossetti & Alberigo. Now, however, that we had this and much more, we could go even further, compared to certain “limitations” the … poor Christ, on account of which the Church "does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination". In conclusion, It would be enough to put himself above God, and act accordingly as best we deem appropriate. Is not this the essence of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?

.

Andrea Grillo is a heretic because in his thinking and unorthodox ecumenical pseudo they recur every major errors indicated in the declaration Lord Jesus of the year 2000, while in his misconceptions of the sacred liturgy uses all that is indicated as an error by the education Sacramentum, place that he has lent to serious liturgical abuses in various parish churches in Liguria, where repeatedly he held sermons in the Gospel instead of the priest during the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, which it is precisely "sacrifice", through which the bread and wine transustanziano in the Body and Blood of Christ, really present in soul, body and divinity. The Eucharist is not a Lutheran transignification, nor a protestantica transfinalization, or a festive dinner at the Calvinist way in which the Eucharist is understood as a mere symbol drained of sacredness. Because for Theologizing Cricket any term is good, species protesting, except the end of living and holy sacrifice. Without it even going to touch the upper echelons of dogmatic sacramental, would be enough to simply remember what the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the Holy Eucharist:

.

In SS. Sacrament of the Eucharist is contained truly, Really, substantially the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, with the soul and divinity, so, the Whole Christ. This presence is called “real” not by exclusion, the other types are not “royalty”, but par excellence, because it's substantial, and by which Christ, God and man, wholly and entirely present [cf. CCC, n. 1374]

.

But basically, who am I, to judge a celebrity as the Theologizing cricket, vacated for years to poison the minds with their heresies in a Pontifical University, directly under the windows of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith headed by Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller and the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments presided over by Cardinal Robert Sarah? For if they do not think these two Cardinals, dressed in red not for choreography, but what a symbol of loyalty and obedience to the faith until the shedding of their own blood, as such responsible to direct these two closely competent ministries for modernist heresy peddled by the papal chair of Theologizing Cricket, I think maybe I? Unfortunately I do not have power to depose from teaching certain characters clearly and proudly non-Catholics. Had he been in office in the place of certain prefects, I would have done for a long time, regardless of the wrath and attacks of the powerful consortium of modernists who for half a century in this part is the host within the Church.

.

That is to say how much I am mindful of being really small thing, before this reality now gone far beyond the same, "Imagination in power", because even the most vivid imagination would ever have imagined that one day, all that was condemned by Pope Pius X, about Modernism as a mother of all heresies, He would have lorded it in the church, to the point where they are heretics, to punish and expel the devotees to the doctrine and the sacred deposit of the Catholic faith, starting from the most renowned universities and pontifical universities, and especially the older ones, where not taught to future theologians have been as pernicious errors of the Protestant heresy, quite the opposite! It's called the heresiarch Luther "reformer", people are even saying that thanks to “reform” Protestant he could have, after almost five centuries, the Second Vatican Council, that "he allowed the applications of Luther ' (!?) What true only partially and as such to analyze and explain very carefully, place some instances born by not a few legitimate protests of Luther - as in the past I wrote -, not only were received as a result of Vatican II, but already before, the Council of Trent, in several of its disciplinary canons, He did own several of these instances its legitimate. Different is instead attributed to Luther certain reforms of Vatican II and, in case that's not enough, directly accommodate Protestants in our house as professors invited in ecclesiastical universities where they form our future theologians, most of them priests and religious, that once titrated into heresy through the seal of the Sante Roman academic papers, then go up on church pulpits to announce proudly as many heresies, with aura from superfine and mimicking intellectual pejorative their bad teachers.

.

therefore aware of my limitations, I leave you to answer the heterodoxies Theologizing cricket both the Pope St. Pius X, what about the Modernist court of miracles mail from the chief heretic Elmar Salmann in the Chairs of the St. Anselm Pontifical Anteneo, He says in clear words and unambiguous in what follows …

.

the Island of Patmos, 3 November 2016

.

.SPEECH OF THE HIGH PONTIFF PIUS X
DIRECTED TO NEW CARDINALS *

.

Vatican CITY, 17 April 1907

.

We welcome more alive glue complacency feelings of devotion and filial love toward Us and this Apostolic See, There you have meanings in the name of you and your beloved brothers for the honor of Purple to which you were called [1]. But if we accept your thanks, we must mean, that the preclear virtue, of which you are adorned, only opera di very, you have done, and the other signal services, that in several fields you have rendered to the Church, They made it even worthy to be numbered in the albo of Our Sacred Senate.

And it rejoices not only hope, but the certainty, which also covered the new dignity always consecrate, As in the past, ingenuity and strength to assist the Roman Pontiff in governing the Church.

If the Roman Pontiffs have always had also they need external assistance to fulfill their mission, this need is felt more keenly now for very serious conditions of the time in which we live and continuous assaults pei, which it is made a sign for the Church of his enemies.

And here do not believe it, Esteemed Fratelli, We want to allude that the facts, however painful, of France, because these are largely offset by more expensive consolations: the wonderful union of the Venerable Episcopate, generous disinterest of the clergy, and compassionate firmness of Catholics willing to make any sacrifice for the protection of the faith and for the glory of their homeland; It has fulfilled a’ Last time that persecution only serve to highlight and point to’ universal admiration of the virtues of the persecuted and at most are like the waves of the sea, that in frangendosi storm on the rocks, they purify them, if it was necessary, the mud that had sullied them.

And you know it, Esteemed Fratelli, that is why he did not fear the Church, When the edicts of Caesar summoned to the early Christians: or abandon the worship of Jesus Christ or die; because the blood of the martyrs was the seed of new converts to the faith. Ma stormy war, that makes repeat: Here, in my bitterness, is that which arises from the aberration of the minds, for which they fail to recognize its doctrines and is repeated in the world of the uprising cry, that the rebels were ousted from heaven. And unfortunately are those rebels, they profess and spread in subtle forms monstrous errors on the evolution of dogma, the return to pure Gospel, namely leafless, with’ they say, from the explanations of theology, from the definitions of the councils, by the highest asceticism, - emancipation from the Church, But in a new way without rebelling not to be cut off, but even submit not to miss with their own convictions, and finally on’ adaptation to the times around, in speech, writing and preaching a charity without faith, very tender pei unbelievers, which opens to all, unfortunately, the way to eternal ruin.

I ben stars, Oh venerable Fratelli, is November, that we must defend with all our might the store that I was entrusted, we have no reason to be in distress in the face of this attack, which is not a heresy, but the compendium and the poison of all heresies, which tends to undermine the foundations of faith and annihilate Christianity.

Yup, wipe out Christianity, because the Holy Scripture to these modern heretics is no longer the sure source of all the truths that belong to the faith, but a common book; the inspiration for them narrows the dogmatic doctrines, However, arrangements in their own way, and nearly differs from’ poetic inspiration of Aeschylus and Homer. Legitimate interpreter of the Bible is the Church, However, subject to the rules of the so-called critical science, that is imposed to Theology and enslaves. For the tradition finally everything is relative and subject to mutations, and then reduced to naught the authority of the Holy Fathers. And all these and a thousand other errors propalano them into booklets, in magazines, ascetic in books and even in novels and involgono them in certain ambiguous terms, in certain forms nebulae, so you always have opened an escape to the defense in order to avoid a’ open condemnation and though taking the unwary to their laces.

We therefore rely too much on the work your, Esteemed Fratelli, because if you know with your suffragan bishops in your regions of these sowers of discord, We will join in the fight, There we inform of the danger in which souls are exposed, reported their books to the Holy Roman Congregations and meanwhile, using the powers that are granted by the sacred canons, solemnly condemn them, persuaded highest obligation that you have hired to help the Pope in governing the Church, to fight the’ error and to defend the truth until’ effusion of blood.

Moreover, we trust in the Lord, beloved children, that will give us the appropriate time the aid necessarii; and the Apostolic Blessing, you have invoked, learn how great its vol, the clergy and the people of your Dioceses, above all the venerable Bishops and the elect children, who decorated with their presence this solemn ceremony, on your and their relatives; and is a source for all and for each of the elected thanks more and more gentle consolations.

.

Pius, PP X

.

___________________

NOTE

[1] Card. Aristide Cavallari, Patriarch of Venice.

* AAS, vol. XL (1907), pp. 259-262.

.

.

.

DOMINICAN THAT THAT ENHANCES SCHILLEBEECKX

.

One of the serious shortcomings of Edward Schillebeeckx is that he confuses the concept and language. The languages ​​vary, change and must change; they must be updated and adapted to the environment; but certain realities of reason or faith, that they express, they are universal and immutable, I'm, in the words of Benedict XVI, "non-negotiable" values, inalienable. So let's go cautious before defining Schillebeeckx a "great theologian".

.

.

.

.

Dear Father Giovanni ,

I follow always on the island of Patmos, and I remember to have read his critical judgments on the Dutch Dominican theologian Schillebeeckx, she accused of modernism, gnoseologia, etc.. Days ago, I came across a presentation made on the official website of the Dominican Order [Ed. WHO], where this theologian from her often criticized is presented in the list of “large Dominican figures”. I am a bit’ confused, I could ask for an explanation?

Francesca Pope

.

.

.

On the site of the Dominican Province of St. Thomas Aquinas Order of Friars Preachers appeared the presentation of the figure and work of the Dominican Edward Schillebeeckx for the pen of Father Gerardo Cioffari, ON [See WHO].

.

The author makes great praise, many of which are undeserved, for me since 1984 [1], along with other critics and in consonance with the complaints, Edward Schillebeeckx in his time received by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I have reported on many occasions and in some publications [2], its serious errors, which find their root in its gnoseology historicist and relativistic and that put his theology in contrast with the doctrine of faith.

.

The fact that Schillebeeckx was one of the architects of Dutch Catechism, I put so stressed by Gerardo Cioffari, It does no credit to Schillebeeckx, since the Catechism It contained errors against the faith and so serious gaps, that Blessed Pope Paul VI was forced to do it corrected and completed by a specially appointed commission of cardinals. The Dutch Catechism without the corrections made by Roma, is the flag of the neo-pro-Protestant modernism and falsely pretends to interpretation of Vatican Council II.

.

The fundamental defect of the epistemology of Schillebeeckx It is a radical distrust of reason, replaced by a "faith" experiential and athematic, very reminiscent of the setting of Luther. In fact, he believes that the concept does not capture reality, therefore it can not be an objective and faithful representation of the real, but it is the expression or interpretation relating to the subject of a previous "athematic experience" of reality, Thus the idea is limited to indicating the object, without identifying with it intentionally, but it is only in conventional form, linguistic or symbolic, as well as, for instance, a road sign indicates the direction to follow to reach the goal, but it is still the place to be attained.

.

Note that the ' "athematic experience" is not the experience of the senses, but it is a priori intellectual intuition of the concrete mixed with real meaning, Schillebeeckx that deduced from Husserl's phenomenology. The knowledge, so, per Schillebeeckx, does not start with sensible experience, as Aristotle and St. Thomas, but with this experience or intuition a priori, bringing to mind the Cartesian and Kantian apriorism.

.

Sense experience, per Schillebeeckx, It does not take place before the conceptualization, as in Thomism, but against the backdrop of the experience athematic, that does not exist in St. Thomas, and which for Schillebeeckx is the starting point of knowledge. He admits that the concept is linked to the experience of meaning, but it is formed only after the experience athematic, as an interpretation and expression "inadequate" (in the sense that we will see) of this experience. All this is accompanied by a marked antipathy to intellectual abstraction, occamistica of origin, which makes it incapable Schillebeeckx, in the name of un'indiscreta concreteness and historicity, to grasp and appreciate the value and realistic objective universal essence of abstraction from the concrete particular, and then the supratemporal being independent and unchangeable by the temporal and mutable.

.

According to the old prejudice Occamistic, the abstract is inevitable, but it takes away or impoverishes the content of knowledge, which would be achieved only by experience athematic, and adds a subjective element, that would be the "interpretation", if it is to grasp the object; or conceptual expression in the language, when it comes to communicating it to others.

.

Per Schillebeeckx, we, by means of the concept we can not objectively know reality, but only "interpret" according to the changing and diverse categories, including the dogmas. The athematic experience miss its true, but it is in itself, as athematic, incommunicable in concept and language. It is easy to say that everything is obviously detrimental to the understanding of the dogmas of the faith, whose content is notoriously immutable and eternal, being infallible interpretation of God's Word. Because of this, wonder supremely, not to say that scandalizes, that Schillebeeckx was right in dogmatic theology professor. The rest, similar cases in the history of thought are not new. Suffice to say that Kant was a professor of metaphysics. It seems that the encyclical Schillebeeckx Feeding of Dominic's Sheep St. Pius X has come to nothing.

.

To understand the theory of Schillebeckx on the concept, comprehensor but no "indicator", We can give an example. If I see the street sign "Bologna", I know the direction that I have to keep to Bologna, but I can not tell you even be in Bologna. But this separation from reality is worsening in vision Schillbeecckxiana, for which the concept points to the reality, ma does not ever reach.

.

This explains the statement Schillebeeckx cited by Gerardo Cioffari: "The conceptual expression is but the imperfect, inadequate and abstract explication cognitive act constituted by an implicit intuition. It always depends on a certain earthly experience, from a given historical moment and a particular culture ".

.

This "implicit intuition" pre-conceptual experience is original, Global and ineffable reality, which is then "interpreted" or expressed in concepts that tend to it, but not the reach.

.

Reality, per Schillebeeckx, It is an objective and; It gives the truth, but the conceptual approaches are many and contingent, as are many road signs, Bologna pointing in different directions. In one reality, so, It did not give a single concept, but many in time and space. Hence the mutability and relativity of dogmatic concepts.

.

For instance, one is the mystery of Christ. But it is one thing the New Testament Christology, an account that Chalcedon, an account that medieval, an account that modern. Compare with each other ever, contradict each other. Instead, they are true, if you refer each to its own time. Truth daughter time. The ontological concept of person was fine for the time of Chalcedon. Today we have to use what existentialist. The flag moves depending on the wind.

.

We also observe that "inadequate expression" It is not only synonymous with "imperfect" - imperfection is natural to the human concept, especially in theology, in the sense that the concept does not totally includes the thing -, but it means missing that ' the conformity of intellect and thing, conditioning and constitutes the truth of knowing. It lacks precisely because the concept does not reach the reality, It does not own, not assimilated, not internalized, but it stays out, impenetrable, unknowable and alien, It just turns around, as in Kant's epistemology.

.

In this way, the subject - "a certain earthly experience, a given historical moment, a particular culture "- enters, by l ' "interpretation", to constitute the object, so the truth is no longer a simple equating the object, but it is relevant to the subject. You epistemological relativism. I can not know the thing how, ma as it is for me. The object is not in itself, but it's relevant to me. There is no more pure objectivity, but the subject contributes to constitute or to form the object, come in Kant.

.

Look Gerardo Cioffari: "But this is not an assertion of agnosticism, as the inadequacy of the concept it does not mean that does not correspond to anything real, but that does not adequately captures the real, but shows, it provides the direction and sense. That is especially true for the speech about God, of which we know, to say S. Tommaso, what is not, and not what is. As a result the revelation remains an unfathomable mystery, and the dogmatic definitions have the function to orient toward the mystery of salvation ".

.

To avoid agnosticism not enough that the concept corresponds to "something real", then if the concept does not reach it and do not know what that something. Even for Kant the thing itself exists, but the trouble is that it is unknowable. What is needed is that the mind knows what is the essence of the thing. Without this act of the mind, lacking the same knowledge, because to know is to know precisely, of one thing, what is it, it means knowing the essence. Knowledge is knowledge say something.

.

With regards to the knowledge of God, We have to remember the distinction made by Gaetano between know its essence, know the essence in any way and the learn essential, knowing manner of wood or essence force.

.

When St. Thomas says that God rationally we know only that which is not, rather than what is, It refers to know quidditativamente, that is, to know God in His essence or in its own essence. It 'impossible to define the essence of God, or form a concept of God by gender and difference, because God is pure Being, above all genera and species. We know God quidditativamente only in faith and especially in the beatific vision. But that does not mean it's completely impossible to form any concept of God or define its essence - know its essence - any one way, however imperfect and analog. It is used, as it suggests the same Holy Scripture [Is 3,14], the entity category, which it is in excess of all kinds, and therefore better than any other lends itself to form a concept of God, as it does St. Thomas with his famous notion of 'a subsistent is the very being of God by itself,.

.

The concept, as already he knew Hegel, It is nothing but the thing "in the element of thought"; the thing as thought, the thing in soul, as Saint Thomas said. This does not mean we should not distinguish thinking from being, or thing from the concept of the thing. To confuse these two terms, while claiming to know the subject exhaustively, as Hegel did, Idealism would Gnostic, repeatedly condemned by Pope Francis [3].

.

Gerardo Cioffari then quotes other words of Schillebeeckx: "Theologically, it seems to me untenable and even impossible to want to fix once and for all the theological concepts by resorting to an ecclesiastical regulation of language. Because every assertion, also dogmatic, It means something only within a specific context. If it brought in another context, the significance of what had been alleged is inevitably shifted ".

.

Another major flaw of Schillebeeckx It is that he confuses the concept and language. The languages ​​vary, change and must change; must be updated and adapted to the environment; but certain realities of reason or faith, that they express, they are universal and immutable, I'm, in the words of Benedict XVI, "non-negotiable" values, inalienable.

.

It is true that the same thing can be expressed in different ways. But do not use the pretext of changing the expression or speech, things that can be useful or necessary, to change it. If you change the meaning or concept of a thing, it can not be the same. And if a value is immutable, It is unfair and misleading to present it as mutable. It must remain the concept of what remains and change the concept of what changes. The knowledge, Certain, must progress; but if the object known is immutable, It is not about to change his concept, but to improve.

.

The language course is not just a verbal terms or linguistic signs. It is too evident that these vary and change. But there are also ways of expression of conceptual, such as the metaphorical concepts, pictures, and symbols, The myths, comparisons, different from culture to culture, from time to time in the same culture. It is clear that these expressive elements change and must change, remaining the same the object's meaning.

.

That being the case, we must say that the Magisterium of the Church fixed once and for all the theological concepts, above all dogmatic, not primarily resorting "to an ecclesiastical adjustment of language", but deepening the meaning of God's Word. The Magisterium is not the search for '. It fixed forever these concepts, especially in solemn dogmatic definitions, simply because the realities and truths that are the subject of these definitions are eternal and divine.

.

Sthe interpretation is infallible, under the assistance of the Holy Spirit, of the Word of God, that "no go" (Mt 24,35) and that is "firm in heaven" [Shall 119,89]. Whether the Magisterium also takes the properties of language, this is true; but always and only in order to explain to the faithful the true meaning of the dogma and therefore the Word of God which interprets the dogma.

.

It is therefore not true that "every assertion, also dogmatic, It means something only within a specific context ". On the contrary, it means something, that is the truth of faith, within any context, although it must be mediated by a certain context, because the truth of faith is a universal and immutable truth. The meaning of the truths of faith, whatever the context in which it is expressed, It's always the same, because it is above the horizon time and belongs eternal and divine, It is not tied to any particular historical context and applies to all. The word of God remains forever.

.

Unlike speech applies to the language, by which the Church expresses dogmatic truth. His language is and can actually be tied to changing historical and linguistic contexts systems. The dogmatic formula, But, It can vary in its linguistic and semantic aspect, but never in the concept of faith that it expresses.

.

Other Schillebeeckx statements reported by Gerardo Cioffari: "The Magisterium sets each time in the changing temporal circumstances which language is valuable in the Church; in other words it regulates the use of the ecclesiastical language and establishes: Who does not speak, and so the faith, exhibits, at least in this cultural situation with its specific preconditions, if not himself, certainly the other faithful, the danger of altering the intended meaning of the Gospel message about the saving reality '.

.

The task of the Church It is not primarily establish of words or verbal formulas, but the concepts, clarify concepts, the concepts of faith, albeit expressed in words suitable and understandable. Certainly the Church's concern to express the Gospel message in the most suitable, so as to be understood by men of his time. But what is most dear is to let us know what Christ taught us for our salvation. And to understand these things, We need a gnoseology who admits that the intellect grasps the real through the concept, otherwise the knowledge vanishes and we lose the great dignity that God has given us to have been created in his image and likeness. So let's go cautious before defining Schillebeeckx a "great theologian".

.

Varazze, 3 November 2016

.

NOTE

[1] CF The criterion of truth in Schillebeeckx, in sacred Doctrine, 2, 1984, pp.188-205.

[2] I mention Schillebeeckx also in my recent article "Decline and Dominican Order recovery" [see text WHO].

[3] Cf. my essay "The dependence of the idea from reality in ' The gospel of joy of Pope Francis, in PATH, 2, 2014, pp.287-316.

.

.

.

.

Note

The editorial staff had titled this article published the address book of the Readers 3 November at 21: «Small heretics grow: by Grillo teologante Sant'Anaselmo of the Dominican prankster who exalts Schillebeeckx». Names and photographs are the result of editorial work and not of the Authors, I proceeded to change the title given to two different comulativamente published writings together. Indeed, the “accusation” of heresy and modernism that I have seen fit to put to the positions of sacramentary liturgical theologian Andrea Grillo, as part of what are ordinary theological disputes, They can not extend to the Dominican Gerardo Cioffari ON, with regard to the writing of it that is different subject. So I proceeded to titrate: «From Grillo teologante Sant'Anaselmo of the Dominican exalting Schillebeeckx»

Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

4 November 2014 hours 20.30

.

.

.

.

.

.

.