ON THE OCCASION OF THE EARTHQUAKE ENZO BIANCHI dusts A NOTE HERESY

.

An earthquake can be considered a punishment from God? Certainly not as a punishment for the sins committed by the victims, but as a consequence of original sin, as is the suffering; e these consequences no one escapes : even Christ and the Madonna, indeed, although exempt from original sin and its consequences, They were subjected to suffering.

.

.

God chastises and uses mercy [Tb 23,2]

.

PDF print format article

.

.

In Future the 27 last August [see WHO] Enzo Bianchi has published some of his reflections on the recent earthquake, and thinking to comfort the afflicted and to give an illuminating answer to why God allowed such a calamity, dusts off the well-known heresy, according to which "God does not punish", falsehood contrary to sound reason, to Sacred Scripture, the Magisterium of the Church and the teachings of all the Saints; ma, According to him, God is always and only "compassion" with all and takes all, believers and non-believers, in heaven. Such an assertion sweetish, grave on the lips of those who should be a man of God, removes the unfortunate that 'unparalleled comfort that comes from our faith, He adds bitterness to bitterness, leaving them in anguish, and he pushes to blaspheme a God who would be "good" in sending earthquakes.

.

We try to remedy the "bad cut drug" [1] peddled by Bianchi proposing the true Gospel teaching, and assuming the reader's willingness to listen to the Word of God. The Christian mystery does not rule out the reason, and it is better a bitter medicine that a sweet drink but poisoned. We say first that Bianchi forget that mercy It raises from suffering or prevents ; it also forgets that, in principle, suffering is the penalty of sin. And then the Suffering does not depend on the mercy, but by justice. So that, call "compassion" one who mistreats me, It is a joke. So, When God allows disasters, He not immediately demonstrates his mercy, but his justice. It is absurd and derisive groped to explain the suffering with the sole mercy neglecting justice. This is not to say that when I happen a disgrace, This is always the divine punishment for a sin I have committed. This may be in certain cases; but it is not necessarily always the case. Indeed, in reality, in this life it happens that there are professional criminals who get away without guilt and innocent who are affected by disasters.

.

As it is clear from the Christian revelation, all the pains of this life, indeed, whether they strike the right, either they hit sinners, They are all in their distant origin protologica, judgment, consequences of original sin and in that sense just penalties, although in fact there are those who are affected little, and some are very impressed. But this disorder is a consequence of original sin. Apart from the suffering caused by the sins or negligence or ignorance of men. The rest, you have to be careful what you mean the Holy Scriptures, when he speaks of "God's punishment". It uses a language metaphoric, as indeed is the case of the word "wrath", taken from human relationships, but which it should best be adapted in the case of God, not to make it repugnant the idea of ​​a "divine punishment".

.

The expression “divine retribution”, indeed, materially socket, He suggests the act of a judge imposing a sentence conventional a wrongdoer. Instead, the penalty of sin is not an evil caused by God in the sinner. God does not hurt anyone. The penalty of sin is nothing more than harm or damage that the sinner himself, with his sin, pulling him. It would be like saying that those who drink too much wine is "punished" with liver cirrhosis.

.

God "sends" no hell as would a judge who sends the offender in prison, but hell, there are only those fools, whose pride is such that prefer to suffer away from God to be blessed with Him in paradise. If our good is to be united to God, it is logical that our evil is the refusal to join the Well. However, Faith teaches us to see the work of God's mercy even in times of suffering, because for us Christians now calls us the punishment of original sin, and perhaps even the penalty for our sins. But the Christian does not stop there. Serenely accept what happens to him, because you know to take advantage of this suffering to join with love, trust and hope in Christ crucified, who atones for us, It gets us the mercy and forgiveness of the Father for our sins, whereby, by an act of great generosity, but also in its interest, It can come to atone for Christ for the sins of others.

.

God's goodness is not only manifested in the consolations, but also with the correction. This too is mercy. And if we suffer from innocent, let's not get upset, we think of Christ, that, innocent, He suffered and atoned for our salvation and unite our suffering to his to do our part to save the world. Christ with his blood has paid for us the debt of sin - satisfaction for us, says the Council of Trent - , but this does not prevent us to make our contribution. So, in this light of faith, what is the experience of divine punishment he is transformed in the experience of his mercy. For it is by mercy that the Father has given us Jesus, in Whom and through Whom we can atone for our sins. And not only can we be saved from sin (healing grace), but also become "children of God" [The Gv 3,1, grace waved], participate in the life of the Son of the Son.

.

However it must be remembered that, though Christ gives everyone the possibility of salvation through the cross, not everybody de facto accept this offer, whereby not everyone is saved. Which means that God offers to all his saving mercy, only if, repented of their sins, they make penance. Whereby, as noted by the Letter to the Hebrews [EB 10, 26-31], if it already deserves punishment disobedience to Natural Law, here it's called "the Law of Moses", much more serious punishment deserve the rejection of God's mercy because of the rebellion against the law of Christ. Christ is very clear teaching us that some will welcome this mercy and be saved, while others, for their disobedience, the refuse and danneranno[2].

.

The Pope should remember these things, otherwise his preaching of mercy is likely to be misunderstood and that take advantage mess, that the good guys are baffled, that the judicial system is paralyzed, and that is not done justice to the oppressed, while they are hindered the reform and improvement of customs and are favored moral laxity and corruption. Moreover, given that the terrorists ISIS, according to the vision Rahner, They are "anonymous Christians", object of divine mercy, we can accept their proposal to replace the Koran to the Gospel, the more so, according to the theology of Rahner, Gospel and the Koran are placed on the floor "categorical", where a concept or the other, while all possess the '' transcendental experience of God ", that is the thing that counts and that guarantees to all the salvation.

.

Remain deaf to the warnings of the Lord for a false idea of ​​mercy, remove from the Bible verses that speak of doom, as unfortunately many do, with the belief that everyone is saved, them under the illusion of being able to regulate his conduct at will, to dissolve all moral restraints and to sin freely, with impunity conviction and that in any case there is no one in Hell. But as these ideas ignore the warning of the Lord, this their vain confidence, as already he warned the Council of Trent for Lutherans, It is useless, whereby, if they do not repent in time, actually end up in hell. The love of virtue is not enough to make virtuous, if you do not think about the consequences of the practice of vice.

.

The moment of misfortune reminds Christians the consequences of original sin and the possibility of redemption that is given by Christ, whereby, if he had any fault to be served, It can take the opportunity to settle accounts with the Lord. And if he was innocent he can take the occasion to offer his cross for the salvation of sinners.

.

We must certainly do good for the love of the good and to the heavenly reward which is the beatific vision of God. The exercise of virtue is certainly already in itself a source of joy; but virtue is not, as they believed the Stoics and Kant, order or its own reward; the exercise of virtue is not the content of happiness, but only the half of achieving, who is in achieving the ultimate goal and highest good, which consists in union with God.

.

The happiness of man is not immanent to man, ie does not consist in an act of man, however sublime and perfect, but in the fact that man, by choice, It joins forever and intimately to an external asset, personal, transcendent and infinite, who is God. But precisely this act will be perfect as it is the act by which man connects fully and eternally with God in charity.

.

The act for fear of punishment it is wise and logically connected to acting disinterested, pure love of perfection and of God. In fact you can not separate the love for the sake of fleeing or hatred of evil. The thought that if I do such a thing, God is punishing me, or I'll damage, She pushes me to do good.

.

Trust in God and in his mercy It gives impetus to our action, It makes us "innocent as doves", burning with charity, tenacious in convictions, brave in business, while thinking that some are damned and that I could damn myself, present in all the Saints, It is a salutary thought, pushing us to the good, It makes us "wise as serpents" [cf. Mt 16,18], modest in opinions, conscious of our weakness, acting brigade, cautious and circumspect in danger, warned of the pitfalls, lowly, ready to correct us, penitents, strong in temptations and trials, circumspect and wary in the treacherous situations, making us avoid precipitation, the ingenuity, the dabbenaggine, the excessive optimism, the presumption, too much security, boasting and arrogance.

.

However, the love of the good that is to hate evil. Because of this, the good action main reason is the love of God and not the fear of punishment. But on the other hand, It must also avoid the false security that everyone is saved. Fear is only a subsidiary reason, and yet necessary, precisely to avoid the false security. Fear that is not afraid, but love and respect.

An earthquake can be considered a punishment from God? Certainly not as a punishment for the sins committed by the victims, but as a consequence of original sin, as is the suffering; e these consequences no one escapes: even Christ and the Madonna, indeed, although exempt from original sin and its consequences , They were subjected to suffering.

But we have biblical examples of castigate city for the sins of their inhabitants. But here we are dealing with primitive conceptions of punishment, for which good and evil were involved in one disaster. It specifies the Scripture at one point that everyone is punished for his sins [Gives 31, 29ss] and not to those of other.

.

Such a serious event such as an earthquake, when he puts to the test our solidarity and compassion for the needy and stimulates the search for remedies or defenses from many misfortunes, It can and should be considered as a cross which God sends us for our purification and for the conversion of sinners. You can therefore see in it a sign of his mercy, as we take occasion from it to unite us to Jesus crucified for the salvation of the world.

Many phenomena of a perfect nature created by God but imperfect man-made and therefore stepmother, bring us misfortunes, who are among the painful consequences of original sin, though the Creator wanted to put in them the rules and laws, to which they obey unerringly. But we will enjoy in the future resurrection of a mother nature, which he will have rediscovered harmony with man and the original meaning,ordained by God, of its existence.

Varazze, 29 August 2016

.

________________________

NOTE

[1] In the context, the word "drug" is used as a synonym for heresy, just as drug dealing understood as "peddling heresies"

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

.

.

.

.

.

.

HELL EXISTS AND TODAY overflows MORE THAN EVER OF THE DAMNED: "STRIVE TO ENTER THROUGH THE NARROW DOOR"

.

[…] the Word of God calls us to strive to enter through the narrow door, because «many, I tell you, seek to enter, but they won't succeed ". And as you understand, this Gospel, then that is the only and the true Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ, is very different from that watered down some priests with The Republic e Espresso arm in arm, that instead of reading the works of theology of the great Fathers of the Church read Micromega, that instead of keep on their desks Imitations of Christ, keep us in plain sight of quell'ateo unrepentant books, and thin detractor and desecration of Catholicism, This has always been Umberto Eco.

.

.

.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

Today, Saturday 20 August, the Church celebrates the memory Cistercian abbot Bernard of Clairvaux, born in 1090 and he died in the now remote year 1153. In the pre-festive Mass on Sunday, the liturgy of this twenty-first Sunday in Ordinary Time, It is offering to the People of God this page of the Gospel:

.

During that time, Jesus passed through towns and villages teaching, while he was on his way to Jerusalem. Someone asked him,: "Man, there are few who are saved?». He told them: "Strive to enter through the narrow gate, because many, I tell you, seek to enter, but they will not succeed. When the landlord got up and locked the door, butter, left out, knocking at the door, saying: "Man, sunny!”. But he will answer: "I do not know where you are". And you will say: "We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets". But he will declare: "Oh, I do not know where you are. Depart from me, all ye workers of evil!”. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, you instead driven out. They will come from east and west, from north and south and will recline at table in the kingdom of God. And here, some are last who will be first, and some are first who will be last " [LC 13, 22-30]

.

In 1145 He went up on the Chair of Peter a disciple of St. Bernard of Clairvaux [1090-1153], also named Bernardo, abbot of the Roman monastery of Saints Anastasio and Vincent near the Tre Fontane, born member of the noble family of origin of de Pisan 'Paganelli of Montemagno. The choice of the cardinals was opposed by Bernard of Clairvaux, who saw fit to warn them indicating to them that this was his disciple person very "innocent and simple" and therefore not appropriate for the government of the Church, in serious doctrinal and political situation that was to live in those years. Probably, in its own way "innocent and simple," so he was the future saint and doctor of the Church, if he had not realized that for that very reason the Cardinals chose that candidate, needing at that precise historical moment of a person who is weak, so easily manipulated by criminals who even then enveloped like vultures the sacred papal throne. The Church was in fact beset by serious problems that the previous Councils Pope Eugenius III [1145-1153] they had failed to sedate. The fact is worth mentioning that the Lateran Council of 1123 sanctioned in their precise regulations canons against simony, respect of celibacy by the clergy and the proper ecclesiastical investitures; but everything had remained virtually a dead letter. In 1139 It was celebrated the Second Lateran Council that in its fees again condemned simony, wear and false confessions. Sixty-two years after the pontificate of Eugene III, preceduto dai council Lateranensi testing cited, It was celebrated in 1215 the IV Lateran council, that after the introductory preamble condemns heresy Cistercian abbot Joachim of Fiore. But it is mainly the subsequent disciplinary canons on bishops and priests who leave nothing short of stunned, both for their gravity both for their topical, just as if they were passed between then and now "unnecessarily" VIII centuries. Complete with detailed descriptions of the Council indicates one by one all the main affectations and malvezzi from which the church had to be cleansed [cf. cann. XIV-XIX]. To give only a brief essay of the disciplinary canons of the Fourth Lateran Council, about the bad manners of the clergy, suffice it to mention just one case among the different:

.

"We regret that not only some minor clerics, but even certain prelates, pass half the night in unnecessary and illegal chatter feasts, not to say the least. They then sleep the rest of the night, they wake up only late in the day with the singing of the birds, remain sleepy for the rest of the morning. There are others who celebrate the Holy Mass just four times a year. But there is worse yet: They not even want to assist. And if it happens that sometimes are present when Mass is celebrated, deserted silence of the choir and go out to talk to the laity, immersing at inopportune speeches and not paying any attention to celebrating the sacred mysteries. Absolutely we are forbid these and similar things on pain of suspension, commanding strictly by virtue of holy obedience, that they recite the divine office day and night, as God gives them the, with a zeal that is equal to their devotion " [IV Conc. Years. can. XVII, Trad.. en. in care of the Author].

.

This is to clarify the state in which the Church poured before and then after the election of Eugene III, but especially to clarify how ever, as soon as he was gone up to the sacred throne, Bernard of Clairvaux hastened to send a complimentary good treaty for every Pope specially adapted to him. And now hear what he writes on the free pen Bernardo inspired by the grace of God. To begin with, Bernardo, It invites Eugene III not to delude themselves about who was around ... and does it with these exact words:

.

"Can you show me one that has greeted your election without receiving money or without the hope of receiving? And the more they have professed your servants, the more they want to dominate within the Church ".

.

Words are written about 900 Years ago, but I defy anyone to say that they are not current, Today perhaps more than yesterday, especially then if we add this other brushstroke is written by Saint Bernard that followed to warn Eugene III with this additional recommendation:

.

"Your brother bishops learn from you not to keep around zazzeruti boys or young men provocative. Between the heads covered by the Episcopal mitres it is very sick that bustle of sophisticated hairstyles » [CF. Bernard of Clairvaux, Treaty good for every Pope, Trad.. en. in care of the Author].

.

this warning, sweetened but clear, It is dedicated to St. Bernard of Clairvaux to certain current ecclesiastical, in particular to those diocesan bishops thundering behind the scenes towards me I am saying that ... "the priest from screanzata pen is obsessed with gay clergy and their so-called lobby gay » [cf. WHO]; and after having turned behind these criticisms peevish, they continue undeterred to ordain priests of subjects with overt structurally rooted homosexual tendencies [cf. WHO].

.

As the People of God, we are projected, since the Holy Spirit Pentecost, in an endless journey. This path moves from the present and looks to the future. We can not remain attached to the past that must not pass, nor live buildings immersed in memories past, as do those who typically and incorrectly defines as "traditionalist" Catholics. Of course, we should know our past well, because the work of the past has led to our present; and if we do not run for cover soon, this born of a past that was not always happy, It is likely to adversely affect our future. For as stated George Santayana, thinker of the twentieth century essay: "Anyone who does not know history is condemned to repeat it".

.

I will try to explain with an example: When 40 years ago I was a teenager, before my eyes of thirteen I had anything but an example and model of bishops and priests. At the time,, an appalling mediocrity like today, still it was not even thinkable in Priestly College, let alone in the Episcopal College. Our priests, and the bishops in particular, They were very careful in pointing to the faithful what was good and what was bad, trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, or at least to indicate what was and what was wheat wheatgrass, remembering that one day, weeds, It would be tied in bundles and burned in the fire. Myer explaining carefully that wheat and weeds must sometimes grow together and that weeds can not be eradicated at once, if anything to eradicate this weed you run the risk of tearing together with it also only one good ear of corn; But the same day last harvest, the owner of the field would provide in each case to separate the good seed from the weeds destined to be uprooted and burned [cf. Mt 13, 24-30; 13, 36-43]:

.

"Let them both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers: “First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to burn; but gather the wheat into my barn” » [CF. Mt 13,30].

.

Today, many priests, pass us by in civilian clothes with The Republic e Espresso arm in arm; and their troubling theological deficiencies feel, even though, of the great intellectuals, Attentive readers because of the radical left magazine Micromega. On their desks flaunt books by Umberto Eco and happen to hear them when they speak magnify - even in their homilies - the worst philosophers and sociologists of the nineteenth and twentieth century anti-Christian, all with pernicious habit and above all boasted a display of a culture that unfortunately, de facto, they do not have …

... And so, just us priests established pastors and leaders of the People of God, We began to be often the first to mislead the people of God, teaching for example, that since God is love, at the Rendering forgives everyone and does not condemn anyone. And from our homilies, often used to make clumsy speeches of sociology rather than to proclaim the Gospel, disappeared words like mystery of evil, Satan, punishment, inferno, judgment of God, salvation and eternal damnation ...

.

To little it's worth, I ask for forgiveness from the people of God for those of my confreres who do not announce the Gospel and who have long been derogated from their fundamental task: the salvation of souls, the salvation of souls and their eternal salvation. For as many of you will remember, over the years the Church has made repeated MEA culpa asking forgiveness to all: to the Jews, to Muslims, to the Orthodox, to Protestants, the African animists, to the descendants of the indigenous peoples of Latin America ... in short, to all, own all, less than ai believers of Christ and his faithful servants, ie not a few bishops and priests who in times far remote lived real situations and their white martyrdom within the Church. Indeed, you can be persecuted for the Church, but also in the Church, and they persecuted the Church often suffer harassment very worst of a martyrdom in hatred of the faith which almost always runs out in the space of a few seconds through a shot decided machete or a gunshot gunshot. White martyrdom lasts instead for all existence. And only God knows how cruel and uncontrollable are in the infliction of such martyrdoms priests or often even worse their bishops.

.

Several of those undergoing long white martyrdom They were then elevated to the altars, as in the paradigmatic case of St. Benedict Menni, who was vilified, dishonored and finally dragged into the criminal courts through serious false allegations created a table by brothers, nuns and various church. It deserves incidentally remembers that Benedict Menni was made the subject of an accusation very shameful: It has used violence to a poor demented hospitalized in a psychiatric structures he created, what gave birth to “Semillan case”, of which occupied the Criminal Court of Madrid. The case dragged on in the classrooms by the court 1895 al 1902. After seven years, the event ended with the full acquittal of Benedict Menni and condemnation of his false accusers. Much worse was the smear campaign in the ecclesiastical court at the Holy Office, that came only three years later to declare the total groundlessness of the accusations. Accused and bitterly fought in the Hospitaller Order of St. John of God, by a group of diehard opponents ready for anything, preferred to resign rather than defend the 20 June 1912 from the office of superior general of the Order, to one year and a little more of his election. The incessant and heavy psychological pressure suffered over the years caused him in 1913 a paralysis attack that led to his death on 23 April 1914, at the age of 73 year old. In 1964 the general postulator of the Order opens the beatification process. In 1982 It has declared the heroic nature of his virtues, the 23 June 1985 Pope John Paul II proclaimed him Blessed and 21 November 1999 santo.

.

but yet, come to think, it was easier to proclaim holy, instead say during the beatification ceremony: "Blessed Benedict Menni, we will proclaim Blessed, and at the same time we ask for forgiveness for the evil that religious, religious, priests and bishops their complaisant accomplices and protectors have caused you during your whole existence ". Never! Certain figures is easier beatificarle and canonizzarle, prudently leaving the terrible oppression they suffered well secreted in the files of their beatification and canonization, creating rather below the loving stories of sweet little saints that are suitable to the People of God, of course, not to arouse in it upsets with excessive realism bathrooms, but especially of truth, because it's true, Yes, that "the truth shall make you free" [cf. GV 8], but some master alchemist the clericalese might even believe that "too much freedom", the good People of God, would ultimately give the head. And who inhibits freedom, Always deny the divine truth, to impose the dictatorship of evil likely.

.

We can forget what happened on that of Sicily to Father Luigi Orione, where in 1908 the earthquake in Reggio Calabria and Messina caused about 90.000 dead? Father Luigi Orione came to the aid of the survivors and numerous orphans, and with Father Annibale Maria Di Francia - with whom he will later elevated to the altars in 2004 - They formed the two pillars of future reconstruction. After that terrible tragedy began to arrive from Italy and from abroad, especially by Catholics North America, Canada and Australia, large sums of money that came on quite a few fantasies, mire and large appetites in the local clergy. They were then prevented from two problems at once: robberies by clergy and accommodation by the same grandchildren, family and friends of friends within an operation with charitable sums of money to many zeros. The Holy Pontiff Pius X appointed Father Luigi Orione Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Messina, where for three years he carried out his mission among enormous difficulties and as many enormous suffering. Suffice it to say that the diocesan clergy, finding himself unable to get their hands on great cake of money, contemptuously nicknamed him: "Vatican Commissioner». Nothing, however, were the despise and slander, compared with the attempted poisoning that Father Luigi Orione suffered through a barber hired by his enemies. In 1910, while serving in a very noticed his ministry, attentive first to hinder riding of money dishonest during the reconstruction, when cutting the beard he was infected by the barber with syphilis virus. A few days later, on his study table and working, some anonymous hand deposited a book-tribute, it was a medical book entitled: "How is Syphilis". If anything was needed confirmation of what at that moment it was impossible to trust the local clergy before such economic interests, Father Luigi Orione called in Messina as close several of his fellow employees, all coming from outside and thus quickly nicknamed by local clergy as "foreign colonizers' [Please refer to an old article 2004 his The Catholic Civilization, WHO].

.

It is much easier to take a theologian priest persecuted all his life for being a tireless servant of the Church and defender of the holy Catholic doctrine, ruled and made subject to ostracism within the Church and of ecclesiastical academic pest-ridden world for half a century of modernist heretics, and finally elevate him to the rank of Cardinal ultra octogenarian, because it costs much less, compared to admitting: "We ask forgiveness, because you were right, we made a mistake ". And I will tell: who has accepted some of these targeted purples to wash certain ecclesiastical consciences, often in his own way he was wrong. In their place I would have acted otherwise, for example, answering: the dignity of cardinals, give it to a fifty or a sixty, not to me that I have over eighty years old. All I want is far less: I to ask my forgiveness for all you have done to me in my lifetime. And what I will not ask for me - to which your excuses not interested in anything - I ask only for yourself, for the eternal salvation of your souls, They can not wash or be washed by putting a purple him to a poor man walking towards the ninety, because purple is also dress the whores, but at least they are much more consistent and honest compared to certain ecclesiastical.

.

This is to reiterate that the Church seems to be able to ask forgiveness only to Jews, to Muslims, to the Orthodox, to Protestants, the African animists, to the descendants of the indigenous peoples of Latin America and so on, but not to his sons, least of all his servants devoted and tireless protectors ...

.

The words written by Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, and here quoted at the beginning, today descend more than ever in the divine word of the Gospel of this liturgy of the twenty-first Sunday of Ordinary Time, in which the Word of God does not tell us: “I love without judgment and punishment”. The Word of God, when absolute and exclusive way tells us: "I'm away, truth and life " [cf. GV 14], with those words tells us that he does not tolerate the denial of his way, and the salvific plan of life that he has given us through the mystery of redemption through His incarnation, Death and Resurrection; not tolerate the lie, It does not tolerate a life that does not conform to him and to his announcement. Christ said, in a clear and absolute: I am. He did not say: "There are various ways to reach the truth and my life". And this with all due respect to certain theologians of false ecumenism which imbued with dramatic ignorance do not want to hear even say the word “absolute”, that theology has a specific meaning, not to be confused with the political absolutism, as do many of our modern theologians or modernists. In his I am, Christ thus it presents us with the purity of the absoluteness of faith, not the vagueness of faith, no religious relativism. He says I am, does not state: "I could be, but it is said that it is always I, it could also be Buddhas, Mohammed, Luther ... "

.

The Word of God does not say: "Since I am Infinite Mercy, you can do what you want and how you want, because so much, the reckoning, I forgive all ". The Word of God does not say that "there is no hell", quite the opposite: there recalls the existence over and over again throughout his entire preaching, even putting us on notice that in that place of eternal damnation "will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" [cf. Mt 7,13-14; 8,11; 7,21; 25,31-46. MC 10,43; LC 17,27-30; etc ..].

.

The Word of God does not say that “the devil is an allegory”, or says - as I hear more priests never called by their bishops, or more professors never fired by the Holy See from pontifical universities - that Satan "is a mythic-symbolic translation of the old man's ancestral fears", as he claimed by Karl Rahner and as now claim its poisonous grandchildren now in power. To affirm this is blasphemy and heresy, is poison fed to our faithful, because in that case the first mendacious legends would just those written in the Gospel, where the first miraculous intervention of Jesus Christ is the liberation of one possessed [CF. MC 1, 23-26]. The Gospels tell of how Jesus Christ cast out demons [CF. MC 1,21-28; 5,1-20; 9, 14-29, etc..] and how to give mandate to its apostles to cast out demons in his name [CF. MC 9, 38; 16,17-18; etc.. ], He urges them not certain to teach his people that the Devil is an allegorical legend, because in that case it would follow immediately afterwards another legendary allegory: the mystery of original sin, until the complete de-construction of the deposit of our faith ...

.

This is to say how today more than ever we need to urgently instruct the living members of the People that God has entrusted to us, explaining that the Word of God calls us to strive to enter through the narrow door, because «many, I tell you, seek to enter, but they won't succeed " [CF. LC 13, 22-30]. And as you understand, this Gospel, then that is the only and the true Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ, is very different from that watered down some priests with The Republic e Espresso arm in arm, that instead of reading the works of theology of the great Fathers of the Church read Micromega, that instead of keep on their desks The Imitation of Christ [Imitations of Christ], keep us in plain sight of quell'ateo unrepentant books, and thin detractor and desecration of Catholicism, This has always been Umberto Eco.

.

And if all of you believers of Christ the door will close, for us priests, that much more, and we had received from Christ in gifts of grace and therefore in responsibility, the door will be closer still, because Christ has entrusted to our hands the Holy Mystery of his Body and his Blood; because our people has given his people to guard and feed, not to disperse, least of all to mislead with thoughts and with fashionable thinkers who have always been the denial of Christ the Good Shepherd who is the door of the sheepfold [CF. GV 10, 1-21]. And the meaning of the "sheep's door" should be remembered - or perhaps worse explained out of the blue - to some of our priests who came out after years of "training" by our most holy ones seminars, when the doors of their parish churches attack posters, various leaflets and ads, often even religious. The door of the Church has a theological significance, metaphysical, the door of the Church is the symbol of Christ the Good Shepherd: "I am the door of the sheep" [CF. GV 10, 1-21]. How will thus allow, breed of villains, to put on Christ the Good Shepherd Gate Sheep, posters stuck with pins that advertise dance competitions and social dinners ?

.

Christ God invites us to go through a narrow door, from which many will not be able to pass, because the infinite mercy of God goes hand in hand with his infinite justice, and a divine mercy without justice is not even conceivable; and if someone conceives, then it does not announce the Gospel, but announces another, ie it is not Catholic, but it belongs to another religion, a false religion.

.

From the island of Patmos, 20 August 2016

St. Bernard of Clairvaux, doctor of the Church

.

.

.

PRAYER TO THE VIRGIN OF SAN BERNARDO

[ by the minute 3,55 following ]

.

HTTPS://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkVmum5l_3k

.

.

THE CHALLENGE OF ISLAM TO EUROPE NOT TO PLAY ON THE DIAL pleasantries ALL BUT HOW MUCH ABOUT GOD'S PROBLEM

.

The Koranic theology does not lack in outlining the attributes of the One God, as recognized by the Council itself, even if it is silent on a vision voluntary e fatalist, which it was taken over instead by the former Pope's address in his famous Lectio Magistralis University of Regensburg, and that is at the root of the taxation method and violent in which the habitually Islam spreads the message Koranic.

.

.

.

.

«I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, also you know my Father: from now on you know him and have seen him ".

[GV 14, 6-7]

.

PDF print format article

.

.

Today the attempt Islamic expansionism in Europe in the name of the Koran you are faced with a Europe that is no longer Christian and indeed is characterized by strong atheist or agnostic tendencies, while the Christian world is suffering from a decline, a weakening [1] or a relativization of religious beliefs; the moral conduct of many often deviates from the principles of the Church and the Gospel and sometimes from those of sound natural reason themselves. You are the praise of a faith that, instead of looking for the certainty, cultivates the doubt [2], believing in what you are qualified to dialogue with atheists. Who believes he can say with firmness, clarity and without hesitation one's faith in front of an unbeliever opposing his error, It is considered a violent and fundamentalist, while it is considered "open" and "friendly" are silent, misleads the speech or says their faith, however, even if the opposite view an infidel. The modernists compare the attitude of the first type of Catholics to that of Muslims. Incidentally: to me once a confrere, whose name I will not, He gave the "Taliban". Not to mention the Dominicans who despise metaphysics …

.

The Church in Europe is having to cope with many hostile forces. From outside comes a twofold pressure, a double vise: one part, the pressure of skeptical tendencies, atee, agnostic and materialistic; on the other, the penetration in place for many years on the territory of various countries, especially Germany, France and Belgium, of millions of Muslims, who do not convert to Christianity at all, but jealously preserve and ostentatiously, for example with their public prayer, with their mosques and educational and cultural centers, their beliefs and practices Koranic, without hiding their intent to become a dominant political force.

.

Inside the church, then, and act as a fifty painful division between Lefebvre and modernists, that disturbs and confuses the entire ecclesial body, without the Holy See and the bishops are able to do justice deviations, in a dialogue with each other contenders, and make peace between the two factions, each of which would, in truth, good sides to complement each other. Except that instead each absolutizes its partial view but not both, so that the agreement so far proved impossible.

.

Entering the case of the problem of the relationship with Islam, both Lefebvre, the modernists reject the idea of ​​an evangelization of Muslims; the first by the fact that, Mindful of the innumerable attempts and indeed of the many violence suffered by Christians in past centuries by Muslims, judge the desperate quest; seconds, because they believe the universality and necessity of the Gospel for the salvation, why they consider that it is good to let the Muslims in their faith, in the belief that to be saved with it.

.

To this they are associated with two opposite judgments on Islam. Lefebvrians and modernists reject the Muslims' imposing and violent method of spreading their creed. The Lefebvrians, But, taking into account the attitude of Christ, recognize as right thing threatening eternal punishment to those who do not believe in God, while the modernists reject the idea of ​​a divine punishment because they feel that all may be saved.

.

The Lefebvrians not accept the positive opinion expressed by the Second Vatican Council [3], in particular that Christians and Muslims both worship the one true God, creator of heaven and earth, just and merciful. believe that, in the case of Islam, whether it is a he gave false the fact that Muslims do not recognize the dogma of the Trinity and the Incarnation, and even combat them.

.

The modernists instead accept the judgment of the council, but it does not give importance to the fact that Muslims do not accept those two dogmas, to which the Council, Islam in the dedicated document, does not mention. This indifference of modernists in respect of those dogmas is given by the fact that they themselves, because of their dogmatic relativism, do not consider them necessary for salvation, besides the fact that they do not conceive in the orthodox way. The Lefebvrians, on the contrary, attach great importance to the orthodox view of those dogmas and know that faith in them is necessary for salvation, at least as an implicit faith.

.

If the modernists in pursuit of a secularized modernity, are relativists in terms of dogma and religion, the Lefebvrians, at the opposite, nostalgic of a sacred Christian, find it hard to appreciate the values ​​of other religions, They see them only as a mass of superstitions to be deleted. For the first Islam must be fought. For the latter to be "integrated".

.

Now, when we say Europe, clearly, we mean not only the European Church. Until the eighteenth century, with the French Revolution, It could say that Europe coincided with the European Christianity, though it was already divided by 1648 with the Treaty of Westphalia between Catholics and Protestants. But with the French Revolution, the European Church does not chair more like in the Middle Ages at the helm of the Member, but shares with the new secular states - then especially constitutional monarchies - the leadership of the European peoples, as citizens and as Christians for States for the Catholic and Protestant Churches.

.

Thus the Islamic challenge to Europe's challenge to the Church and civil society. The church, to adequately address this challenge, It must make the contrast between modernists and Lefebvre so primarily to pacify inside. And then we need to see where and how much, in this confrontation with Islam, secular forces are allied to us Catholics and where they can be an obstacle or at least show incomprehension.

.

Among the secular forces there are theistic or deistic, as for example the liberal, Republicans and Masons, of the Enlightenment. There are agnostic, as phenomenalists and empiricists. There is the wide area Marxist atheism, Freudian and positivist, not as acrimonious as before and yet a substantial and dangerous reality, responsible for wide popular diffusion of permissiveness, hedonism and materialism. There are small areas of intellectual phenomenologists, idealists, pantheists and gnostics.

.

Christians and Muslims are certain of God's existence, even if different is the shape of this certainty: reasoned, the first, fideistica the second. Problem is for us Catholics a possible alliance with the least religious fringes of or even atheistic secular world. People tend to feel on this point of faith in God closer to Islam than to the secular world, especially if an atheist [4]. Moreover, another undeniable point of convergence between the Gospel and the Koran and confrontation with humanism land, atheists a pantheist, is the conception we have in common man, composed of soul and body, created by God, but the sinner, object of divine mercy, done for him, yet able to reject Him by free will by disobeying his commands and refusing to worship Him, swell with pride and with deify himself and condemning themselves to hell and then automatically. For the Gospel as the Koran the man who submits to God awaits the resurrection to eternal life at the last day of earth's history with the return of Christ.

.

Not minor the issue of Christian dogma. Of all the religious forces in Europe, only Christian ones, catholic, Orthodox and Protestant, They bear witness to the faith in the Trinitarian mystery and the Incarnation, which in fact constitute the center, the fulcrum and the characteristic peak of Christian religion. The Church has to proclaim and defend itself these fundamental truths of Christianity in Europe is already a Christian time, but now it is influenced by many more or less distant from Christianity doctrines, if not even opposed, and some are contrary to that religion in general.

.

The really effective brake on Islamic in Europe not so much the secular forces, political or other religions, some of which, though close to Christianity as Judaism, do not accept these two dogmas. The decisive brake is the Church, precisely because of the invincible force, Data that Part, with which it removes the pernicious and harmful to Islam poison of centuries hostile and obstinate denial of those sums and divine saving truths for all of humanity, as demonstrated by the whole history of Christianity.

.

This seemingly insurmountable obstacle to the spread of Christianity in the Arab countries and the Middle East, going on for centuries, and indeed the advancement of Islam not only religious but also political, in various parts of the world is a great mystery, if we think of Christ's command to evangelize all peoples and to the countless peoples, also fiercely barbarians and pagans, that during these two thousand years have ended with the welcome and still accept the Christian faith.

.

The Koranic theology does not lack in outlining the attributes of the One God, as recognized by the Council itself, even if it is silent on a proactive vision and fatalistic, which it was taken over instead by the former Pope's address in his famous Lectio Magistralis University of Regensburg [cf. WHO], and that is at the root of the taxation method and violent with which Islam habitually spreads the message Koranic. Instead, what is incomprehensible and perhaps inexcusable is like after fourteen centuries that Christian theologians have clarified and proved that the Triune God Christian is the same One God worshiped by Muslims and Jews, even the faithful of Islam oppose the Trinitarian doctrine of the Incarnation and the same coarse objections of the Koran.

.

The Christian God is not "another God", as some say, than Koranic. It is the same one God, with the difference that, as Christians, we know it better [as a Trinitarian] thanks to the revelation made by Christ, while Muslims have strayed from the mistakes of the Quran. The name "Allah" is the same Hebrew root of The, which means "God".

.

I'm sorry to have to contradict in what even the wise observations of Cardinal Giacomo Biffi, stating that it is not true that the Koran would present a concept of humanity "different" from our. Instead, it is the same concept of "man" [animal rationale] tract by natural reason. The difference is that we Christians propose an ideal man "son of God" in Christ, something that can only be deemed impossible Islamic humanism because of the fact that, denying that Jesus is the Son of God, It is consequently apparent that the man can not be a "son of God".

.

But the Church can not and must not give up even announce to Muslims the truth about Christ and the Holy Trinity. Why Muslims should be an exception? They are exempt or exempt from believing in Christ? They do not have sufficient intelligence? They are not rational beings like everyone else? Their mindset It is not suitable? They are saved with the Quran? But why then they want to impose on the whole world? Mohammed has perhaps had a mandate from God is more credible than that of Christ? They have come to Christ the most diverse peoples, the more uncouth, the barbarians, the superstitious, the most uncivilized. And there should or could have access to Christ the Muslim populations? For what reason?

.

Christ was no exception to anyone. Even they can not be saved unless thanks to Christ. similar case is that of the Jews, which indeed six centuries before the Qur'an reject the divinity of Christ, her behalf del monotheism. But at least the Jews in the Old Testament, while Muslims have the Koran, containing an assurance from God of his revelation to Muhammad: a collection among other unconnected and uncoordinated short chapters, with theological teachings, moral admonitions and warnings, often mixed with exemplary stories from the Old Testament [the Sure], reminders and reprimands made to Jews and Christians, with many repetitions, and the addition of improbable legends and mythological characters.

.

Insistent and peremptory in the Koran is the claim that there is only one God, "Creator, wise, clemente, Almighty, Provident, right, merciful and rewarder ", with the caveat that you must not associate other gods and is therefore a sign of blasphemy and polytheism think that he has a son, God to equal Him, obvious reference to the Christian belief in the divinity of Christ, for which, however,, "The son of Mary ', the Koran also words of praise. But the eschatological prophet is Muhammad.

.

The Koranic opposition to the deity of Christ It is expressed in very simple terms, However that transparently reveal the terrible misunderstanding. Muhammad did not conceive of the generation except in biological terms, so from his point of view he is absolutely right when he says that God can not have a child, and because He is pure Spirit and is why admitting a God son would mean to admit another God ["Son"] next to God "the Father", which would fall into polytheism.

.

Mohammed does not include that the generation in God must be understood in an analogical sense as an emanation spiritual, as Jesus said to be "released" from the Father, as the thought emanating from the intellect, precisely because Christ is the Thought, the Logos of the father. this enactment, then it is not the production of a child in a biological sense that bait from the essence of the generator, but it remains within the divine essence. For Mohammed admit two divine persons, God the Father and God the Son, would mean to admit two gods. He does not understand that the Father and Son in God are the same and only God. He does not understand that they are distinct as they are distinct between them subsistent relations, like thebe-father It is distinct from 'being-son. subsistent relations because l 'being-Father and the father, and l 'being-Son is the Son. And the one and the other are God.

.

Mohammed does not know the concept of reaching divine person because he can not get rid of the concept of human person, for which each person corresponds one individual nature. Therefore do not include such a single divine nature can match three people, because he can not conceive of the divine person as relationship subsisting. In fact the person in general is a subsistent spiritual. Only that, while in the case of the human person the subsistent is a substance or nature, in the case of the divine person, the subsistent is a relationship [being-Father-Son and be].

.

Finally Muhammad could not admit the divinity of Christ, because he could not admit that one divine person [son] could have due nature, a human and a divine, as he called the Council of Chalcedon in 451, proprio quella Chalcedon, a few centuries later would be Islamized by Muslims [cf. the initial part of the article Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo, WHO]. Muhammad was worried Christology to avoid pantheism, namely the deification. Jesus could not be God, because this would entail, according to Muhammad, confused man with God, idolizing a man, "Associate to God another god", as he puts it.

.

The same concern is found in Schillebeecx, for which he says that "Jesus is God" imply pantheism. This is why he prefers to say that "God is in Christ". However, the divinity of Christ is not to be conceived even in the manner of Rahner, which he has no difficulty in admitting, but only because it defines man letting God in his essence: "What he is man, you can not say except stating that to which he aims, and from which it is seen " (= Dio) [5].

.

To conceive and to accept in faith the dogmas of the Trinity and the Incarnation it is not necessary to understand the subtle metaphysical explanations of St. Thomas in QUESTION, but it is enough to understand the notion catechetical also to children. Even the most sublime theology remains in his mysteries of faith infinitely below the comprehensive understanding, and on the other hand, already the mind of the child, enlightened by the Holy Spirit, he's able to know Mystery and make source of eternal life. So the Muslims have no excuse to judge absurd or blasphemous Christian dogmas. Into questionable, they approach with humility and trust to the Gospel in its interpretation by the Church, avoid heresies [per es. Luther, Küng, Rahner e Schillebeeckx] and will get the immense saving benefits, that many other peoples in these two thousand years have already obtained.

.

So what are the possibilities of the Church for the defense of Europe? The Church can ally itself with the Enlightenment of Human Rights for the defense of European civilization and religious freedom against Islamic religious totalitarianism. The Church can be found in the Islamic Monotheism and natural religion of the Enlightenment [Side] allies in the defense of religion against atheism. Christians, Catholics and Protestants are called to defend the value of the Christian revelation against Islam, Enlightenment rationalism and atheism. In this they are defending Europe's Christian roots.

.

Christianity weak, relativistic, indifferentista, gooder and modernist, as for example the one promoted by Schillebeeckx, It is not able to withstand the pressure or threatening Islam imposition, but it is expected that in the case that Islamism purchases tomorrow political power, It will dissolve and be absorbed Islam, as it has always happened in Christian countries invaded by Islam.

.

The same applies to the idealistic Christianity, pledges, pseudomistico Gnostic and Hegelian origin, as for example the one rahneriano. Here Christ is not God in the sense of God transcendent common to Christianity and Islam, but it is nothing but the last summit and the ' "horizon" of human transcendence, being every man mainly and continuously "in grace"; which, for Islam and true Christianity, It is blasphemy.

.

I end with a conclusion semiseria, despite the seriousness of the matter, assuming an Islamic invasion of Europe. If until now the bishops were not able to prevent this abomination among the faithful laps of human confusion with God, We will think Muslims, once the mayor of Rome will be a follower of Muhammad, because you can get insurance by the modernists, accustomed to the more perfect chameleon, that the Gospel, according to the most advanced exegesis, denies the divinity of Christ.

.

As for Rahner's denial of God's punishments and the existence of the damned in hell, the Muslims, with effective pastoral method, with quotations from the Koran and the Bible, re-introduce the traditional Christian belief in hell.

.

It can be expected that even the trendiest parts of Enlightenment-Masonic, given that the Masons in the end is more interested in this life than to that of the beyond, before the Islamic threat, they will be ready, albeit only for convenience, to embrace Islam, as it happened in the sixties to the philosopher André Mason Guenon, albeit in its esoteric form.

.

A similar trend applies to areas atheist. Since the atheist pointing his whole life on welfare in this world, it is expected that tomorrow, before the Islamic threat, It will be converted, for convenience to the Koran. emblematic and famous example is that of the French Marxist philosopher Roger Garaudy in the seventies.

.

If Muslims were to increase their power in Rome, dad, on the advice of Cardinal Walter Kasper, It could take between employees in the Secretariat of State a few Muslim scholar. Mass could be integrated with the addition of Muhammad's quote in the Roman Canon and some verses of the Koran, and so it might be open to all, also to Muslims, with the faculty participants to believe or not believe in transubstantiation, or the Mass as Sacrifice of Christ. Moreover, already the modernists do not believe more.

.

Alberto Melloni could be commissioned by the Holy See to propose a project of episcopal collegiality, that would include a representative of the Islamic mullahs, while the Community of Sant'Egidio could choose between Islamic immigrants those whom it deems suitable to be elected to the city council of Rome.

.

The ORP could organize pilgrimages to Mecca or Medina. Every Christian should know the Koran, to the point that, if it were to be questioned about the sayings of the Prophet by Islamist agents, is able to respond, in order to save his life.

.

Religious instruction [Sharif] and control about the true faith [Koranic] they would be entrusted to the police offices under the control of the imams. It would have abolished the right to religious freedom and would return to the state religion, which, however, this time it would be the Islamic religion.

.

While the law would leave unpunished outrages upon the Christian religion, the insult to the figure of Muhammad could be punished by death. They would be so punished with death homosexuals. The government officials could benefit from a harem. The crucifixes in public places may be replaced by the half-moon of Islam.

.

If Muslims were to increase their political power in Europe, you may come to the fashion shows in Paris presentassero the performance of different types of burqa, according to the traditional French creativity. There would be no more the anguish, complicated and embarrassing problem of divorced and remarried, since it would have allowed the simplest and practice polygamy.

.

He would return the woman to be submissive man, so that he no longer has around him a dangerous competitor, rival or antagonist and lend itself better to satisfy his sexual cravings. Adulterous women would be punished by stoning, if anything, with a slight reduction of our population.

.

At this point, There could however be a risk that Lefebvre They take to the bush or to turn into a terrorist secret society against Muslims and Christians traitors, ie rehabilitating the death penalty for heretics.

.

Only true Christians, in full communion with the Church and with the Pope, convinced and courageous, holiness lovers, as it has always happened, resist the Islamic arrogance, if need be to martyrdom. All the others, for which all values ​​are all questionable or negotiable, They will be ready to barter them with Islam to save your skin.

.

Those of "faith" doubting the Cardinal Martini and the interlocutors to Cardinal Walter Kasper, and those that solve the Christology in mythology as Archbishop Bruno Forte, or the fat ones prophets to Enzo Bianchi, They will be the first to pay tribute to the Koran. The only ones to save the dignity and freedom of man, Europe and the Church, they will be, as it has always happened, the Christians, and above all the saints and martyrs fully faithful to the Gospel and to the Church.

.

Varazze, 15 August 2016

Solemnity of the Assumption of Mary into Heaven

.

_____________________

NOTE

[1] Supporters of "weak thought", from them strongly supported, Gianni Vattimo, They found a positive thing.

[2] See for example,. the atheist who, according to Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, continuously it lies in the consciousness of the believer to challenge his convictions of faith. It's this one, for Martini, It would be the true faith.

[3] In our age, n.3

[4] See how concerned the Council speaks of atheism, while it has no difficulty in recognizing that we and the Muslims worship one and the same God, Known though in different ways and also contrasting.

[5] Foundations of Christian Faith, p.215.

.

.

____________

Dear Readers and Dear Faithful People of God.

We are pleased to inform you that from 1 January of the current year to date, 16 August, The Island of Patmos It exceeded 4.000.000. of visits.

Every so often remind you that we also, to spread the faith and Catholic doctrine, “we are not funded by the Emir of Qatar nor Saudi Arabia“. Our work and site management of this online magazine is supported by our increasingly, entirely, with your offers.

If you can and if you please remind us and our apostolic work, using the convenient and secure Paypal system found at the bottom right on home-page.

Thank you!

.

.

.

.

.