I CAN'T BE SILENT: THE DAY WHEN CRIMINAL LAW DISCOVERED THAT IT WAS BORN IN THE SACRESTY

He who remains silent cannot affirm with systematic enthusiasm: «modern criminal law - of which, moreover, canon law is a precursor in many aspects […] - distinguishes between the fact and the responsibility".

—Hypatia's cogitatory—

.

.

I'm asking for a friendly cat, this time not from the city but with a fair amount of legal reading behind him, who asks whether the entire manual should really be updated to adapt it to the latest discovery of those who cannot remain silent and who for this reason affirms with systematic enthusiasm: «modern criminal law - of which, moreover, canon law is a precursor in many aspects […] - distinguishes between the fact and the responsibility" (cf.. who).

Now, the cat in question, who did not attend either the Alma Mater Studiorum or the Lateran University, but it still distinguishes, with a certain obstinacy of times gone by, between common law, Roman law and modern codifications, he asks if he missed something: if Cesare Beccaria, Ludwig Feuerbach and the entire modern criminal law construction must be reread as an appendix of the ecclesiastical forum, perhaps waiting for an amended reprint of the manuals, or whether it is not better to distinguish between historical contributions and systematic genealogies, avoiding easy enthusiasms of fatherhood.

Because it is one thing to recognize that medieval canon law, starting from the great Bolognese Glossators, has affected certain institutions such as imputability, intention, procedure; it is another thing to attribute to it a paternity function, even more so if you even try to mock between the lines other jurists.

The use of the category of «forerunner» even when attenuated by vague formulas such as "in many respects", ends up suggesting a systematic continuity that the history of law does not allow us to support regarding what arises within the crisis of the confessional state and the legal development of the modern age, as if the history of law were a straight line and not a complex stratification.

The cat, confused but not completely clueless, it is therefore limited to a simple question, formulated with due feline prudence: if this is really the principle, perhaps it would not be appropriate to warn the law faculties before they continue to teach the history of criminal law in a way that is now hopelessly outdated, also suggesting the wise reading of the pearls of wisdom of those who cannot remain silent? We must therefore take note of a fact: if the criterion is the "forerunner" one, then modern criminal law was born in the sacristy.

This world full of "unsolved", as those who cannot remain silent like to repeat …

From the island of Patmos, 30 April 2026

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers, this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our Bank account in the name of:

Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome – Vatican

Iban code: IT74R0503403259000000301118

For international bank transfers:

Codice SWIFT: BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff,

the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message: isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

THE RIGHT TO INSULT AND THE PROHIBITION OF BEING CRITICIZED

We don't want to compare an irrelevant nonsense, such is a son who mistreats his mother, compared to a priest who after a polemical debate is sued by an LGBT activist and for whom, to the logical rigor of he who cannot remain silent, life imprisonment and maximum security regime pursuant to art. should be requested. 41-bis, subject to excommunication and dismissal from the clerical state?

- Church news -

.

Author
Ivano Liguori, Ofm. Cap.

.

PDF print format article

 

.

In the age of culture hip-hop e, in particular, in music rap we know a methodology for making fun of and mocking the opponent made of songs, of rhymes and lyrics that are passed away social. We're talking about “Dissing”, abbreviation of the English term “disrespecting” (disrespect).

(© The Mirror, 2014)

Between the serious and the facetious, the Dissing it stands between play and provocation, a skirmish between world abilities rap and cultural quips social. Often, however, the "Dissing” reveals itself as a means of making people talk about themselves, to advertise or advertise, to escape from anonymity and make yourself known; to free themselves from the label of "loser" and to enter the Olympus of those who count. Many "Dissing” have brought undeniable advantages in terms of visibility and notoriety to people around the world rap e pop, to the point of also touching other aspects of public life, so we also witnessed “Dissing” between political exponents or from the world of television and cinema.

Even in the world of digital Catholicism, let's include those who mock and invective Modus Operandi usual to attack those who are not to his liking and who do not align with his personal vision of the Catholic world. And "Dissing” much more malevolent and radical that has lost the note of playfulness and skirmish between equals (whose value and respect is recognised) to clothe itself with all that perversity and insolence of the worst clerical resentment which should be promptly removed, under penalty of being seriously entangled.

There is a now sadly well-known character «whose name it is merciful and wise to keep silent» (cf.. The Name of The rose, 1986), because you just need to read it to recognize it: aggressive language, judgments without appeal, labels handed out generously to anyone who doesn't fit his mold. It is a subject that cannot be kept silent, or as Saint Augustine states in his Letter 23 the 392: I can not remain silent (I can't keep silent). This is why he writes a lot, always hits, it spares no one: priests, bishops, cardinals, but above all journalists. Anything can become a target. Every verbal attack is justified in the same way: frankness, justice, freedom of speech, defense of the faith. There is no measure, nor respect for the opponent, nor distinction between criticism and insult: everything flows into the same register, that of systematic and repeated aggression.

It's not an excess, but a method. Language is no longer useful for understanding reality, but to reduce it and bend it: a word replaces an argument, a label an analysis, a liquid formula a person. It requires no expertise or verification, but only safety and repetition. And this is precisely why it works in the digital ecosystem: there speed matters more than precision and impact more than truth.

This language doesn't build anything: does not clarify, does not distinguish, it doesn't open spaces, but it simplifies and closes, transforming reality into a sequence of targets. More than what he says, this character is recognizable by what he avoids: the real comparison. And here the decisive point emerges: does not tolerate being contradicted. You don't need an attack, a documented denial or calm criticism is enough. At that point everything changes. Whoever insulted until a moment ago presents himself as a victim; those who delegitimized everyone report being delegitimized; those who spoke without limits now demand protection. The reversal is immediate and systematic.

You can see it clearly even when facts enter into the discussion, for example when he accuses and incites third parties to accuse a priest dedicated to journalistic activity of having been sued years ago for defamation by an LGBT activist, However, the matter is awaiting trial at the appeal court. At the same time, But, is capable of tearing his clothes and declaring himself highly aggrieved if someone replies to him that in a provision of the Supreme Court of Cassation, relating to a dispute he brought against his own parents, dragged to the final stage of trial - after having lost at first instance and on appeal -, the judge of legitimacy writes:

"there is no evidence of the alleged mistreatment suffered by the complainant while a trial is underway for the same crime against him for actions committed against his mother" (cf.. pag. 3, see who).

However, it may be that for the one who cannot remain silent, a lawsuit brought by an LGBT activist for defamation in the press and currently awaiting the appeal judgment, is much more serious than a judge of cassation who writes in an order that a trial is underway against him for mistreatment of his mother. We don't want to compare an irrelevant nonsense, such is a son who mistreats his mother, compared to a priest who after a polemical debate is sued by an LGBT activist and for whom, to the logical rigor of the one who cannot remain silent and of the unfortunate people who give him credence, life imprisonment and ex-maximum security regime should be requested art. 41-bis, subject to excommunication and dismissal from the clerical state?

It's always the same pattern depicted in a previous article dedicated to the psychology of the malignant narcissist (see who): those who attack pretend to appear as victims. As long as the word proceeds in only one direction, the system holds up, as long as reciprocity does not take over, because you can strike a word, but don't be put, with the same word, in the face of its own evident inconsistencies. So people attack and then report having been attacked; he exposes himself and then complains about being exposed; you strike and then you invoke protection; you declare that you have been mistreated by your mother and you find yourself before a judge who, far from falling into the trap of this inversion, he writes in an order that proceedings are underway against his son, as it was he who mistreated his mother and not vice versa. Ordinary inconsistency? No, it is a system perfectly coherent in its logic: absolute freedom for oneself, absolute limit for others.

When this dynamic is put to the test, the comparison disappears. We don't go into the merits, the arguments are not answered: you change plan. And so the question is no longer what is true or false, but who has the right to speak. The truth is not refuted: it is circumvented and manipulated if necessary. This shift has a definite effect: brings attention from the content to the person. It doesn't matter what is said, but who says; not the correctness of an argument, but the legitimacy of those who pronounce it. The discourse thus becomes impervious to any verification.

At this point a further step is taken. We are no longer limited to the word: reports are used, complaints and formal actions aimed at platforms or other subjects, not to protect a right that is actually violated, but to hit the interlocutor in any way. Tools created to guarantee protection are thus bent to a different function: do not clarify, but discourage; don't defend, but create pressure; do not ascertain, but wear out through reiteration. You don't have to be right: it is sufficient to activate the mechanism. The mere fact of forcing the other to defend himself already produces a result: time taken away, energy consumed, continuous pressure.

We are no longer in the midst of controversy, but in that of mafia-type intimidating dynamics. The confrontation is replaced by the attempt to prevent it, the response from pressure, the dialectic circumvented rather than addressed. At this level it becomes clear that we are not faced with someone who defends the faith, but to someone who uses religious language as a violent instrument of personal affirmation. I'm not interested in clarifying, but prevail; do not convince, but take up space; do not seek the truth, but control the narrative.

This also produces a broader effect. Who reads, especially if less trained, tends to internalize the schema: if those who speak like this are not contradicted, then he must be right; if he uses absolute tones, then he has certainties; if he attacks everyone, then he defends something. This is how an aggressive dynamic transforms into apparent authority: not because it is founded, but because it is continuous. The insult becomes ordinary language, the delegitimization method, the conflict system. Everything is based on simple logic: what is permissible for oneself is not permissible for others. E, as was written in these columns in an article already referred to before (see who), the Ecclesiastical Authority has its own responsibilities in this sense for never having taken action to protect those weak and fragile subjects - including certain priests - who listen to the falsehoods of similar characters, thinking that everything could resolve itself over time by simply ignoring the problem, instead of facing it and nipping it in the bud with all the legitimate means at our disposal.

The paradox is evident: those who accuse everyone because they cannot remain silent, does not accept being contradicted, he who judges everyone does not accept being judged, those who claim to tell the truth do not accept that truth being verified. Eventually, no comparison is sought, but a monopoly: don't argue, but to establish who can speak without being contradicted. Freedom of speech is thus reduced to its poorest form: always talk, never answer. It is not a defense of the faith, it's his caricature, to the extent that the subject who embodies it is sadly caricatured, which is not so much a personal name, which it also has, but a sad paradigm of the worst that they can offer social media.

Sanluri, 22 April 2026

.

.

The books of Ivano Liguori, to access the book shop click on the cover

.

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

 

Read more

Italian, english, español

 

MONTECARLO AND THE YOUNG POPE COOKED BY THE NUN

The Principality of Monaco, which has always had a privileged relationship with the Holy See, has a seat at the UN, while the Vatican is only an observer. Perhaps certain dialogues or meetings are held because they can have them, albeit silently and with soft feet, even other implications that do not tickle populism? Go and explain it to those who comment easily on social media.

.

PDF print format article – article print format – article in printed format

 

.

When I was a young man with high hopes the only one who noticed it was a very good nun who spent much of her religious life feeding philosophy and theology students, with its kitchen. The nun envisaged a future for me as Pope. Not just a remote eventuality, but belonging to the realm of the impossible. For more, if we see what it means to be the Pope today in the time of the internet and gods social media, a career of that kind would rather be discouraged than hoped for. Newspapers or agencies give news of something the Pope has said or done? Open up heaven. Comments rain immediately, criticism and comparisons. There is someone who takes care to verify the news or evaluate it? Let's imagine. If it has already been ruminated on and prepared to be read, in case anticipated by some little title that gets likes, how do you say, the game is done. Tomorrow is another day anyway and that will be old news by now. Meantime, the flow of illiteracy that leaves no one behind continues unstoppable, even a successor of Saint Peter.

Take for example the recent trip of the Holy Father in the Principality of Monaco, The second one. But how, a Pope who goes to the kingdom of the rich, of ostentatious luxury and tax evasion? With the jarring confrontation with Francesco just around the corner, his first trip, instead he did it in Lampedusa. But if you think that even that trip was not free from criticism, you are wrong. Only now the comparison becomes useful and even good Christians fall for it, forget about that guy who was once called a glutton and a drunkard, friend of prostitutes and publicans, who didn't disdain getting help from Giovanna, wife of Cuza, Director of Herod (Mt 11,18-19; LC 8,3).

What if the Pope had gone to Munich on purpose precisely to remember what the Gospel says to those who have more than others? Easy to say in Lampedusa, try saying it in front of those who have the money, and how; with the risk of being told what the Athenians said to Paul by patting him on the shoulder: «We'll hear from you another time about this» (At 17, 32). Without the fact, not secondary, that in the Principality of Monaco there is a Catholic community which has always had a privileged relationship with the Holy See, has a seat at the UN, while the Vatican is only an observer. Perhaps certain dialogues or meetings are held because they can have them, albeit silently and with soft feet, even other implications that do not tickle populism? Go and explain it to those who comment easily on social media. They don't have time to read what the Pope said to Prince Albert II in Monaco, when he recalled that the countries of the «Mediterranean (I'm) today threatened by a widespread climate of closure and self-sufficiency". Than living in an elite place, although composite «it represents for some a privilege and for all a specific call to question their place in the world. In the eyes of God, nothing is received in vain! As Jesus suggests in the parable of the talents, what has been entrusted to us should not be buried underground, but put into circulation and multiplied in the horizon of the Kingdom of God.

This horizon is broader than the private one and it is not about a utopian world: God's Kingdom, to which Jesus consecrated his life, it's close, because he comes among us and shakes up the unjust configurations of power, the structures of sin that dig chasms between the poor and the rich, between the privileged and the discarded, between friends and enemies. Every talent, every opportunity, every good placed in our hands has a universal destination, an intrinsic need to be unrestrained, but redistributed, so that everyone's life is better. This is why Jesus taught us to pray: “Give us this day our daily bread” (Mt 6,11); and at the same time he says: «Search, first of all, the kingdom of God and his justice" (Mt 6,33). This logic of freedom and sharing is at the foundation of the parable of the Last Judgment, which has the poor at its centre: Christ the judge, who sits on the throne, he identifies with each of them (cf. Mt 25,31-46). Anyone who wants to understand should not have much effort. He reminded the Catholic community:

«Cristo […] dynamic center, heart of our faith […] His compassionate and merciful trait makes him an "advocate" in defense of the poor and sinners, certainly not to indulge evil, but to free them from oppression and slavery and make them children of God and brothers among themselves. It is no coincidence that the gestures performed by Jesus are not limited to the physical or spiritual healing of the person, but they also include an important social and political dimension: the healed person is reinstated, in all its dignity, in the human and religious community from which, often precisely because of his condition of illness or sin, had been excluded. This communion is the sign par excellence of the Church, called to be in the world a reflection of the love of God who does not show preference for people (cf. At 10,34). In this sense, I would like to say that your Church, here in the Principality of Monaco, possesses great wealth: be a place, a reality in which everyone finds welcome and hospitality, in that social and cultural mix that is your typical trait. The Principality of Monaco, indeed, it is a small state inhabited in a varied way by Monegasques, French, Italians and people of many other nationalities. A small cosmopolitan state, in which the variety of origins is also associated with other socioeconomic differences. In the Church, these differences never become an occasion for division into social classes but, on the contrary, everyone is welcomed as people and children of God, and all are recipients of a gift of grace that encourages communion, brotherhood and mutual love. This is the gift that comes from Christ, our advocate with the Father. Indeed, we have all been baptized in Him and, therefore, says Saint Paul, “there is neither Jew nor Greek; there is no slave nor free; there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus". (Gal 3,28) (cf.. official speech in the video, who).

Then there was also the meeting with the young people which I omit because what I have reported is enough for me to underline that even the Petrine ministry is going through the crisis that envelops today's communication and that those who rely on the titles already set, they leave out the effort, although beautiful, to delve deeper and know.

Then there is one last aspect. Words are like seeds, they need time to germinate. In the Church quite a lot. When Benedict XV, in the midst of the First World War, defined that war: "useless massacre"; that expression, as one historian put it, «he stayed, and raised a storm". It was opposed by everyone, received with indifference by the press, by politicians and even accused of weakening the troops at the front. Today we recognize it as the most fitting definition of a tragic event and rightly consigned to history. Without that statement another Pope, Paul VI, he could not have uttered the equally famous cry in the UN assembly: «Never again war, never again war!». Today it is normal to think of popes as men of peace.

I started by mentioning the good cooking of a nun. In the same period, a few days before the conclave that would elect him began, I was mandated - I confess, without much desire - to serve Mass to Cardinal Albino Luciani, at the Church of San Marco in Piazza Venezia in Rome. We were two acolytes, the rector of the church and four cats of believers. After Mass, in the sacristy, not knowing what to say I left: "Eminence, congratulations". He looked at me good-naturedly and then said: «You know what they say in my country?». the: «no…». And he told me it in dialect and then translated it for me: «You can't make gnocchi with this pasta».

You can see that from up there someone knows how to cook better than us. It's that in the Church words are like some foods: they prefer slow and prolonged cooking, so that they can then be enjoyed in all their aromatic ranges. Today we feed on fast food, even in the news we scroll through on our smartphones. It's our time and nothing can be done about it. Maybe just remember that Guy I mentioned earlier, the one who asked for financial help from women. He once said that the Word of the Kingdom of God is like a seed that falls on different soils, some quite refractory, others more well disposed. And there it bears fruit. The divine Sower doesn't care much about the soil, but of the fruit yes, if necessary, good food too.

From the Hermitage, 30 March 2026

.

MONTECARLO AND THE YOUNG POPE COOKED BY THE NUN

The Principality of Monaco, which has always maintained a privileged relationship with the Holy See, holds a seat at the United Nations, while the Vatican is only an observer. Perhaps certain dialogues or meetings take place because they may have, even if silently and with soft steps, further implications that do not lend themselves to populist appeal? Try explaining that to those who are quick to comment on social media.

.

When I was a young man full of promise, the only one who seemed to notice was a very good nun who spent a large part of her religious life feeding students of philosophy and theology with her cooking. The religious sister envisaged for me a future as Pope. An eventuality not only remote, but belonging to the realm of the impossible. Moreover, if we consider what it means today to be Pope in the age of the internet and social media, such a career would be more to be discouraged than desired. Do newspapers or agencies report something that the Pope has said or done? All hell breaks loose. Comments, criticisms, and comparisons immediately pour down. Is there anyone who takes the trouble to verify the news or to examine it? Hardly. If it has already been chewed over and prepared so that it can be read, perhaps preceded by some catchy headline designed to attract likes, as they say, the game is done. After all, tomorrow is another day and that will already be old news. Meanwhile, the relentless flow of an illiteracy that spares no one continues, not even a successor of Saint Peter.

Let us take as an example the recent journey of the Holy Father to the Principality of Monaco, the second. What then, a Pope who goes to the realm of the rich, of ostentatious luxury and of tax evasion? With, just around the corner, the striking comparison with Francis who, on his first journey, went instead to Lampedusa. But if you think that even that journey was not without criticism, you are mistaken. It is only that now the comparison proves useful, and even good Christians fall into it, forgetful of that One who was once called a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of prostitutes and tax collectors, who did not disdain to be assisted by Joanna, the wife of Chuza, steward of Herod (Mt 11:18–19; Page 8:3).

What if the Pope had gone to Monaco precisely to remind those who have more than others of what the Gospel says to them? It is easy to say it in Lampedusa; try saying it in front of those who truly have money, and plenty of it, at the risk of hearing the very words that the Athenians addressed to Paul, patting him on the shoulder: “We will hear you again about this” (Acts 17:32). Leaving aside the not insignificant fact that in the Principality of Monaco there exists a Catholic community which has always maintained a privileged relationship with the Holy See, it holds a seat at the United Nations, while the Vatican is only an observer. Perhaps certain dialogues or meetings take place because they may have, even if silently and with soft steps, further implications that do not lend themselves to populist appeal? Try explaining that to those who are quick to comment on social media. They do not have the time to read what the Pope said in Monaco to Prince Albert II, when he recalled that the countries of the “Mediterranean (are) today threatened by a widespread climate of closure and self-sufficiency”. That living in an elite place, albeit a composite one, “represents for some a privilege and for all a specific calling to question their place in the world. In the eyes of God, nothing is received in vain! As Jesus suggests in the parable of the talents, what has been entrusted to us must not be buried underground, but set in motion and multiplied within the horizon of the Kingdom of God.”

That horizon is broader than the private one and does not concern a utopian world: the Kingdom of God, to which Jesus devoted his life, is near, because it comes among us and shakes the unjust configurations of power, the structures of sin that dig abysses between the poor and the rich, between the privileged and the discarded, between friends and enemies. Every talent, every opportunity, every good placed in our hands has a universal destination, an intrinsic requirement not to be withheld, but to be redistributed, so that the life of all may be better. For this reason Jesus taught us to pray: “Give us this day our daily bread” (Mt 6:11); and at the same time he says: “Seek first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness” (Mt 6:33). This logic of freedom and sharing is at the foundation of the parable of the Last Judgment, which places the poor at the center: Christ the judge, who sits on the throne, identifies himself with each one of them (cf. Mt 25:31–46). Whoever wishes to understand should not find it too difficult. To the Catholic community he recalled:

“Christ […] the dynamic center, the heart of our faith […] His compassionate and merciful disposition makes him an ‘advocate’ in defense of the poor and of sinners, certainly not in order to condone evil, but to free them from oppression and slavery and to make them children of God and brothers and sisters among themselves. It is no coincidence that the actions performed by Jesus are not limited to the physical or spiritual healing of the person, but also include an important social and political dimension: the person who is healed is reintegrated, in all his dignity, into the human and religious community from which, often precisely because of his condition of illness or sin, he had been excluded. This communion is the preeminent sign of the Church, which is called to be in the world a reflection of the love of God who shows no partiality (cf. Acts 10:34). In this sense, I would like to say that your Church, here in the Principality of Monaco, possesses a great richness: being a place, a reality in which all find welcome and hospitality, in that social and cultural mixture which is a characteristic of yours. The Principality of Monaco, in fact, is a small State, yet inhabited in a varied way by Monegasques, French, Italians and people of many other nationalities. A small cosmopolitan State, in which to the variety of origins are also joined other differences of a socio-economic kind. In the Church, such differences never become an occasion for division into social classes; on the contrary, all are welcomed as persons and as children of God, and all are recipients of a gift of grace that fosters communion, fraternity and mutual love. This is the gift that comes from Christ, our advocate before the Father. Indeed, we have all been baptized in Him and therefore, as Saint Paul affirms, ‘there is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus’” (Gal 3:28) (cf. official address in the video by Vatican News, here).

Then there was also the meeting with the young people, which I omit because what I have reported is enough for me to underline that even the Petrine ministry is traversed by the crisis that envelops contemporary communication, and that those who rely on pre-packaged headlines neglect the effort — though a beautiful one — of going deeper and of knowing.

There is then one last aspect. Words are like seeds; in order to germinate they need time. In the Church, quite a lot of it. When Benedict XV, in the midst of the First World War, defined that war as an “useless slaughter”, that expression, as a historian put it, “remained, and stirred up a storm”. It was opposed by everyone, received with indifference by the press and by politicians, and even accused of weakening the troops at the front. Today we recognize it as the most fitting definition of a tragic event, rightly consigned to history. Without that statement, another Pope, Paul VI, would not have been able to pronounce, in the assembly of the United Nations, the equally famous cry: “No more war, never again war!”. Today it is normal to think of the pontiffs as men of peace.

I began by mentioning the good cooking of a nun. In that same period, a few days before the conclave that would elect him began, I was sent — I confess, not very willingly — to serve Mass for Cardinal Albino Luciani at the Church of San Marco in Piazza Venezia in Rome. There were two of us altar servers, the rector of the church, and a mere handful of faithful. After Mass, in the sacristy, not knowing what to say, I blurted out: “Your Eminence, my best wishes.” He looked at me kindly and then said: “Do you know how we say it in my village?” I replied: “No…”. And he told me in dialect and then translated it: “With this dough, you can’t make gnocchi.”

It would seem that someone up there knows how to cook better than we do. The point is that in the Church words are like certain foods: they prefer slow and prolonged cooking, so that they may then be savored in all their aromatic layers. Today we feed on fast food, even in the news we scroll through on our smartphones. It is our time, and there is nothing to be done about it. Perhaps only to recall that One I mentioned earlier, the one who allowed himself to be supported financially by women. Once he said that the Word of the Kingdom of God is like a seed that falls on different kinds of soil, some rather resistant, others more receptive. And there it bears fruit. The divine Sower is not so concerned with the soil, but with the fruit — and, when needed, with good cooking as well.

From the Hermitage, 30 March 2026

.

MONTECARLO AND THE YOUNG POPE COOKED BY THE NUN

The Principality of Monaco, which has always maintained a privileged relationship with the Holy See, has a seat in the UN, while the Vatican is just an observer. Perhaps certain dialogues or meetings are carried out because they may have, even if it is silently and with plush steps, even other reaches that do not flatter populism? Go explain it to those who comment easily on social media

.

When I was a young man full of hope, The only one who seemed to notice was a very good nun who spent much of her religious life feeding philosophy and theology students with her cooking.. The nun predicted a future for me as Pope. An eventuality not only remote, but belonging to the realm of the impossible. Besides, if we consider what it means to be Pope today in times of the internet and social networks, a race of that type would be more to advise against than to wish. Do newspapers or news agencies report anything the Pope has said or done?? The sky is armed. Comments immediately rain, reviews and comparisons. Is there anyone who takes the trouble to verify the news or examine it? Don't even think about it. If it has already been ruminated and prepared to be read, perhaps preceded by some like-catching headline, as they say, the game is done. Total, Tomorrow is another day and that will be old news. Meanwhile, The flow of illiteracy that leaves no one out continues unstoppable., not even a successor of Saint Peter.

Let's take as an example the recent trip of the Holy Father to the Principality of Monaco, the second. But how is it possible?, A Pope who goes to the kingdom of the rich, of ostentatious luxury and tax evasion? With, immediately around the corner, the strident comparison with Francisco, who, on his first trip, went instead to Lampedusa. But if you think that that trip was not without criticism either, you are mistaken. Only now the comparison is useful, and even good Christians fall into it, forgetful of Him who was once called a glutton and a drinker, friend of prostitutes and publicans, who did not disdain to let Juana help, woman of Cusa, Herod's administrator (Mt 11,18-19; LC 8,3).

What would happen if the Pope had gone to Monaco? to remember what the Gospel says to those who have more than others? Easy to say in Lampedusa; try to say it in front of those who have money, and a lot; with the risk of hearing himself answer the same thing that the Athenians said to Paul, patting him on the shoulder: «We will hear from you again about this» (Hch 17,32). Leaving aside the fact, not secondary, that in the Principality of Monaco there is a Catholic community that has always maintained a privileged relationship with the Holy See, has a seat in the UN, while the Vatican is just an observer. Perhaps certain dialogues or meetings are carried out because they may have, even if it is silently and with plush steps, even other reaches that do not flatter populism? Go explain it to those who comment easily on social media. They do not have time to read what the Pope said in Monaco to Prince Albert II, when he recalled that the countries of the «Mediterranean (are) today threatened by a general climate of closure and self-sufficiency". Than living in an elite place, although composed, «represents for some a privilege and for everyone a specific call to question their own place in the world. In the eyes of God, nothing is received in vain. How Jesus makes us understand in the parable of the talents, what has been entrusted to us should not be buried underground, but put into circulation and multiplied on the horizon of the Kingdom of God.

That horizon is broader than the private one and it does not refer to a utopian world: the Kingdom of God, to whom Jesus has consecrated his life, is about, because he comes among us and shakes the unjust configurations of power, the structures of sin that open chasms between the poor and the rich, between privileged and discarded, between friends and enemies. every talent, every opportunity, Every good placed in our hands has a universal destiny, an intrinsic demand not to be held back, but redistributed, so that everyone's life is better. That is why Jesus has taught us to pray: "Give us today our daily bread" (Mt 6,11); and at the same time says: «Seek, first of all, the Kingdom of God and his justice" (Mt 6,33). This logic of freedom and sharing is at the base of the parable of universal judgment, that has the poor at the center: Christ judge, who sits on the throne, identifies with each one of them (cf. Mt 25,31-46). Whoever wants to understand should not find much difficulty. He reminded the Catholic community:

«Cristo […] dynamic center, heart of our faith […] His compassionate and merciful trait makes him a “lawyer” in defense of the poor and sinners., certainly not to support evil, but to free them from oppression and slavery and make them children of God and brothers among themselves. It is no coincidence that the gestures performed by Jesus are not limited to the physical or spiritual healing of the person., but also include an important social and political dimension: the cured person is reinstated, in all its dignity, in the human and religious community of which, often precisely because of their condition of illness or sin, had been excluded. This communion is the sign par excellence of the Church, called to be in the world a reflection of the love of God who is no respecter of persons (cf. Hch 10,34). In this sense, I would like to say that your Church, here in the Principality of Monaco, has great wealth: be a place, a reality in which everyone finds welcome and hospitality, in that social and cultural mix that is a typical feature of yours. The Principality of Monaco, indeed, It is a small inhabited state, however, variously by Monegasques, French, Italians and people of many other nationalities. A small cosmopolitan state, in which other socioeconomic differences are also added to the variety of origins. In the Church, Such differences never become an occasion for division into social classes., but, on the contrary, all are welcomed as people and children of God, and all are recipients of a gift of grace that fosters communion, brotherhood and mutual love. This is the gift that comes from Christ, our lawyer before the Father. Indeed, We have all been baptized into Him and, therefore, Saint Paul affirms, “there is no Jew or Greek; there is no slave nor free; there is no man or woman, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.". (Gal 3,28) (cf. official speech in the video, here).

Then there was also the meeting with the young people, which I omit because what I have mentioned is enough for me to emphasize that even the Petrine ministry is going through the crisis that surrounds current communication and that those who rely on already prefabricated headlines neglect the effort - although beautiful - to go deeper and to know.

There is also one last aspect. Words are like seeds: they need time to germinate. In the Church, quite. When Benedict XV, in the midst of the First World War, He defined that war as "useless slaughter", that expression, as a historian said, "it stood and raised a storm". It was fought by everyone, received with indifference by the press and by politicians, and even accused of weakening the troops on the front. Today we recognize it as the most accurate definition of a tragic event., rightly consigned to history. Without that statement, another Pope, Paul VI, would not have been able to utter the equally famous cry within the UN: «Never again war, never again war!». Today it is normal to think of the pontiffs as men of peace.

I began alluding to the good cooking of a nun. In that same period, a few days before the conclave that would elect him began, I was sent - I confess, without much desire — to serve Mass for Cardinal Albino Luciani, in the church of San Marco in Piazza Venezia, in Rome. We were the acolytes, the rector of the church and four cats of faithful. After Mass, in the sacristy, without knowing what to say, I blurted out: "Eminence, congratulations». He looked at me benevolently and then said: «Do you know how they say in my town?». Yo: «no…». And he told it to me in dialect and then he translated it for me: «Gnocchi is not made with this dough».

It seems that up there someone knows how to cook better than us.. In the Church, words are like certain foods.: They prefer slow and long cooking, so that they can then be savored in all their aromatic notes. Today we eat fast food, also in the news that we scroll through on our smartphones. It's our time and nothing can be done about it. Maybe just remember the One I mentioned before, the one who allowed himself to be helped financially by women. He once said that the Word of the Kingdom of God is like a seed that falls on different soils., some quite refractory, others more willing. And there it bears fruit. The divine Sower does not care so much about the ground, but of the fruit yes, and, when required, also good cuisine.

From the Hermitage, 30 March 2026

.

 

.

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

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome – Vatican
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.

Italian, english, español

 

THE VARIOUS FACETS OF BLESSING

The Church can give the blessing, even among a thousand distinctions, also to those experiencing exceptional situations, particular or irregular. Particularly if these people are baptized in communion with the Church, even if they live in a vital situation that the Church considers wrong.

.

PDF print format article – Article print format – Article in printed format

 

.

The statement Begging for Confidence, dating back to December 2023, it concerned the possibility of blessing irregular and even same-sex couples.

The receipt thereof, immediately, must have elicited conflicting responses from the episcopate if already in January of the following year the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith felt the need to issue a press release with clarifications regarding the simple nature, informal and pastoral of the aforementioned blessings, without creating confusion with the doctrine regarding marriage and normal ritualized liturgical blessings. In the same context, mention was made of the possibility of a gradual acceptance of the Declaration or even its non-reception in the most delicate and difficult cases. However, its value was advocated, as an opportunity to listen to the requests that arise from the faithful and to offer them appropriate catechesis in this regard.

At the end of an article that appeared in this magazine of ours, in which the topic of homosexuality and the Bible was discussed (Who), it was hoped that the path of reflection on these issues would not be abandoned. With this writing, despite its brevity and inadequacy of the author, I would like to continue the task, answering the question whether it is right to give a spiritual good of the Church, how can it be a blessing, also to those who live in situations that we could define as particular, which constitutes an exception, if you really want to avoid the recurring term that refers to irregularity, starting from or extending what the Church already does in other situations.

In the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church we talk about the theme of intercommunion with separated brothers, especially the fee 844 addresses the topic concerning the administration of the Sacraments by a minister of the Church to the faithful who do not have full communion with the Catholic Church, the so-called Communication in the sacred. The text takes into consideration two categories of non-Catholic Christians: the «members of the Eastern Churches» (§ 3) and the "other Christians", that is, those belonging to Western Christian confessions, that is, those that have existed in the West since the time of the Reformation (§ 4). For both categories of Christians the text of the code states that «Catholic ministers lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, of the Eucharist and the anointing of the sick" (§§ 3-4). The same canon reiterates that both categories of Christians "do not have full communion with the Catholic Church" (§§ 3-4); which means - said positively - that these Christians are in true communion with the Catholic Church, even if not full (cf.. above all The light, n. 15; Reintegratio, NN. 3,1; 22,2).

More specifically the fee 844, § 4 demands that there must be a serious and urgent need for the administration of the Sacraments by the Catholic Church to non-Catholic Christians belonging to Western Confessions. However, the encyclical To be one, to the number 46 he also speaks of the existence of "special cases" e Church of the Eucharist, to the number 45, also mentions "special circumstances". Since the Code of Canon Law depends essentially on the Second Vatican Council, one cannot fail to mention what is the most important text on this topic, that is Reintegratio, all no. 8, which is thus expressed: «Intercommunion (in the Sacraments, n.d.r.) It depends above all on two principles: from the manifestation of the unity of the Church and from participation in the means of grace". The manifestation of unity mostly prohibits intercommunion. The participation of grace, the grace to be procured, sometimes he recommends it. Naturally the first principle serves to safeguard ecclesial communion and therefore the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, as if administering the Sacraments to Catholics and to those who are not were the same thing, because such is not, without penalty of misunderstanding. Therefore, believing that there is no difference between being or not being in communion with the Catholic Church would lead to disorientation and scandal.. On the other hand - and I recall here the words of Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, president emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Legal Texts —:

«The second principle recalls the need to confer grace on the part of the Catholic Church and not in just any way, but rather specifically through the administration of the Sacraments. And this applies not only to Catholic Christians, but for all the baptized, even for non-Catholics. This is the great teaching stated with clarity and conviction by the great text of Vatican II. Let's realize this carefully: Non-Catholic Christians have a spiritual need to receive the conferral of grace through the administration of the Sacraments. They therefore have the spiritual need to receive the Sacraments. We can also say that non-Catholic Christians have the right to receive the Sacraments. And the Catholic Church has the duty to administer the Sacraments to these Christians. We can consider all this as a simple determination of the principle of grace to be procured, where the gerund is noted as a sign of necessity" (edited by Andrea Tornielli, Who).

Taking the reasoning to the end, when asked if a married couple, one Catholic and the other not in full communion with the Church, by participating together in the Holy Mass they also wish to receive the Eucharist, this can be considered an exceptionality, if this corresponds to a spiritual need of the spouses who would otherwise experience that moment separately or not at all, abstaining from it; the expert Prelate responds thus:

«If the Catholic minister administered Holy Communion to the non-Catholic spouse, everyone could reasonably believe that this concession is determined by the just need not to separate a married couple, especially in such a special moment as participation in the sacrament of the Eucharist. All this can, Anyway, always be recalled through an explanatory catechesis given to the community of the faithful even on a recurring basis".

I don't want to dwell too much on this topic any longer, also because the focus, as mentioned initially, it's another. Many other things could be said because the topic is still studied and explored and I haven't mentioned it, just so I don't get too long, to the previous conditions or spiritual and mental dispositions that must be present in someone, even if not in full communion, the Church can, in specific and exceptional cases, receive the sacraments of grace from a Catholic minister. It is also clear that all this belongs to an area strictly regulated by Church law and cannot in any way be confused with forms of indiscriminate intercommunion or, worse, with Eucharistic celebrations that ignore full ecclesial communion and the validity of the priestly ministry. Precisely because it is a delicate matter, the reference to exceptional cases must never be taken as an ordinary criterion, but as confirmation of the fact that the Church, while firmly guarding the meaning of its spiritual goods, he never ceases to wonder how to obtain them, in permitted cases, for the salvation of all souls.

As you can imagine, all this reasoning that from the Council then landed in the Code, arises both from theological reflection on the spiritual goods of the Church which in themselves want to be lavished in abundance and can hardly be denied to those who trust, he asks for respect and good disposition, both from not being able to deny that the human situations that people experience in this world are multiple and varied. And the Church, which guards the treasures of divine grace, he can only wonder about this.

Returning then to the topic that started this writing, the answer can only be positive. The Church can give the blessing, even among a thousand distinctions, also to those experiencing exceptional situations, particular or irregular. Particularly if these people are baptized in communion with the Church, even if they live in a vital situation that the Church considers wrong. If they can, under the appropriate conditions, receive the Sacraments like all other baptized people e, we saw it, even those who belong to another confession and are unable to contact their ministers can do so, why not even a simple blessing that would only serve to reiterate what the Church has always done: reject sin, but to welcome and love the sinner, as the Lord taught? However, it remains necessary to clarify that such a blessing could never be correctly understood as confirmation, ratification or legitimization of the objective condition in which these people find themselves. If so, both the meaning of the blessing and the very truth of ecclesial pastoral care would be betrayed. The church, indeed, can bless the person who asks God for help, not sin as such, nor the claim that a situation contrary to his doctrine is thereby recognized as morally good or ecclesially legitimate. Precisely for this reason the blessing, if requested with faith and humility, it retains its meaning only if it remains a gesture of invocation, of trust and accompaniment, never of implicit consecration of a condition of life.

As the prefect of the Dicastery specified at the time for the Doctrine of the Faith in the press release referred to above, the purpose of the Declaration that, it must be admitted, someone had a bad stomach, was to highlight the value of the blessing for the Church, in order to arrive at a "broader understanding of the blessings and the proposal to increase pastoral blessings, which do not require the same conditions as blessings in a liturgical or ritual context".

No longer living in a Christianized context for a long time, the Church will increasingly encounter situations that are not regular according to doctrine. It will be able to entrench itself in a defensive position and simply take refuge behind the doctrine that recognizes the illicit nature of some human conditions, but that wouldn't say anything new about it. Or, following the example of his Master, will be able to recognize that a relationship is wrong, yet it preserves within it positive elements that cannot be denied and therefore why not pour on these situations "the oil of consolation and the wine of hope", even a simple informal blessing where requested with confidence? Also here, however, discernment remains decisive: it is one thing to pastorally help people who, even in an objectively disordered or irregular condition, they ask for spiritual help without claiming any legitimacy; it would be another thing to endorse, even if only indirectly, the claim that ecclesial welcome coincides with the recognition of their status as compliant with the Gospel. The mercy of the Church does not consist in obscuring the truth, but in accompanying people towards it with patience, without rejecting and humiliating anyone, but at the same time without distorting anything.

here it is, so, a small contribution to the reflection which has no pretensions, moved only by that spirit that lies behind Jesus' invitation to be a disciple "similar to a householder who extracts new and old things from his treasure" (Mt 13,52). For this, the Church's task is neither to close the door of grace to those who ask for it with sincere trust, nor confuse mercy with the legitimation of what remains contrary to the Gospel, but to safeguard truth and charity together, so that every pastoral gesture is an authentic help for people and never an occasion for misunderstanding regarding doctrine. All of this, without ever losing sight of the very essence of the mission entrusted to us by Christ with precise words:

«It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. Go and learn what this means: I desire mercy, not sacrifice. For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners " (Mt 9, 12-13).

From the Hermitage, 19 March 2026

.

THE VARIOUS FACETS OF BLESSING

The Church can grant a blessing, albeit with many distinctions, even to those who live in exceptional, particular or irregular situations. Especially if these persons are baptized in communion with the Church, even if they live in a life situation that the Church considers erroneous.

.

The Declaration Begging for Confidence, issued in December 2023, concerned the possibility of blessing irregular couples and even same-sex couples. Its reception, at least initially, must have elicited contrasting responses within the episcopate, if already in January of the following year the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith felt the need to issue a press release with clarifications regarding the simple, informal and pastoral character of such blessings, so as not to create confusion with the doctrine concerning marriage and with the ordinary ritual liturgical blessings. In the same context, reference was made to the possibility of a gradual acceptance of the Declaration or even to its non-reception in the most delicate and difficult cases. Nevertheless, its value was encouraged, as a way of remaining attentive to the requests arising from the faithful and of offering them an appropriate catechesis on the matter.

Toward the end of an article published in this same journal, which dealt with the theme of homosexuality and the Bible (Here), the hope was expressed that the path of reflection on these themes would not be abandoned. With the present text, despite its brevity and the inadequacy of its author, I would like to continue this task by responding to the question of whether it is right to grant a spiritual good of the Church, such as a blessing, even to those who live in a situation that we might define as particular — an exception, if one wishes to avoid the recurring term that refers to irregularity — starting from, or extending, what the Church already does in other situations.

In the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church the question of intercommunion with separated brethren is addressed; in particular, canon 844 deals with the administration of the Sacraments by a minister of the Church to the faithful who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church, the so-called Communication in the sacred. The text considers two categories of non-Catholic Christians: the “members of the Eastern Churches” (§ 3) and “other Christians,” that is, those belonging to Western Christian confessions, namely those existing in the West since the time of the Reformation (§ 4). For both categories the canonical text states that “Catholic ministers administer licitly the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and the anointing of the sick” (§§ 3–4). Concerning both categories the same canon reiterates that they “are not in full communion with the Catholic Church” (§§ 3–4); which means — stated positively — that these Christians are in a true, though not full, communion with the Catholic Church (cf. especially The light, n. 15; Reintegratio, NN. 3,1; 22,2).

More specifically, canon 844 § 4 requires that for the administration of the Sacraments by the Catholic Church to non-Catholic Christians belonging to Western confessions there must be a grave and urgent necessity. However, the encyclical To be one, in no. 46, also speaks of the existence of “particular cases,” and Church of the Eucharist, in no. 45, likewise refers to “special circumstances.” Since the Code of Canon Law depends essentially on the Second Vatican Council, one cannot fail to mention what is the most important text on this subject, namely Reintegratio, no. 8, which states: “The sharing in the Sacraments (Communication in the sacred) depends chiefly on two principles: the manifestation of the unity of the Church and the sharing in the means of grace.” The manifestation of unity generally forbids intercommunion. The sharing in grace, the they procure graceit gives, sometimes recommends it. Naturally, the first principle serves to safeguard ecclesial communion and to avoid the danger of error or indifferentism, as if administering the Sacraments to Catholics and to those who are not were the same thing, which it is not, without giving rise to misunderstanding. To maintain that there is no difference between being or not being in communion with the Catholic Church would lead to confusion and scandal. On the other hand — and I recall here the words of Cardinal Coccopalmerio, emeritus president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts —:

“The second principle recalls the necessity for the Catholic Church to confer grace not in just any way, but in a specific way through the administration of the Sacraments. And this applies not only to Catholic Christians, but to all the baptized, including non-Catholics. This is the great teaching affirmed with clarity and conviction by the great texts of Vatican II. Let us be fully aware: non-Catholic Christians have a spiritual need to receive the conferral of grace through the administration of the Sacraments. They therefore have a spiritual need to receive the Sacraments. We can also say that non-Catholic Christians have the right to receive the Sacraments. And the Catholic Church has the duty to administer the Sacraments to these Christians. All this can be understood as a concrete application of the principle of grace to be procured, note the gerund, which indicates necessity” (edited by Andrea Tornielli, here).

Carrying the reasoning through to its conclusion, one may ask whether a married couple, one Catholic and the other not in full communion with the Church, participating together in Holy Mass and desiring also to receive the Eucharist, might constitute an exceptional case — if this corresponds to a spiritual need of the spouses, who would otherwise experience that moment as separated or would not experience it at all, abstaining from it. The expert prelate responds as follows:

“If the Catholic minister were to administer Holy Communion to the non-Catholic spouse, everyone could reasonably consider that such a concession is determined by the just necessity of not separating a married couple, especially at such a special moment as participation in the sacrament of the Eucharist. All this can, in any case, always be clarified through an explanatory catechesis offered to the community of the faithful, even on a recurring basis.”

I do not wish to dwell too long on this topic, also because the focus, as mentioned at the beginning, is another. Much more could be said, since the matter is still being studied and deepened, and I have not mentioned — precisely in order not to prolong the discussion — the prior conditions or the spiritual dispositions that must be present in those who, although not in full communion with the Church, may in specific and exceptional cases receive from a Catholic minister the sacraments of grace. It is also evident that all this belongs to a sphere rigorously regulated by the law of the Church and cannot in any way be confused with forms of indiscriminate intercommunion or, worse, with Eucharistic celebrations that disregard full ecclesial communion and the validity of the priestly ministry. Precisely because this is a delicate matter, reference to exceptional cases must never be taken as an ordinary criterion, but as confirmation that the Church, while firmly safeguarding the meaning of her spiritual goods, does not cease to question how to provide them, where permitted, for the salvation of all souls.

As one can imagine, all this reasoning — which from the Council has found its way into the Code — arises both from theological reflection on the spiritual goods of the Church, which by their nature are meant to be poured out abundantly and can hardly be denied to those who request them with trust, respect and proper disposition, and from the recognition that the human situations people experience in this world are manifold and varied. And the Church, which safeguards the treasures of divine grace, cannot but reflect on this.

Returning therefore to the question that gave rise to this text, the answer can only be affirmative. The Church can grant a blessing, albeit with many distinctions, even to those who live in exceptional, particular or irregular situations. Especially if these persons are baptized in communion with the Church, even if they live in a life situation that the Church considers erroneous. If they can, under the proper conditions, receive the Sacraments like all the other baptized — and, as we have seen, even those belonging to another confession can do so when they are unable to turn to their own ministers — why not also a simple blessing, which would serve only to reaffirm what the Church has always done: reject sin but welcome and love the sinner, as the Lord has taught?

It remains necessary, however, to clarify that such a blessing could never rightly be understood as a confirmation, ratification or legitimation of the objective condition in which such persons find themselves. If that were the case, both the meaning of the blessing and the truth of ecclesial pastoral care would be betrayed. The Church, in fact, can bless the person who asks God for help, not sin as such, nor the claim that a situation contrary to her doctrine should thereby be recognized as morally good or ecclesially legitimate. Precisely for this reason the blessing, if requested with faith and humility, preserves its meaning only if it remains an act of invocation, of entrustment and of accompaniment, never of implicit consecration of a state of life.

As was specified at the time by the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in the above-mentioned press release, the purpose of the Declaration — which, it must be admitted, some have found difficult to accept — was to highlight the value of blessing for the Church, in order to arrive at “a broader understanding of blessings and the proposal to increase pastoral blessings, which do not require the same conditions as blessings in a liturgical or ritual context.”

Since we no longer live in a Christianized context, the Church will increasingly encounter situations that are not regular according to doctrine. She may take refuge in a defensive position and simply entrench herself behind doctrine, which recognizes the unlawfulness of certain human conditions, but this would say nothing new. Or, following the example of her Master, she may acknowledge that a relationship is erroneous and yet contains within itself positive elements that cannot be denied, and therefore why not pour upon these situations “the oil of consolation and the wine of hope,” even a simple informal blessing when requested with trust?

Here too, however, discernment remains decisive: one thing is to offer pastoral assistance to persons who, though in an objectively disordered or irregular condition, ask for spiritual help without claiming any form of legitimation; another would be to endorse, even indirectly, the claim that ecclesial welcome coincides with recognizing their condition as in conformity with the Gospel. The Church’s mercy does not consist in obscuring the truth, but in accompanying persons toward it with patience, without rejecting or humiliating anyone, while at the same time falsifying nothing.

Here, then, is a small contribution to a reflection that makes no claim to completeness, moved only by that spirit which lies behind Jesus’ invitation to be a disciple “like a householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old” (Mt 13:52). Precisely for this reason, the task of the Church is neither to close the door of grace to those who ask for it with sincere trust, nor to confuse mercy with the legitimation of what remains contrary to the Gospel, but to safeguard together truth and charity, so that every pastoral act may be a genuine help to persons and never an occasion for misunderstanding concerning doctrine. All this without ever losing sight of the very essence of the mission entrusted to us by Christ in these precise words:

“Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means: I desire mercy, and not sacrifice. For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mt 9:12–13).

From the Hermitage, March 19, 2026

.

THE VARIOUS FACETS OF BLESSING

The Church can give the blessing, although with many distinctions, also to those who live in exceptional situations, private or irregular. Particularly if these people are baptized in communion with the Church, even if they live a life situation that the Church considers erroneous.

.

The Declaration Begging for Confidence, December 2023, It referred to the possibility of blessing irregular couples and even same-sex couples.. Your reception, at first, must have provoked contrasting responses in the episcopate, If already in January of the following year the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith felt the need to issue a statement with details about the simple nature, informal and pastoral of said blessings, without creating confusion with the doctrine regarding marriage or with ritualized liturgical blessings. In the same context, reference was made to the possibility of a gradual acceptance of the Declaration or even its non-reception in the most delicate and difficult cases.. However, its value was emphasized, as the possibility of remaining attentive to the requests that arise from the faithful and of offering them an adequate catechesis in this regard.

Towards the end of an article published in this same magazine, which dealt with the topic of homosexuality and the Bible (Here), The wish was expressed that the path of reflection on these questions would not be abandoned. With this writing, despite its brevity and the insufficiency of its author, I would like to continue this task, answering the question of whether it is fair to grant a spiritual good to the Church, How can the blessing be?, also to those who live in a situation that we could define as particular, which constitutes an exception - if you want to avoid the recurring term that refers to irregularity - starting from what the Church already does in other situations or extending it.

In the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church The issue of intercommunion with separated brothers is discussed; in particular, the canon 844 addresses the question of the administration of the Sacraments by a minister of the Church to the faithful who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church, la llamada communion in the sacred. The text considers two categories of non-Catholic Christians: the "members of the Eastern Churches" (§ 3) and "the other Christians", that is to say, those belonging to Western Christian denominations, those that have existed in the West since the time of the Reformation (§ 4). For both categories the canonical text states that "Catholic ministers licitly administer the sacraments of penance.", of the Eucharist and the anointing of the sick" (§§ 3-4). Of both categories, the same canon reaffirms that "they are not in full communion with the Catholic Church." (§§ 3-4); which means — said positively — that these Christians are in true communion with the Catholic Church, although not complete (cf. especially The light, n. 15; Reintegratio, NN. 3,1; 22,2).

More particularly, the canon 844 § 4 demand that, for the administration of the Sacraments by the Catholic Church to non-Catholic Christians belonging to Western confessions, there must be a serious and urgent need. However, the encyclical To be one, in the number 46, also speaks of the existence of "particular cases", and Church of the Eucharist, in the number 45, also refers to "special circumstances". Since the Code of Canon Law essentially depends on the Second Vatican Council, one cannot fail to mention the most important text on this topic, that is to say, Reintegratio, n. 8, that is how it is expressed: «The intercommunion (in the Sacraments) It depends above all on two principles: "of the manifestation of the unity of the Church and of participation in the means of grace". The manifestation of unity usually prohibits intercommunion. Participation in grace, the grace to be procured, sometimes he recommends it.

Naturally, the first principle serves to safeguard ecclesial communion and avoid the danger of error or indifferentism, as if administering the Sacraments to Catholics and those who are not Catholics were the same, which is not, without risk of misunderstanding. Maintaining that there is no difference between being in communion with the Catholic Church or not would lead to disorientation and scandal.. On the other hand - and I return here to the words of Cardinal Coccopalmerio, president emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts —:

«The second principle recalls the need to confer grace on the part of the Catholic Church not in any way, but specifically through the administration of the Sacraments. And this applies not only to Catholic Christians., but for all the baptized, also for non-Catholics. This is the great teaching affirmed with clarity and conviction by the great text of Vatican II. Let us be fully aware: Non-Catholic Christians have a spiritual need to receive grace through the administration of the Sacraments. Have, therefore, the spiritual need to receive the Sacraments. We can also say that non-Catholic Christians have the right to receive the Sacraments. And the Catholic Church has the duty to administer them to these Christians.. All this can be considered as a concrete determination of the principle of grace to be procured, observe the gerund as a sign of necessity» (edited by Andrea Tornielli, here).

Taking reasoning to its ultimate consequences, When asked if a married couple, one Catholic and the other not in full communion with the Church, participating together in the Holy Mass and also wishing to receive the Eucharist, may constitute an exceptional case - if this responds to a spiritual need of the spouses who would otherwise live that moment apart or would not live it at all -, the expert prelate responds like this:

"If the Catholic minister were to administer Holy Communion to the non-Catholic spouse, everyone could reasonably consider that such a concession is determined by the just need not to separate a married couple, especially in such a special moment as participation in the sacrament of the Eucharist. All this can, in any case, always be clarified through an explanatory catechesis offered to the community of the faithful, even recurrently.

I don't want to go into too much detail on this topic., also because the focus, as indicated at the beginning, is another. Many other things could be said, since the issue continues to be the subject of study and deepening, and I have not mentioned - precisely so as not to lengthen - the preconditions or spiritual dispositions that must be present in whoever, even though they are not in full communion with the Church, can, in specific and exceptional cases, receive the sacraments of grace from a Catholic minister. It is also evident that all this belongs to an area rigorously regulated by the law of the Church and cannot in any way be confused with forms of indiscriminate intercommunion or, even worse, with Eucharistic celebrations that disregard full ecclesial communion and the validity of the priestly ministry. Precisely because it is a delicate matter, The reference to exceptional cases should never be assumed as an ordinary criterion, but as confirmation that the Church, still firmly guarding the meaning of their spiritual goods, You keep wondering how to get them, in permitted cases, for the salvation of all souls.

As you can imagine, All this reasoning - which since the Council has passed into the Code - arises both from theological reflection on the spiritual goods of the Church, who by their very nature want to be poured out in abundance and can hardly refuse those who ask for them with confidence, respect and good disposition, as well as the fact that the human situations that people live in this world are multiple and varied.. and the Church, that guards the treasures of divine grace, You can't help but wonder about it..

coming back, therefore, to the topic that gave rise to this writing, The answer cannot but be affirmative.. The Church can give the blessing, although with many distinctions, also to those who live in exceptional situations, private or irregular. Particularly if these people are baptized in communion with the Church, even if they live a life situation that the Church considers erroneous. If they can, in proper conditions, receive the Sacraments like all other baptized people — and, as we have seen, even those belonging to another denomination can do so when they cannot turn to their own ministers —, why not also a simple blessing, that would only serve to reaffirm what the Church has always done: reject sin, but welcome and love the sinner, as the Lord has taught?

However, It is necessary to specify that a blessing of this type could never be correctly understood as confirmation, ratification or legitimation of the objective condition in which such people find themselves. If so, both the meaning of the blessing and the very truth of ecclesial pastoral care would be betrayed.. The Church can bless the person who asks God for help, not sin as such, nor the claim that a situation contrary to its doctrine be recognized as morally good or ecclesially legitimate. Precisely for this reason, the blessing, if asked with faith and humility, retains its meaning only if it remains as a gesture of invocation, of trust and support, never as an implicit consecration of a condition of life.

As the prefect of the Dicastery specified at the time for the Doctrine of the Faith in the aforementioned statement, the objective of the Declaration — that, you have to admit it, some have digested poorly — was to highlight the value of the blessing for the Church, in order to arrive at a "broader understanding of the blessings and the proposal to increase pastoral blessings, "that do not require the same conditions as blessings in a liturgical or ritual context".

By not living for a long time in a Christianized context, The Church will increasingly encounter situations that do not conform to doctrine. He may entrench himself in a defensive position and limit himself to taking refuge behind the doctrine that recognizes the illegality of certain human conditions., but this wouldn't say anything new. Or, following the example of his Master, You will be able to recognize that a relationship is wrong and, however, It contains positive elements within it that cannot be denied., And then why not pour out “the oil of consolation and the wine of hope” on these situations?, even with a simple informal blessing, if requested with confidence?

Also here, however, discernment remains decisive: It is one thing to pastorally accompany people who, even in an objectively disordered or irregular condition, They ask for spiritual help without seeking any legitimacy; another thing would be to endorse, even indirectly, the claim that ecclesial welcome coincides with the recognition of its state as conforming to the Gospel. The mercy of the Church does not consist in obscuring the truth, but in accompanying people towards it with patience, without rejecting or humiliating anyone, but at the same time without falsifying anything.

Behold, well, a small contribution to reflection that has no pretensions, moved only by that spirit that is behind Jesus' invitation to be a disciple "similar to a householder who brings out of his treasure new things and old things" (Mt 13,52). Precisely for that reason, The task of the Church is not to close the door of grace to those who ask for it with sincere trust., nor confuse mercy with the legitimation of what remains contrary to the Gospel, but to jointly guard truth and charity, so that each pastoral gesture is an authentic help for people and never an occasion for misunderstanding about doctrine. All this, without ever losing sight of the very essence of the mission that Christ has entrusted to us with precise words:

«The healthy have no need of a doctor, but the sick. Id, well, and learn what it means: I want mercy and not sacrifice. Because I have not come to call the righteous, but to sinners" (Mt 9,12-13).

From the Eremo, 19 March 2026

.

.

 

.

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

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome – Vatican
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.