THE NEW ONES FALSE PROPHETS AND THE LIES OF ENZO BIANCHI

.

A similar arrogant effrontery in Bianchi can be explained only because, in this tragic and unmanageable situation, who is living today the Church, It is backed by powerful anti-Christic forces, so that, as the dark times of the tenth century, Marozia and powerful Roman families lorded over the Pope, so today the lord far more astute Modernist, now present in the Holy See and among the "collaborators" of the Pope, you do not understand on what grounds if it keeps them or hire them, or perhaps because he hopes to hold them off or because it is not capable of around cavarseli […]

.

.

.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

«The day will come, indeed, when they will not endure sound doctrine;, ma, having itching ears they, will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, refusing to listen to the truth to turn to fairy tales ".

[Blessed Apostolo Paolo II's Letter to Timothy, 4, 3-4]

.

.

.

The famous monaco Enzo Bianchi recently he held a conference in Turin on "Christian Ethics and Health Insurance" at the XX National Congress FADOI [Federation of Associations Executives Italian Hospital]. In it Bianchi would put forward Christian ethics on the subject of pain, of evil and death, instead of the fact exposes a purely philanthropic vision, if not atheist, that best reflects the rationalistic Enlightenment or ethics of Freemasonry and has nothing to do with Christian ethics.

.

Da who unbelieve impudenza Bianchi with which falsifies the Christian ethic. Instead, the true Christian ethics, the redemptive suffering, It is mocked by him as repulsive and exceeded what. Speak not a monaco cristiano, but how they would talk about Nietzsche o Marx. Therefore, that Luther which Bianchi boasts of being party, It would be shocked and with his typical phrase book Blood and complexion would give him the fool and the blasphemer. Bianchi fact seems rather welcome the humanistic approach and solidarity of Christianity, with the duty to care for the health and fight disease and suffering, but then everything is revealed by a red herring, because Bianchi completely fails in presenting the appearance own and therefore also human Christian ethics, as we shall see from his statements, Here I carry with my rebuttal contained under the title “reply”.

.

To check forgery his thesis simply compare the teaching of Catechism of the Catholic Church. But evidently subjects as the Whites do not care Catechism, Why, the example of Luther, they know Christianity better than the Pope and the Catholic Church.

.

A similar arrogant cockiness in Bianchi you can be explained only because, in this tragic and unmanageable situation, who is living today the Church, It is backed by powerful anti-Christic forces, so that, as the dark times of the tenth century, Marozia and powerful Roman families lorded over the Pope, so today the lord far more astute Modernist, now present in the Holy See and among the "collaborators" of the Pope, you do not understand on what grounds if it keeps them neighbors or hire them; perhaps because he hopes to hold them off or because it is not capable of around cavarseli, probably too much indulgence or appeasement and insufficient energy, or for fear of reprisals or because they threatened or circumvented? While the stronger, brave and insightful Benedict XVI was instead forced to relinquish the sacred throne, but our thoughts also anxious about what happened to poor Giovanni Paolo I …

.

… I have always been used heretics, when the plots fail and ambitions remain unfulfilled, to resort to crime, just to realize, defend or hide their wicked plans. Not having theological and legal arguments to support their thesis, easily, if they have power, They resort to intimidation or violence. The question we ask is why does not appear any higher authority to stop this impostor, seducer of believers and unbelievers puppet. No one who defends the Vicar of Christ or give him some good advice? Only some few brave, as for example the illustrious theologian Antonio Livi, They are helping to clarify to prevent it disgraces the Catholic name and help those who are misled - or want to be deceived - by Bianchi obscenities … [cf. WHO, WHO, WHO, etc..]

… but now we see the White thesis. We indentation in his italicized statements and in my answers.

.

.

Christian ethics

Ethics is a way to become a man or woman. Christian ethics has suffered and undergoes changes. On this point no illusion: it is not given once and for all, It is not crystallized into dogmatic formulas.

.

Reply

Becoming a man or woman is the subject of genetics and not of morality. Ethics is not about the genesis of man, but the question of human action and choice between good and evil. It certainly educates man to reach the psychological and moral maturity and spiritual perfection, but supposes the man already formed, responsible for their actions, and it intends to address it to achieve its ultimate goal, who is God, through the observance of the divine commandments. If anything, the Christian ethics aim is to become a child of God. Men are born children of Adam sinner, but Christ makes us, with baptism, children of God.

The ethics rules, of reason (natural law, natural right, natural ethics) or of faith (moral dogmas, divine right, Christian ethics) they are universal and immutable, as immutable is human nature, the same in all individuals from beginning to end of the story, beyond the historical evolution and different cultures. If not, It would open space to all forms of discrimination between man and man and all forms of oppression of man by man.

There are in fact different levels and forms of moral conduct, different legal codes and customs, linked to different individuals, peoples and societies, with strengths and weaknesses. But the basic standards, dictated by natural reason, I'm the same for every man, educated or uneducated, not as it is this or that man, ma as it is man. All men - and they know it - they must answer to God for their actions.

Showing up for an opportunity, and this may be the 'approaching death, we must not be afraid to talk about God to atheists, because they also know that their God exists, although they pretend not to know or maybe do not want it. How many people, duly and charitably assisted, convert on his deathbed by a life spent in the sin!

Moral norms therefore require absolute duties and require fidelity and constancy, at the cost of sacrifice, the commitments made before God and men. Undoubtedly, moral standards can and should be better known and applied with the progress of science and morals.

Mutable and on the other hand, and subject to exceptions, are the positive rules established by law and by the civil and ecclesiastical power, in 'application of the moral law in the various situations and circumstances.

.

.

The problem of evil

Christian ethics does not give any explanation to the problem of evil, disease and death. It proposed an imaginary like a story which claimed to explain the origin of evil: the myth that evil, illness and death arising from a fault of the first humans. We no longer accept that our suffering "resulting" from the guilt of someone who has gone before us and, Consequently, There has been given for an inheritance.

.

Reply

.

The Genesis story of the origin of evil by the angel's sin [1] and torque of our ancestors, with its consequences, It is in no way an "imaginary" nor a "myth", but it's Truth historical object of faith (cf. Cat. NN. 385-409) [2]. This story makes us realize that humanity, following original sin, It has fallen into a state of misery and tendency to sin, condition from which man can not recover by their own efforts.

The Scripture tells us how the Father took pity on us and gave us for our salvation and the forgiveness of sins His Son Jesus Christ, who, as the Council of Trent says, "With his most holy passion on the wood of the cross we merited for us justification and made satisfaction for us to the Father" (cf. Denz.1529) [3]. If you understand what is not original sin and what are its consequences, It does not even understand the meaning of Christ's saving work, who asked us to join his cross for the salvation of the world.

One of the greatest merits and virtues of Christianity is to explain what is evil, from where it originated and how you can win. Christianity teaches that God essentially infinite goodness does not want evil, but it allows it to show his omnipotence, his mercy and goodness.

Omnipotence means that God, with its beneficial creative power, merciful and providential, certainly punish the wrongdoer, but in view of obtaining the same punishment or calamity, and then in general from evil, the greater good, such as forgiveness, greater good than we would have been if it were not evil: For he, in his mercy, forgiving in Christ yl peccato, leading man, by grace, the son of God was, moved by the Holy Spirit, state that is superior to the state of innocence before sin of our first parents.

All this shows God's goodness that fills exceedingly simple natural happiness needs, a goodness superior to that which he would have shown, if he had not high man in Christ to the supernatural condition of the son of God. The father, But, while, as it is apparent from the dogma of the Redemption, It wanted to be compensated for the offense done him from Adam and his descendants, and therefore it wanted that man to justice would fix his guilt herself to the sacrifice of the cross, with which Christ merited our justification. In this way man can win for Justice, with good works, through the merits of Christ, that same salvation that is given to him by Christ for free, for mercy.

.

.

The Christian faith

The Christian faith does not solve the problem of the origin of evil, of suffering, does not explain! Faith, It does not suppress the absurd, Nor it gives meaning to the disease.

.

Reply

.

One of the main strengths of Christian revelation (Scripture and Tradition) It is to illuminate with the light of faith humanity about the mystery of evil [4]. The Word of God tells us what is the true nature and ultimate evil, the origin and the total and definitive harm than good; but it does not give us a reason or explanation or proof necessary or logical (as Hegel believed) to know Why God has allowed evil. This is an impenetrable mystery, known only to God, However mystery, the purpose of our salvation, you do not need to know.

But if we did not know what evil, which it is the origin and what causes, we may not know the means to get rid of it and salvation would be impossible. Christianity teaches us that the true evil, more than grief, you do wrong, It is sin, because it is a consequence of sin. Doing good is to promote life; consequently do evil is to take away life. Life is the fruit of justice. Death is the consequence of sin. So as not to do evil, It is therefore better to suffer evil, as St. Domenico Savio: "the death, rather than sin ». Suffering is bad. But if to do good and avoid sin, must suffer, so be suffering.

If God had willed, He could ensure that evil does not exist. God is not at all needed to allow the existence of evil, but he did so freely. We can only make guesses on the reasons of convenience or because of the existence of evil, but not producing tutorial topics. We are we to believe with firm faith that it is so well, although we can not scrutinize why.

We have to say, in the light of faith, it is good that there is evil, certainly not to do it or approve it or accept it, but to fight it and destroy it. Fighting evil is good. So the presence of evil gives opportunity to do good. Only evil the just penalty, for example hell [5], is an absolute good sense, because it is an expression of divine justice.

Already the natural reason, thanks to the philosophy, He realizes that evil exists, it is not necessary but contingent, He knows what is, He knows its harmfulness, There is a sense and a meaning intelligible, however repugnant to the will. He knows that it is worse the blame evil to punishment; controls the fight against evil and sin, He knows that it is a cause of suffering and which is caused by a free agent, finished and peccable, so not from God, which it is infinite goodness and that can overcome evil. But the fragile and sinful man, without the help of grace, can not get rid of evil and suffering.

So then Revelation is' additional light, final, encouraging and consoling the mystery of evil, thanks to the teaching and example of Christ, mediated by the Magisterium of the Church. The main contribution of Christianity is teaching man that evil (sin as an offense against God and his punishment) It is even more serious than the only reason might suspect, but nevertheless Christ, with his sacrifice "expiatory vicar" [6], which continues in Mass, frees us fully and definitely from wrong and teaches us how to turn evil into good.

Faith rejects the absurd, because faith is reasonable homage to truth sovrarazionali, but relatable to reason and that harmonize with reason. The content of faith is not absurd, it is not unreasonable, it's not impossible, It is not inconsistent, but it is sublime truth, infinity, immutable and mysterious.

God does not change, does not contradict, We do not deceive us, and not denied, but it implies, It is loyal and reliable, always identical to itself and faithful. Faith transforms the disease in a time of penance, repair, of redemption. Re-d-emo: I buy again. "We have been bought with a price!» (The Cor 6,20).

.

.

The suffering.

Christianity has always fought suffering, considering it a redemptive road and meritorious. If Christian ethics asks that death is not removed, nor denied, it is not an assumption of pain or in view of the "redemption". The disease was for our salvation, It was atoning, Therefore it was necessary to offer to God. The illness, suffering no use for our redemption. On the contrary, we can say that the pain does not make sense. Suffering is not pleasing to God, otherwise he would be sadistic.

.

Reply

.

Suffering is certainly a bad thing, as such, It must be removed or at least alleviated. Sedatives thus play a positive role. Nevertheless, they should remove the cause of the pain, but they must not destroy the healthy forces. If suffering can not be removed, It must be born. Although the pain is unbearable, not be mitigated or removed causing the death of the patient. However, suffering can be an asset, then espiativa and redeeming.

God does not like or want or suffering as such, but he likes or wants the redemptive suffering. The suffering is redemptive suffering of Christ, which offers expiation or reparation to the Father for the forgiveness of our sins. So the redemptive suffering is a good thing, that meets or compensates the Father for sin, purifies and atones for the sins, and prepares the cancellation of suffering in later life.

.

.

Conscience

Consciousness is never a voice that reminds us of a law already made. We must recognize consciousness as a fundamental instance of choices, in life and facing death. The conscience says to each of us, man or woman, believer or non-believer in God: "Become conform to what you are".

.

Reply

.

This is not the concept of consciousness that we are taught by the Second Vatican Council [7], which instead says: "In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which has not laid upon himself, but which he must obey, and whose voice ever calling him to love and to do good and avoid evil, when you need, He says clearly to his heart: 'do this, shun that. The man actually has a law written by God in his heart: To obey it is the very dignity of man, according to it he will be judged. Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man, There he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths ".

In these few lines, the Council also mentions three times the divine law as the law that we find in our consciousness, we are bound by what law, which we must obey, and in relation to which we must and we will have to answer to God of our work.

Of everything in Bianchi not a word, rather, quite the opposite, because it is clear that the benchmark and the rule of conscience for him is not God, but the man himself ('Compliant become who you are'). He speaks a perfect atheist.

.

Sedation pain

The global personal care contributes to "une apaisée death", to a "better to die than you can". We must practice deep sedation and continues, till death; necessary, indeed, avoid all suffering. Palliative care is an absolute must, because death is part of life and should be softened to make the tame death and acceptable.

.

Reply

.

Care needs to live as much as possible, must never let die. He must accompany the patient to death, soothe the pain as much as possible. But we do not possess drugs that are able to totally remove all pain, without compromising or suppress the patient's life. The other part, a product that removes the pain by killing the sufferer, It is not a drug, or a sedative, but a poison, even when it used under the pretext of pain sedation. The some pain is bad, but worst evil to take away life. You can not suppress bad (pain) causing a greater evil (the killing of the sick).

The other part, It is necessary to avoid overtreatment, which is to keep the patient alive by technical means, so that vital functions emerge more from their subject's resources, but they are mechanically induced from outside, as it causes the motion of a machine. The patient is therefore practically dead.

Its movements depend solely by the action or mechanical power coming from the outside, so that, suspending this action, stop the movements of the subject, But not in the sense that his life be extinguished, but since the subject proves to be already dead, and who previously had only one life related, like that of a robot, which seems to be a living, and instead is a machine.

The feed suspension or stimulation, but it is justified only when it is determined that the patient's body has lost all their energies, which would be the only sign that he is no longer alive, and then authorizes the suspension of care, which at this point would not make sense. From these considerations it understands the error of doctors Eluana Englaro, which they have suspended the power supply to an organism still capable of feeding and therefore practically have killed.

The ideological background of such intervention was not the desire not to hurt the poor Eluana, because she did not suffer, but it was a materialist view of life, for which a human subject is prevented or incapable of discernment is not a "person" and therefore does not deserve to be left to live.

So you understand what terrible consequences it might lead, if this horrible principle were applied, in addition to the embryos and fetuses, as it is already done on a large scale, to other broad categories of people, such as newborns, the children, people in a coma, the elderly and demented or those who, based on the wrong criteria, They would be judged dementii or are not considered human beings. In the face of mercy.

Undoubtedly, there are situations, in which the patient is no longer able to bear the pain, so rather die, rather than go forward with so much suffering. And on the other hand, it happens that a family member who assists him helpless, heartbroken at the sight of so much pain of a loved one, and moved in a certain way by compassion, He would rather see him dead than see him suffer so much.

but yet, reasonable person, non-believer, He knows it is not permissible to obtain or cause death to stop or avoid pain, however great, However, it should understand, forgive and have compassion for these unfortunate, which, overwhelmed by grief and by 'anguish, maybe victims of depression, without seeing a future that is not the worsening situation, They lose their heads and kill, especially if deprived of a Christian education, which could help them to resign, to endure misfortune and hope in divine.

The temptation to suicide by the intensity of pain can also occur in the saints, as he happened to St. Therese of the Child Jesus, which, in recent times of his illness, She asked that she be moved away from the table a certain drug, not to be led into temptation. But God, confidently invoked, It does not fail to give the force of endurance, as it is shown by countless examples of pious people who are entrusted to Him.

The doctor - although the civil law were to allow it to him - must not be content in consciousness the patient requesting euthanasia, the so-called "deep sedation", hypocritical expression to hide the crime, It can please him if he asks for a poison and should do as a nurse or firefighter, which it intervenes to withhold that is about to throw himself off the roof of a house.

On the sufferer, the doctor, in the absence of other persons, He must be able to say, he is able, a good word of comfort or hope, not necessarily based on the Christian faith, but simply humanitarian, if the patient is not a raving atheist or a blasphemer and a prey to the fury against God or fate, in which case it is enough to pray, without satisfy him in his insane cravings, although somewhat understandable.

The good death is not euthanasia, but to die in peace of conscience, despite suffering, quietly endured in complete abandonment in God's hands, uniting ourselves to Christ's sacrifice, forgiving chi ci ha offeso, trusting that God will take account of our good works, forgive our sins and will receive us in heaven.

If you understand, against the other, As these ideas of Bianchi on "deep sedation" and especially its ideological assumptions inhuman and anti-Christian may favor the practice of suicide, without waiting to go to the hospital to get to euthanasia, as it is already happening, for example people in emotional or unable to care, they have learned to be with cancer.

Undoubtedly, it is necessary that the assistant of the patient or doctor knows wisely find and adapt the words to the psychological situation of the patient, not to provoke counter-reactions. If the sick person is a believer, not to Bianchi, but according to the Gospel, and warmly welcome the call of the Cross all'amabilità.

But if it is not a believer, You will need to be careful not to scandalize, because Christian love for the suffering could be mistaken for masochism. It is wrong to consider instead Bianchi "dolorism" the conception Christian redemptive suffering. If anything is to be rejected dolorism Bruno Forte and Karl Rahner, who admit the suffering in the divine nature.

About this, we realize how precious and useful both, where it is possible or granted, the proximity to the patient's bedside, especially if the believer, pious people or well prepared priest. The seduction is exerting on many today, the prospect of euthanasia is inversely proportional to the decline in priestly ministry, which should be one of the main tasks of the priestly ministry, especially the pastor, e, more root, this situation was affected by the decline of the Christian vision of life, under the influence of a mundane conception and secularistic, forget the end of this worldly life, and necessity and the duty to orient to it all earthly life.

This conference Enzo Bianchi, person of great success for years in the Catholic world, It gives us the extent of squalor, and the collapse of the impressive decline of Catholic thinking on an issue as important as that of pain, of evil and death, with being dropped to a level of such lowness, Christian where nothing remains, if not a vague philanthropy, that can not be distinguished for anything from visual masonic or illuministica. We are faced with a corrupt Christianity and dying, for who would really want to practice euthanasia, to liberate the souls from this rotten and poisonous food and open them to the respect of human dignity.

If tomorrow you were in the hospital dying, I would look good from calling at my bedside a priest on the model of "monaco" Enzo Bianchi and being able to do, I rivolgerei to a true priest, rimettesse that my sins, He comforts her through the sacraments and the Word of God, so as to open up the path to eternal life.

.

Varazze, 19 June 2016

________________________

NOTE

[1] Cf C.Journet, J.Maritain, Philippe of the Trinity, The angel's sin. Peccabilitas, unborn and surnture, Beauchesne, Paris 1961.

[2] See also the encyclical of Pius XII The human race the 1950.

[3] G. Cavalcoli, The mystery of the Redemption, ESD Bologna 2004; C.V.Heris, The mystery of Christ, Morcelliana, Brescia 1938; E.Hugon, The mystery of the Incarnation, Who are you, Paris 1940.

[4] Cf C.Journet, Evil, Tassel,Torino 1963; J.Maritain, God and the permission of evil, Desclee de Brouwer, Paris 1963.

[5] Cf my book Hell esiste. The truth denied, Editions Faith&Culture, Verona 2010.

[6] Satisfaction for us, as the Council of Trent says, Denz.1529.

[7]The joy and hope, n.16.

.

__________________________________________________

.

Note the avoidance of doubt

.

Some years ago, legal counsel, distrusted Dr.. Paolo Deotto, director of the online magazine Levied Christian from making use of images of Dr.. Enzo Bianchi. At the time,, before I took this magazine carried Lefebvrist, on its columns they were publishing articles also present the two Fathers of’Patmos Island. At that distrusts, Ariel S. Levi Gualdo responded with an article in which he explained that since then to follow, to talk about Enzo Bianchi, he would use the images of the beautiful Italian actress Monica Bellucci [cf. WHO]. Given this precedent, the drafting of the’Patmos Island note that the photos included in this article are public images available to anyone on magazines on-line and on the search engines and that some of the do not constitute violation Privacy Act. Recall also that the accusations made by the Fathers of’Patmos Island to Enzo Bianchi, such as for example “bad teacher“, “false prophet“, “heretic” etc.. all fall in the theological lexicon. Therefore, any magistrate of the Italian Republic would be no serious difficulties, but just unable to establish with a judgment and a judgment what is and what is heretical heterodox. For if certain bosiani consultants do not know the law, as in the past they have already shown, nell'Island of Patmos the right hand is known, respected and practiced. Therefore, the false prophet e bad teacher Enzo Bianchi, It takes of theologically’heretic and avoid to also deliver letters to us by clumsy jurists.

.

.

.

.

.

.