Protect Divo Barsotti from the clutches of Lefebvre

PROTECT DIVO BARSOTTI from the clutches of Lefebvre

 

Father Divo would find the strength even in old age, even in a wheelchair, to pick up a stick and throw him on his back with blood Tuscan spirit of anyone who dared to ask publicly questioned the Church's Magisterium and the authority of the Second Vatican Ecumenical dell'assisa.

Author Ariel S. Levi Gualdo
Author
Ariel S. Levi Gualdo

 

 

HOW TO KEEP SILENT ABOUT attempt to misuse FATHER FIGURE DIVO BARSOTTI BY THE SITE “Heresies&SURROUNDING” MARY GUARINI?

SEE WHO

 

Reverend Father
Serafino Tognetti, CFD

 

 

divo barsotti Book
one of the valuable works of Father Serafino Tognetti on Father Divo Barsotti [click WHO to open the video presentation of the work on]

Venerable Brother in Christ, know as well as I am fond of the figure of Father Divo Barsotti and how much is still grateful to his pious memory, so great and providential divine grace was its incidence in my vocational journey, later in my priestly spirituality. My esteem for this Servant of God has been repeatedly expressed in my books and articles, is known to you and to your various lay people of the Community of the Children of God of which are confessor and spiritual director, as it is to other members of your aggregation participating often my celebrations and listen to my sermons; all of them are tied in loving spirituality barsottiana.

Forgive me if I use the public letter instead of the private message, but as they say in parts of my native Tuscany, where you are from and where you lived as a faithful disciple next to Father Divo: «I decided they might take two birds with one stone».

Seeing carried in triumph Father Divo Blog of Lady Maria Guarini, which aspires of being a theologian, color stay, canonist, Historic Church, etc ... but most legitimate censor the supreme authority of the Church and of the whole ecumenical seated, believe me: really made me sick at heart.

These so-called Traditionalists or better "Lefebvrians”, always seek to appropriate figures of men of God to use them as legitimation to their mistakes, which are then errors related to forms of precise and manifest heresies, because as you know, since you are a brilliant theologian, deny the authority of an entire ecumenical council sticks to the wire piddling laughable that it would "only a pastoral council and undogmatic”, to come to say that "does not matter”, Finally, may it “is in error“, is an insane talk that ends early over from error heresy, as shown by the content pseudo-Catholics the blog in question, which should not be associated with the name of the Venerable Father and even your, his beloved disciple. Then to evaluate the objective dangerousness of doctrinal errors of these characters, need only consider their critical thinking furiously toward the magisterium of the last Roman Pontiffs from 1958 to follow; aberrant idea of Apostolic Tradition reduced to a stagnant immobility that rejects the natural evolutionary process of the Church; reduced to a liturgy "supreme fetish”, often purely aesthetic, aesthetic centered on a blind refusal of The Council and it reveals how the people in these metaphysical and theological inability to distinguish substances by the accidents external quotas and understand that the substance of the Mass has never been altered, least of all in the structure of his mystery sacrificial.

You understand well what is inappropriate that certain subjects fiercely sunk in error and tireless speaker error poison among the members of the People of God, can dare to abuse the figure of Divo Barsotti as its legitimizing banner. You and I both know that the Father Divo would find the strength even in old age, even in a wheelchair, to pick up a stick and throw him on his back with blood Tuscan spirit of anyone who dared to ask publicly questioned the Church's Magisterium and the authority of an entire Ecumenical Council.

Please therefore you and your brothers to me so estimated to act with great care before such attempts to "embezzlement", because of you, I and all those who worship this great man of God who after many years could be venerated as a saint and perhaps also as a Doctor of the Church [see WHO], we know that the Father Divo, giustamente and godly, expressed words also very hard on the theological drift of the post-conciliar; and all of us with him we continue to express those same words with equal force. But do these characters properties in your pond stale and able to mystify his thoughts to turn it into a critique of the Second Vatican Council and the reforms, the magisterium and the doctrines born from that meeting of the Fathers of the Church gathered together with the Successor of the Prince of the Apostles. Throughout the vast production of Father Divo does not exist in fact only a sigh of opposition to Vatican II, thing of which you are privileged witness, not only because a student of Venerable Father but because you were next to him until his death as a beloved son devoted.

Tomas Tyn 3
Tomas Tyn. To open the video with the audio / video of a sermon and the celebration of Holy Mass, click WHO

Our fellow priest John Cavalcoli Order of Preachers, with whom we carry out the online magazine The island of Patmos, can confirm you his part that similar operation was carried out long ago by the usual suspects on the figure of the Servant of God Tomas Tyn, of which these fringes attempted in some way to appropriate, almost as if this theologian returned to the Father's house just 39 years - but with a philosophical-theological genius comparable to that of a new Aquinas - it was a kind of anti-conciliarista [see WHO, WHO].

This is their tactic: appropriating figures taken, cut and sewn to use to legitimize their serious errors and confirm each other in that mistake that at its base has the formidable queen holding as solid trunk all the other deadly sins: the Superbia.

Free Mrs. Maria Guarini, to put it very pleasant even in austere Lent, and those who want to take exploit, but let alone the Venerable Father Divo, Today the presence of God in the glory of the Angels and Saints, after having loved and obeyed the Church despite all her wrinkles; because they are the wrinkles with which men often have disfigured that our beloved Father Divo has righteously, and godly criticized, just as expressed by preaching the spiritual exercises to the Roman curia in 1971 at the invitation of Blessed Paul VI [see WHO]. Never put instead into question the face always holy and immaculate Church, whose doctrine has never been the subject of his union, because of it he was extraordinary speaker, defending the essence and greatness of all the Second Vatican Council by drifts of certain theologians of the post-conciliar; drifts today even more dangerous and against which we, disciples and sons of his spirituality, we continue to fight with the Church, in the Church and for the Church, which means at the same time with Peter, for Peter and under Peter, unlike Lady Guarini and his retinue of Pelagians fighting instead against the Church and against Peter of which are elected censors.

To you and your brothers a fraternal embrace in sincere union priestly.

.

From the island of Patmos, 25 March 2015 – Feast of the Annunciation

.

 

papi postconcilio
The Church is a people on a journey with Christ and his chief guide who conferred upon Peter vicarious function to shepherd his flock [GV 21, 17] and mandate of confirming the brethren in the faith [LC 22, 32]

.

Father Divo Barsotti was not “of your”

PRAISE IN APPENDIX TO TOTAL INCOSISTENT

Mass celebrated by the Venerable Father

In the video that follows below is a fragment of the Holy Mass celebrated by Divo Barsotti assisted by young Serafino Tognetti, his faithful disciple. It is the celebration of the Holy Mass in the blog of Guarini&Is similar for years defined as “Mass Protestantism” nee “opera destructive of Paul VI ” thanks to “Mason Annibale Bugnini “, etc. … etc. … Well, that Mrs. Guarini and his columnist Dante Pastorelli look in this video how godly devotion this man of God celebrated with the Missal of Paul VI that Divine Sacrifice which they have defined for years with contempt as “Protestantism put the huddle“, but then expect to exploit this venerable priest in their use and consumption.

CLICK WHO

About isoladipatmos

8 thoughts on "Protect Divo Barsotti from the clutches of Lefebvre

  1. "I am perplexed against the Council: the plethora of documents, their length, often their language, they scare me. Are documents that bear witness to a human security across more than a simple firmness of faith. But especially angers me the behavior of theologians.
    The Council and the supreme exercise of the magisterium is justified only by a supreme necessity. The gravity of the present situation of the Church fearful could not derive just from the weight he wanted to provoke and groped the Lord? It wanted to perhaps force God to talk when there was this supreme necessity? Is it so? To justify a council that claimed to renew everything, He had to say that everything went wrong, something that is done continuously, if not by the episcopate, dai theology.

    Nothing seems more serious, against the holiness of God, the presumption of clerics who believe, with a pride that is only evil, could manipulate the truth, purporting to renew the Church and to save the world without renewing themselves. Throughout the history of the Church is nothing comparable to the last council, in which the Catholic bishops believed to be able to renew all things in obedience only to one's pride, no commitment to holiness, in open opposition to the law so that the gospel requires us to believe as the humanity of Christ was the instrument of the omnipotence of love that saves, in his death.
    DON DIVO BARSOTTI (25 April 1914 – 15 February 2006)

    It seems quite clear that we are not talking only of the application of the Second Vatican Council, but also the manner in which was conducted and documents produced. On this issue I hope to do with you a more in-depth reflection.

    1. Gregory Caro.

      But it is not just for nothing obvious as she writes, the fact is that she priprova – as other – read what “It Is Unwritten” and interpreting what “It Is Unwritten” attributed what the Father Divo never said.
      I cite a document in which the Father Divo questions the teaching of the council, the doctrine of the Council and the reforms that it had made and now binding for the whole Church.
      In this, as in other writings, he speaks of certain bishops, certain clerics who were at the council, He does not speak of the acts of the council.
      But it, if she knows one half page in which the father denies:

      1. the Council (and not certain, few or many of its participants);
      2. acts of the Council;
      3. the doctrines of the Council;
      4. the reforms of the Second;

      then we indicate the, because doing cut and paste, and attributing to him what in truth is not said, Christ first he ended on the cross.

      1. Caro Father, In the text cited seems to me that Fr. Divo is said perplexed by the very necessity of the Second Vatican Council; specifically states that the documents produced by it arouse fears: in particular it seems interesting to the emphasis placed on language, because we know that this is a very thorny point (there are points – personally I could give you several examples in the liturgical constitution – whose ambivalence is such that are cited to support opposing views!). I would not say finally, at least from the passage cited, that there is a critique of “some” Clerics: he even says “Catholic episcopate”. And’ Obviously, this is an expression that should be taken with debts distinctions, but it is also true that raises another problem: how many of the bishops they witnessed how the scope of what they were voting? Warning, I'm not saying that they were a mass of irresponsible; but that the problem of language, above mentioned it is also essential in this perspective. Clearly there is no room now for deepening, but I will see in the coming days to submit some remarks more precise. Thanks for your attention!

        1. Gregory Caro.

          As sometimes happens, I guess you and I are saying the same things and we are moving on the same underlying substance but using different words or terms.
          In the Vatican there are undoubted “issues” language, because the Church, for the first time, uses a new language. There are also, in some documents, of expressions which may be variously interpreted, say and admit also some linguistic expressions ambiguous, it is true. But what the critics of Vatican II does not say let alone admit – of course, not people like her, but many other subjects – is the fact that the Blessed Paul VI, both Saint John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, with their teaching amply clarified certain ambiguity.
          I venture to suggest our archive of this online magazine an article of mine in the past which I am talking of the issue of language.

          http://isoladipatmos.com/babele-e-la-neolingua-una-chiesa-senza-vocabolario-da-mezzo-secolo/

          One must also take into account that the Council Fathers of Vatican II were not those of the previous Vatican, many bishops of the late fifties at the time were mostly missionary bishops of lands of new or recent evangelization; if anything, they were missionaries and pastors overtime, several of them have become well blessed, several others have died martyrs, others have or had spent much of their lives in prisons … but were not, however, most of them theologians sopraffini, and the whole is more than understandable, if we think that there certainly is evangelized with the metaphysical speculations of the best school but with a good catechism. Many Erani time the bishops gathered in Rome not able to follow and understand speech in Latin, or to read and understand a document in Latin; and this not because they were ignorant of the poor, It is given that they were responsible for the evangelization of nations, the paths roughest of them moved traveling for days to reach a pastoral visit to a village moving a little’ in barca, a powder’ a donkey and a bit’ on foot, certainly not coming with a few meters of the hood magna supported by caudatari, galero in the head, the bobbin lace and so on, interdersi always and always to not miss the opportunity to take it to those who know …
          In several of these bishops, ? They were holy pastors and evangelists, but often theologically naive, different “stars” theology like Rahner, his beloved disciple Kung, Schillebeeckx, the young Franzoni, etc. .. They tried to persuade necessary fireflies for lanterns. But if we see, Paul VI began the good at the right time all the facts straight “the”, especially in the two dogmatic constitutions, preventing for example the attempted “blow” distorted on the idea that some of these “rising stars” They had collegiality, etc..
          As though understands, the discussion would not only long but also quite complex to be treated.

          It is always a pleasure to host and interact with people as you pose questions such serious and relevant.

  2. "From the first session [Council] He saw where things were going to end up, with the provision disdainful of all the schemes prepared. In addition to, the bishops said immediately that they did not intend to condemn anyone: which it meant renouncing their service as teachers of the faith, custodians of divine revelation. The bishops should not replace the theologians, they have another function: the episcopate should tell us what to believe and what we must reject. […] The bishops did not put in the first place their function to approve or condemn, the documents of Vatican II have a more theological language that doctrinal. Even, for example, in certain pages of Gaudium et Spes, there as a reason by sociologists, journalists.
    In addition to, in the documents you will come across three or four different theologies. For instance: the first document [Council], the one on the liturgy, only has a vision of mystery; the last, what the relationship between the Church and the world, It is marked by a certain "theilardismo". Wait a genius to know that the theology of synthesis of these differences. So Vatican II was a mistake? No, certainly: the church needed to deal with the culture of the world, and the Holy Spirit prevented that documents crept error; but even if everything is ok, in Vatican II, it is said that everything is appropriate»
    (Don Divo Barsotti)

    Source: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/22372

    1. Amica way.

      Well-found!
      But above all thanks to your contribution as appropriate and valuable for our readers and commentators.

  3. because the great crusaders fighting the Second Vatican Council does not say that all mons.Lefebvre accepted until the close of the Ecône 75 He was in full communion with the “conciliar church”? This term used by relativists hyper-traditionalists. Why not say that Bishop. Lefebvre was to 10 years in “church heretical conciliar”?

  4. Reverend Padri, not a Lefebvre, but I assure you that I suffer from stomach ache-caused by the ingestion of adulterated doctrine proposed by the church from the world incultured- not even find a remedy to Ecône.
    After all you do not need to be, chess …a horse, to enjoy an afternoon racecourse.
    GOOD Paqua THE LORD.

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.