Homosexuals and that cardinal virtue of prudence that the Supreme Pontiff should exercise, being on earth the Successor of the Apostle Peter, not the Successor of Christ

- Church news -



The Roman Pontiff is indeed the Vicar of Christ, but it is not Christ, he is his vicar on earth, not his Successor on earth. The Supreme Pontiff is the Successor of Peter, not the Successor of Christ. Therefore it cannot be more "open" and "good" than Christ himself. Nor can it abolish what Christ established also through the creation of man and woman, created through him and for him (cf.. With the 1,16).


Ivano Liguori, Ofm. Capp.



PDF format Print article



The Fathers de The island of Patmos have inserted in the articles the audio-reading for Readers affected by those disabilities that prevent them from reading and providing a service also to those who being traveling and unable to read can take advantage of the audio-reading



"Children don't buy themselves" – If the bill against homotrasophobia will be converted into state law, for an image like this one will risk prison.

For days I have been listeningthe troubled Christian faithful from the recent statements by the Roman Pontiff on civil unions between people with homosexual tendencies. I add to them several priest confreres who found themselves confused and embarrassed by these private utterances of the Pope. We priests, faithful to every Successor of Peter, we know, how certain affirmations produce precedents in the common feeling which then make pastoral practice problematic and difficult, sacramental and moral. As happened in the past with the post-synodal apostolic exhortation love joy. Qhis due to an intrinsic formative weakness of people who are no longer able to distinguish between a magisterial pronouncement of the Church and ecclesial gossip. Said in other terms: for the men of today - including many Christians - there is no difference between an off-the-cuff interview of the Pope with Eugenio Scalfari or with Antonio Spadaro, an encyclical and a own motion Popes.


For this I do not intend to dwell on purpose on the analysis of the ambiguous words present in that documentary by Evgeny Afineevsky shown at the Rome Film Fest a few days ago. The work of the Russian director, it has been defined by many as «a good product, able to outline the profile of a Pontiff who is reaching out to the suburbs, in listening to the whole community, especially to the last and the distant " [cf.. WHO].


A bold assessment, this, which could also have a merit for the purposes of cinematographic art, but which appears totally detrimental to the authority and dignity of the Pope who cannot be compared and subjected to any man by virtue of his spiritual and moral role that he plays for all of catholicity. In the documentary film project, the Pope would have said about inclusiveness:


“Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out or made unhappy about it. What we need to create is a law on civil unions. This way they are legally covered. I fought for this " [cf.. WHO].


Faced with this statement, we can include the testimony of the Chilean activist Juan Carlos Cruz, also present at the Rome film event, who stated:


“When I met Pope Francis he told me how sorry he was for what had happened. Juan, it's God who made you gay and still loves you. God loves you and the Pope loves you too ".


Combining the documentary of the Russian director the testimony of the Chilean activist thus creates a very precise intentionality with which to read the figure of the Pontiff, reducing him to a faction leader. Unfortunately,, such an attempt is useless, because the figure of the Pope does not stand on the strength of subjective reviews or evaluations, on the contrary, the figure of the Pope is authentic on the basis of what Christ himself established for him, constituting him his vicar and representative on earth. This is why it is not necessary to analyze the interview with the Pope and try to reconstruct a complex exegesis with the sole purpose of exonerating or blaming the Roman Pontiff. Much less need an interpretation in a good part of certain theologians who have the sole purpose of saving what can be saved and making the Pope say what perhaps he never thought, said or simply hypothesized. Because we must also deal with this other type of subject: those who for seven years have now specialized in making the Supreme Pontiff say what he did not say, finding in his words what is not there.


The Pope's voice is that of the Church, which is expressed through official organs and channels of the Holy See and through a solid magisterium, precise and punctual, not through improvised and inappropriate private chatter. Her, like it or not, it must be a clear and scrupulously protected voice, it cannot be used in documentaries, off-the-cuff interviews o live your Facebook or your Instagram. The Pope doesn't have to be influence him God.


The Pope's voice should not give rise to official denials as it is guarantee of that cardinal virtue of prudence which is indispensable for every pastor of the Church. A voice that should be heard wisely, avoiding those disputes of speech with the world that the Seraphic Father Francis advised against to his friars.


That's why I consider these scoop so sensational, harmful to the figure of the Supreme Pontiff and not binding for the Catholic faithful who have no obligation to assent of faith. We know well how today every statement can be wisely manipulated and used properly. The print, the social media and the media I'm able to sew a makeover to any statement when, extrapolating the original context, it is turned over so many times that it assumes a contradictory value, with the result of changing into white what is black and into good what is evil.


Such ploy are obvious to all, but some turn out to be more useful than others when they facilitate, eg, very specific and very specific purposes. And the purpose in this case coincides with the law against homotransphobia and LGBT rights that is being approved in Italy. If we think about it, this interview with the Pope had the merit of perfect timing, in fact which better sponsor of the Pontiff to present the open-minded requests of the rainbow community in the Italian media and social context that has always been Catholic?


He is sure in the face of such utterances, everyone will feel compelled to say naively: «If the Pope says so, it's a good thing, it's an urgent and just law ", so you have to let it pass. Warning, Examples such as this lead very quickly to the consequence of the supremacy of juridical positivism over natural law and natural morality. With the consequence that a law becomes right only because it has been implemented and approved by a human legislator or because the human legislator considers this law just by virtue of its very existence. We know well that this is not the case, indeed, many laws that claim the title of just and civil have proved to be the most deleterious and dangerous.


For St. Thomas Aquinas, human right proceeds from natural law, therefore a law that conflicts with natural law can not only be harmful but also morally inhuman and unseemly as it opposes God as the supreme good and legislator. Clarified this, let us return to papal outbursts and contingent problems.


It must be clear to everyone that any Pope it cannot go against the deposit of the Catholic faith and the perennial doctrine of the Church. The Church has already been clear enough about people with homosexual tendencies, both through scriptural revelation, both through magisterial pronouncements, and in the pastoral practice of directors of souls. The Pope can only reiterate and confirm what is already in the teaching of the Church and in case he wants to further clarify his thoughts on particular issues, he can do so without however leaving the bed of the two thousand year old magisterium.


Hence the Pope, as such, will never tell that it is necessary for same-sex couples to marry, having children and equating their marriage to the natural one between a man and a woman. This will never happen, but this should not necessarily be seen as a hateful stance, indeed, it is necessary to clearly reiterate that in the Church any person predisposed to homosexuality will never be mocked or condemned but if anything accompanied with concern towards a path of truth that cannot, however, deny itself.


My analysis appears correct and makes sense if we compare it with the evidence of the facts and with the reactions that arose after the release of the documentary on the Pope. In Italy, the Honorable Zan, main signatory of the law against homotransphobia, writes on Twitter:


"The words of @Pontifex_it on #UnioniCivili recognize the right of #lgbt people to family life and help fight hatred and discrimination. It is the duty of the legislator to combat these violent phenomena: now let's speed up the law against #omotransphobia " [cf.. WHO].


Public answers like these they have multiplied throughout the international political world and in all circles that support LGBT lobbies, so much so as to raise a victory song and bring the Pope in triumph as the one who finally put an end to Catholic obscurantism of medieval origin, racist, fascist and male chauvinist.


It is clear that these gentlemen are profoundly ignorant of what the Roman Pontiff is and what its role is within the Catholic Church. Yes, he is the Vicar of Christ but he is not Christ, he is precisely his vicar on earth, certainly not his Successor on earth. The Supreme Pontiff, to better clarify, It is the successor of Peter, he is not the Successor of Christ. Nor can he be more "open" and "good" than Christ himself. With this it is easy to say that it cannot abolish what Christ established also through the creation of man and woman, created through him and for him (cf.. With the 1,16). So the man and the woman, male and female, unique and complementary, they are part of a natural purpose that is achieved not only through a physiologically correct act but also by respecting the purpose for which this act intrinsically aims, that is, to live a unitive and procreative sexuality oriented and redeemed by the one and highest good that is God.


And the awareness of being a Servant of the servants of God it constitutes precisely the way of redemption of the Blessed Apostle Peter. He in Cesarèa di Filippo, although constituted by Christ as a stone on which to build the Church (cf.. Mt 16,18), he had to be converted through a new following. After having scandalized the Master with an alternative salvation proposal to the cross and obedience to the Father (cf.. Mt 16,21-23), he understood that Christ is the only path that man can take. Peter, therefore every Pontiff of all times, he realizes that his office is in the hands of Christ and produces salvation only and only when Christ is allowed to save the world through the sacrifice of the cross and obedience to God (cf.. GV 21,15-19).


As we all know, today speaking of the cross and obedience means being taken for fanatics, these are realities not liked by the world. For this reason it is better to seek realities of salvation alien to Christ, showing a substitute in the Vicar of Christ, through which to show more exciting new ways, or better to say, obviously proceeding by absurd paradox: “If Christ remained behind, his Vicar on earth can update, or rather, revolutionize everything ".


This is the real demonic cunning which rages in our contemporaneity and which still tries to use the figure of the head of Christianity to confuse men and disunite the Church. Peter, which in the past was sifted as good wheat by Satan (LC 22,31-34), still suffers from the attacks of God's monkey, than from inside and outside the Church, subjects the successors of the apostle to a continuous temptation that can only be resisted through the prayer of Christ and to a continuous and humble repentance after the error: «Simone, Simon behold satan has sought you to sift you like wheat; But I have prayed for you, that thy faith fail not:; and you, turned again, strengthen thy brethren " (LC 22,31-32).


Laconi, 24 October 2020




«You will know the truth and the truth will set you free» [GV 8,32],
but bring, spread and defend the truth not only of
risks but also the costs. Help us supporting this Island
with your offers through the secure Paypal system:

PayPal - The quick method, reliable and innovative way to pay and get paid.

or you can use the bank account:

payable to Editions The island of Patmos

WERE GOING: IT 74R0503403259000000301118

in this case, send us an email warning, because the bank
It does not provide your email and we could not send you a
thanksgiving [ isoladipatmos@gmail.com ]





About isoladipatmos

39 thoughts on "Homosexuals and that cardinal virtue of prudence that the Supreme Pontiff should exercise, being on earth the Successor of the Apostle Peter, not the Successor of Christ

  1. Thank you for the clarification.
    It is true that journalists manipulate the Pope's words, however it seems to me, personally, that the current Pontiff encourages the press with his ambiguous or unclear speeches. Some of his speeches that I listened to on TV make me strongly suspect that they want to overturn the teachings of the Gospel. I would like to give an example: some time ago Bergoglio affirmed that Mary in front of her Son on the Cross had feelings of disappointment towards God regarding the promises of greatness that had been made towards her Son. How to say: Mary is a woman like any other who has feelings of resentment or rebellion against God and her faith has faltered???
    This was what the Pontiff meant?
    I honestly have no words! Never has a Pontiff tried to question the granite faith of the Blessed Virgin. I do not pretend to be right, but allow me to say that this externalization was not manipulated by the press as I, like many others who watched the Rai channel, heard it live. I want to clarify that mine does not want to be a form of attack on the Pope, but with each passing day, unfortunately, my fears and negative feelings are confirmed. I seem to see a Church as a ship in a storm without a captain. By commander I mean the Vicar of Christ certainly not Christ God who will never abandon his Church, it is also going through a period of bewilderment, I hope as short as possible.

    1. He also said on live TV that “also” he has little faith. Not that you can't understand him for his sense of humility, but why say it in that dry way, embarrassing? It wouldn't be better to keep quiet, out of prudence, note?

    2. Good morning Father Ivano,
      I am becoming more and more convinced that to scandalize and bewilder the faithful is precisely the purpose of Francis I with his method of preaching. More than confirming in the usual doctrine, he aims to shake minds on a given topic so that it is discussed no matter what the poor faithful understand. . What do you think ?

      1. Dear Reader,

        the problem is not so much what Father Ivano thinks - who carried out regular theology studies and later specialized in Health Pastoral Care - the most worrying problem is what simple Christian faithful think who see the Pope as a spiritual and moral guide unusual, not comparable to others leader contemporary religious.

        Over the past forty years, we have had figures like John Paul II and Benedict XVI who had the ability to instill in the hearts of believers that living nostalgia for God and for the Gospel that invited them to desire the perfection of the Father (cf.. Mt 5,48).

        I'll tell you more, many young people of the 80's and 90's then embarked on the path of religious consecration, of Christian priesthood or marriage often after World Youth Days in which opening the doors to Christ became the war cry which made hearts tremble and spurred on to want to accomplish great works by trusting God. Today it is still like this today?

        Francis I certainly chose a different way than his predecessors to present himself to the Catholic and non-Catholic world. A totally unique way, perhaps close to the Jesuit style which often deconstructs and questions everything in order to arrive at a more precise synthesis. The discontinuity with its predecessors is certainly evident, but this may not necessarily be bad.

        On the other hand, what a Pope absolutely cannot afford to do is be unclear, incomplete, ineffective, misunderstood and interpretable. And this is because his is not a word of any man - to be clear Jorge Mario Bergoglio - but that of the Vicar of Christ, Pietro's, namely of Francis I., Roman Pontiff.

        Having said that I think, with all possible respect due to the Roman Pontiff, that such a pastoral style is imprudent and in the long run dangerous, because it is well known that any pastoral, exhortation, Homily, speech that a pastor of the Church intends to implement, it must necessarily start from a well-founded and solid doctrine, something that the Church has had for two millennia.

        All other variations on the theme, they do not make the Gospel more attractive but weaker and we are experiencing this by seeing our churches empty, our lost Christians and we priests distracted by palatable mirages.

        I hope I have answered your question, I ask her for a Father, Ave, Gloria for my conversion.

    1. I remember that after the L'Aquila earthquake, some rash statements about God's punishments caused a purge within the Church, because it must never again be said that God punishes. In return, now it can be said that God is sadistic.

  2. Good morning. For the first time I read an article from you instead of waiting for the vocal to be processed. Congratulations Friar Liguori. Article not long and written in a very understandable way. On Thursday I listened to Father Ariel in the clip released on Retequattro in the broadcast “Straight and Reverse” and he too had been very clear. However, I voted against the homotransphobia law, I signed a petition on CitizenGo, but I fear the law will pass. As I wrote in commenting on videos related to the issue on Youtube on Catholic channels, what I find truly scandalous is that the Pope does not speak out and does not clarify. It goes without saying that if it doesn't, and it didn't, it means that he wants the wrong message to get through. Furthermore, in the aforementioned Retequattro broadcast it was said that the documentary by the Russian director, it seems that even in the Vatican he was awarded. I don't know if this is true. Thanks for this great article. Let Jesus Christ of Hail.

  3. Esteemed Fathers and Brothers,

    what you can say, and the good you can do, and above all the courage with which you act, if on the one hand it helps the faithful, on the other, it is a great relief and stimulus to us priests.

    don Carlo Menegatti

  4. Father Ivano, as an old parish priest I tell you that these words of yours were never more wise:

    “We priests, faithful to every Successor of Peter, we know, how certain affirmations produce precedents in the common feeling which then make pastoral practice problematic and difficult, sacramental and moral. As already happened in the past with the post-synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia”.

    Who knows if anyone is interested in the problems that we priests have to face in concrete pastoral practice?

    Thanks for that article, certainly, he did much good also and above all to us priests.

  5. after the anti-papist bullshit fired by Mr.. Ariel in that sewer of Dritto and Reverse of ReteQuattro, we lacked in the dose increase of another who has forgotten that the pope is infallible.
    Poor you!

    1. Jesus told the adulteress: “God created you like this, the state must recognize your right to adultery”,
      or he told her ” Go and sin no more”?

    2. If a dictionary were drawn up with the collection of all “arm expressions” of the popes, so many and so beautiful would turn up that she would not know where to attack to proclaim the a priori and posterior infallibility of certain unhappy outings.
      This was different: the “arm expressions” the predecessor of the ruling dell'augustissima, they were made outside of magisterium acts and public speeches, not to Spadaro or Scalfari. It existed, and then, a system of total protection of the figure and words of the pope, who also measured sighs when he spoke, system totally pulverized by the most august ruler. So the “arm expressions” they were and remained so, if anything, they came out of the sacred walls years or centuries later, but without ending up in newspapers and televisions to the great confusion of priests and faithful.

      don A.T.
      (professor of Church history)

      Very good Father Ivano Liguori.

    3. Antipapist Father Ariel? It seems to me that Father Ariel defended the figure of the Pope (the current one) far too much, on several occasions, more than what Bergoglio deserves.
      Bergoglio has said so many anti-Catholic affirmations and contrary to the doctrine of Christ that I find it hard to consider him Pope.
      “Anyone who proposes a doctrine other than that taught by Jesus Christ, even if it were an angel, be anathema ".
      I would like to ask the Pope personally if he is a servant of Christ or a servant of this world.

  6. The Supreme Pontiff was a fan and still continues to cheer for the Argentine football team San Lorenzo, when he talks about it with friends he says it's the best team in the world.
    She believes, Themselves. Kerigmatico, that this affirmation falls within the infallible magisterium, like his responses to journalists or the interviews with Eugenio Scalfari in the living room of the Domus Sancthae Marthae?

    Animo, dear son, now there are only four old cats left to dance on the carpets of the Kiko-Carmenian liturgies to the sound of bongos, between one stroke of rheumatic arthrosis and the next, because neither your children nor your grandchildren intend to know anything about your sectarian amenities.
    I know, it's bad to die, but sooner or later it happens to everyone.

  7. Mr. Giovanni, prize accompanied by a cake for the director's birthday and to hand it over as a waiter to Papa. That cake ultimately threw more bewilderment and disappointment in many like me than the documentary itself. SA, to Cardinal Zen the Pope is not there’ hasn't even received it after a very long journey from China to now 88 year old. As Valli said in one of his articles, you have to be the worst, clearly of a certain political line to be welcomed in the Vatican, otherwise NOTHING , NOTHING….

  8. Thanks Rev. P. Ivano,
    do not abandon us, we need you to support us in these moments of confusion and bewilderment.

  9. A useful study is proposed by Stefano Fontana:
    This is a short excerpt:
    “… The Magisterium of the Church has already pronounced itself extensively on the question, denying the legal / moral legitimacy of the civil recognition of homosexual unions and the lawfulness for the Catholic faithful to concur to approve them. This occurred in various documents and especially in the Considerations regarding the projects for the legal recognition of unions between homosexual persons of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith., ….”

    1. Good evening Father, if the CDF among others has defined that it is against the moral law for a Catholic politician to give his assent and favor laws on de facto and civil unions, I therefore consider it a mortal sin,aggravated by being public, spend oneself on them and consider them a lesser evil, if you look at Ratzinger's note to the US bishops which forbade giving communion to politicians. Mistake? Invincible ignorance can be invoked?

  10. May the Pope be only one “useless servant” It is well established that throwing stones in the dovecote is however the favorite pastime of this Pontiff.
    I do not think the current successor of Peter is Catholic. When it appears I change the channel.
    Its riverbed is beyond the Alps. From in Germany.

    1. I agree with his thinking, if I do not change the channel it is to collect the proofs of Bergoglio's apostasy.

  11. Lady Lucia, certainly now later 7 years we all know the Pope well what he does and what he wants. Personally, I believe that Bergoglio is a good person, if only we remember that in a meeting with the prison guards talking about laws, of custodial sentence, he said life imprisonment is not a solution, And this, contrary to people's unique thinking, to that of most people who would like someone to die in prison rather than repent e “to change”, we can understand. This and other examples show us the Pope's disposition. But it, obviously the Pope must be the Pope, that is, to abide by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, to the Doctrine, there is no escape from here. Good day everyone.

    1. When Bergoglio speaks of detention, Pannellian motifs echo.
      And who has ever claimed that prison is a solution?

      And if the Pope has to do The Pope,that is, to stick to the Magisterium,the assertion conveys a misrecognition,in the current disorder,compared to what Tradition has affirmed for centuries about the lawfulness of the death sentence.

      "Death inflicted as a penalty for crimes takes away all the punishment due for crimes in the other life,or at least part of the penalty in proportion to the fault,of repentance or contrition. Natural death does not remove it. ”Summa theol.,

      «Who instead scandalizes even one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for him to have a donkey-turned millstone hung around his neck, and was thrown into the depths of the sea. "
      Amerio rightly speaks of the Jacobin utilism of the neotericists.

      "And when it is argued that a man's life cannot be cut off because he would be deprived of the possibility of atonement,the great truth is neglected that capital punishment itself is an expiation……..capital punishment,indeed every pain,it is illegitimate if the independence of the individual is placed before the moral law,through subjective morality,and in the face of civil law as a consequence of that first independence. Capital punishment becomes barbaric in an unrelated society ,that,closed in the terrestrial horizon,he has no right to deprive man of a good that is all good for him. "Romano Amerio-Iota Unum
      I remain silent on the low regard that is reserved for the victim; only the wicked is the subject of a weird tale…

  12. In order not to repeat either the article or the comments, I place two noterelle: 1) who always and only speaks of rights, ignoring that they can only come from duties, litter of the Law; 2) ecclesiastics who instead of enunciating the necessary moral principles come down to advocate specific legislative acts, they engage in clerical interference damaging the autonomy of the state.

  13. Your Telepace.it, Verona section, there is a video of Don Bruno Fasani, titled Homosexual Children of God, which is exalted by praising modernity and the prophecy of Pope Francis. In fact, that broadcaster is very close to the Pope.
    However, it does not affect health problems in the least.
    I had read Dr. Silvana De Mari, who is medical, and repeatedly treated the problem from a medical point of view.
    He does not believe that all priests should deepen the pastoral care of health?
    “A sound mind in a sound body” the ancients said so. Abusing the body in rebellion against God (road, alcoholism, deviant sexuality, etc.…) he mistreats his mind and spirit and rushes into unhappiness.

  14. Dear Father Liguiori, I frankly did not understand the meaning of the article. Defend the Pope? Minimize what happened? It seems to me that defending oneself behind the fig leaf of the fact that these are private affirmations and not of the Magisterium, make the noise of someone's nails heard a mile away and try to climb mirrors to defend the indefensible. If it is true that you exist “an intrinsic formative weakness of people who are no longer able to distinguish between a magisterial pronouncement of the Church and ecclesial gossip”, it is equally true that if the Pope does not share certain positions to which some of his ambiguous affemations lead, has two ways to dispel doubt: first of all use caution (even by keeping silent instead of talking nonsense) and then eventually clarify what has been said. The silence from the Vatican on this film, I know so much about assent. I think it is evident that Bergoglio does not care about the Magisterium and the Doctrine. The Church today has a problem: a gentleman dressed in white who has nestled on Peter's throne, stuffed with a South American provincial cattocomunismo and with a rather bulky ego.

    1. Gentile Antonello,

      è sempre più difficile per un sacerdote oggi, rispondere a quesiti come quello che lei ha esposto in questo suo commento, per il semplice motivo che molti si attendono risposte da rivoluzionari o da contestatori.

      Tale difficoltà consta perché oggi c’è la diffusa tendenza “minutelliana” a trovare e incolpare i difensori del Pontefice regnante, etichettandoli come incauti difensori d’ufficio da eliminare e combattere.

      Believe me, il Papa non ha bisogno di difensori, per un sacco di validi motivi che sarebbe lungo spiegare in questa sede.

      Si chiede quale senso abbia il mio articolo? Quello di dire semplicemente che ogni Papa ha bisogno della prudenza apostolica data dallo Spirito Santo in ogni momento del suo ministero. Questo perché il Pontefice sperimenta le miserie e le fragilità legate alla persona umana così come tutti, cose che possono sussistere anche in presenza di un ufficio tanto delicato e alto come quello che è chiamato a ricoprire. E proprio il fatto che il Pontefice sia riconosciuto come una persona autorevole e come la legittima autorità a capo della Chiesa Cattolica deve indurre il fedele cattolico a non confondere quello che è magistero infallibile da alcune infelici, evitabili e manipolabili “espressioni a braccio” che sono proprie dell’umano.

      1. Gentile Padre Liguori,
        Le assicuro che non mi aspetto risposte da rivoluzionari o da contestatori. E per quanto concerne don Minutella, che resti dove sta.
        Il Suo articolo mi pare in pio tentativo di difendere il Papa e sminuire l’accaduto. Lei si richiama al fatto che si dovrebbe avere pruenza. Ma un discorso del genere poteva avere un valore all’inizio dell’infelice pontificato di Francesco. by now, dopo anni di imprudenze, non credo più che si tratti di imrudenza, ma di deliberate e calcolate scelte destabilizzanti. Come Lei ha già indicato nel Suo articolo, certe affermazioni provocano disastri. Provi un po’ (Lei lo saprà di gran lunga meglio di me) ad andare a spiegare ad un anziano o, forse ancora peggio, ad un adolescente che quello che conta è il Magistero, Tradition, etc. La risposta sarà, ma se lo ha detto il Papa
        Questi siono i fatti. Il resto sono congetture e cavilli burocratici (la differenza tra Magistero e opinioni personali) che tali vengono recepiti e non compresi dalla maggior parte dei fedeli.
        Non credo più che certi atteggiamenti siano miserie e fragilità umane. Francesco semplicemente non crede. O almeno è questo che io ormai penso di questostravagante” Successor of Peter. E lo dico con il dolore del cuore.

      2. Gentile padre Ivano Liguori, io mi trovo spesso a meditare sulle parole che Gesù ha detto a Pietro in Mt 16,19 «A te darò le chiavi del regno dei cieli: whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven ".
        Non sono un mandato a modificare anche le Sue parole?
        Come va inteso correttamente questo versetto?

        1. Of course not, neppure uno iota sarà cambiato, mi dispiace per la chiesa 2.0 Modernist. La dottrina è quella e Pietro deve pascere le pecorelle di Dio, non le sue, al modo di Dio, non il suo. Le garba? 😉

          1. È ciò che pensavo anche io fino a quando tutto è stato messo in discussione. E mi è sorto il dubbio.

  15. Il papa ė infallibile soltanto quando parla ex-cathedra, come quando pubblica una enciclica, un’affermazione dogmatica, and hope…
    Uno che dice cheDio ti ha fatto gaye che non chiarisce mai nulla e che bisogna rincorrere per cercare di mettere una pezza a quello che dice, è indifendibile. Meno male che adesso sono in molti ad accorgersene.

    1. Cara Manuela,

      could be – anche se personalmente prego e spero di noche a 84 anni io potrei essere molto peggiore.
      Per questo prego e spero, nell’eventualità, di poter avere vicine a me, come sempre ho avuto, delle persone che mi impediscano all’occorrenza di creare disorientamento nei fedeli e di gettare discredito sulla Santa Chiesa e il Sacro Collegio Sacerdotale.
      La differenza è che io mi sono sempre circondato di persone valide e capaci, che al momento mi hanno indicato i miei errori o gli errori che rischiavo di commettere.
      Se invece avessi eliminato dai miei paraggi tutte le persone di valore, animate da prudenza e sapienza, per circondarmi di ruffiani opportunisti in carriera capaci solo a dire: «… and, wonderful, stupendo, meraviglioso … of, che originalità, che novità, che rivoluzione!», sicuramente già da adesso direi fesserie non solo sul pulpito o sui miei scritti, ma anche a colazione, lunch and dinner.
      In ogni caso ricordi sempre una cosa fondamentale: né le limitatezze, né lo spirito imprudente ed egocentrico, intaccano in alcun modo la legittima autorità dell’imprudente e dell’egocentrico, se ne è rivestito per grazia di Dio, che può avercelo dato per grazia o disgrazia, ma sempre e in ogni caso per grazia, anche se al momento non comprensibile.
      This, è il secondo passaggio che fatichiamo molto a far comprendere spesso ai fedeli: le miserie imbarazzanti della persona e la grandezza di quel suo alto ufficio istituito da Cristo Dio in persona.

      1. Grazie per la sapiente risposta, Father Ariel, che ovviamente condivido e a cui cercherò, con tutte le mie miserie, di adeguarmi; però quest’uomo non ha demenza senile, non si può giustificarlo semprelo Spirito Santo lo ha messo, some, spero però che il ruolo che questo papa svolgerà non assomigli a quello svolto da Giuda. Forse Gesù torna, dato che i principi non negoziabili non esistono più nemmeno per certa chiesa, tutto crolla, i cristiani sono perseguitati ovunque e importa assai poco a quasi tutti? Chi lo ha capito bene è l’Islam, che è pronto a spazzarci via, alla faccia dell’ecumenismo lontano anni luce da quello di san Francesco. Mi sa che Cristo sta venendo da Re: non permetterà più pachamame impudenti in Vaticano ed altri peccati gravissimi ai Suoi occhi, che mai ha lasciato impuniti nell’AT. Paragraph? Un affettuoso saluto e tante benedizioni!

          1. Volentieri padre, la penso per esperienza come lei sulla pericolosità secolare dell’islam. Spero che Oriana sia morta convertita. Grazie per la graditissima benedizione, la e vi leggo sempre con grande interesse

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters remaining

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.