IN THE LIVING ROOM OF FABIO FAZIO, ARCHBISHOP VINCENZO PAGLIA CONFIRMS HIS IDIOT BROTHER OF DON ABBONDIO

.

The Holy Father Francis really said the phrase "who am I to judge a gay" in the way that Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia intends it, speaking not like the President of the Pontifical Academy of Life, but like any Nichi Vendola?

.

Author
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

.

satirical representation of The Betrothed

He Prof. Luigi Manconi and S.E.. Mons. Vincenzo Paglia they put the book to the press The meaning of life. Dialogue between a religious and a little believer. The 18 April the two authors were guests in the living room of the biased Fabio Fazio, excellent war machine of the left radical chic.

.

Fabio Fazio is really tender when he smiles naively, pretending embarrassments and blushes worthy of a girl in her first menstruation, while Luciana Littizzetto, ferocious as a hungry hyena, it tears apart the Catholic Church and Christian sentiment with mockery. Both - needless to say - take shelter behind the finger of the right to satire: shy girl and hungry hyena.

.

Dialogue with non-believing scholars it can be very important and constructive. Initially, Vincenzo Paglia, does not start badly, however, he begins to get lost after the first few bars, and then quickly get lost, completely. From this bleak television host, a subject emerges who tries to meet the interlocutor in a truly disheartening way, showing in concrete facts that they are afraid to say the very things that should be said. Example: before an objection such as "In the event of a serious illness, the last decision, whether to die or live, it must be mine ", the Archbishop President from the Pontifical Academy for Life, cannot answer: "The important thing is that the patient is not left alone". It is a statement worthy of a romantic nun who is convinced that she can solve the tragedies of life and death by stroking the hand of the dying person. Something else would have been the question to be made, but Vincenzo Paglia evaded it without answering a fundamental question: a patient can ask the state to be killed, without anyone being able to give him any kind of hope just because he has decided so?

.

The reality of the facts is that Vincenzo Paglia is a limited little man not able to handle dialogue of this kind, all the more to a live television broadcast. Its serious flaw is that it tends excessively to distort the essence of Catholic faith and morality in order to meet those who claim the right not to take Catholic faith and morals into the least consideration. We can, indeed we must dialogue with everyone, but always keeping firm points, because if in some cases it is good to stand out in others we are required to distance ourselves and divide ourselves from certain interlocutors who try to impose ideas on life, ethics and morals which are totally unacceptable for Catholic faith and sentiment.

.

I try to clarify everything better with an example: In the 2000, when he came out there Declaration Dominus Iesus in which the exclusive concept of the salvific uniqueness of Christ God is reaffirmed, at a Door to door directed on the First Rai Channel by Bruno Vespa, the Dominican theologian Daniel Ols was invited. The then president of the Italian Jewish Communities was present in the studio, Tullia Zevi, who already knew little and badly about Jewish culture and theology, let alone the Catholic one. Despite his controversy, he claimed that that declaration marked in his opinion "a great step back in time after the Second Vatican Council" (!?). The Dominican theologian became animated and graciously told her in a dry and decisive way: "Lady, i'm sorry, but I can't sell off and debase the foundations of my faith to please her ".

.

The style of this Dominican master, French by birth and family but in fact more Roman than the Romans, he was an illuminating model for me when years later I found myself, as a presbyter and theologian, to speak on issues that are not particularly easy to deal with in a parterre television during a live broadcast, with very short response times and the presence of specialized interlocutors to divert the discourse to prevent speaking to those who dared to raise issues deemed unacceptable by the dictatorship of the politically correct.

.

At a certain point Fabio Fazio throws this appetizing question to Luigi Manconi:

.

«[…] there is also the individual choice of the sphere of sexuality, it is a theme that is dealt with very clearly. Also here, I don't think sexual orientation really agrees with you ".

.

The scholar responds promptly:

.

«[…] It must be said that the Catholic Church, ecclesial pastoral care, thanks also to Pope Francis, he has made enormous progress. And yet the Catechism of the Catholic Church still bears the affirmation that homosexuality is an expression of sexual disorder. Then, the great openness of the Church towards homosexuals essentially risks perfecting a serious misunderstanding, that is, basically I welcome homosexuals as long as they do not act homosexual, that is, I welcome homosexuals only if they perform chastity ... that is, what emerges is not just a legal question. Same-sex marriage, to understand each other, it is a matter of substance and concerns the very concept of love and pleasure, this is the very fascinating knot ... ".

.

Pay close attention: a few words Luigi Manconi carries out a work of total destructive devastation that separates morality from pastoral care and the Church from the Supreme Pontiff. On the one hand he praises and exalts the Reigning Pontiff, on the other hand he attacks the Catechism which he presents as unthinkable in actuality. Fabio Fazio does not linger and intervenes with a series of statements disguised as questions:

.

"Real distances, however not surmountable, I think, from any point of view. And it could only be so. Let's say that the paths that are taken to shorten these distances are paths that mark, to put it right, the tremor of fear, in the sense that there are no easy choices in any way and there are no easy positions in any way. But, Monsignor, I think I can say that the issue of self-determination is fundamental, that is, the positions diverge when it comes to talking about issues such as euthanasia, sexual orientations, abortion, in which precisely what we call self-determination comes into play ".

.

At this point Vincenzo Paglia manifests the best of its limitation, proving that he was not even able to grasp the destructive splits made by Luigi Manconi, while the interviewer took care to pack him a poison puff that the President of the Pontifical Academy for Life swallows without even chewing, through this response:

.

«I would be careful to reflect on this issue of self-determination, which is a word also linked to freedom. there, here the crux is: but we, we are truly free in an absolute sense? We are disconnected from others? For me it is not like that, we are all united. Our every gesture is always a social gesture, always requires a relationship with the other and the covid showed us this in a dramatic way: we put on the masks, we have a distance, not only to defend ourselves but to defend others as well. In this sense I said, in our dialogue with Luigi, that self-determination to freedom is obvious that it is a founding value, but freedom must always be linked to fraternity and equality, if we want to resume the triad of the French Revolution. And in this the line of charity, solidarity, or Pope Francis would say "of universal brotherhood", I think it is a line that we must fully resume on all fronts ".

.

Such an answer is worse than raising the white flag from the trenches, because in war, the deed of surrender, it has its own deep dignity, while the prostitution of those who indulge in all the worst whims of the customer without feeling pleasure and without being paid, he has no dignity, since he does not even do it for pleasure or for money, but only out of pure and gratuitous servility aimed at the satisfaction of others. To understand this unsuccessful dialogue that arises from the incapacities and limitations of Vincenzo Paglia, it would be enough to think of the square of opposti, or logical, by Michele Psello: the opposite propositions will meet each other if desired, but the contradictory ones are not. This is why Vincenzo Paglia proved unable to carry on a dialogue of this type, not failing to arouse embarrassment in all of us, Catholic priests and theologians, through the use of categories worthy of the most seasoned Freemason, instead of shepherds taking care of souls. Here then is that the dialectic is dragged once again into the political struggle and the annihilation of the adversary, something very clear to Professor Luigi Manconi, unknown instead to Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia who launches into a continuous gurgling of clichés and third-rate pastoralisms, ignoring even the foundations of those philosophical and theological categories which should support a Christian thought.

.

Having then magnified the cardboard idol of the French Revolution to please the ultra secularists at all costs, marked the apotheosis of Vincenzo Paglia's objective idiocy, unaware of the principles of freedom, equality and fraternity are the foundations of Christian ethics, not an invention of the Enlightenment and much less of the French Revolution, which was the largest and most violent bloodbath of modernity. These three gospel principles were then taken, twisted and transformed into anti-Christian elements, while the blood ran in rivers under the guillotines. In short, what history did Vincenzo Paglia study, if he has studied it? No one has ever told him that the French Revolution culminates with Robespierre's period of terror, with the innocent convicted and killed on the basis of simple accusations, but above all that the great fruit it produced was Napoleon Bonaparte? Just so: cut off the head of a king who came from at least a thousand-year-old lineage, the French placed the emperor's crown on a small Corsican corporal, who then put it in his head by himself, he was so arrogant. These, they are the historical fruits of the French Revolution, all the rest are false historians and legends created at the table during the nineteenth century by liberal enlighteners and Freemasons. Well I fear that poor Vincenzo Paglia ignores all this, in the same way that perhaps the person who has placed him in the delicate role he covers ignores him.

.

After having hit the mark, Fabio Fazio takes the reins to lead the donkey and finally tie it where the owner wants, continuing like this:

.

«Naturally I turn the question to Monsignor Paglia and I just extend it. He does not find that - what Professor Manconi was saying - can be summed up like this: there has always been an excess of attention, long since, by the Church, with respect to sexuality, that I distinguish this, which Manconi then summarized perfectly in this objection, is effectively surpassed by the reality of the facts and by human nature?»

.

Now tied like a donkey to the stake chosen for him, Vincenzo Paglia is now literally addicted to the desire to please at all costs and whatever it costs, until giving an answer that seems packaged and then came out of the mouth of Nichi Vendola:

.

«First of all, let's go in order, the theme of marriage has always been clear, marriage is between a man and a woman. Then, that there may be other cohabitations of another nature this is obvious and what Pope Francis said with great clarity is enough for me on the subject of homosexuality: “Who am I to judge him?”. So in this sense it is a dimension that must be recovered and certainly every homophobia must be fought decisively. As for the question she was asking, we know that the relationship between the Church and sexuality has never been linear, in fact it is true that at times there has been an identification between sexuality and sin and vice versa and this has brought a lot of damage […]»

.

The Pope Francis I, who, as I have written and explained several times, is not a polyglot like his Supreme Predecessor John Paul II was and who does not have a particularly good command of the Italian language, but how presumptuous and stubborn as few, he insists on talking to journalists off the cuff, in any case, he enunciated a profoundly and obviously Catholic concept. Let's go in order, first he began by saying: "If a person is gay and seeks the Lord and has good will" - this premise is of no small importance - "who am I" continues the Supreme Pontiff "to judge him?». Then he goes on stating: "The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that these people must not be discriminated against but welcomed". To those who then the message was not clear adds: “The problem is not having these tendencies, they are brothers, the problem is lobbying […]».

.

This is the whole sentence pronounced in response to the reporter from the Supreme Pontiff Francis during one of his return flights to Rome. It's been years that unfortunately, uselessly, in my articles, video-lessons and conferences, I explain what the Supreme Pontiff really said with that sentence: above all that welcoming the sinner who seeks God is the founding mission of the Church, that does not reject anyone, starting with homosexual people. Moreover, none of us, starting from the Successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter, he can read and judge the conscience of a man, that God alone can read and, above all, to judge. Hence the obvious statement consistently and theologically Catholic: "Who am I to judge?». To follow with the call to the lobbies which is equivalent to saying: the problem is not having these tendencies, but to pass them through the social and political activism of gay lobbies as well. Which is to say: the problem, for the Church which must always welcome the sinner, it is not having these tendencies; the problem is sin, or rather the lobbies that would demand acceptance and legitimation not of the sinner, but of sin. And the Church will never be able to sanctify sin, even if all the lobbies of this world claim it and demand it.

.

Unfortunately, the phrase "who am I to judge?"?» torn from its articulated context, ended up on the banners of Gay Pride between the cries of crazy queers masquerading as nuns in fishnet stockings and stilettos. So the Supreme Pontiff did not say this the same way he did, to quote another billboard from Gay Pride, when St. Augustine Bishop and Doctor of the Church says "love and do what you want", by no means does he mean that a boy can get on all fours with another boy who works behind him. This badly extrapolated Augustinian expression, it is inserted in a commentary on the First Letter of St. John, in which, amare, it means to conform, through human freedom, our will to God's will. This means "love and do what you want", to do fully the will of God, source of eternal love. It does not mean getting on all fours with a boy who works behind you and with everything Gay Pride praising "love and do what you want".

.

I refuse to comment on this confused anthology of Vincenzo Paglia, to the same extent that I would refuse to see and then comment on a porn movie. The latter is linked to an expression of the great philosopher and theologian of the twentieth century Cornelius the carpenter, which indicated certain subjects such as Porn-theologians from the Porn-theology. there, Vincenzo Paglia is a genuine pornocrat when he claims:

.

«[…] it is true that at times there has been an identification between sexuality and sin and vice versa and this has caused a lot of damage. In reality, however, a more serene relationship is emerging […]».

.

By stating this you are practically apologizing to the ultra-secularists if the Church, for a long time, has counted lust among the Seven Deadly Sins. Also for this I I refuse to comment on the stupid and reckless words of this little man, that for sure, a bishop and doctor of the Church such as Sant’Alfonso Maria de ’Liguori, considered the father of Catholic morality, he would have literally beaten him up. Why this, at the bottom of, Vincenzo Paglia deserves: to be beaten like the merchants in the temple.

.

Respect for the truth requires us to conclude by remembering to all affected by chronic anti-bergoglism that Vincenzo Paglia the Holy Father wanted him to be a bishop saint now John Paul II, with Cardinal Camillo Ruini that this appointment supported it by accepting the pious suggestions of the Community of Sant’Egidio. All this took place in the 2000, while the one that some have taken the habit to indicate as the greatest theologian of the twentieth century, he was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then risen to the sacred throne. And under the pontificate of Benedict XVI, the good Vincenzo Paglia thrived for eight years, doing endless damage in the Diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia, where by the way left a deficit for tens of millions of euros and a fresco in the cathedral church which seems to be the representation of an orgy in a gay club in Testaccio. Having said this, it is good to clarify that the Supreme Pontiff Francis I, who also gave wisdom to be extraordinary in choosing the wrong people, however, the responsibility for having chosen Vincenzo Paglia cannot be attributed. Because the fault lies entirely with the Holy Father saint now and of the greatest theologian of the twentieth century, Benedict XVI.

.

From the island of Patmos, 23 April 2021

.

.

TO OPEN THE VIDEO OF THE FULL INTERVIEW, CLICK HERE

.

.

Dear Readers,

we need you, read WHO

Thank you!

.

.

.

put

on the Facebook page of Edizioni L’Isola di Patmos, which you can open by clicking on the logo below:

.

.

Visit the pages of our book shop WHO and support our editions by purchasing and distributing our books.

.

.

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

payable to Editions The island of Patmos

IBAN IT 74R0503403259000000301118
in this case, send us an email warning, because the bank
It does not provide your email and we could not send you a
thanks [ isoladipatmos@gmail.com ]

.

.

.

.

.