The Synod Youth: Enzo Bianchi and original sin in the context of a dissolution

- Church news -

THE SYNOD OF YOUTH: ENZO WHITE AND THE ORIGINAL SIN IN THE CONTEXT OF A DISSOLUTION

.

Who today wants to speak to young people in a credible way, but especially those who intend to protect them from the work of the devil that in the twentieth century and the new millennium seems to have triggered in all areas and at all levels, It should first invite them to flee the inside of sin, certainly not to insert the acronym LBGT in’Work tool Synod, to see how to fix certain new “edifying” trends.

.

Author
John Cavalcoli, o.p.

.

.

PDF format Print article
 

.

.

Enzo Bianchi visit by Pope Francis I

He could miss the Bose Prior Emeritus, His Beatitude Enzo Bianchi, the Synod Youth? The time to stop the preaching of the spiritual exercises to the clergy at Ars [cf. article WHO], and here he is coming to give relief precious pearls as a participant in the Synod. And since we are in the era of so-called "epochal revolution", He first explained to reporters that in this Synod "There is a great freedom of action than in previous synods I have experienced" [cf. WHO]. Obviously HB fails to point out that this “freedom” very recalls period of terror Robespierre during the French Revolution, since all those who have raised objections in various capacities free, or they have been dismissed from their offices of the curia, or discharged without cause, or left in place but totally ousted from the exercise of their duties, or died of a broken heart, as the late Cardinal Carlo Caffara [cf. our articles, WHO, WHO].

.

Maybe, His Beatitude, ignores that in the world, the crimes and the worst injustices, paradoxically, they were made in the name of freedom of pretexts. It remains at the noblewoman Madame Roland, that climbing the stairs to the guillotine said: «Oh Freedom, what crimes are committed in thy name!» [Oh, freedom, how many crimes are committed in thy name!].

.

Who today wants to speak to young people in a credible way, but especially those who intend to protect them from the work of the devil that in the twentieth century and the new millennium seems to have triggered in all areas and at all levels, It should first invite them to flee the inside of sin, certainly not to insert the acronym LBGT in’TheThe Labor nstrumentum Synod, to see how to fix certain new “edifying” trends [cf. our article WHO]. Obviously, none of this can be accomplished, When talking to young people is precisely invited His Beatitude, who is not only qualified to gloss over sin, because going deeper still and starting from the root, Enzo Bianchi ends up denying, through its smoky interpretations, the same original sin. A quel point, everything becomes more or less lawful beyond good and evil. And then he asks to speak to young people? Why the young should not be offered nor washy Gospel, nor an easy way, at least according to what he said Jesus Christ:

.

"Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad the way that leads to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:; How narrow is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and few there be that find!» [Mt 7, 13-14].

.

Let's see what is the concept of original sin This person invited to the Synod after having just finished preaching to priests …

.

The whole meaning of Christianity It rests on the doctrine of original sin. If this doctrine is distorted, the whole of Christianity crumbles. Indeed, Christianity, It is the original sin divine power of salvation and its consequences and return humanity to the happy condition precedent to sin, with the addition of a superior condition, that of the "children of God", "Spiritual men", the image of the Son Jesus Christ.

.

The redemptive work of Christ It is essentially to free mankind from original sin and its consequences: in healing the wounds, remove the condemnation of sin, covetousness, the suffering, death and bondage to Satan, giving satisfaction with the sacrifice of the cross to the Father for our sins, reconciling with each other and with the Father and by obtaining for his mercy and his forgiveness, and giving the law and the grace of the Holy Spirit, that makes us children of God, heirs of eternal life.

.

It is clear then that is impossible understand and appreciate the greatness of the Father's mercy, for mercy sends us his innocent Son to die on the cross For us and for our health, for us sinners, insolvent debtors, If you do not understand the immense gravity and pervasiveness of original sin, origin of all our sins and misery, in which, for righteous judgment of the Father, it threw the whole of humanity.

.

Christ is the divine Physician, who knows our ills, can interpret our disorders, shows us the causes and consequences and teaches us how guardarcene, as well as the way and the means to reach the healing. Jesus came on purpose to teach us and show us, through the Church, better and beyond any philosophy, what is the source of evil that afflicts all humanity from time immemorial, evil which alone not only can not free, but which can not even fully understand the nature and to make the diagnosis.

.

It is thus quite false what he says Bianchi, that the Church does not know what is the origin of evil and why, because, if so, It would not have a way to eliminate it, which is absolutely false, it would be to frustrate the work of redemption and would make the whole Christian zero, or at most would make a philanthropism at the level of the masonry or of Gnosticism, where Jesus Christ is nothing more than a prophet or a great benefactor of humanity, a Nobel Prize, that, to support the cause of justice and the oppressed, It stands firm against opponents to death.

.

The greatest manifestation of divine mercy It is certainly the free forgiveness of sins, but, according to the Father's plan, explained by the dogma of the Church [1], This plan provides that we collaborate with our suffering, penance and good works in grace, priestly work [2] and cultic repairing and atoning work of Jesus Christ crucified, gift precisely the Father's mercy through which espiamo our sins, and bringing satisfaction to the Father, offended by sin, reconciling us with God in Christ and the Church through the sacraments. So salvation is not only a gift of grace, but also our achievement and merit award thanks [3] supernatural good works. By denying the value of the merits, White falls into the same heresy of Luther.

.

White does not understand that the doctrine, taught by the Council of Trent [Denz. 1511, 1522, 1529], for which the Father, outraged and offended by the sin of man, requires reparation, and to that end sends the Son to offer himself in sacrifice on the cross to redeem us from our sins, it is far from a false interpretation, outdated, the work of the Father and of the Son, as if it were a cruel Father and Son from under the thumb of a domineering father, but is immutable dogma of faith [4]. Instead it is biblical and dogmatic doctrine, that makes us understand the immense mercy and admirable justice of the Father, who gives us his Son for the salvation of us sinners, glorifying the Son with us, which in turn, in the Holy Spirit, We glorify the Father in Christ [GV 17]. And in this sacred and divine circularity of mutual glorification it is recapitulated the whole mystery of the Christian liturgy, source and summit of the Christian life, mystery dissolves into the design of Bianchi.

.

The doctrine of original sin, like all the truths revealed, it is not easy to understand and offers great difficulties to our reason. It also emerges only by a skilful connection of passages of Scripture, ranging from the famous story of Genesis, the Book of Job, a San Paolo, Apocalypse, between them very distant, whose link is not immediately visible. In addition to, this doctrine, because fundamental, stand and fall of Christianity, branches and has connections with all the other moral truths of divine revelation, Financo with those theoretical, so that one who wanted to expose this doctrine in all its relations with the other truths of faith, should consider the whole set of I believe Christian. Indeed, the perception and contemplation of a truth so purely speculative as is the dogma of the Trinity, It is made possible, after all, by the fact that we are there freed from original sin, welcoming the grace of redemption offered to us by Christ.

.

This doctrine is not a simple biblical exegesis, but it has slowly gained in history and has been clarified and specified over the centuries with the help of the Fathers, the Doctors and the Saints, under the guidance of the Magisterium of the Church, especially in the Council of Orange 529 [Denz. 371-372], and the great Councils Fourth Lateran and Trent, where he assumed a form definitive dogmatic, which since then has not been further investigated, even by Vatican II, which is limited to assume the traditional doctrine. This doctrine is now entrusted to Catechism of the Catholic Church [NN. 396-406]. At the same time the data revealed that it expresses urges theologians to always new explanations and information and urges them to ask new questions, leading to an ever increasing knowledge of God's Word.

.

Progress historical-critical exegesis, especially since the nineteenth century, They have been of great help to the Church to correct certain popular naivete, clarify the literary genre of the Genesis story, the history of its drafting, the dell'agiografo relationships with extra-biblical contemporary cultures, to separate the historical and theological core by coating symbolic and mythological, to overcome a cosmological vision evidently overtaken by modern scientific progress, especially in relation to the data of the theory of evolution. They helped the understanding of the dogma of original sin even the philosophical and theological progress made since the nineteenth century, especially with the Thomistic revival promoted by Pope Leo XIII, the progress of metaphysics concerning the nature of good and evil, of natural theology regarding the creation of the world, the progress of anthropology about the nature of man and woman, the progress of psychology and moral theology on the nature of free will, accountability, of consciousness, of sin, of guilt and grace.

.

The darkness of the biblical data, the apparent naivete of the Genesis story - a pair placed in a garden of delights tempted by a snake eating a forbidden fruit - , its apparent contrast with the data of science on the origin of man [5] and its apparent absurdity, a sin that is transmitted by biological or generation of a good God, but it allows evil, all these difficulties were always opportunity for the doctrine of original sin has been misunderstood, until, Oh, in many different ways falsified rifiutata.

.

THE DESIGN OF THE WHITE AND THE THOUGHT OF THE CHURCH

.

In this article we look at the position of Enzo Bianchi. He considers himself a "Catholic" and claims to expose the vision that the Church has of original sin, giving to understand that it would not accept more that we find exposed in Catechism of the Catholic Church. We would then ask Enzo Bianchi on which the "Church" speaks, since it is not that of Catechism. Actually Bianchi hardly exposes the doctrine of the true Church, but a false church, which is that of the modernists.

.

The original sin Bianchi presents a conception that, as I said, masquerading as a doctrine of the Church, but which in reality, as you can be easily verified by consulting Catechism, It is exactly the opposite of what the Church teaches and is therefore completely false. He begins by mocking the Genesis story like a fairy tale for children:

.

"Needless to say, the Bible does not say where he was from evil. I hope none of you remember this little story told we were telling everyone that there would be an angel who has turned to God, God has fallen and this has become the devil, the devil tempts us, the world was beautiful, was gold, he walked from morning to sunset. Indeed the sun never came because there was no darkness. Then those two poor things of Adam and Eve have done that thing and pay us after I do not know how many millions of years "[cf. Enzo Bianchi, WHO].

.

It explains:

.

"But when you say original sin today the Church, attention to this, It does not mean the sin of the origins and later caused a disaster forever, but sin that is to the origins of each of us, of our existence, our freedom and our right to decide; this is evil "[cf. Enzo Bianchi, WHO].

.

"No original sin in the sense of a sin committed at the beginning. That the Catholic Church does not say more. But the original sin that dwells in every man emerges every time we touch, in communication or in connection with the things. In front of a tree symbol of all things, man and woman feel tempted "[cf. Enzo Bianchi, WHO].

.

"The Church is no longer on these positions. The Church does not read the original sin in the prehistory of men. This is now nonsense. More no one dares say this. But original sin is read as the sin that is in the fibers of every man who comes into the world "[cf. Enzo Bianchi, WHO].

.

On the contrary, the Catechism presents original sin just as sin committed by a human couple really existed, progenitor of the whole human species, created by God in his image and likeness, rebelled against the divine prohibition to take his place in the deciding of good and evil [nn.396-399] [6]. The original sin, therefore, it is not a sin which is at the origin of our personal lives, as if it were an act our, but it is at the origin of mankind.

.

Original sin is not the first sin we make in our personal history, reached the age of reason. The biblical account is not, as also believe Karl Rahner and Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, an 'aetiological myth ", to explain by referring to the past what happens in this. The guilt of original sin, in which we are born, It's not our fault, but a sin that we inherited from our first parents. For how could it be our fault, If at birth we still have not reached the age of reason?

.

According to the dogma of the Church, which clarifies the doctrine of St. Paul, the guilt of original sin is not only a personal fault of their ancestors, but it is collective guilt of all humanity, guilt that, when committed by ancestors, It is transmitted to all humanity generation born from Adam, so everyone, except the Blessed Virgin Mary, free of original sin, It is conceived by the mother affection and stained by this original and hereditary guilt, independently of the will of the individual, still incapable of discernment, guilt from which it free Baptism.

.

And if it is true that Christ never speaks precisely of the order, and the effect of Baptism reason, except to say that cleanses from sin and grants salvation, and never mentions the original sin, the very fact that orders to baptize every person, It is the implicit admission of the existence in each of us of original sin, guilt that precisely is removed from Baptism.

.

The transmission of original sin, involving and infects the whole of humanity, It supposes a corporate conception of human nature, if it were not just a collection of people, but a single entity or a single person [7], one “super-person” composed of people, without excluding all the singularity, the autonomy and the responsibility of individuals in.

.

This conception of humanity appears clearly in its Pauline thought is sinful humanity as a result of original sin ["In Adam all have sinned"], [RM 5,12] [8] and both in its conception of humanity santa, that the Church as a "mystical body" of the Lord, "Bride of Christ". That is why St. Thomas Aquinas explains that original sin is not so much the sin of that individual, but rather it is a sin of human nature, sin nature, like saying that if a man sin by hand, is he who sins [9]. Thus, with regard to original sin in so and so is the same humanity to sin in them. Or - Thomas makes another comparison - we say that a stream is polluted because it is polluted at the source. Certain, it's simple comparisons, that, as do light, They can not remove the darkness of the mystery. The historical fact of original sin is a pure datum of divine Revelation. The reason comes to understand the essence of the evil of guilt and punishment, He understands that this is a consequence of that; He understands that the existence of evil is not necessary, but it is something accidental and contingent.

.

Starting from his false assumption, then you understand as Bianchi fails to explain why all of us, though born good, as created by God, and given the power to choose between good and evil, inevitably become bad; and not finding a solution, complains that the Bible a mistake that is his alone.

.

Bianchi So here evidently confuses two things. An account is the original sin, parents' sin, that touches our origins and whose fault is spreading throughout humanity. It is one thing to our innate inclination to sin, - lust - which is a consequence of original sin. Bianchi says so that the church would have dropped like a "stupid" and a "lack of intelligence unpardonable", the story of the creation of Adam in paradise, with preternatural gifts, happy, immortal and innocent, in communion with God. Dice:

.

"The Church does not read the original sin in the prehistory of men. This is now nonsense. More no one dares say this. But original sin is read as the sin that is in the fibers of every man who comes into the world. If you want quell'incapacità is always doing good. The evil at some point enters into us " [cf. Enzo Bianchi, WHO].

.

But just see what the Catechism He teaches to make sure of the words of falsehood Bianchi. He says the Catechism referring to the sin of our first parents:

.

"The man, tempted by the devil, he left off in his heart the trust towards his Creator and, abusing his freedom, He disobeyed God's command. In what was to man's first sin [cf. Rom 5,19]. After, every sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness " [n. 397].

.

In addition to, because of its denial of the historicity of original sin, Bianchi ends up conceiving the human tendency to evil not as a result of the original Fall, but as intrinsic to human nature itself, with dire consequences for the evil man and man, because, While this is natural, become well, because good is what is second nature. It follows then a horrible consequence: that the sin becomes good action and good deed becomes sin. No longer it distinguished what is second nature from that which is against nature:. From here probably overindulgence Bianchi against the sodomy.

.

He says Bianchi:

.

"The tale we all know and that the man and the woman. Humanity in its duality in to relate with things, in living existence. Show to choose evil and do not choose the good. Do not read that story as if it were the origin of our history. It would indeed be an unforgivable lack intelligence. The story of Genesis wants to tell the reality of man, of every man who comes into the world, of every woman who comes into the world. It is located in a world where there is already evil. There is already the snake, before the man. It was already there. There was already bad. And the man in her life and lets you choose evil " [cf. Enzo Bianchi, WHO].

.

For Bianchi, as we have seen, the tendency to sin is not proper to fallen human nature from a primitive state of innocence, but it is inherent in human nature itself. But if evil is naturally in humans, then evil is natural and it is not bad. Therefore, thinking that Christ deliver us from evil is an illusion or a flaw. Bianchi takes the presence of death and hostilities of nature are no consequences or punishment of a sin we have committed to basics, because evil was already there before sin. Dice:

.

"With the knowledge of the sciences that we, we know that the first man's evil reign in nature even before: the wolf ate the lamb. Even before, the chain of life went on through the death of some for others to live. There was no harm our introduction. The evil was. And certainly evil preceded us: the snake, Satan, the devil and then the names are many. But evil was " [cf. Enzo Bianchi, WHO].

.

We respond by saying that it is true that evil there was already a result of the angel's sin and it is true that the death of the living infra-humans has historically preceded the appearance of man on earth. This second figure is the science, while the first is a matter of Revelation. From Scripture we know that evil originated from the rebellion of some angels to God [AP 12, 7-9]. But what about the death of the living infra-humans, it is natural; in fact it is already present in Eden. It is a consequence of human sin. The infra-human living to serve humanity as nourishment.

.

Thenalready, regarding our death, Revelation teaches that it is a consequence of original sin, also, although in itself it would be natural [10]. But, as taught by the Council of Trent [Denz, 1511], Eden possessed a grace of immortality, we have lost through sin. Indeed, the first parents in Eden were immortal. And also, according to Revelation, the death, from which Christ saves us, It draws its origin from the first angel's sin [Sap 2,24] [11] beginning of creation.

.

Also of note that Pius XII encyclical Humani Generis of 1950 [Denz. 3897] It reiterates that it is necessary to admit the existence history of a couple, from which all humanity originated, otherwise it would have been impossible to transmit the original sin to all mankind, which is part of the dogma of original sin.

.

For as the saying Catechism:

.

"Adam has transmitted to us a sin, by which all are born contaminated " [n,403]. "All men are implicated in Adam's sin, as well as all are implicated in Christ's justice " [n.404]. St. Paul makes it clear that, if it were not for Adam with his sin, there would be no Christ, because Christ repair Adam's sin [RM 5, 12-20]. "Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature, that they transmit in a fallen condition. It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, with the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. For this, original sin is called "sin" in an analog mode: is a contract not a sin and sin, a state and not an act "⦋ibid.⦌. It is not affected by a conscious act of the subject, as if this was responsible, but simply getting the grace of Baptism, allocable even at a baby ' [ibid.].

.

White acknowledges that God can not will sin, ie the evil of guilt; it is deficient when it comes to punishment or divine punishment, in which God inflicts a just penalty. In the name of mercy, Bianchi does not want to admit the punitive justice, that seems unworthy cruelty of God's Love. Undoubtedly the punishment of sin is precisely the evil that the sinful pulls him with his sin.

.

However, we know as the Bible speaks frankly "God's punishment, without any need to judge the sign of an archaic theology or exceeded, because the severity is also God in Christ. So this can only refer to the logical and necessary consequence of sin, that disturbs the order established by God himself in things, though God, in his goodness has in some cases the possibility to suspend or cancel it.

.

THE PROBLEM OF EVIL [12]

.

The question of original sin is certainly linked the problem of the nature and origin of evil, because sin is to do evil. And the evil of punishment is the consequence of sin. Bianchi stands several times to the second question, moreover falsely declaring, as we have seen, that the Bible does not give an answer, when in fact there is already an answer, however imperfect, supplied by philosophy, although obviously not up to the answer which comes from Scripture.

.

But the major shortcoming of Bianchi is not tell us what is evil, evil of punishment and guilt evil. Indeed we see that he has a wrong notion of evil, when he says that the serpent of Genesis is the "evil". Not at all. The snake, as he should know, It is the symbol of an evil spirit creature, created before man, ie the devil, as clearly he taught the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 ⦋Denz. 800⦌.

.

Bianchi, with this serious misunderstanding, thus it proves to ipostatizzare the sostanzializzare evil, falling exactly that Manichaeism, he says it will avoid. Thus jointly and it denies that the sin of man draws his chance from the angel's sin, refusing, we saw it, as silly fairy tale this truth of faith, which is also taught by that Council [ibid.], Truth extremely enlightening and useful for our way of salvation, because it teaches our duty to be vigilant and beware of pitfalls, illusions, by attacks, deceptions and temptations from the Devil, without fearing his threats, or leave us confused by his accusations and his reproaches, there insinuate false guilt, and without succumbing to its allurements and seductions, They harden in sin, blind us to arrogance and pride, and without being disturbed by his scare, they want to throw us into despair.

.

The most serious question of evil, in order to be taken seriously, with hope of success, without being in the dark, It requires, as already Aristotle teaches us, the use of metaphysics, because it touches the question of 'being and non-being, of the position and of the negation-deprivation, Specific themes of metaphysics. Now Bianchi unfortunately proves to be made of completely ignorant metaphysical. And therein lies the cause of his serious mistakes on the question of evil.

.

Thus the above-mentioned clumsy substantialization or reification evil wrought by Enzo Bianchi, throws it into a very serious difficulties, which it seems not to notice, the same difficulty to say the absurdity of Manichaeism, namely that, if evil is a substance, there is no remedy to it. In fact it is possible to remedy the evil, precisely because it is not a substance, and there is not necessarily, but it is accidental and precisely a deprivation [13], a lack of good or entities, which can be remedied by affixing the missing well. Certain, a subject or a harmful substance may be destroyed or prevented from harming. The murderess can be executed. But evil, from which then we are freed, It is not the subject as such, ontologically, but the damage made by the subject.

.

The bad part of the not be, although it is designed as if it were to be, to figure being [entity]. Which of course does not mean that evil is nothing or does not exist or is only apparent or subjective and did not have influence on the real [14]. anything. Tremendous is the deadly and destructive power of evil. But it is precisely the negation, and more precisely as deprivation of being. But if evil, as it seems to believe Bianchi, It is a substance, whether it exists or subsists in itself and not in a subject, It is not bad, but good. It must be remembered that the substance itself, ontologicamente, it's good. There are bad substances by essence. As a villain in it can not be that its action, but not its being. A substance may be harmful, but in itself, as body, it's good. And being a good turn, according to the known principle transcendental.

.

Already philosophy, physically and morally, confirmed by the Christian Revelation, although much less perfectly of Revelation, He tells you what is evil, which it is the cause and what are the effects. It also tells how to remove it. Christ, on the supernatural level of faith and life of grace, It is the Divine Physician, that, through his Church, We tell us what disease we, how we've taken and what we must do to heal.

.

If God had wanted, He could create a world free from evil. He could prevent the angel to sin. He could prevent Adam and Eve to sin. If they had sinned, He could forgive quickly, without that evil is extended to all mankind. Why did not?

.

This is the impenetrable mystery, hidden away infinity of wisdom, of goodness and divine freedom, no mystery “detectable” to us for its transcendence. There is a reason why God wanted to allow the existence of evil, though he is innocent, because He does nothing without reason. But only he knows. Let's trust [15]. The great and incomprehensible mystery, therefore, It is not exactly what is evil, Where is he from, it produces and how it takes off - on these points Bianchi shows a deplorable ignorance and contempt for the Divine Revelation -, but it is why God allows evil, when, If she wanted to, He could have created a world without evil. However, evil does not necessarily exist with creation, but there is only the possibility of the existence of evil conditions, which are given by the existence of the creature free will.

.

Evil could not possibly exist if there was only God, because evil is related to the existence of creation. In fact, God is absolutely good and therefore can neither effect, nor suffer evil, which supposes instead an agent or patient finished, ie the creature. The finiteness but not bad; only ownership of a property over. However, the finiteness is the condition of possibility that a spiritual person will carry out or suffer evil. Indeed evil is the lack of an asset due to a person liable, that, as such, that can not be finished, because only the finite can be deprived of his good or actively, why does evil or passively, because it suffers evil.

.

For who suffers evil must be finished, because only the finite can be deprived of his right. But the actor of evil must be finished, because only a finite agent can be bad acting, that is, deprive the patient's own good. Evil can be made or – harm – or suffered - pain.

.

The harmful act, that provides the patient bad penalty, It may be voluntary, and then we have sin, evil of guilt; for example a Adultery or a theft; or it may be involuntary - human or animal - and then we have the simple harm; for example the lion that kills the gazelle. However, if the man who does evil, flaw, ie disobeys the moral law, the lion kills the gazelle obeys the law of nature.

.

As for the man's death consequence and punishment of his sin, for the lion's death is a consequence of his nature. Evil can only have originated from a creature capable of disobeying God supreme Good, therefore endowed with free. Indeed, all the sub-human creatures do nothing but obey the laws of God, which they are always good.

.

If a mosquito bites you, do not complain, because it does nothing but his duty, although no one forbids to kill her. If anything can be said that Eden mosquitoes had respect for man. The hostility of nature against man is indeed not intrinsic to nature itself, as it seems to assume Bianchi, but it is a consequence of original sin [There 3,17-18]. God did not create an evil nature, but she has become a mother, "stepmother" in punishment of original sin.

.

Evil, then, is not a substance, It is not an absolute, the less a deity, but it is a simple accidental lack of good, which you could be remedied with the contribution of the missing well. Evil exists because there is good, that is made worse by bad. Instead, the good in itself could exist without evil. Evil exists because there is a subject in which there is. If the subject is corrupt, even evil disappears. If this one dies of cancer, the cancer disappears, but only because that person is dead. Already philosophical reason then knows that in principle the evil may be taken away and won. Evil is a result of a lawsuit, whereby, removed the cause, you could eliminate evil.

.

The reason also knows that God, in his infinite goodness, He could not have wished evil and therefore it must have been caused by a fault of the original creature, perhaps man. Plato thought that we are now in darkness and injustice because of a fall occurred in the past as a happy state, in which we contemplated the truth and the good. Of this ancestral guilt we smell, Plato, for the fact that now we are born with an inclination to sin irresistible, be subject to suffering. Such a thing is not normal: You should be born good and happy. It must therefore - suggests Plato - have happened, the origin of mankind, a tragedy, for which it has plunged in the current state of blindness, of misery and mischief.

.

Divine Revelation takes, It clarifies and corrects the ancient pagan view, showing better the nature and severity of this early fall, and its consequences. But above all - and here is the most revelatory element - Scripture, the interpretation of the Church, gives to humanity in Christ the means and ways to break free from his ancestral misery and tendency to evil, to rediscover the original plan of creation, high from the Christian prospect of divine filiation.

.

suffering, as a result of original sin It is transformed by Christ into an instrument of atonement and way of salvation. From repugnant becomes lovable. Not sure lovable itself, but for Christ's sake. From condemnation it becomes a response of love to the love of the One who gave Himself to deliver us from suffering and sin. It is always an evil that must be fought. And yet it should not be rejected by any means, but, the occasion should be welcomed for the sake of Christ as the way to make us saints. Only sin must be rejected absolutely, as, says a liturgical hymn, "Nails of the Cross, although hard, They are sweet".

.

This is what he thinks and announcing His Beatitude Emeritus Prior of Bose Enzo Bianchi, who just finished his preaching to the world the clergy at Ars, He rushed to Rome, to talk to young people, then to attend the first “Synod of freedom”, if it considers that, as he himself says: "There is a great freedom of action than in previous synods I have experienced" [cf. WHO]. But it, in this climate of “freedom” why s ’ was seen before, He tells us that they did not order, those who think differently …

.

… «Oh Freedom, what crimes are committed in thy name!». Oh, freedom, how many crimes are committed in thy name! [Marie-Jeanne Roland de la Platière: 1734-1793].

This, It is the end that made!

.

Varazze, 19 October 2018

.

.

 

______________________

NOTE

.

[1] I illustrate in my book The mystery of the Redemption, Editions ESD, Bologna 2004.

[2] CF. C.V.Héris, The mystery of Christ, Publishing Morcelliana, Brescia 1938.

[3]The doctrine of merit, denied by Bianchi in the wake of Luther, It is dogmatically taught by the Council of Trent [Denz.1545-1550].

[4] CF. Catechism of the Catholic Church [nn.166-172].

[5] M.-J. Nicolas, Evolutionism and Christianity. Of Teilhard de Chardin to S.Tommaso d'Aquino, Publishing Massimo, Milan 1978.

[6] CF. Erlangen Paul II, I believe. General Audience by Sandro Beetles, Edizioni Piemme, 1988, vol.IV, nn.4-5.

[7] CF. Heribert Muehlen, A person Mystica, Publishing New Town, Rome 1968.

[8] CF. my book The mystery of redemption, Editions ESD, Bologna 2004, pp.29-56.

[9] Of bad, q.4,a.6; In II Sent., Dist.31, q.1,a,1.

[10] S. Pius V in 1567 condemned Michele Baio, who argued that immortality was due to the state of innocence [Denz. 1921,1926, 1978].

[11] CF. (C). Journet-J,Maritain, Philippe of the Trinity, The angel's sin. Peccabilitas, nature and supernatural, Beauchesne, Paris 1961.

[12] CF. St. Thomas, Evil. disputed Questions, edited by G.Cavalcoli and R.Coggi, vol.VI, Editions ESD, Bologna 2002; C.Journet, Evil. theological Essay, Borla Publisher, Turin 1963.

[13] The steresis, of which Aristotle spoke.

[14] Luigi Pareyson, rightly affirming cha evil exists, It remains trapped in an inadequate conception of existence, it ends by arguing that evil is a reality, he fell in Manichaeism or at least in the Hegelian dialectic of this bad even in God, although Pareyson then try to make up by saying that God has "overcome evil in Himself". However Pareyson least has the merit that he understood that the question of evil is above all a metaphysical question, while the mature catholic '' Bultmannian Enzo Bianchi still alive in the world of fairy tales. Cf book Pareyson, however, nice and deep, Ontology of Freedom. The evil and suffering, Publishing house Einaudi, Turin 2000.

[15] CF. J.Maritain, God and the permission of evil, Paris 1963.

.

.

«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:



or you can use the bank account:
They were IT 08 (J) 02008 32974 001436620930
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

4 thoughts on "The Synod Youth: Enzo Bianchi and original sin in the context of a dissolution

  1. Father John,

    Lei says: "For Bianchi, as we have seen, the tendency to sin is not proper to fallen human nature from a primitive state of innocence, but it is inherent in human nature itself. But if evil is naturally in humans, then evil is natural and it is not bad. Therefore, thinking that Christ deliver us from evil is an illusion or a flaw. "And later: "Bianchi recognizes that God can not will sin, ie the evil of guilt; it is deficient when it comes to punishment or divine punishment, in which God inflicts a just penalty. In the name of mercy, Bianchi does not want to admit the punitive justice, that seems unworthy cruelty of God's Love ".

    Indeed, because it admits the punitive justice (and the right "infinite" mercy: infinity, i.e., for those not so unfair as to refuse it) if evil is naturally in humans? And why should I repent if I do the evil nature? No, God is absolutely good, and I forgive me because my lower nature does not need to be forgiven. Although we try to be very good we, as the best of men teaches, Jesus. (This is a subtle demonic in his speech because false humility prepares a rebellion against God himself).

    Whether you come to this kind of conclusions (although disguised by the ambiguous style "here I deny it," I say here in our sample) it shows for example this prodigious mystification of the meaning of the "Prodigal Son parable" I draw from an article written by gravure Famiglia Cristiana: http://www.famigliacristiana.it/articolo/enzo-bianchi-la-misericordia-e-uno-scandalo-che-gli-uomini-religiosi-non-hanno-capito.aspx
    "At the beginning, When he returns home, the prodigal son does not do it because he was sorry but because she was sick and had nothing to eat so much that says to his father, with peremptorily, the command: "Make me like one of your hired servants". The father does not seek explanations, the immediately she gives the best robe, the ring on his hand and kills the fatted calf to celebrate. The father's forgiveness precedes repentance of the prodigal son. Here the scandal ».

    It 'true that forgiveness, that is, the willingness to forgive by the father precedes repentance son, but because forgiveness you must implement in her son mature willingness to be forgiven, and this happens when your son says to himself: "I will get up and I go to my father, and I will say: 'Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you ... ", that is, when the son repents, He recognizes the truth, and with it God the father figure. For Smith rather forgiveness takes place, or becomes effective, before the son's repentance and independently of it, that is, when still in the soul of the son is only the calculation of a man in despair, even if, seems to understand, his son should have somehow "penitent", why more and somehow we must also not get rid unwisely repentance entirely from the speech ...

    1. Not to be forgotten the words of the father to the eldest son: “Son, you are always with me and all that is mine is yours”;
      the father so that specific, having the youngest son burned its entire part of the inheritance, all remaining assets would be inherited by the eldest son.

  2. Writes White: “… we know that the first man's evil reign in nature even before: the wolf ate the lamb.”
    But how could the Whites misjudge that the wolf eat the lamb, if he had the innate “knowledge of good and evil”? Perhaps the owners of dogs or cats as poorly morsels of lamb or chicken to give their beloved animals?

  3. Il peccato originale si è trasmesso agli altri uomini per SOLIDARIETA’. Proprio quella solidarietà che invece oggi viene banalmente usata come sinonimo didatemi i vostri soldi”.

Leave a Reply