Author Father Ariel

love joy. SIAT headphones, however, pay taxes, because the payment of taxes is a real dogma of faith

JOY OF LOVE. SIAT HELMETS, BUT PAY TAXES, BECAUSE THE PAYMENT OF TAXES IS A TRUE DOGMA OF FAITH

.

It is easy and comfortable to get into other people's finger pointing at sentencing bedrooms as a new dogma of faith "as long as they live as brother and sister '. I will, hypocrites ever, that "filter the gnat" in other people's bedrooms and then "swallow the camel" [cf. Mt 23,24] are you ready to accept, make yours and spread as unquestionable dogma of faith: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar ', then pay taxes without a murmur, especially without azzardarvi to say that are high and that are not right?

.

.

Author Father Ariel

Author
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

Dear Father Ariel.

In the Church there has been a proletarian expropriation! In fact, if I understand correctly the words of the player signing his comments to his article as "nonsonobigotto”, a name which is a program, in practice this would happen: Hierarchy betrays, then the people, against all hierarchical idea, the "Holy Spirit" would give rise to pockets of resistance made up of humble canon lawyers and theologians who would know makeshift drown traitors chosen by Christ and with a Bolshevik revolution would report the faith in the Church, indeed rifonderebbero they scratch as they wish, that's God ... Outstanding! We are only at the ideological and theological destruction of the entire Magisterium of the Church, but humble theologians that every day they attack the Pope knows more of the devil, and then ... then, people ahead: to the rescue!

George M. G. Locatelli

.

.

.

Pope signature

The Supreme Pontiff Francis sign the post-synodal exhortation The joy of love

By its question our player hits a problem that has its roots in the late eighties and early nineties that develops within the Church through best of the worst the postcouncil. And when I say best of the worst the postcouncil, I do not mean the Second Vatican Council, quite the opposite: I am referring to the fact the worst betrayals who has consumed this great council of the Church on the part of all those who, moving on the pretext of dangerous interpretation of his lyrics and his spirit, they ended up giving life to that Council egomenico of theologians who never was celebrated, and never has been written by the Church Fathers.

.

These people who call theologasters traitors of the council, They have created a great confusion of those in the Church are the functions of the laity participate in the common priesthood of the baptized through the Sacrament of Baptism, and clerics, chosen for the mystery of grace and established through the Sacrament of Orders, and only participates in the ministerial priesthood of Christ, as well as legitimate custodians of the task of teaching, a gift that no secular, even a layman awarded a theological doctorate, You can exercise with the authority the A grace with which can and must exercise the coated Priest of function consacration. This enormous confusion created situations today become unmanageable, thanks to cries of "collective trade union" or "leftist collective" summed up in the devastating slogans: «More dialogue, more collegiality, more democracy in the Church ". Cry to which is added as a result the slogan: "More room for the laity in the Church".

.

Based on this premise, to give rise to a situation which today appears now uncontrolled and uncontrollable - as you can ascertain from blog to blog, where the last of the laity who has trawled the Catechism feels a theologian and a canon lawyer superfine, both believed to be in the right to challenge the Roman Pope to the last priest of’the Catholic world - They contributed two factors that have created by joining together the explosive effects that can create the potassium union with sulfur: the fall of the Berlin Wall and the uncontrolled field taking certain lay movements during the pontificate of Giovanni Paolo II, in particular Neocatecumenali and Charismatics.

.

We proceed by order, from the large army of people from the seventies, to follow throughout the course of the eighties, They belonged to the great "messianic church communist". I refer to the children of "imagination to power", the "forbidden to forbid", convinced that the "proletarian paradise" of "Holy Mother Soviet Union "the shine" Red Sunrise ". I am referring to those who, ideological and much more blind the blind man of Jericho [cf. MC 10, 51-52], When the tanks Russians invaded in August 1968 Prague, without saying a speech and, far from condemning that action, they simply move their silent irrepressible need for "messianic ideology" in China slaughterer Mao Zedong. Fallen also the Chinese myth, here they trasmigrare en masse to the exotic Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, turning into a "sweet Christ" that being vile and bloodthirsty Ernesto Guevara, not surprisingly nicknamed by Bolivians the pig [pork], to indicate how dirty outside and inside dirt.

.

NThe novembre the 1989 Communism collapses imploding on itself, historical event sanctioned by the images of the fall of the Berlin Wall. A quel point, this army of ideological orphans home and no longer messiahs, thrown from Europe to China until the Caribbean Cuba, They are found before that their beloved Sigmund Freud would call the "work of mourning". The problem is that these individuals have not mourned, but once again have proceeded - always using a Freudian term - with a translational process. Hence paradoxically, the Catholic Church, until yesterday their bitter enemy, Paul VI with his satirical mocked on the radical left newspaper Evil and with his Giovanni Paolo II charged until just before by the same ideological anachronism and blind anti-communism of captive-reactionary matrix, It has become - and I repeat: paradoxically and not by faith - their point of refuge, their last chance.

.

This barbarian horde former ideologues, They are not entered or returned in the Church through a journey of faith and purification in order thereby to processing, quite the opposite! You have entered a straight leg bringing this same if such were, up to create in its interior a very negative transformation process. All under the eyes of the Supreme Pontiff Giovanni Paolo II, which unfortunately, to the test, this problem does not seem to have their own perceived. I doubt that this Holy Pontiff, during certain oceanic its meetings, I've realized that to acclaim him as a leader They were the same until just before, in the usual way but above all with the same spirit, They had hailed the Moscow Soviet, Then Mao Zedong, then Castro and Ernesto Guevara. And if you were to acclaim him not to age the direct protagonists involved, were their children born and raised in this spirit and become the first young and then into adulthood worse than their own parents.

.

These subjects, in need of "strong structures" exercising over them psychological pressure both individual and collective, where they could merge? But it is obvious: such as pigs narrated by the Gospel that are thrown off the cliff [cf. LC 8, 26-37], They converged in the Neocatechumenal and the Charismatic, inside of which there is a leader, strong leadership that puts pressure on the pretext of collectivism now called communitarianism; or call democracy now participation of the laity, O collegiality.

.

The less vigilant and blind Ecclesiastical Authority, he never wanted to consider how high they were in the orphans disconsolate number grew among the ranks of the Communist Party, or worse, much of Lotta Continua and Proletarian Democracy, that today, over sixty, are celebrated and undisputed mega-catechists of the Neocatechumenal Way, which it was far from being truly converted and processed, they just changed the flag and keep the same basic spirit, starting with the repressive spirit and coercion against those who today do not call more like yesterday's "dirty fascists", they call them "closed to the Holy Spirit", or simply "under evil influence". Change the style but the substance remains the same: the demonization and possibly the destruction of anyone who does not think like them. In this regard I refer to the article learned of my clever collaborator Jorge A. Facio Lince on communism Gramscian [cf. WHO].

.

Sorry to really think a connoisseur of communist ideology as the Supreme Pontiff Giovanni Paolo II, no one has ever noticed the dangerous situation that was creating within the Church. But on the other hand, i Neocatecumenali, They had adopted styles of behavior that the future Holy Pontiff were particularly dear: first of all the family and children, then the treat sexual morality. This is not caused him to question what the very negative, the ecclesial level, there was in this sect in which, on one side they churn out children and promoted the sexual morality so dear to Giovanni Paolo II, but on the other he created a church within the Church, a community within the ecclesial community, in conclusion: a real para-Catholic sect.

..

It's true, the Neocatechumenal Way were the sacred liturgy Eucharist and what they wanted and how they wanted; made terrible confusion between the common priesthood of the baptized and the ministerial priesthood of Christ, proclaiming from the rooftops that we were all priests; had a parallel catechism and went on a mission for the world to proclaim the "verb sacred"Mr. Kiko Arguello, however ..., They were children and condemned contraception and promoting lax sexual morals. And while this was happening, none of the pundits of the Holy See is asked: but the center, the heart and engine of the life of the Church, Eucharist is scempiata by the officials of the Neocatechumenal up to verge on blasphemy and desecration, or the moral prohibition of the use of birth control pills and condoms? In short: the Word was made flesh, or the Word was made against contraceptives?

.

If the Neocatechumenal Movement, instead promote sexual and family morality, so to speak "more rigid", He had instead promoted a certain laxity, Giovanni Paolo II would not hesitate a moment to declare "outside the law" and to wipe them with a shot of broom. But since, albeit at the cost of their havoc Eucharistic, their immense liturgical abuses and a poorly understood and promoted concept of the priesthood, the Neocatechumenal defended the family and sexual morality, if the past are always smooth, and especially under the long pontificate of Giovanni Paolo II.

.

To anyone who wanted to throw the accusation: "How dare you criticize a saint?». I reply that I have never criticized the supreme magisterium of this Holy Pontiff, I have always promoted and continue to promote it today. And anyone who wants to deepen the doctrinal and theological discourse about the fact that the Saints, although such and as such model of heroic virtue, They are not perfect, You can go to read, in the archive of 'Patmos Island, an old article titled: "The Saints obnoxious, Popes including ' [cf. WHO].

.

The results of this They were the progressive secularization of clerics and the dangerous clericalization lay, with devastating consequences for the pastoral plan. Now I will try to explain with examples: Our churches in the presbytery was restricted from the balustrade, function of which it was to delimit and indicate the status of the so-called space Holy of Holies. In this balustrade the faithful knelt to receive the Holy Eucharist. And what happened at that time not so far away where no one would ever occurred to you to receive the Eucharist sitting in the chair in place according to the arbitrary and disrespectful provisions dictated by the lay lords Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez. After saying this is needed now a premise: no document of Vatican Council II, starting from Holy Council He never established that the balustrades, and especially those of monumental historic churches, just as the altars before God [facing east] they were torn down, as they did the priests, or as did the bishops themselves, often perpetrating appalling havoc to the historical and artistic heritage, based on the erroneous principle that the balustrade was a 'former sign of division "between the faithful and the priest. Certain statements and explanations, albeit sometimes coming from bishops and priests, They are false and misleading, place that the balustrade was a sacred sign of respect, and he had a precise theological and pastoral whole function linked to that holy fear of God, of which today no longer speak; and not talk about it anymore since the theologasters They have taken to confuse the awe and fear of the Father. And finally we have passed, both liturgically, in the theological dimension ... the Oedipus complex.

.

The presbytery has thus become the walkway of the laity "Participate" and "active", with an overwhelming and often overwhelming presence of women who assume the rights and prerogatives that do not compete with them in particular as to the lay men.

..

Initially many priests welcomed certain dangerous intrusions that were going to touch the sphere of the liturgy and that pastoral closely linked to the priestly figure. Throw out "finally" to the winds their dignified and austere cassocks, now confused in jeans and sweater as lay people among lay, priests could finally open the doors to all those worst trespassing field of the laity which initially made the freest priests to devote themselves to political activism, the sociological confabulations, the figure of the priest as a man all in the midst of all differences and barriers without ... well: let the priests much more free to make your business.

.

One time, those who went to bring the Eucharist to the sick? Obvious, the pastor. Even the deacon, although he had power, more rigor and the pastor. Today, instead, who goes there? But obvious: the "pious women" extraordinary minister of Communion, to which many pastors are forced to ask, please, the key of the tabernacle. And who was the first to teach catechism to children, or if he could not hold all alone catechism classes, to control and instruct catechists? But obvious: the pastor. And who were, those who were appointed as catechists? Those in charge were men and women, mostly elderly, recognized models of Christian virtue, often teachers, Catholic teachers and retired teachers who with all their teaching experience held this valuable service in our parishes. Today, whoever happens instead of finding as catechists and I repeat ...: ahead and foremost as "catechists"? But obvious, often find females fatal twentysomethings, not infrequently with miniskirt, Hipsters and discovered basin, platform shoes from 15 centimeters to feet and so on. But most of all, today, pastors teach catechism? Of course not, an average of 9 his 10 they don't, because they are engaged in ... - unbelievable, hear! - pastoral activities! In short: They have spread like wildfire and numerous beyond measure and decency pastors who do not have time to bring communion to the sick, They do not have time to confess, least of all to do spiritual direction, They do not have time to teach catechism ... and all because - and again I repeat: hear, hear! - ... because they engaged in pastoral activities. Personally, if you were a bishop - and it goes without saying that my example is a purely academic -, then came to discover that my charge as parish priests not bring the Eucharist to the sick, do not confess, do spiritual direction, do not teach catechism, all because they engaged in pastoral activities ..., esigerei call them and be informed on the spot what are these important pastoral activity of all higher than those who do not perform or worse sometimes delegate to the laity and to the secular; and if you do not give me more than plausible explanations, I think it'll play them as you play bagpipes at Christmas.

.

Most priests have withdrawn from their land to engage in activities far from pastoral, social and political activism to protect the environment, more secular, but mostly secular aggressive, flooded fields that are themselves pastoral land of the priest. It is yesterday, before a qualified theologian, even the priests, sometimes even the bishops themselves did not dare utter a groan, forward the authentic wisdom of a truly wise old theologian, Today however it happens that even the champion of the ignorant of our lay people raise his fist in the air and beat your feet on the ground to move humoral disputes without rhyme or reason to cry … "I do not agree, because I think that …», therefore also eziandio "It is right and correct what I think, I feel that I ".

.

All this is a logical consequence of the fact that, while the priest in jeans and sweater takes part in the city council meeting where we talk to the refugee problem of environmental pollution or, the pious women go to bring the Eucharist to the sick, teach catechism with no control whatsoever, feature of the parish church as their own terms, establish them motu proprio liturgical rules and so on. And if taken before this field the pastor does not adapt, here is that the laity, and in particular secular, make her life miserable and totally unlivable. If then, before pastors similar, come into the parish, the Neocatechumenate, then the priest assumes the role of mere "consecrator of wafers”, and once the Mass has its place of sitting in respectful silence beside the mega-catechist kikiano fell the day before from the scaffolding on which he did all his life a bricklayer, and which he launches one after the other blunders and often real heresy in matters of doctrine and faith, species under the Pneumatology. But woe to tell him anything. First, why do you answer that you are hostile to the Spirit, second, why do you say that what matters is having the Spirit, third, because it is the Spirit who gives the true knowledge, not the study, not the theological culture.

.

This increasingly intolerable arrogance - and I, as a presbyter, I have never tolerated and I will not tolerate the exercise of my sacred ministry - is a common element is the so-called traditionalists is the so-called progressives. And receive, promote collections of referendum signatures against a measure taken personally by the Supreme Pontiff, which as I explained in my previous article is not subject to any human union [cf. WHO]; seconds, drive past balustrades and relegated with a kick in the ass of all the priest, as one among all, They proclaimed - in the name of a never celebrated council and a sick movementism but still tolerated by Giovanni Paolo II - that we are all priests.

.

That army of canonists and theologians improvised which refers to our astute reader Giorgio M.G. Locatelli, I am the product of an ecclesial and ecclesiastical situation now totally degenerate. They are the product of the sons of “imagination in power” he was born in “forbidden to forbid” that after the fall of the Berlin Wall have never been able to mourn and who have transferred in the Church, via translational process, the worst of their ideologies, the worst of their post-communist messianism. All this with a problem of no small importance: They not converted to Catholicism, but they have tried and still try to convert Catholicism Communist messianic ideology of which were orphaned and from which you have never posted; Ideology transferred to educational level on their children, which are now even worse than their parents. And this damaging and dangerous spirit, He has found its outbreak in certain movements, in a particular way in the Neocatechumenal.

.

The discussion on divorced and remarried concerns all of an underlying problem: sex. For if there had been half a sex, all the pre-synodal and post-synodal controversy there would be no, May!

.

The problem is that this army of poor deranged and unbalanced, fail to grasp and understand is an essential element of the Christian life is the mystery of salvation: we will be judged by God on charity, indicated no coincidence that the Blessed Apostolo Paolo as the most important of the theological virtues in a passage of the Pauline collection which is the heart of Catholic theology, always known as Hymn to Charity, where it advises us:

.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, They are as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And if I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge;, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing. Love is patient, love is kind; It is not envious, It does not brag, not puffed up, no disrespect, does not seek its own interests, don't get angry, ignores the evil received, does not rejoice, but rejoices with the truth. It bears, Love believes, It hopes all things, It endures all things. The charity will never end. Are prophecies; the gift of tongues will cease, and will fade science. We know in part and we prophesy. But when that which is perfect, all imperfect disappears. Quand'ero bambino, I spake as a child, I thought as a child, I reasoned like a child. Ma, He became a man, what was a child I abandoned. For now we see in a mirror, dimly; but then face to face. Now I know imperfectly, but then shall I know perfectly, as I am known. And now these three remain: faith, hope and charity; but the greatest of these is love! [The Cor 13, 1-13]

.

To those that the Holy Father indicates rightly as modern Pharisees, Pelagians, lovers of legalism, or what I call the moral inhuman and as such can never be moral Catholic, escapes an underlying problem: there are many serious sins, indeed very serious, much more serious of sins variously linked to sex or the so-called deadly sin of lust, ranging all penalty from waist up. But for them, instead, there are only the sins ranging from the waist down. We are in fact in front of people with human sexuality have a bad relationship, toward sex instead they have a real obsession.

.

As a single person and constrained by choice of living in chastity, I have been repeatedly attacked by terrible hives every time the Lay Lords, with a nauseating lightness and an intolerable complacency, They pronounced as a dogma of faith the phrase: "The divorced and remarried? As long as they live as brother and sister, why then, then, can …". And every time these days feel utter the phrase "like brother and sister ', It melts the adrenaline in the blood, both are mindful as a pastor in the care of souls, as a confessor and as a spiritual director, many live dramas certain families. But above all, I know, I attend and I have daily reports with divorced and remarried who have guaranteed their children the best Catholic education, within authentic Christian families, in which one of the two spouses is rather divorced and remarried civilly second marriage. A Christian spirit that unfortunately is not however in many so-called regular families in which, when the child comes home from catechism, parents say they enjoy among crabbed and despise the opposite of that which was explained to them in the parish, instructing them since children understand that "the priests and all those around the priests, always tell a lot of bitrate». This sentence quotation marks I was told three years ago, during confession, by a teenager that three days later he received the sacrament of Confirmation in the Cathedral of San Gimignano, at which I was just about to confess the next candidates for Confirmation.

.

All the more reason I priest and shepherd of souls care, for the mystery of grace giver of the Sacraments, I have never allowed and will never allow me to point the finger at certain “irregular couples” saying the self-righteous judgment: "As long as you live as brother and sister ', so I am aware, as a confessor and spiritual director, that the worst sins against charity, almost all range from the waist upwards and are committed by many people who live in de facto and de jure marital and family situations wholly compliant and regular with canon law.

.

The lack of delicacy of these neo-Pharisees who pronounce from the empyrean of their colossal theological and canonical ignorance in the name of a harsh law which is their human law and not the divine law of Christ, it is a source of pain and embarrassment to me, especially when it is combined with the presumption of considering oneself and for this reason feeling like true and authentic Catholics, of the defenders of the one true faith.

.

But let us now bring the matter to a strictly theological level. The indomitable supporters of the "dogma" "provided they live as brother and sister", refer to a statement by Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts [cf. WHO] which not being at all a solemn act of the infallible magisterium I therefore discussed and legitimately refuted in my previous article [cf. WHO]. An affirmation in which a Pauline expression is used as a support which constitutes a statement of a general principle, turned as such to sin, generically, not instead to a precise single sin:

.

Therefore everyone who unworthily, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord, It will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Each, therefore, examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup; because whoever eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord, he eats and drinks his own condemnation [1 Color 11, 27-29]

.

Dove, the Blessed Apostle makes express reference to adulterers and concubines? He refers to sin, perhaps it could even address those many sins that go from the waist up, instead of for the Apostle, the queen of virtues, it is charity; and charity is also variously linked to human sexuality, undoubtedly, but certainly not and not only to human sexuality.

.

Given that these defenders of the true and only truth, to elevate to immutable doctrine of the Church, or rather of a real dogma of faith a positive ecclesiastical law, they use as support a statement of general principle of the Blessed Apostle Paul, I think all of them, that is to say improvised theologians and last-minute canonists who are debating from blog to blog with ruthless hardness of heart on events that touch on a very delicate topic such as the family, now offer an entirely theological and juridical answer to the question which I will now ask all of them.

.

By adopting their own principle, I will now refer not to a generic statement such as that of the Blessed Apostle Paul, but to a clear and precise statement addressed to an equally clear and precise fact, pronounced not by an Apostle, but from the Incarnate Word of God, by our Lord Jesus Christ, which is expressed thus:

.

Then the Pharisees, retired, they held council to see if they could catch him in his speeches. So they sent their disciples to him, with the Herodians, to tell him: «Maestro, we know that you are truthful and teach the way of God according to truth and are not in awe of anyone because you do not look at anyone's face. So tell us your opinion: It is lawful or not to pay tribute to Caesar?». But Jesus, aware of their malice, He answered: "Hypocrites!, Why tempt ye me? Show me the tax coin ". And they brought him a denarius. He asked them: "Whose is this image and the inscription?». They answered: "Caesar's". Then he said to them: "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and to God what is God's". At these words they were surprised and, let him, they went away [Mt 22, 15-22].

.

Simply said,: if the Apostle Paul does not affirm that concubines and adulterers must not access the Eucharist, unless they live like brother and sister, in this clear and precise passage of the Gospel the Word of God responds by stating that taxes must be paid to Caesar, which implies a clear warning: it is illegal not to pay taxes.

.

Expensesuever studied the Holy Scriptures with all that it entails in anthropological and historical knowledge, knows what it meant to pay taxes in ancient Judea. Among the Roman provinces Judea was the most harassed, the tributes were very high; and those who did not pay taxes, sometimes they had to submit to pains that weren't subtle. At best, the evaders were flogged, others paid directly with their lives, and for the "pedagogical" purpose of frightening the other evaders they were condemned from time to time to the penalty of crucifixion.

.

In ancient Judea, the agents of the Guardia di Finanza did not arrive to draw up reports and issue fines that often, to the present day, the higher they are, the more they are not paid. We all know convicted but immediately free evaders who whiz past us with their cars worth one hundred thousand euros. But that was not the case in Judea: taxes were not only high, they were really wicked; it is no coincidence that the Jews called the Romans "hungers of the people".

.

Now you understand, lovers of hard and pure morals, immovable bestowers of sentences even towards the doctrinal acts of the Roman Pontiff, as well as supporters of the dogma of faith "provided they live as brother and sister", who in the face of the warning "give to Caesar what is Caesar's", we are faced with a real dogmatic expression of the perennial and immutable faith, pure divine law, certainly not in the face of a rule of principle concerning sin expressed in general terms by an Apostle, because here we are faced with a clear and precise dogma that does not allow for discussion, and the dogma is as follows: “Pay taxes to the state».

.

I already hear your voices from a distance, dear improvised theologians and immovable canonists on the skin of others, and together with your voices I hear all your reasons and justifications, which one by one I can anticipate: «One cannot pay taxes to a State whose taxation in certain sectors reaches the 50%, because those are not taxes, that's a theft … it's a robbery, as the Servant of God Silvio Berlusconi said, for friends the flowers, when he was president of the council of ministers. To then follow with the justification based on the principle that "the other is worse", always and rigor, so on with the litany about the fact that «…with taxes we are forced to pay salaries and golden pensions to politicians … their privileges … their blue cars … while poor pensioners with minimal pensions starve … while honest families have difficulty paying their electricity bills and some gas …». OObviously none of you, will look to the positive of taxes, for example the free national health service for all, free schools for all, numerous guarantees of assistance and so on … no. Having to justify yourself, you will only list the negative things and if you really have to admit that the right to health and education is free and guaranteed to everyone, at that point you will continue to justify yourself by saying: "And, but the national health system sucks and the schools suck» … Eh, how well I know you, Pharisees of yesterday and today!

.

Gentlemen: dogma is dogma and Christ God is clear, precise and decisive in saying that to Cesare, the cup, they pay and that's it. Christ knew very well how the leaders of Roman power in Judea reveled and gave themselves up to the good life, while the poor Jews were often hungry; the Word of God knew it, but even knowing it, he proclaimed this dogma of faith: "Paying Taxes to the State". And this dogma is a perennial and immutable divine law.

.

To this band of hypocrites, that behind the screen of an unspecified Catholicism emptied of charity and stuffed with the worst legalisms, they are doing such a bad service to the Church and to the faith, I therefore reply with the same words of Christ God:

.

Thus you have annulled the word of God in the name of your tradition. Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying: 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men " [cf. Mt 15, 5-9].

.

It's easy and convenient to walk into other people's bedrooms with your finger pointing to pronounce as a new dogma of faith "provided they live as brother and sister". I will, hypocrites ever, that "filter the gnat" in other people's bedrooms and then "swallow the camel" [cf. Mt 23,24], are you ready to accept, make yours and spread as unquestionable dogma of faith: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar ', then pay taxes without a murmur, especially without azzardarvi to say that are high and that are not right?

.

For you see, per me, morally speaking, one “zealous” Catholic regularly married to his wife, che non usa mezzi contraccettivi e che si attiene alle prescrizione della morale sessuale, il quale fa poi lavorare in nero nella propria azienda venti lavoratori sottopagati, gran parte dei quali giovani che non possono sposarsi e mettere su famiglia, perché non sanno se il mese successivo avranno ancora il lavoro … per me, morally speaking, questo grandissimo peccatore commette un peccato molto peggiore di una coppia di coniugi irregolari che non vivono come fratello e sorella, che vivono una situazione indubbiamente irregolare, ma che all’interno della loro “sinful” camera da letto non giocano affatto per i propri scopi di lucro e di egoismo sulla vita altrui sfruttando nel peggiore dei modi il bisogno di lavoro di venti persone, with all the relative inconveniences also extended to the families of these twenty workers.

.

And who has issues to raise about me, both as a priest and as a theologian, please take and send this text of mine to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, so that its theological orthodoxy and its full conformity to Catholic morality may be examined by it. And if in my speech there were doctrinal errors presented and disseminated by a priest called to guard and spread the faith in the People of God and to protect and safeguard the moral heritage of the Church, rest assured that that Dicastery will not fail to ask my bishop to shut up my mouth and, if the case requires it, all the deserved canonical sanctions, also because I have disserted on what for many represents the origin and center of the whole mystery of evil: sex and human sexuality. Not for nothing, the Blessed Apostle Paul, in a passage from the Pauline epistolary which is the heart of Catholic theology, always known as Hymn to Sexual Continence, recommends us:

.

And now these three remain: faith, hope and sexual continence; but of all the greatest is sexual continence! In which everyone will live as brothers and sisters, even if this were to lead to the extinction of the human species. But the "moral" of the inhuman moralists she will be saved, and their idea of ​​angelic sex will never end.

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

39 replies
  1. Vincenzo says:

    One can and must do without the explanations of those who misuse S. Tommaso, speciously discussing the greater gravity of pride compared to lust, e, forgetting though’ that if you have one of 7, then you have all, and therefore each one also has the face of the other six.

  2. It is necessary to sail says:

    Thanks for this excellent reflection, Don Ariel. Outspoken, it needs, shareable almost to the point.

    I take this opportunity to point out another form of serious moral corruption which we tend to overlook too much, also (if not mostly) in ecclesiastical circles: that of the civil servant who has obtained a job – effectively an annuity position – fraudulently, that is, through a competition won thanks to a recommendation, co-option or nepotism. It is a practice that, like that of tax evasion (and maybe even more), deserves harsh words of condemnation, since in many cases it translates into a real theft of the existence of others (where is that “of others” is who that workplace, if everything was done honestly, he would have obtained it through merit and ability).

  3. Gianluca Bazzorini says:

    Because in the Decalogue it is also written not to fornicate, which in the case of the divorced and remarried occurs in abundance unless they live as brother and sister, it is a natural consequence that the aforementioned subjects do not receive Communion as they are in a state of mortal sin. What escapes me is why her, Horses, Bergoglio and ….singer company want to make them access this sacrament thus contributing to a profanation, risking the loss of souls that “recklessly” follow these false teachers….,..and false shepherds as well as his and his companions' eternal death…..”singers”. Simple no?

  4. hector says:

    A self-critical reflection. Emilio above talks about the priest. When ever I Christian conform my action to the teachings – reported in the Gospel – that Jesus addressed to me and to all those who claim to believe in Him and that we should ALWAYS practice?
    Some passages from Luca come to mind, 6 (plain speech)
    "Be merciful as your Father is merciful" (6,36).
    «Do not judge and you will not be judged; do not condemn and you will not be condemned; forgive and you will be forgiven!» (6,37).
    I would say (and I would pretend to impose) my interpretation of the divorced and remarried question, Here Jesus asks me : “Hector! Because you look at the straw (sin) that is in your brother's eye (divorced remarry) and you do not notice the beam (every kind of sin) which is in your eye?” (6,41) “How can you tell your brother: Let me take away the speck that's in your eye, and you do not see the beam that is in yours? Hypocritical, first remove the beam from your eye and then you will be able to see clearly in removing the straw from your brother's eye. “(6,42)

    Hypocritical! Caught red-handed, I am silent,

  5. Riccardo Toscano says:

    Good morning Reverend P. Ariel,

    I am a layman who has already commented on this site. According to his writings there is a section of Catholics who are orthodox in sexual morality but lax in the rest.

    To rely on this to condemn their positions in sexual morality is incorrect. If they don't pay taxes, perhaps the truth value of the propositions they enunciate changes? For example, I am a sinner and I say that all the precepts of God must be observed.

    There are some separated and brought back who give a good education to their children? well, when they do this they do well, but they hurt to live separated and brought back together. There are some people with an orderly sex life who teach their children to despise God's ministers? well, first of all they are good, not for the second.

    Taxes must be paid, you must not have relations outside of marriage, and I doubt it's okay to live as brother and sister.

    • Riccardo Toscano says:

      “…and I doubt it's okay to live as brother and sister.”

      Just to avoid misunderstandings, I meant that I doubt the legitimacy of living as brother and sister.

  6. Gianlucam says:

    Dear father Ariel,
    given that I am not a theologian and indeed, I'm still pretty ignorant, but I always try to put reason first, I disagree with some of the things he wrote (in this and other articles), in particular with regard to communion for the divorced and remarried who do not live as “brother and sister”. Among other things, I think I understood from his writings, that the Holy Father did not approve it; although reading the apostolic exhortation it seemed to me that I was reading (always ambiguously) the opposite. So I'm happy with this.

    And it is right that you have focused on the fact that, although adultery and fornication are serious sins, there are also much more serious sins.

    Having said that, I must sincerely thank you for your writings, like those of his father Cavalcoli, they are nonetheless enlightening and, these yes enlightened by the Spirit, they put those serious doubts that are good for faith and reason and can put them back on the straight path, particularly at times like this where the turbidity and fog are very thick.

    Gianluca M.

  7. Emilio says:

    Thorough and shareable text, some marginal notes:
    – bunga is the name of an ancient tribe of northwestern Congo, where one of the names of God is Kunji, until a few years ago present in Tibet as a frequent interjection, see Folco Maraini, and in the name of one of the sacred mountains in Asia, Hunzakunji… the story attributed to Berlusconi is a fake
    – Pelagius was against predestination and Augustine organized a council via his secretary Orosius… Augustine approves of the torture of those suspected of frequenting pagan places, declares that penetration is a consequence of original sin and that pleasure was given as a temptation to be rejected
    – I've been wondering for a while’ of time what percentage of Christians have ever read the gospel.. more than one per thousand?. a pious woman who takes communion didn't want to believe me when I said that Jesus was a Jew. But when does a priest ever say he reads the Gospel?

  8. hector says:

    Rev. Dad,
    I draw your attention, His and Father Cavalcoli's, on this article:
    http://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/amoris-laetitia-chiarire-per-evitare-una-confusione-generale/
    The paradox of contradictory interpretations of «Amoris laetitia» second
    Mons. Schneider. Because too many – even high-ranking – they interpret “for his own house”.
    E’ just that hard, in papal documents, use the evangelical language of the little ones and the simple? The Congregation responsible for the custody of the Doctrine should not intervene?

    • father ariel
      Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

      Dear Ettore.

      Thank you for your report and your pertinent question.
      As you may recall, at first, shortly after the release of the text of this post-synodal apostolic exhortation, I came up with an article in which I complained about its length, its sometimes ambiguous language, the excessive lingering on the sociological and the psychological, etc … in conclusion, I criticized the linguistic structural system, seeing, a pontifical document, it is a document that communicates and that must communicate, it is not a collection of opinions or sociological treatises, etc …

      But she, as a keen observer as he is, will have noticed instead that in my first article, I didn't touch, in fact I didn't even remotely touch the doctrine, because this is something else. And when in fact it was a matter of entering into the strict doctrinal merit, I wrote and stated, in two subsequent articles, that pontifical documents apply and that's it, not discussed, much less do they contest.

      The initial problem, that of the at times talkative length and the unhappy style of language, it can lead many to dangerous cutting and sewing of extracting from the document what it doctrinally does not contain at all.

      This is why, together with her, I hope as soon as possible, the competent department, which is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, disseminate a document of one and a half pages specifying in a simple and elementary scheme what is the doctrine contained in this document and the doctrines already in force that this document confirms and integrates.

      And I repeat again: I immediately manifested that the length, I didn't like the talkative and at times convoluted style of that document. Else, instead, it is the doctrine that that document contains.

      • vincenzo says:

        Sorry huh, dr. Rev. Ariel Gualdo, I'm not an insider, but what is he talking about?If we all know ,correct me if i'm wrong, that the Pope with this Document does not speak ex cathedra and does not change anything on the doctrine, but focuses on pastoral care?What Doctrine?She talks a lot, but then it makes a big mess, of course’ talk to each other and go around your navel. good thing than not having them, I have not given money to support the blog.Cosi’ at least it gives me’ unjustly of the miser and creates me a merit for Paradise. But I prevent it,hoping that giving up one merit creates a greater one ,What do you think?It might enlighten me,please ?

        • father ariel
          Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

          Good.

          So let's take note – and for that we all thank you – that if there is not an infallible pronouncement from the Supreme Pontiff from the throne, all of the pastoral directives, discipline, exhortations and statements, they have no value whatsoever, least of all binding on the bishops, i presbiteri, the deacons, the faithfuls.

          Thank you.

  9. Athanasius says:

    «“The lack of delicacy of these neo-Pharisees who pronounce from the empyrean of their colossal theological and canonical ignorance in the name of a harsh law which is their human law and not the divine law of Christ, it is a source of pain and embarrassment to me, especially when it is combined with the presumption of considering oneself and for this reason feeling like true and authentic Catholics, of the defenders of the one true faith»

    Excuse me but it was precisely the Incarnate Word of God who affirmed: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder" (Mt 19,5-6); “Anyone who divorces his wife and takes another, commits adultery; and anyone, she takes the one that was repudiated by her husband, commits adultery” (LC 16, 18); and the Apostle Paul thus expresses himself: “to the married, I order, not me, but the Lord, that the wife does not separate from her husband, and if she is separated, remain without remarrying, or be reunited with her husband” (1Color 7,10-11). Therefore that adultery and sexual acts performed outside a valid marriage constitute a grave sin is of Divine Revelation, being they condemned both in the Old and in the New Testament by the mouth of the same Incarnate Word of God. In this regard, the neo-Pharisees are precisely those who today as in the time of Jesus invent exceptions to the rule, probably considering himself more good and merciful than Christ himself who said to the adulteress "go and sin no more". I don't understand then why to contrast the sixth and the seventh commandment: both should be respected. It is not that because one claims not to pay taxes then adultery becomes lawful and ceases to be a grave sin. I conclude with a phrase from a great and courageous Catholic Bishop: “Admit couples in «irregular union» to Holy Communion, allowing them to practice the acts reserved for spouses of a valid marriage, would amount to the usurpation of a power, which, however, does not belong to any human authority, because it would be a question here of a claim to correct the Word of God itself.” At this link the complete text of the speech by S.E Mons. Athanasius Schneider on the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetizia (to read and meditate on)
    http://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/amoris-laetitia-chiarire-per-evitare-una-confusione-generale/

    • father ariel
      Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

      Thank you for your learned disquisition and thank you for quoting that holy man Bishop Athanasius Schneider, who is a Bishop insofar as he is in communion with the Bishop of Rome, certainly not in communion with himself, that is, just enough to prevent any Catholic from using, directly or indirectly the expressions of a Bishop to put them before those of the Bishop of Rome.

      Now, since you are commenting on an article of mine in which I initially proceed with a historical-social-ecclesial analysis, to follow up with a theological question, if you want to comment on this article you must enter into the merits of the same. If then he wants to use an article to express his views, this is something else.

      The question I raise, precisely basing myself on the system of reasons you have just adduced, It is the following: “Paying taxes to the state is a divine positive law given by the incarnate Word of God. Therefore, pay taxes to the state, it is a dogma of the Catholic faith”.

      This is the question I raised, this is the question you should answer using the same yardstick of reasons that you use to state that it is “divine law” the fact that the divorced remarried, etc … etc …

      Otherwise, he risks only talking himself into himself.

      • Gianluca Bazzorini says:

        “Pay taxes to the state” it is a positive HUMAN law that Christ takes up again in the passage quoted from the Gospel; “Live like brother and sister ” it is the DIVINE Positive Law descending from the Divine Commandment not to fornicate. Bishop Mons Shneider is a Bishop in Communion with Pope Benedict XVI.

        • father ariel
          Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

          Dear Mr. Bazzorini.

          The first two lines were written by him “theologian” of trust, while the following rant, the one regarding Bishop Athanasius Schneider in communion with Benedict XVI, she wrote that.

          Let me get, or at least ask yours “theologian” trust the following: as ever when it comes to embezzlement related to money, with all selfishness, the Superbia, the envy and avarice that is often and almost always linked to them, the most you can get out of it is a … human positive law, even if they recur – except lust – all the deadly sins?

          If one does not pay the right wages to the worker, it is known and known that he commits a sin considered so serious as to be defined by the social doctrine of the Church as one of the most serious sins that “they cry out for vengeance before God”.

          But nothing to do … human positive law.

          But, when it comes to sex and human sexuality, then that's where it comes into play divine law.
          Then refer to yours “theologian”, I have now seen this of ours speaking through third parties, that the Word of God did not become incarnate and did not die on the cross solely to redeem:

          1. teenagers caught in hormonal storms masturbate;
          2. young people who have sex before marriage;
          3. spouses who use contraceptives and birth control pills;
          4. the divorced and remarried.

          … while everything else is related to the human positive law.

          And when Christ will return in glory to judge the living and the dead, will not judge:

          1. teenagers caught in hormonal storms masturbate;
          2. young people who have sex before marriage;
          3. spouses who use contraceptives and birth control pills;
          4. the divorced and remarried.

          And much less, Dominiddio, he will have the accounts of the souls to be sent to Hell kept by those who have exploited others, who got rich on the needs of others, who have humiliated and underpaid workers and forced their children and entire families into suffering and hardship, to whom I doubt he will confer the prize of bliss as they have only failed some “every time” purely related to human positive law.

          I remind you that there are seven deadly sins, and in first place, as queen and charioteer of all capital sins, there is no lust, but there is pride, always considered the worst, the most fearsome of the deadly sins, the hardest ever to heal.

          If you take care to study the moral treatises but above all the literature of the Holy Fathers of the Church, he will learn and discover that it is pride that makes one totally blind, not lust. E’ also known and always known that it is much easier to recover a lustful than a superb.

          This is why it is difficult to recover her, Themselves. Bazzorini, Why “Unfortunately”, she, he is not a lustful.

          • father ariel
            P. Andrea, O.M.I says:

            Unsolicited advice: if she fails to treasure what Father Ariel told her and explained, At least think about it carefully.
            She shows malice, contempt and hatred in every line of it. It is not, this, a rash judgment against him, but only an acknowledgment based on what she writes.
            Forget the divorced and remarried and their situations of irregularity and sin, because its manifest sin of hate, poured with full hands on the Pope and on two worthy priests such as Cavalcoli and Levi di Gualdo, it is worse than any adultery. You publicly disclose sins more serious than adultery, while boasting of doing battles against the sin of others.
            But you have never gone to a confessor?

            father Andrea

          • Gianluca Bazzorini says:

            Because it widens the discussion to other sins that I have not taken into consideration as I have answered only and exclusively to what you asked of me, that means “Don't pay taxes”?
            What is this, his new dialectical tactic? Why does she want the “payment of taxes” be elevated to a dogma of faith? What does the “payment of taxes” with the “live as brother and sister”? He should know that the “live as brother and sister” it concerns human nature as it has been decreed by God and therefore it is unchangeable Divine law, it understands that the payment of taxes is one of the constitutive aspects of human nature?

          • father ariel
            Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

            Themselves. Bazzorini.

            First of all, you started quibbling with comments on an article of mine in which I raise a fantastic one question dogmatic, played on what the Greeks called hyperbole. Therefore it is obvious, that I dealt with the subject of taxes, it is structurally part of the article in question.

            I confirm that your elderly theologian does not know, in addition to theology, not even the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I'll explain why:

            «Do not steal» with all that this imperative command entails on the level of the doctrine of the faith, it is a command given by God, unless, when it comes to money, she and her theologian do not agree that the Patriarch Moses, when it came to writing «do not desire the woman of others"The"do not commit adultery», he got it right, while when the Creator told him «do not steal», he misunderstood.

            The question it is therefore simple: in the Decalogue, there are imperative commands related to divine law and commands attributable only to the human law?

            Moreover, in my article, I refer specifically to taxes, which it may entail in and of itself, morally speaking, a stealing worse than other kinds of thefts. Indeed, who does not pay taxes, it's not that he takes money away from the state, or ugly politicians, Dirty and Bad … no, no! Who does not pay taxes robs the entire national community. With all due respect to the tax evaders – read thieves – who justify themselves by giving to believe that they, not paying taxes, they don't give money to the state, you have policies.

  10. Manuel says:

    Certain expressions in your articles make me laugh too, expensive P. Ariel. Thank you because it helps us reflect and keep the center of gravity straight, sincere thanks!
    Manuel

  11. father ariel
    Don Ciro says:

    Here's what happened …
    … my mother (cursed the day I taught her how to use the internet and gave her an ipad for her birthday!), as soon as Mass was over she rushed to the sacristy. My mother, you met her, she is a simple woman, a Neapolitan of the people all heart, with an economically functioning brain, to prevent it from consuming too much.
    And this morning his face was as upset as when he came to tell me: “The pope has resigned!”.
    Then, after, I apologized, ma, at the moment, very angry, I answered her: “You may never get a right one?”.
    And with the usual face of that 2013 my says (this time with the ipad turned on in hand): “Your friend, father ariel, declared a new dogma of faith”.
    … “give me here!”. And I snatched the ipad from her hand.
    When I started reading and laughing, and to laugh, and to laugh … my mother said: “but then it is a joking dogma?”.
    I answered her: “Mamma, it's joking, but trust me, It is brilliant, really brilliant”.

    • father ariel
      Don Stefano Bellobuono says:

      With a priest son like you, my poor mother, who has been in heaven for years now, he would have laughed even when by now, suffering from physical illness, recited the rosary.
      But you said everything that needed to be said “it's playful but really brilliant”.
      You're right, really brilliant.

      • father ariel
        Don Angelo Rossit says:

        Granted: when I read certain articles, I hope first of all to find a comment from Don Ciro.
        And having said that, I say to you in solidarity and in agreement: an undeniable stroke of genius, before which the possibilities are not many: a silence, or go smash your head on the wall.

    • father ariel
      Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

      Dear Brothers,

      thank you for your excesses of generosity.
      What Don Ciro has not told you is the fact that his mother is just like him, in the sense that it is an inexhaustible factory of jokes with a high concentration of humour.

      What I remember and now I share with you, it was that fateful February morning 2013, in which I too received a phone call from my mother. I had just accompanied Jorge, my collaborator, in front of the Lateran gates, where zealous and above all penitent the young man was completing his theological studies, to then leave that gate and never come back again.

      I answer in the car (obviously on speakerphone!) To my mother, that without saying hello or anything else, intimates me: "Where are you?». Not from her though, who would never dare to ask me where I am, or less than ever what I'm doing …
      "I'm on car".
      she retorts: “Then try turning on the radio, any, because everyone is talking about it, radio, televisions …»
      I ask: "All right, but tell me what happened"?
      And she: "Benedict XVI has resigned".
      I remain silent for a moment and answer her: "Tell me a little, after so many years that you quit, Did you happen to start smoking again?, throwing you straight to the crack instead of cigarettes?».

      I will never forget that phone call behind San Giovanni in Laterano, when in February of 2013 I told my mother about the drug addict.

      • father ariel
        Don Luciano says:

        Instead, I was in the mountains with the scouts, when my excited mother called me, announcing the fact. Since my mother suffers from bad diabetes, in a peremptory tone I told her: Measure your blood sugar immediately!
        there, I believe that if we set out to do an investigation, let's find out who knows how many priests who, joined by their mothers by telephone, they gave the poor things more or less hallucinations.

  12. father ariel
    A SYNOD FATHER says:

    Rev.mo and dear Ariel.

    I know I can count on your confidentiality and that of the distinguished Dominican theologian Father Giovanni Cavalcoli.

    It is no mystery that your writings circulated in the hall during the last Synod on the family, in particular the interview reported in Avvenire by Father Cavalcoli, and it's no mystery that, for several of us Synod Fathers, have also been the starting point for series and profound reflections.

    You can rest assured (but you know this!) that no one will call you to account to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, especially for what, wisely, you wrote in this last article.

    The Father Cavalcoli, and you yourself, you should have been in that assembly of ours, perhaps more and perhaps better than other people invited …

    You can, If you want, post my comment. Not that I have a problem signing it, but I ask You to omit my name for one reason only: avoid that it can only be the subject of useless controversy, strictly out of context and off topic, which are absolutely useless, because they don't serve to understand and they don't serve to clarify.

    I bless you from the bottom of my heart.

  13. Gianluca Bazzorini says:

    And who are the “hard-hearted” according to St. Paul? She, like bergoglio, they swapped i “hard-hearted” with those who respect and follow the Commandments of God and you have “cleared through customs” sinners that the Commandments of God transgress them. E’ a diabolical inversion you call for “Pharisees” those who follow the Law of God.

    • father ariel
      Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

      Themselves. Bazzorini.

      She persists in throwing invectives, but at the same time he persists in not answering at all to the very precise theological question that has been raised in this article: she, recognizes that "paying taxes to the state", it is a dogma of faith, as a perennial and immutable divine law personally enunciated by the Incarnate Word of God?

      To this he must answer, if you want to talk: must respond to this precise question of high dogmatic theology.

      Thank you!

      • Gianluca Bazzorini says:

        “Pay taxes to the state” not only is it not a dogma of faith but it is currently unfair to pay them as they are enormously high and are destroying the economy for a plan designed by Freemasonry and central bankers in favor of international finance led by Jews like you.

        • father ariel
          Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

          Themselves. Bazzorini.

          We take note, at the end of what she wrote, that Christ was wrong, and gave an iniquitous command later reported in the Gospel [Mt 22, 15-22]

          • Gianluca Bazzorini says:

            Christ was not wrong but now Caesar is taking much more than his due, Clear now?

          • father ariel
            Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

            Excuse me …

            You are perhaps telling me that the present Caesar is worse than yesterday, in Judea, condemned those who did not pay taxes to flogging, or that for persuasive purposes he condemned the evaders to crucifixion to make it clear to all the others that it was better they should not even think of not paying tribute to Caesar? And perhaps it turns out that the current Caesar, to those who do not pay taxes, take away his sons and daughters to sell them in the slave market as compensation for unpaid taxes?
            Themselves. Bazzorini, if she weren't ridiculous, that would be really comical.

          • Gianluca Bazzorini says:

            and also see not to do the “cunning” since he should know better than me that the dogmas of faith are based on Divine Truths and Divine Laws and not on human laws such as paying taxes.

            ____________

            At the end of the discussion: the editorial staff of the island of Patmos acknowledges that the Word of God did not have a clear distinction between divine laws and human laws. Therefore, what is convenient for us of His word is “divine law”, what doesn't suit us instead is “human law”.

          • Vincent Vega says:

            Dear my law doctor Gianluca Bazzorini, one of the commandments is do not steal, and if someone does not pay taxes edge, to the State and to those who cannot evade taxes, and this is what an entrepreneur says (I have a family business) not an addict in the throes of the rote.

            Unfortunately her, as a good doctor of the law, takes care of pity of the underpantsa, but is willing to condescend to much more serious sins against others and against charity than two consenting adults who make love.

            Father Ariel did well to put her and those like her in the pillory. The funny thing is, maybe you'd be willing, while you justify the don't pay taxes (which is the violation of the commandment do not steal) to stand up for people like this http://www.ilsecoloxix.it/p/italia/2014/06/23/ARVJQIs-convivere_novarese_uccidere.shtml

            One can only have compassion for people like you.
            Greetings.

            Good day.

  14. Gianluca Bazzorini says:

    Look how the sexual practice that you actively engage in has reduced your brain and that has led you to write all this nonsense and heresies about the “norma” that for “his goodness” and that of Cavalcoli calls “ecclesiastical norm” referred to “brother and sister”. But you know that St. Paul mentions i “fornicators” which one of the categories that will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven and according to you, why the divorced and remarried must live, from the one she blasphemously mocks, it gives “brother and sister” except to avoid getting between the “fornicators”?

    • father ariel
      Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo says:

      And according to St. Paul, the hard-hearted closed to God's grace and contemptuous of Christian charity, instead they will enter the Kingdom of Heaven?

  15. Alessandro B. says:

    I just wanted to express the fact that I find myself laughing out loud about my miseries by reading Father Ariel's texts .
    I can only say that I was wrong in being able to judge theological matters as a layman. I realize I know very little to say nothing. So his lashes make me laugh and laughter does me a lot of good because it's like seeing the Lord smile on my limits.

    I feel like hugging you (I would happily play football with you) and I invite you to continue beating us up for our own good!

    With sincere esteem

    Alexander

Comments are closed.