Theologica – Page 5 – EDIZIONI L'ISOLA DI PATMOS

The paradigm of “as direct Stolta”: from the fifteenth century monasteries reduced to brothels to the twenty-first century infertility. The rejection of reality creates the decadence that leads to death. We can say that in religious life for women all went well after Vatican II ?

3 February 2019/10 Comments/in Theologica/by father ariel

— Theologica —

THE PARADIGM OF STRAIGHT Stolta: FROM THE MONASTERY OF XV CENTURY A REDUCED brothels TO THE XXI CENTURY STERILITY. REFUSAL OF REALITY THAT CREATES VOID THAT LEADS TO DEATH. WE CAN SAY THAT IN RELIGIOUS LIFE FEMALE EVERYTHING WENT WELL AFTER THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL ?

PDF print format article
.

Author:
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

It was in the end of the year away 1563 when the 3 December, two days before the closure of the session, The Council of Trent approved a decree on religious and the nuns. Within this document they were also established more precise rules on the subject of the enclosure, linked to religious and to the interiors and exteriors of their homes. Already at the end of the thirteenth century, with bubble dangerously promulgated in 1298 by Pope Boniface VIII, then entered into force in 1302, the norms on the observance of the enclosure and its reintroduction were reaffirmed wherever they had been abandoned [1]. Even despite, at the turn of the XV and XVI century, rules enclosure had not been effectively implemented, except by a few female religious orders: the Poor Clares, the Dominicans, the first Carmelite and Carthusian. All other nuns, especially those living in their great abbeys and monasteries, It had increasingly moved away from those very precise and strict rules aimed at the moral protection of women's religious institutions.

It would be interesting and instructive to study in depth of Teresa of Avila real life, that his daughters for the first are careful not to transmit, making them more comfortable to just remember and recount his sublime ecstasies, but they came toward the end of his life. Different was the existence of this great Saint and reformer of the Carmelite Order, just remember that when he was appointed prioress of the Monastery of the Incarnation in Avila, the one hundred and thirty nuns who lived there gave rise to riots to prevent her from entering, until he physically attacks on the door of the monastery the procession that accompanied the new prioress, who was not elected by the chapter of nuns, but chosen by superiors of the Order at the urging of the Ecclesiastical Authority of the place, to bring into line the turbulent and relaxed inhabitants of the monastery. Why not mention that this great Tridentine reform, First of mystical ecstasy, He had to use as prioress of the populous monastery of on-call duty, used as appropriate for business to beat the rebellious nuns? And why, not mentioning that his room was guarded night and its cuisine and its controlled foods with care to avoid being poisoned? Therefore, the figure of St. Teresa of Avila only reduced to a mystical ecstatic Christological love, is an image that if one part is more convenient course, other less embarrasses all those who to this day, albeit in different ways and forms, in over five hundred years they have not yet transposed the solemn lesson of their Holy Mother.

How Teresa's lesson has not been transposed? To do understand we must always resort to practical concrete examples, like this: Some years ago I found myself celebrating Mass in a monastery of Carmelite nuns in place of the chaplain. When at the time of Holy Communion I went to the grating of the choir, the prioress came forward to me with a glass case to take the Eucharist to a nun who could not walk. the whispered:

"Rev. Madre, do not worry about it, I open the lattice gate that I enter into the choir to bring Communion to the sick nun ".

Replica prioress:

"It is not possible, knows: we papal enclosure, for this I am an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion ".

I do not put certain to make a fuss with the ciborium in his hand containing the Precious Body of Christ, the so called the Holy Eucharist to bring to sister. After Mass I left the church and, before rising in the car, I put it in a hidden corner of the outer wall of the enclosure, I turned on the phone and checked if there were missed calls and messages. And so, from within Blessed papal enclosure, I hear male voices. I move away from the wall and climb on a nearby off to see from a distance if I can catch a glimpse inside the cloistered space. Beyond the wall of Blessed papal enclosure there were two people in their twenties, dressed in a tank top and shorts - to clarify: The football shorts, in practice the underwear - which I assume were doing chores, because they work tools. It was clear that at that time they were on break, In fact they were talking loudly loudly and fiddling with one of their cell phones, as if they were watching something particularly funny on display.

Needless to specify in, because with common sense we can also reach the fasting in canon law: a presbyter, the exercise of its functions can sacramental, indeed must enter the necessary papal enclosure, with all the methods dictated by the canons and the monastic rules - I know, and my brother priests equally -, to administer the Sacraments to the sick nuns. But above all I have full authority to do that just in case, while the prioress prevented me to join the choir during the celebration of Holy Mass to bring Holy Communion to a sick before the whole community, and under the eyes of the faithful in the church, at the same time, however, he allowed a couple of young men more undressed than dressed to move uninhibited, coarse and irreverent in the spaces of Blessed papal enclosure the Discalced Carmelites. And while pouring followed the diaphanous image of Teresa of Avila in ecstasy, at the same time it continues to ignore that Holy Mother, the reform of the Order Carmelite, He made it necessary even with a stick. And with this as I think was explained and clarified how five hundred years, not for a few, rather unfortunately for many, They are spent unnecessarily, from century to century, from reform to reform.

WHEN TRAGEDY IS TOO TRAGIC, BETTER dampen WITH COLOR NOTE

When problems are very serious and situations that derive truly tragic, I always avail of a consolidated my faculties: From a note of color. In this case, a rose note, femininely intended. Indeed, to inspire this paper was a woman belonging to the most unfortunate of women's categories, which it is that of so-called its direct Stolte. Having said this, it should be stated that many priests and monks, in their superficial folly, They can only be overcome by the nuns. The sisters remain unsurpassed in fact an element to which even the worst of clerics and religious never be able to reach: that particular malice characterized by cruelty elements often untold which is totally unique and peculiar of the sisters. And so, finding a deal with a as direct Stolta belonging to one of an increasing number of congregations in agony destined in the coming years to the total extinction for lack of vocations and for the now very high age of religious in it survived, my question if by chance, during the period after the Second Vatican Council, something in his, as in many other congregations, It did not go the right way, the poor responds with this display of admirable acumen: "Know we can not go back to the dark times of the Council of Trent!».

The I state and I admit "candidly": I do not ask better than to be able to embarrass a as direct Stolta, those which on one hand are afraid of opening, modernity and confidence, on the other, if a four year old of their asylum must be helped to urinate, here to assist ship's secular teacher, They may remain troubled day and night for a week by the attribute of a beardless little angel, though the little angels do not orinino, since they lacked the raw material, namely the manly attribute, given that the angels have no sex. Indeed, none of our Guardian Angels was never sick prostate, while being forced to act as patron to some of the worst priests, the worst of the worst monks and nuns, What this would cause prostate cancer also apparatus urologenitale healthier. Maybe that's why the angels were created without sex, to avoid serious inflammatory and cancer diseases of the urogenital reactive to having to fulfill the role of priests keepers, brothers and sisters. Granted and admitted everything, I went to my answer was that this:

"You see, Dear sister, the Council of Trent, in case you did not know, of merit he has had many and, to be honest, the worst darkness, if anything, has freed us. In a very special way he has delivered you religious, for example prohibiting the establishment and the lives of those who called themselves secular language Case Closed».

However, since the as direct Stolta I do not understand, I wonder if instead or pretended not to understand, I had to enlighten thus continuing the conversation:

"... you know that before the Council of Trent had obscure monasteries and convents that were authentic brothels? Suffice it to say that during his homily from the pulpit of the Basilica of San Marco held on 25 December 1497, the famous Franciscan preacher Timothy from Lucca had railed against the sins being committed in the convents of Venice denouncing: “[…] when some Lord in this land, you show him the monasteries of nuns, but they are not monasteries, but brothels and public brothels” [2]. Such were in fact the monasteries - that is to say the brothels - because the noble and rich families in a very particular way, often related to issues both their assets, It is sometimes also political issues, locked up - or as they used to say they monk - their daughters, within those religious structures, But they had their separate accommodation, their servants and their own kitchen. There were powerful and noble families who built specifically abbeys and monasteries for their daughters, equipping of assets and income; and young nun of these families, in these monasteries were always elected abbess and rigor, because otherwise the powerful family would have revoked annuities. Animate so far by faith, vocation and virtues of life, young led within those sacred walls mundane existences, not infrequently as real courtesans, complete with internal parties and men who went in and out without problems; and monasteries where reigned absolute in the most unspeakable moral debauchery, They were those of the Benedictine monks and nuns of the Cistercian ".

In 1514 the Inquisition in Venice He had the opportunity to deal with a case beyond the same human imagination, the pious Benedictine monks of the Monastery of San Zaccaria, than happy to have turned their parlor - and not just the parlor -, in a reception lounge for youngsters, singers and actors, One day they organized a costume party that in its course turned into a veritable bacchanal that rivals the ancient cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum, that as we remind any fasts in Roman history they were two brothels in the open [3].

The Church Council of Trent first he reported the monasteries and convents to be what they were supposed to be: places of prayer and penance. The decree of 3 December 1563 He forbade the profession of vows before the age of sixteen and the entrance into the monastery before the twelve; He imposed the requirement of at least one year of novitiate and ruled that the bishop FINDS the real will of the young person to freely pursue a religious life. That decree reestablished so the principle of the enclosure, and subject to few exceptions no nun could leave the monastery and no outsider could enter, especially men. In 1566, with bubble About pastoral duties the Holy Pontiff Pius V impose the penalty of excommunication of all offenders, while the ecclesiastical laws had already clarified and included among the offenses that of carnal sacrilege. So only a priest, preferably elderly or in any case chosen with care by the bishop, He was admitted within the enclosure and solely to administer the sacraments to the sick or infirm nuns, and it was required by canon laws that four elderly nuns I welcome him at the entrance of the enclosure, They accompany him and then lead him back exit. The young nuns relationships with family were reduced to short meetings in the parlor, all with the rigid separation created by dense gratings, from which he could hear the voice of the nun but only barely one could catch a glimpse of the figure. The great noble families raised many protests against this hardening of convent life, but none of their protests prevented the application of the new rules born from the "dark times of the Council of Trent", which prevented families to solve their capital problems and inheritance sending their daughters in the abbeys and monasteries, and also preventing daughters without any glimmer of vocation to change these religious houses in authentic brothels within which to lead lives of real courtesans. A phenomenon, that of young people forced to monastication, who assumed implications at times not a little disturbing, especially in the cities of Venice, Naples and Palermo.

Several decades after the end of the Council of Trent, the civil authorities of the Republic of Venice came to introduce a law against Munich - the nuns lovers were given in this way - which provided up to the death penalty, This is not only for the carnal sacrilege but also for the simple violation of the enclosure. Law introduced in concrete but remained a dead letter made, because both the dissolute nuns, both their Munich, they belonged, if no penalty but almost always, the most powerful and highly placed families of those same cities.

Not only, with the Council of Trent, dignity was returned to religious life, because after that season of reform, the Church and the world was able to witness one of his extraordinary rebirth. All with all due respect to the as direct Stolta with hair in the wind and to his knees skirts fluttering on the 'obscurantism Tridentine "at the bedside of his dying congregation now in the oncology department of women's religious life, which currently hospitalized dozens of religious congregations that within a few years no longer exist.

It was the true obscurantism!

THE COUNCIL OF TRENTO OFFERED GREAT MEDICINE BUT THE CARE WAS NOT TOTAL BECAUSE OF MANY DOCTORS WHO DID NOT PRACTICE IT

The Council of Trent It was not exactly a meeting between brothers gathered in Rome to talk a little ' modernization and pastoral, replacing dialogue at the harsh sentence e the rigor of the hard doctrine to theological reasoning open and pluralist, like five centuries following - just to clarify -, It was reduced the Second Vatican Council, during which it was produced: before para-council theologians in cahoots with journalists, Then follows the much more problematic post-council, which gave rise to that for years I define as the Council egomenico socio-theologians. The Council of Trent had first run for eighteen years [1545 – 1563] and it took place under the pontificates of Popes Paul III, born Alessandro Farnese principles [Canine 1468 - Rome 1549], Giulio III [Monte San Savino 1487 - Rome 1555], PO IV [Milan 1499 - Rome 1565]. I considered it appropriate to clarify this history because of the ignorance that reigns today - alas, even and especially in the Catholic clergy -, not rarely have heard clergy and pastors in the care of souls say that the Council of Trent would take place under the pontificate of St. Pius V, He was instead elected two years after the closing of the Council of Trent, In the 1566. This confusion unfortunately generated from gross ignorance stems from the fact that the Saint Pius V published 14 July 1570 the reformed and unified edition Roman Missal, also known as Missal of St. Pius V or how Tridentine Missal.

The Council of Trent offered, Also at disciplinary level, undoubted, large and effective treatments. We could say that in his own way he established chemotherapy to fight cancer and prevent the spread of metastases in the body of the Church. Even in spite of the visible Church it was far from the mutate in the following decades in the Heavenly Jerusalem, because the fight against cancer and metastases will always be ineffective if oncologists in charge fail to carry out the treatment with all its therapies. All this we learn from the writings and words penned fire and spoken by different saints in their lyrics or sermons. Sant'Alfonso Maria de 'Liguori, Bishop and Doctor of the Church [1696-1726] He did not hesitate to complain about the bleak and low level of Bishops of Southern Italy, their economic interests and their subservience to political power in achieving the benefits and perquisites; He did not hesitate even to identify them scarce pastoral skills, but above the low theological formation, with all that could ensue from such bishops to their clergy. Needless to say, we are about two centuries after the close of the Council of Trent.

Complaints similar to those of the Holy Bishop and doctor Alfonso Maria de 'Liguori, emerge in different expressive style but identical in substance from the writings of Blessed Antonio Rosmini, It collected more than a century after the work The Five Wounds of the Holy Church [the text edited by Rosmini Fathers is readable WHO].

Are Sant'Alfonso Maria de ’Liguori, below Blessed Antonio Rosimini, respectively they were expressed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries within terms so real and severe, this is due to the fact that after two three centuries after the close of the Council of Trent, even some of its fundamental rules had not yet been applied in many regions of old Europe, including quite a few ancient local churches of apostolic foundation. Like this, for seeming paradox, The Council of Trent had better and more widespread application in mission lands through the work of missionaries, that moving the Tridentine whole continents evangelized disciplines. The consequences were that, while in the missions of Latin America the missionaries provided to institute in the 16th century seminars made compulsory by the Fathers of the Council for the formation of priests, in many ancient Diocese of Southern Italy, the mid-eighteenth century, the seminars were not yet in place. And when they were instituted, it were to form in them the children of the nobility or the upper middle class, then be allocated to important ecclesiastical posts, while the majority of future priests seguitavano to receive their education from poor rural pastors as they did before the Council of Trent. It should not be forgotten that for matters both political and economic, in many European countries, the application of many canons of the Council of Trent, It was hampered by the rulers, obviously with the complacent acquiescence of the local bishops, that if one side did not apply, on the other profited, by the Bourbons in southern Italy as the German princes in the far north of Europe, their good benefits and perquisites.

The Council of Trent established the age of twenty-five years to receive priestly ordination, but many bishops are not adhered to that as to other provisions, It is something comprehensive as one of the great saints of charity, Vincenzo de 'Paoli [Pouy, 1581 - Paris, 1660], coming from a very poor family and encouraged by his father to study divinity with the support of a wealthy lawyer of Toulouse who paid his education expenses, but above all we do not know if it moved initially from a true vocation, which in any case came later and with results quite extraordinary. Indeed, the father, he hoped that in the future, acquired one status superior, his son could help and support the family. Regardless of the provisions of the first four decades by the canons of the Council of Trent, the Bishop of Toulouse ordained him priest at only nineteen years 23 September of 1600.

AFTER THE COUNCIL OF TRENT, MAYBE THE DISAPPEARED FROM MONASTERIES malpractice FEMALE?

The sixteenth century was undoubtedly the century of the great reformers and great Saints who formed and concrete implementation of the reforms made by the Council of Trent, think of Saint Ignatius [Azpeitia, 1491 - Rome, 1556] and his first Comrades, a San Filippo Neri [Florence, 1515 - Rome 1595] and St. Felix of Cantalice [Cantalice, 1515 - Rome, 1587], a San Carlo Borromeo [Arona, 1538 – Milano, 1584], to San Pietro da Alcantara [Alcántara, 1499 – Arenas, 1562], a Santa Teresa d’Avila [Avila, 1515 - Alba de Tormes, 1582] and St. John of the Cross [Fontiveros, 1542 – Úbeda, 1591], San Giovanni d'Avila [Almodovar del Campo, 1499 - Montilla, 1569], St John of God [Montemor-o-Novo, 1495 – Granada, 1550] ... without forgetting of course the already mentioned figure of the Saint Pius V [Bosco Marengo, 1504 - Rome, 1572], that for these Saints was inspiring and authentic teaching model, moral and pastoral virtues.

The vices and moral decadence that snaked in convents and monasteries between the fifteenth and the sixteenth, They were far from being eradicated. Or to put it with some sad examples chosen at random among the many historically available: a stone's throw from Rome, in the town of Sora, the mid-nineteenth, in the canonical territory of the Diocese of Sora-Aquino-Pontecorvo, the abbess of the monastery of Santa Chiara, Domna Maria Francesca Tronconi, Arch-communicated Montecassino, Dom Celestino Gonzaga from Naples, that Canon Basil Fortuna, member of the Chapter of the Cathedral of Santa Maria Assunta in Sora and ordinary confessor of the nuns of St. Clare, He had abused three nuns during sacramental confessions and have them put pregnant. of the three, a certain Iacobelli, in the days that the abbess wrote that letter she would be close to giving birth [4].

How can we forget what we are then able certain religious, just tell among many a case: In the 1821, two nuns of the monastery of St. Andrew Apostle to Arpino and with them a third, even schoolgirl, They accused the ordinary confessor of serious harassment. After careful canonical investigations the allegations proved unfounded, however, and the three women withdrew their complaint, trying to argue that you were wrong and that they had merely misunderstood the priest. The sad story was completely different, however, in terms: one of the nuns had marchingegnato all with the support and complicity of the other two, wishing she retaliate in every way the confessor who the previous year had Ecclesiastical Authority denounced a priest to serious abuses of religious. The priest denounced, But this was a relative of a nun, he thought tarnished the good name of his family because of that complaint. Like this, the religious, he tried to take revenge by making the same accusation to this innocent [5].

According to the term of the Holy Bishop and Doctor of the Church Ambrose of Milan [Gaul 337 – Mediolanum 397] the Church is "chaste whore», One woman chaste. Expression, the ancient Bishop of Milan on which over a decade ago, the Venerable Pontiff Benedict XVI structured one of his homilies indicating the Church as "holy and made up of sinners" [6] [the full text is readable, WHO]. In some particular historical moments, the Church does not even appear to be made up simply defeasible men and sinners, but as a veritable structure of sin which produces an internal sin and that it spreads to its outer.

Even before the Council of Trent, the immorality and the great moral decay that raged in the clergy was condemned in the strongest possible terms by the Fourth Lateran Council, Seventy who promulgated decrees of reform and that he was called to the man of iron of Pope Innocent III [Gavignano 1161 – Perugia 1216]. The disciplinary canons of this council suggest in a very clear and comprehensive way what were the deep and serious moral lapse and corruptions that impestavano the clergy. but yet, a few decades later, after the celebration of that Council, another saint and doctor of the Church, Bonaventura da Bagnoregio [Bagnoregio 1221 - Lyon 1274], he expressed himself in these terms at all reassuring:

"Rome corrupts the prelates who corrupt the priests who corrupt the People of God".

To assess the situation in this Church, one wonders if the disciplinary canons against moral immorality of the clergy were written for the church 1215 or to those of today [text in Italian translation is readable, WHO].

No Council, He never made the perfect Church, none of them has ever destroyed corruption of man and sin. I concilî, some of them in particular, They have given the Church oxygen and they put her in a position to continue to live in an ecclesial body made up of clerics and lay faithful within which always lived with sinners and saints. All this is explained by the parable of the weeds and the good grain that ends with these words:

«[…] From where it is therefore the tares? And he answered them: An enemy has done this. And the servants said: Do you want us to go and gather? No, He answered, because when you, gathering the weeds, with it also uproot the wheat. Let them both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to burn; but gather the wheat into my barn " [Mt 13, 27-30].

WHAT IS THE REAL SITUATION OF WOMEN RELIGIOUS LIFE AFTER THE GREAT BREATH OF THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL ?

To answer this question let's start from the figures: the world's population now has seven and a half billion people, in today's world the average age of a woman's life is 70 years and eight months; that of a European woman is 84 years and nine months. Today the world's Catholics are about one billion three hundred million. The religious orders and religious congregations, according to statistics the 30 October 2018 They have made official data 2017, amount to 659.445, subtracting the number of deaths to the number of new religious professions have a decrease of less 10.885, the average age of religious is equal to 64 year old, but if the statistics were removed from Africa and some Asian countries, the average age of religious would be above 70 year old, testing is something that in Europe, for two decades in this part, religious are gradually disappearing from whole diocese [cf. official statistics, WHO]. We are now going back sixty years, to be exact, five years before the opening of the Second Vatican Council, when according to the paradigm of as direct Stolta used as the theme of my writing, vigevano rules "obscurantist" the Council of Trent. In 1958 the world population had two billion nine hundred million people, Catholics around the world were about 800 millions, the average age of a woman's life was 49 year old, that of a European woman 67 year old, religious orders and religious congregations were in 1957 one million and sixty thousand, the average age of the religious was 41 year old, subtracting the number of deaths to the number of new religious professions have increased more 12.450.

I point out, who possibly had not paid any attention, when are these two alarming statistics: that recorded when ever existed "obscurantism Tridentine", one recorded half a century after the explosion of New Pentecost occurred with the Second Vatican Council. The alarming fact is based on both the number of the world population and on that of Catholics worldwide. Indeed, in the era when "obscurantist" the world's population did not reach three billion people and the Catholics were about 800 millions, religious in the world were more than a million, while half a century after New Pentecost, compared with a world population more than doubled - seven billion and a half people -, and in the face of a worldwide Catholic population increased from about 800 millions of faithful to one billion three hundred million, religious are lowered to an equal number to over 400.000 in just sixty years, all - I repeat again - while the world's population had more than doubled, while Catholics were half a billion members in more than about half a century before.

If the numbers are dry and have no soul, But they have a history, above all, a reason for being, here then rise to the first question: if after what some ecclesiastics and contemporary theologians define triumphantly as the greatest council of church history, we have come to these statistics; if by the day close religious institutions, monasteries and convents historical tradition, someone, intends to begin to wonder if, in what at the time was defined as New Pentecost, something did not go the right way? It is a response, this, which is required so serenely painful to the Ecclesiastical Authority and to the Pastors of the Church, It is not claimed by prevention, or irony, and least of all by blind ideology: is a response claimed by the numbers, which as I said before do not have souls, but they have their own history and their reason for being. E, These staggering numbers, half a century since the end of the church council represent a question that just claim reply, although it costs to admit that just before, that during and after the Second Vatican Council, something went wrong, with the consequent result that today we have before; results made entirely undeniable aridity, but at the same time from the undeniable precision of the numbers.

It WAS REQUIRED "UPDATE" OF RELIGIOUS STROKES SUITS, HEADS UNCOVERED AND PUT INTO FOLD THE HAIRDRESSER ?

Between the mid-sixties and the early seventies of the twentieth century, the lives of most women's congregations was shocked - more and worse than those of men -, the largest wave of so-called "update". There have been various capocomici during the unhappy season of the post-conciliar egomenico - at the head of all the Jesuits, that in many religious institutes held for many years the ministry of confessors and spiritual directors -, who they have literally turned upside down life, the meaning of life and charisma of those institutions. O, always use concrete examples: but to 1965 religious were covered with their clothes from head to toe and her hair completely hidden by the veil, the meaning and the sense of which date until the time of the apostolic. The same Blessed Virgin Mary is depicted in iconography since the first centuries with so-called maphorion [maphórion]. The maphorion, then known as "monastic veil", It was and still is the sign of the virgins consecrated to God. The Blessed Apostle Paul, addressing to the people of Corinth, recommended for women to cover their heads. It is an apostolic letter from undoubtedly put the era and culture in which it was written, but through a message that has never lost relevance it implies the sign and the intimate sense of belonging to God the woman he consecrated [The Cor 11, 1-6]. But here suddenly, a few years after the last council, we found ourselves in front of nuns dressed in tailors, with skirts that barely covered the knee and with dyed hair treated with permanent and cared for by styling your hair done at the hairdresser. I wonder and wonder: and perhaps an attack of treason, just say and nothing but the truth, namely that such things, in North America and several European countries, They are mainly occurring at those religious congregations which have always, if not for real tradition, They are availing themselves of the Jesuits as confessors, spiritual directors, teachers and preachers? [one example among many, WHO].

The facts show that the so-called "updating" of the religious in tailors, with bare heads and hairdresser's curls, produced emptying of entire congregations, which will disappear permanently when octogenarians survived today will finally be buried with their tailors, their bare heads and put them into the fold of the hairdresser. But, die-date! And with them it will be delivered to the grave of their religious congregation, and also just updated.

THE RELIGIOUS HOUSES AND EMPTY nefarious "CAMPAIGNS PURCHASE" THE VARIOUS RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS Rasenti A TIME ... THE "TRAFFICKING IN BLACK"

In certain things we must proceed with caution because unfortunately there is an ideological closure priori: indeed, everything is black, itself is beautiful and good. Above all, everything is black, survived victim, or falling victim to the nefarious colonial policies and conquest of the various countries of the West. If in various countries of the African continent today we find ourselves with an unmanageable clergy who, starting from the great chimera of inculturation - another magical word of the post council - ended up becoming a clergy that ranges between animism and an adulterated and corrupt Catholicism, this is due to the fact that between the middle and the end of the Sixties, the Holy Pontiff Paul VI had the questionable vision of wanting to create at all costs of the local bishops, unmindful that some of those countries had been evangelized even thirty years ago. There have been numerous cases of elevated subject to the episcopal dignity only forty years, or at thirty or thirty-eight, who had been baptized and become Christians at thirteen or fifteen years, after being born and raised in families that had taught them from childhood to animistic cults and the worship of ancestral spirits.

In times gone by there someone tried to tell the Holy Pontiff Paul VI that in order to create an indigenous clergy, and that it took generations to create the first bishops chosen among natives was best to wait for a century, or at least no less than seventy or eighty, but at this, he well knew him well, would not listen, committing, in this as in other cases, of considerable errors. We clarify the whole with an example related to a sad figure, that Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo, excommunicated in 2006 and then discharged from the clerical state in 2009 [official document, WHO] …

… Emmanuel Milingo was born in 1930 Zambia, African country where real evangelization - after some sporadic attempts made only at the end of the nineteenth century in a few places by small groups of missionaries -, It starts only after 1915. He received the baptism in 1942 the age of twelve and priestly ordination in 1958 at the age of 28 year old. In 1959, just 39 year old, He is elected Archbishop of Lusaka, Capital of Zambia. He received episcopal consecration by Pope Paul VI, who he had wanted bishop and who greeted him as the youngest bishop in the entire African Continent. This timeline does not need comments, because the apotheosis imprudence is enclosed all the dates, which just add that the apostolic vicariates established around the 1915 Zambia, They have only been elevated to diocese between the 1959 and the 1976. Emmanuel Milingo was the first native archbishop of the Archdiocese of Lusaka, his predecessors were two appointed Polish Jesuit missionary bishops holders and placed at the head of the Apostolic Vicariate: Bruno Wolnik from 1927 al 1950; Adam Kozłowiecki dal 1955 al 1969. The latter, First he cultivated and then pointed to Paul VI, the young Emmanuel Milingo as a figure of Episcopal profile. In the consistory of 21 February 1998 Adam Kozłowiecki was made a cardinal by the Holy Father John Paul II, while Emmanuel Milingo, for its problematic not sustainable on site, He had already been forced to give up the government of his diocese and called to Rome in 1983. Fifteen years before the mentor Emmanuel Milingo was created cardinal for his missionary and pastoral merits - merits to which you could add a concept in vogue in the Society of Jesus, or the “ability to discern” —, he had already given all the problems worse, until his grotesque participation as a guest singer at the Italian Song Festival in San Remo 1997, to follow with its entry into a sect, his sham marriage with a Korean Lady, his act of apostasy from the faith and of schism from the Catholic Church. At the concrete evidence of Emmanuel Milingo facts he has not done anything to miss, however, it remains unanswered the key question: those who occasionally helps with its own light, emotional and imaginative recklessness the birth and development of similar “monsters”, in our Church in which Caesar is never wrong and Caesar's wife is always and penalty above any suspicion?

What have been the results of certain pastoral choices? It was, unfortunately, that many bishops of these countries just evangelized, in fact they behaved as the great tribal leaders, but above all they had always at groups of young service nuns belonging to the myriad of congregations of diocesan right arose like mushrooms during the whole of Africa; and all with the same original and strange charisma: assist bishops and priests. However, in a socio-cultural context in which today priestly celibacy, but especially chastity linked to it, it is not easy to penetrate, it was necessary to collect, for bishops and for priests, of the domestic sexual so clean, so to speak, avoiding, if anything, that the priests leave pregnant girls from village to village. And what happened to practice, If the nun became pregnant? If it was not had an abortion - what unfortunately happened several times -, at that point the nun ended thrown out by the community, and the priest sent instead to study in Rome at the Congregation expenses of reliable advertising.

Since the anthropological wolf He loses his hair but not the vice, here in 2008, the four corners of the large refectory of the Roman Collegio San Pietro next to the Pontifical Urban University, appear signs that warn: "It is forbidden to the priests pick up the nuns in their rooms'. Signs that were read by dozens of priests, including two today, more than a decade away, They have become bishops, one of an African diocese, one of a missionary diocese of Latin America; were in fact the ones who, to inform me of these signs posted by the rector of the college and to make me see the images themselves photographed.

While in the prime of New Pentecost the houses of religious institutes were emptied during the seventies, while many novitiates were now deserted and shortly thereafter, the nuns of old Europe would have to begin to come to terms with age, here is that their superiors general farsighted decided together with their tips to open missions in several African and Asian countries. And in the late seventies and early eighties he began: the shameless and somewhat immoral ways recruitment drive we might in some ways be compared to a real It is black.

But we have to prudently fly on how to treat and difficult to put on the right line certain African youth, culturally refractory even the most basic forms of discipline are the backbone of community life in religious communities, because addressing certain issues would stand promptly in response a polyphonic chorus of souls politically correct to begin the solemn hymn: At racist, the racist! And we do not talk about what happened in certain religious communities when they are ready rather than Brazilian groups, with elderly nuns who prayed for the grace of a good death fast, or at least the grace to remain deaf and blind as soon as possible, ond'evitar of attending some havoc.

This manovalanza acquired in such shopping campaigns to prevent the extinction of certain congregations, although no time, almost always it has also been particularly expensive, with implications far from clean. Many of these congregations, the acquisition of certain religious, They have paid and are continuing to pay with the economic maintenance of all the families of the nuns. To this are then added to the depredations of the sisters themselves, They just could have seized money from the speakers or the resources of religious communities, to send to their relatives in their countries of origin. Repeatedly, these sisters, always at the expense of the community they have brought their brothers and sisters in Europe, forcing the congregation to provide for their accommodation, including that of brothers and nephews anything but willing to work, Why, in some African countries and cultures, to work is the woman, not the man. It's here, to prevent the polyphonic choir of politically correct souls ready to cheer At racist, the racist! Part, steps to the complaint, it is good to remain silent about the nationality of some of these African men, allergic to such point to the work that, if one day encounter the person who invented the job, would not hesitate to kill barrel. I refer of course to those who, although not to work, They prefer much more to bring their wives and their daughters into prostitution on the streets of our cities, Finally exercising their job: pull his pocket money then when they go to take them back at the end of their service.

After the wave of African and Brazilian, It has come below that of Indian. In that case we met several times before really young pretty girls. And when a very beautiful European girl became a nun, This was almost always a sign of a particular vocation and solid, because if he wanted, He would have pleased and happy life when you choose the best husband that she could choose, because it has always, female beauty, It is an asset that can produce excellent weddings.

The recruitment drive indiana It does not however take into account one thing, or rather he did not want to take them into account: in most parts of India, if a family does not have the money necessary to constitute a dowry to his daughter, this, It was also a pearl of rare beauty, can not marry. And girls who can not get married, often they choose between two different trades: be prostitutes in Calcutta, or to the nuns. And between the two choices, Many rightly choose the second option.

The superiors general of the congregations who have done shopping campaigns in India, If they want to tell us what happened, those girls so beautiful but so poor, free for this wedding dowry, when they arrived nuns in Italy? Well, given that most priests are liars only the nuns, knowing that such a question would remain unanswered or otherwise be processed with a response of all false, the truth will be better for you to narrate I: most of these beautiful girls, arrived in Italy or other European countries, shortly after they found a man that if he married is treating them as authentic queens. Indeed, for the Italian man, and in general for European men, a young woman, beautiful and above all with the femininity now-lost many of our tomboys women only able to place themselves in a professional and social competition with men, is a wealth that is priceless. That's where many of the beautiful girls are over, arrived in Italy as nuns, in response to shopping campaigns by many dying religious congregations who are breathing their last breaths thanks to the New Pentecost.

SOON we will witness the BIGGEST SALE OF THE RELIGIOUS HERITAGE

Many religious congregations have large real estate portfolios. Numerous possess great stable and of great historical and artistic value, They possess other large buildings that were once kindergartens, schools, education institutions and colleges. Turning to the only Roma, It is visible for all to see that already many of these buildings have been transformed into shelters or hotels, other leased or sold to private. Naturally, and especially coming from the historic centers of large cities, it will not be possible to convert all these facilities in hotels or in prestigious locations representative offices of private companies or freelancers with the parcels to six zeros. Therefore, Most of these assets, They are intended to be sold off in a short time. So that, within a short time, We witness the most colossal sellout of religious Real Estate. Perhaps, businessmen and various vultures, They have already done their accounts, or maybe, with cold lucidity, They have already done the project to divide the pie among various real estate companies and groups of individuals and wealthy businessmen.

To this figure, or if you prefer at this tragic chronicle of death foretold, unite all the complications arising from nefarious shopping campaigns. Example: There are religious congregations who for many decades, if not for centuries, we are dedicated to childhood education or the management of secondary schools are characterized by the high quality of training. These institutions, for greater, They were holding up thanks to the nuns who were all of them teachers; to be fair, They were also some of great teachers and high level. During the New Pentecost, the Holy Spirit, instead fill vocations novitiates, But it seems that for inscrutable mystery of grace has emptied them, while in, the nuns, over time grew old. Thanks to recruitment drive several congregations managed to survive by acquiring a number of African and Indian nuns, which however, far from graduates and far from perfectly juggle in the Italian language, They had little training school and they could not speak the Italian language, So imagine if you could replace their older sisters in school education. A quel point, if it was possible, the institute was changed into a hotel in which today, a group of young African and Indian nuns, do the maids, while the few surviving old Italian will step forward to run and manage as long as they will live as long or will the whole administration. Request: what's going to happen, When elderly Italian nuns die and these institutions, with related assets, They will end up in the hands of the fruit of the wicked recruitment drive? Because tomorrow, the so-called "proprietary completely", They will be groups of foreign Sisters of low culture, without proper instruction, with some knowledge of the Italian language and so to follow.

Given that the current nuns have always tried to stay away, as I believe it is good to stay away from the corpses put in the morgue refrigerator cells awaiting you some free place for their burial in the cemetery overcrowded, in my own priestly ministry and pastoral experience I can say that I have known in Italy only a handful of African and Asian sisters with deep training and professional skills. For instance: I remember some Indian sisters in one of the best clinics in Rome, owned and run by the congregation of these religious, are professional nurses who all surgeons operating in that structure always try to get as close to the operating room assistants, because they are of an extraordinary talent. But we must note that these Indian nuns are native state of Kerala, where the Christian culture is very ancient and where that particular church boasts its apostolic foundation, occurred in the year 52 D.C.. Apostle Thomas to work. And for culture and ancient Christian tradition, religious Kerala are totally different from those of other religious region of India which are vegetarian and do not eat meat for fear of being able to feed some of their ancestor reincarnated as a cow or a calf. Also in Rome, I met an outstanding Filipino nun, Today almost seventy, arrived in Italy just nineteen years of age, who for years he was a teacher and principal of a middle school run by his religious congregation. In addition to his hard work and for her extraordinary capacity for work, this religious speaks Italian as a true native speaker, he received at the time the degree in letters and has been for nearly forty years a very good teacher and then principal of the school teaching. Even in this case, But, we're talking about a woman born in the Philippines, where Catholicism was not brought a few decades ago, but it has a history of more than five hundred years, however it characterized by a Catholic population particularly linked to the Christian faith and deeply devoted to Rome. Different story but completely analogous to that of the Philippine nun, that of a Congolese nun who juggles a perfect Italian and speaks English beautifully, French and Spanish. This religion of Congolese origin comes from an old family being Catholic for generations and that he decided to become a nun when, with a scholarship, He came little more than eighteen years in Rome to carry out their university studies, after studying for four years at the Italian High School in his hometown, He is having planned her parents to send her to study in the European metropolis which they consider the great world capital of Christendom. And here we note that the evangelization of Congo got underway in the late fifteenth century, while the early seventeenth century, the Jesuits established in that country the institution of the Holy Savior, that will train for years to follow the classes Congolese leaders, while in the mid-seventeenth century came the Capuchin Friars Minor, which he was instead given the task to educate and assist the local clergy in the erection of parishes.

Subject to the exceptions and without fear that the polyphonic choir of political correctness gives startup hymn At racist, the racist! The products of these shopping campaigns, in addition to the large number of Indian sisters landed the religious life because without dowries and thus the fundamental means to marry, was the introduction in many religious congregations of many Sisters from various African countries recently evangelized, become Christian by teenagers, lack a deep Christian formation and without adequate religious formation due to their own lack of Christian education, steeped in animism, He is suffering from quite a few superstitions and in fact tied to ancestral cults AGAIN. When old Italian nuns who now govern the day their lives with his teeth, and on the other they continue to hold and manage these congregations, will fail, what will happen to these institutions, including their assets often substantial sums, when everything will be in the hands of the products of unhappy campaign purchases?

It WAS BETTER IN PERIOD BEFORE THE COUNCIL OF TRENT MONASTERI WHEN MANY WERE THE AUTHENTIC brothels

The fruits produced by New Pentecost, or as others say "to input that air spring in the closets too long closed the Holy Church of God", They are those that we can see: are fruits that have produced a religious crisis in women's institutions as he had never seen before. After all we have planted a tree that was to be the most beautiful and lush garden, and although in fact it is not, there are those who declares him to be, throwing all the lightning and thunderbolts ostracism towards anyone who dares to indicate that the tree is ugly and sick. Yet the Holy Gospel, through the words of Christ the Lord, It teaches us how to recognize trees:

"No good tree bears bad fruit, nor a bad tree bear good fruit. Each tree is known by its own fruit: They do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from brambles. The good person out of the good from the good treasure of his heart; and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil, For the mouth speaks out of the abundance of the heart " [LC 6, 43-45].

We should therefore ask ourselves: If the tree has grown crooked and the fruits from it data have died before they even sprout, it may be that both the plant it has in it grow, something went wrong?

Vatican II was a council of the Church, to be exact XXI, was neither a super-council or the council of councils. But most of all, as he explained the Venerable Pope Benedict XVI, Vatican II can not be turned into a kind of superdogma. This concept was taken up by the Supreme Pontiff 14 February of 2013, three days after making withdrawal from the holy throne. In his speech to the Roman clergy, Benedict XVI clearly admits that rages in the Church a serious crisis of doctrinal and moral order, attributing it to both the para-council celebrated by theologians on the columns of the newspapers, both post-conciliar:

«[…] We know how this council of media It is accessible to all. So, This was the dominant one, more efficient, and it has created many disasters, many problems, really so much misery: seminars closed, convents closed, liturgy banal ... and the true Council has struggled to materialize, to be realized; the virtual council was stronger than the real Council […]» [full text, WHO].

In the mid-sixties it was announced the arrival of new springtime of the Church, to the test of the facts we have instead plunged into one of the worst Siberian winters, or as I wrote in my article two years ago: we are the new Roman Empire. [see text WHO].

As I explained during my writing, after the Council of Trent, we have seen a great revival of the Church together with great missionary activity, all placed in the history of the sixteenth century was a century of great reformers and great Saints. Even despite, The Council of Trent did not DeBello all the malpractices, and several centuries away many of its fundamental rules were not yet applied everywhere, or were only partially applied.

The products posthumously to the Second Vatican Council are now under the eyes of all: half a century by what some suggest as the largest Church Council, or the council of the councils, the Church is facing a crisis of doctrine, moral and spiritual before which it is really hard to find historical precedents, because it is a situation of a crisis entirely new. In conclusion, therefore, with the initial paradigm of as direct Stolta who claimed: "Know we can not go back to the dark times of the Council of Trent!», as a last conclusive answer I think I can replicate that in terms of women's religious life, perhaps it would be better to go back to the period before the Council of Trent, when many monasteries were reduced to authentic brothels. Do not forget that in them, in addition to become nuns such compulsion, there were also Sante that as good wheat lived side by side with the weeds [cf. Mt 13, 27-30], because as the Apostle teaches Beato: "Where sin increased, abounded grace » [RM 5, 20]. And the end is worth reiterating that the great reformer and Santa Teresa of Avila was born in this kind of dissolute populated monasteries of nuns, becoming what it has become and producing the fruit that produced.

Today this is not possible, because we are no longer talking about wheat and weeds that live together and which should be left together to avoid the risk of destroying even a single ear of good wheat; Today we are facing the corpse of women religious place inside the refrigerated morgue to prevent it from decomposing. And the state of grace, as known, abounds also and above all in the worst sin, but on living bodies, not on the dead bodies. But no one can pronounce it on a corpse formula: "I baptize you…», or "I absolve you from your sins", less so you can give the Holy Eucharist in the mouth of a dead saying the inanimate corpse "The Body of Christ".

But this, the as direct Stolta with the hair blowing in the wind and the half-leg skirt, abbeveratasi the post-council created by the para-council, He does not know, like all people who live unconscious and irresponsible with the idea of a spring under the winter frost of the glacial temperatures of Siberia. Because the trees, beautiful and lush, they are for the fruits that give, not for the fruits but not given to us in any case imagined. Faith is not based on ideological emotions but on facts, for as sure what he preached one of the great teachers of the school, Sant'Anselmo d'Aosta: faith seeking understanding, understanding seeking faith [Faith requires reason, the reason requires faith]. Fantasy and Illusion, are not fundamental elements of our faith, but elements of destruction of faith, because by removing the great light of reason which produces works and which is a gift of admirable grace of the Holy Spirit, then comes to life a pseudo Christianity based on the sentimental and sull'emotivo. And so, you pass from Christianity to neo-paganism, to Gnosticism, if not worse: to atheism. In fact, "faith, if it has no works, He is dead in itself […] show me your faith without works, and I by my works will show you my faith " [Ge 2 1, 17-18]. Here is the fundamental question of which many terrible, too many, must make God seriously: what were the fruits of the work and what kind of faith have produced? In fact these fruits that we will be recognized and then judged by God, because "wisdom is vindicated by her works" [Mt 11, 19].

the Island of Patmos, 3 February 2019

Presentation of the Lord Jesus in the Temple

No need to de-sanctify and take the fun of the Catholic Church, because the Catholic Church is de-sacralized and makes fun of itself

NOTE

[1] «where the violation […] carefully restored;, and where intact […] pRESERVED»: (C)oncilii Tridentinii Press. Some comprising six done after the sixth session (XXII) until the end of parliament (17 sept. 1562-4 dec. 1563).

[2] Quote Original in Italian archaic: «[…] when it comes somewhere in this land Mr., I show them monasteries of nuns, ma prostribuli of the monastery of the public does not out of the bordel» — Marino Sanuto, Diaries (by Federico Stefani), Venice, 1879, t. I, col. 836. See. Pius also Paschini, The convents in Italy in the '500, in AA. VV., Problems of religious life in Italy in the sixteenth century. Proceedings of the history of the Church in Italy, Bologna, 2-6 September 1958, Antenor Publishing, Padova, 1960, pp. 31-60 Innocent and Giuliani, Genesis and the first century of life of the Magistrate over monasteries (Venice, 1962).

[3] S. F. Wemple – S. Salvatore – S. Giulia: A case study in the endowment and patronage of a major female monastery in northern Italy, in Women of the medieval world. Edited by Julian Kirshner and Suzanne F. Wemple. New York: Blackwell, 1985.

[4] Archive of the Apostolic Nunciature of Naples, Scat. 44, Denunciation of the abbess Domna Maria Francesca Tronconi, 21 April 1836.

[5] ASDS, by location Acts, Arpino, B. 61, FASC. 4. ASV, Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, The positions of nuns, November 1822, S. German, Placida Hulls.

[6] CF. S.S. Benedict XVI, Homily at the Epiphany liturgy, Archbasilica Papale di San Pietro, 6 January 2008.

Thanking all dear readers who have supported us, I remember, as we are now well aware of our many loyal, that our work is based entirely on your financial support [cf. WHO], and in this regard we recall:

"Do not you know that those celebrating the cult, from the cult get their food, and those who serve at the altar, receive their share from the altar? So also the Lord has commanded that those who proclaim the Gospel should live by the Gospel " [The Cor 9, 13-14].

.

«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:

or you can use the bank account:
They were IT 08 (J) 02008 32974 001436620930
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 ]

In this terrible dark night, for the New Year 2019 the work program has been dictated to the Island of Patmos from the Blessed Apostle Peter: “Your enemy, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, looking for someone to devour. Resist him, firm in the faith, knowing that your brothers around the world suffer the same sufferings as you "

4 January 2019/7 Comments/in Theologica/by father ariel

— Theologica —

IN THIS TERRIBLE NIGHT BUIA, FOR THE NEW YEAR 2019 THE WORK PROGRAM HAS BEEN INSPIRED TO THE ISLAND OF THE BLESSED APOSTLE PETER PATMOS: "YOUR ENEMY, THE DEVIL, AS A ROARING LION GOES ON TOUR, LOOKING WHO EAT. Resist him, firm in the Faith, KNOWING THAT YOUR BROTHERS SCATTERED TO THE WORLD SUFFER THE SAME SUFFERING OF YOU '

"The church, this spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, she is drunk with shrewd enemies who fill her with bitterness and who lay their sacrilegious hands on all her most desirable things. Where is the seat of the Blessed Peter mail to the chair of truth to enlighten the people, there have established the throne of their abominable impiety, so hitting the shepherd, dispersing the flock " [S.S. Leone XIII, AGAINST SATAN AND ANGELS]

PDF print format article

Author
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

The period that marks the end and the beginning of a new year, more than time budgets and programs is a special occasion more to rely on God and the Blessed Virgin Mary Mater Dei, especially in these times not happy, before which occurs to my mind the tender memory of the late Cardinal Carlo Caffara, that in one of our last conversations, when the 19 August 2017 He was kind enough to call me to greet me for my 54th birthday, in the turn of the speech he said:

"What the Church to live a dramatic moment that has no historical precedent, only blind and irrational can deny, if anything remains passive waiting for all steps and to come as for better times charm ".

And just with the Cardinal Carlo Caffara I faced many times complex and painful conversations related to those passages of Holy Scripture used today by many exegetes, sure you can use them as if they were homeopathic pills with which to treat a degenerated cancer in its terminal phase irreversible. Let me be clear: "Homeopathic pills" are certainly not the Holy Scriptures, or certain steps in particular, it is the way in which some presume reassuringly surreal use those passages of God's Word that encloses to the tragedy of our own rules in mind. This is combined with an operation in itself worse: use the Holy Scriptures monche, extrapolating a piece of sentence out of context and use them to tell them what to them is not really written. Simply it said that using this way, the Word of God to impose or to seal with the supernatural its human opinions, in some respects it could be worse than heresy to state. Perhaps it was this way of acting he did say to Karl Marx - which was invented not the concept but the extrapolated by Titus Lucretius Carus - that "Religion is the opium of the Peoples'. And he was right, If this definition he meant the kind of religion that God uses in preposterous way, or so to say opiate, in order first and last to impose the subjective ideas and totally objectionable man. There has always been a fact much worse classical atheism atheism which denies God: atheism of those who use God to deify their own opinions and interpretations, , changing their in divine truths not subject to discussion and disproved. Forever, the worst atheism, It is not to deny God, but the place of God; It is not to deny his word, but the twisting of his Word. And today, Unfortunately, teem in the visible Church bishops and priests who are the perfect atheists devotees practitioners.

Incidentally remember that Lucretius [Campania 94 a.C. - Rome 54 a.C], In his work Nature, It says how they are evident the dire consequences of religion, citing as an example the case of Iphigenia, below explaining that the myth is a false representation of reality, the so-called euhemerism, Named after prosperity [Evemero from Messina, who lived between the fourth and third centuries B.C.. in Ancient Greece] from which develops the idea that the origin of the gods, else there would be that of human personality, marked by special skills and talents, and finally folded due to divine nature and consequent worship of worship by populations. The religion, according to the classic Roman Author, that's what the main cause of ignorance and unhappiness of men. Now, as Lucretius was born about a century and died half a century before the birth of Christ, It is obvious that he does not turn to Christianity, but the negative religious spirit that runs through the entire history of humanity. Long would be the anthropological and historical discourse to explain and demonstrate with scientific rigor that in the history of humanity, the decline, sometimes the disappearance of many ancient civilizations, It has always been preceded by religious decadence, which reached its peak produced the collapse of the political systems and government, Finally, the total decay resulting in disappearance of those same civilization.

Eschatological THE PROBLEM OF THE GREAT APOSTASY IN THE CHURCH VISIBLE

From everything narrated so far We, however, we feel immune to a presumption without limits, Why, doing cut and paste on the Holy Scriptures, extrapolate from them the type of homeopathic pills: "Christ the Lord has ensured that the gates of hell shall not prevail!». It's true, he said it. But, we want to ask about what the gates of hell shall not prevail? For when Christ the Lord says to Peter:

"You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" [Mt 16, 18]

It is nothing short of a must wonder: in which the Church was referring? Obvious: to his, or better: the Church of God's Word, since the mystical and soteriological definition of the Church there gives the Blessed Apostle Paul pointing to Christ as "the head of the body which is the Church" [With the 1, 18]. It is therefore natural that the gates of hell shall not prevail against Christ, to the same extent in which Satan, trying the man Jesus in the desert [cf. Mt 4, 1-11], certainly he could not topple the Word of God incarnate. I fear, however, that meanders - perhaps now even more than ever - some confusion before which the question arises: is not that the religious animal, or if you prefer the theological animal, It has come to confuse the Church, the mystical body of Christ, of which the glorified Christ is the head and we are living members, with that blatant sin of this structure is the actual visible Church, structured on a human hierarchy is composed of men, many of whom have been living beyond good and evil, after having long since lost the meaning same, of good and evil? Because in case certain they had not understood, it is referring to this kind of structure that Lord Christ says with a terrible question: "But the Son of Man, when will, find faith on earth?» [LC 18, 8]. What reason would ever have, the Word of God, to launch this question that weighs more than they can weigh the boulders of an entire mountain, if the Church is Christ and is governed by the Holy Spirit and therefore "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"? [Mt 16, 18]. Perhaps, to Christ the Lord on faith, by chance an inconvenient question that needs to be corrected on the metaphysical plane and dogmatic plan? It can also be, because basically, Christ the Lord, It was at this well-intentioned, as such devoid of all those instruments of scholastic metaphysics and that will only centuries later. In short: in his "divine ignorance" he did not know and did not apply the logic of Aristotle.

did what, we must also continue to change the Catechism of the Catholic Church, many articles which are made every day a dead letter, or emptied of their meaning, thanks to today's pastoral practice that we naturally believe that it is strictly inspired by the Holy Spirit, indeed dictated word for word, interview interview directly from the Third Person of the Holy Trinity. And if they are really things, then it would be good to correct all the texts of the Sacred Scriptures that refer for example to the great apostasy in the Church:

"Before the coming of Christ, the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers [cf. Ii Ts 2,4-12; I Ts 5,2-3; 2 GV 7; 1 GV 2,18.22]. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth [cf. LC 21,12; GV 15,19-20] He will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems, the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, that is, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh [cf. Ii Ts 2,4-12; I Ts 5,2-3; 2 GV 7; The Gv 2,18.22]. This Antichrist is already delineated in the world whenever it wants to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be accomplished if not beyond it, through the eschatological judgment; also under its mitigated form, The Church has rejected this falsification of the kingdom under the name of millenarianism [cf. Sant'Offizio, The Decree on millenarismo (19 July 1944): DS 3839] especially in the political form of a secular messianism "intrinsically perverse" [Pio XI, Became. enc. The Redeemer (19 March 1937): AAS 29 (1937) 65-106, condemning the "false mysticism" of this "counterfeit of the redemption of the lowly" (p. 69); Vatican Council II, Cost. past. The joy and hope, 20-21: AAS 58 (1966) 1040-1042]. The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and resurrection [cf. AP 19,1-9]. The kingdom will be fulfilled, then through a historic triumph of the Church [cf. AP 13] according to an ascending progress, but through God's victory over the final unleashing of evil [cf. AP 20,7-10] who will make his Bride come down from heaven [cf. AP 21,2-4]. God's triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment [cf. AP 20,12] after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world " [Catechism of the Catholic Church, NN. 675-677].

If the Catechism all ’ today in force, as it dominated and in fact set aside by the new pastoral "do-goodism", supportandosi on the Apocalypse of Blessed John the Apostle and other Apostolic Letters, over and above all that the Holy Gospel itself, he claims:

"The kingdom will be fulfilled, then through a historic triumph of the Church a progressive ascendancy, but through God's victory over the final unleashing of evil " [Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 677]

how correct and very unimaginative, We should read and interpret that "will not prevail"? Because if someone thinks that the powers of hell will never prevail on today visibly reduced visible Church to a structure of sin that produces internally sin and that spreads outside, in this case better to abandon the metaphysical and dogmatic and give to the far more healthy and satisfying art of gastronomy and oenology.

OUR CONTEMPORARY You AS WRITTEN IN A CHRONICLE OF CURRENT EVENTS IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION

Lately I have been thinking more and more often on different themes linked together by a common thread, from Revelation structure prepared by the Apostle John Beato on an Aegean island known as Patmos Island, also called the place of the last revelation, which takes its name not by chance that our magazine. As we know, Revelation speaks of the Antichrist and his final defeat, However, before which he will sow bad that at present perhaps we can even imagine in his devastating significance. Obviously, the apocalyptic is an allegorical language that shows beyond the images something very real; and this is something that today we might reasonably define in its advanced stage. He writes the Blessed Apostle:

"Come, I'll see the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters. With whom they have committed fornication the kings of the earth and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication " [AP 17, 2]

It just goes ahead:

"Fell, fell
Babylon the Great
and it has become den of demons,
cage for every unclean spirit,
prison of every unclean and hated bird
and a cage for every unclean and hated beast.
For all nations have drunk of the wine
of her fornication,
The kings of the earth have committed fornication with her
and the merchants of the earth grew rich
of her delicacies " [AP 18, 2-3].

For a long time it was thought - and the commentators have explained with great wealth - that the Blessed Apostle, using allegorical language, in these lines he had hidden the image of Rome and the Roman Empire. About that, in my previous writing I tried to explain:

"... making use of an old testamentary image Blessed Apostle John addresses the Roman Empire, then Rome hidden behind "Babylon the Great", all for reasons that anyone can understand. Reasons related in part to security and partly to the spread of the text, in order to prevent their destruction by the Romans at the time about a strong suspicion towards gesuano movement and its spread of his message. After two thousand years now, it comes from saying that never as today has that reference to ancient Rome hidden behind the image of Babylon current, place that has long Roma "has made all nations drink of the wrath of her fornication with wine" [see article, WHO].

Once you have painted these pictures, the Blessed Apostle followed by saying that the Chosen People must escape from Babylon:

«Exit, my people, from Babylon
be not partakers of her sins,
and ye receive not of her plagues.
For her sins have reached unto heaven
and God hath remembered her iniquities.
Pagatela with his own coin,
retribuitele twice his misdeeds.
Pour double measure in the cup which mingled.
All he has spent his glory and his
luxury, restituiteglielo so much torment and sorrow.
As he said in his heart: I sit a queen,
and I am no widow, and mourning I shall never see;
because of this, in one day,
We will of her plagues:
death, mourning and famine;
It will be burned,
for strong is the Lord God
who judges " [AP 18, 4-8]

What does it mean to say with the dramatic invitation:

«Exit, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and receive not of her plagues "? [AP 18, 4].

The significance of this dramatic invitation I tried to represent him in an article of mine in which I explain in what way the visible church, after Shoah the Catholic world, It will reach the dock at the new Nuremberg trial, where we will hear an army of clerics say: “But I only obeyed orders from above!» [the article is readable, WHO].

NOBLE SALVIFIC VALUE OF ESCAPE BEFORE THE COMPLICI ACTIVE AND PASSIVE TO COMPLICI

There are times when you need to escape, or move away decisively, which it is also synonymous with escape, by virtue of the fact that within a structure of sin, then a gear structure which produces sin internally and which diffuses the outside its borders, there are two different kinds of grave responsibilities: the active complicity of those who generate the evil and spread the, to follow along with the passive complicity, no less serious for this, of all those who rather than lose their little place in the sun they are silent and pretend not to see, He is forgetting how the Lord made his escape faithful few survivors from the City of Sodom and Gomorrah before they were destroyed, urging them not to look back while his wrath would be unleashed, except finish mutated, as it happened to Lot's wife, into a pillar of salt [cf. Gen 19, 1-29].

In a Church in which the ecclesiastical law has been replaced by the arbitrary whims of subjects able to hit the innocent with unprecedented destructive wickedness worthy of Joseph Goebbels, all good officers who are powerless and segretarietti, except complain to their intimate inside closed rooms, They are equally responsible and complicit in sin; and will end one day destroyed along with all the other inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. When the interior of a structure of sin can not do anything, then you need to escape from the passive accomplice impotence, give up without hesitation to their little place in the sun, turning pleading with the diocesan bishop to ask for the grace to be sent to the priest in the most remote of rural parishes or high mountain. It is indeed good clarify that the reason "I could not do anything", or that even worse given by Nazi leaders in Nuremberg: "I obeyed the orders from above ', He can not save the guilty from the right fork of men, still less by far more severe punishment given by justice and mercy of God, that we remember: "He punishes and shows mercy ' [Tb 13, 1].

The truth is that unfortunately the sin and with it the structures of sin, They are convenient to all: who gives birth to sin, who commits, who covers him and who before that assists silent and helpless, in the inner desire no less perverse can derive anything from sin. It is the truth, that's not in the active sinners like to taxable sinners; why they are trying in every way, by recourse to falsehood and coercive and violent means, to destroy the truth together with the good that proceeds from it.

PETER EXERCISE THEIR TEACHINGS infallible ONLY OPEN TO THE GRACE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, OTHERWISE THE GRACE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT IN HIM AND DOES NOT THROUGH HIM

Christ the Lord reminds the danger and pitfalls of Satan very precisely to Peter himself, within a discourse from which many like to extrapolate and give only one piece of sentence: "Strengthen your brethren" [LC 22, 32], to give so much to a non-life Super Peter, but at a Super Pontiff. This sentence, But, It is preceded by a tragic "before", and is followed by a dramatic "after". Let us try to analyze it all, eliminating the need to say to Christ the Lord what the Word of God did not say, considering that He is seriously warned Peter telling him:

«Simone, Simone, behold Satan has demanded to sift you like wheat; but I prayed for you, that your faith may not fail ".

Let's stop this first part and try to ask: but where is Christ the Lord - then Peter, to whom he said, "And I tell you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it " [Mt 16, 18] - affirms and reassures that his faith will never be any less? Christ the Lord did not even alleged, He reassures Peter that he will pray that his faith "may not fail ', does not say and does not guarantee at all that Peter's faith will never and in no way less. What also amply demonstrated by the continuation of the sentence, when Christ the Lord, Peter boldly states that all:

"Man, with you I am ready to go to prison and to death " [LC 22, 33]

unhesitatingly answers:

«Pietro, I'm telling you: the cock shall not crow before you thrice deny that you know " [LC 22, 34].

The sequence is therefore this: Christ the Lord puts Peter on guard against Satan, assuring him that he will pray that his faith may not fail;, but in the event that it is even less, It gave, as the facts show, It will do nothing to prevent it, because otherwise it would deny a suffix of man's creation, that is freedom and free will; and God can not contradict himself. In fact Pietro, which it is the first great master of doctrine and faith, finds nothing better to do than deny three times shortly after the Word of God made man, and everything after that Christ the Lord, at the Last Supper, He had instituted a priest and head of the College of the Apostles, namely the Supreme Pontiff [Cf Lc 22, 7-19]. Had he not received Pietro, viepiù by Christ, God himself, a special grace and just as completely Holy Spirit's special assistance, it should be remembered, do not “It is born” only later, to Pentecost, as already it hovered over the waters in the days of the creation of the world? [Gen 1, 1-2].

We also know that Peter's story does not end here, because the same Blessed Apostle Paul tells us that in Antioch shooting and publicly rebuked the Prince of Apostles in matters of doctrine and faith [cf. Gal 2, 11-14]; because if Peter had continued and led the believers of Christ in that error, today we would not be Christians, would have only a seven heretical of Jewish matrix, because of Peter who showed at that moment not to understand, or have misunderstood some of the fundamentals of the mystery of revelation and redemption. Even in this case, perhaps you need to understand that only eighteen centuries later will be defined the dogma of papal infallibility which makes the Roman Pontiff not subject to wandering in matters of doctrine and faith, whereas Pietro, chosen by Christ, God himself, apparently he could easily err in matters of doctrine and faith, evidently because the dogma of papal infallibility had not yet been proclaimed?

Let us see what was the error of Peter and that tells us about the Blessed Apostle Paul:

"But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. Indeed, before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles:; but after their coming, he withdrew and separated himself, for fear of the circumcision. And the other Jews did the same in the simulation, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel, said to Peter before all: “Be yourself, being a Jew, live like a Gentile and not in the manner of the Jews, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews”?» [cf. Gal 2, 11-14]

.
Many do not know what it all, then we try to briefly summarize: Pietro, before this episode narrated by Paul, He took his meals with pagans and had been taught that salvation comes through faith, place that is not conceivable a Christian observance of the law for its own sake without faith from which are born the works [cf. Powered 2, 14-26]. But, when some Jews joined the community, for fear of giving them sorrow to take meals with pagans, he withdrew to eat on the sidelines observing all the meticulous provisions of the rabbinic law - the so-called cosher kasherùt —, because the Jews were forbidden to take food with the Gentiles, considered unclean; and thereby he gave ambiguously to understand that salvation is achieved by compliance with the rabbinical laws, then those enclosed in Talmud Talmud, where, starting from the third century, these norms were drawn up and were in force long before the time of the Jesuits; standards later codified in the sixteenth century, in the legal text Table set Shulkhan ark. This behavior was considered to be very dangerous Paul on what today we would call strictly doctrinal. Indeed, This way of acting, He would cause the Gentiles to be their church, or to submit to what were the requirements of Rule halakha, rabbinic law interpretation of the rabbis themselves erected on the dictates of the Book of Leviticus and the Book of Deuteronomy; or, i pagani, they would have to submit to Hlcot Hlkhot [laws of the Jews], from circumcision. By acting in this way Peter put at serious risk the unity of the Church, to the point that Paul resumes publicly and in a severe manner, giving hypocrite and telling him in substance: how you can evangelize if it's you the first to be ambiguous and lacking in clarity in proclaiming the mystery of Revelation and Redemption?

Here's the thing, and so the events took place: Pietro, chosen and appointed by Christ the Lord, He erred in matters of doctrine and faith at the risk of compromising the unity of the Church, a documented fact and then passed down through the historicity of the sacred texts from the Pauline Letters. For the rest, those who have read and understood, face on its behalf its assessments. While stating that for my part, regardless of the ancient apostolic Antiochene theological disputes and regardless of the ironies that I have spent on those who consider the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff in matters of doctrine and faith as a kind of magic that the Holy Spirit would act even beyond the will itself the Successor of Peter, in the dogmapapal fallibility remains out of the question and its application is explicated in the Dogmatic Constitution The eternal shepherd of Blessed Pope Pius IX and then in To protect the faith of the Holy Pontiff John Paul II. The exercise of infallible teaching, however, it involves specific features and requirements that can not be separated from freedom and the free will of those who practice it this infallible teaching. These characteristics are summarized by the refined theologian Cardinal Charles Journet [1891-1975] than in his work Church of the Incarnate Word explains:

"The axiom" where the Pope is, there is the Church ", so where the Pope acts as Pope and Head of the Church; if not, or The Church is in him, neither he is in the Church ".

Exactly as it happened in Antioch and exactly how it could be repeated throughout history, without the dogma of papal infallibility and is minimally affected in any way, quite the opposite: recognize the freedom and free will, with its ability to accept or to refuse the grace of state, it means protecting, and in my opinion even in the best way, the dogma of the infallibility of the same. This is the reason why recently, a question we might call mere academic speculation, my interrogai: "Can a Roman Pontiff legitimately elected and legitimate Successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter to be deprived of the grace of state?» [see article, WHO]. Following the logic of the Holy Scriptures, from the mystery of creation itself and the Book of Genesis, it looks to be, enough to consider that He did not prevent Adam and Eve committing the original sin because of which was handed over a corrupt and deadly nature to all mankind that descended from them; a poor humanity that sin not committed it, but because of them he has inherited through corruption of this nature because of their sin of rebellion to God the Father. Now, because God, If not for those two wretches, but at least for the poor humanity that they would be followed, unsprung their freedom and preventing their free will to make that sin? From this we can deduce logically and theologically that all men, including Catholic faithful, presbyters, bishops and the Roman Pontiff, They may be closed to the sanctifying grace or reject the sanctifying grace, why never, It gave, He has turned against the freedom of man, nor ever he has suspended for one minute man the exercise of this right, and he never acted on it beyond his will, no he did with Adam and Eve, no he did so with Cain, He has not done so with Judas Iscariot, did not do it with the Blessed Apostle Peter, who after being ordained high priest and chosen as Vicar of Christ on earth, It initiates to own ministry denying Christ, giving himself to flee, deviating from the straight doctrine, trying to escape again even in old age in Rome, if Christ himself, as tradition tells, he had not appeared on the Via Appia, or the so-called Via quo Vadis? Incidentally: according to the account of the text of the apocryphal Acts of Peter, in old age, the Prince of the Apostles, He had returned to flee, this time in Rome, during the anti-Christian persecutions of Nero. As he walked down the Via Appia, Risen Christ appeared to him. Peter asked: «Quo vadis, Dominated?» [Where are you going, man?]. Christ the Lord answered: «For Rome, I crucifixion» [I am going to Rome to be crucified again]. Only then, in old age, Peter ceased to escape, he returned to Rome and accepted the sanctifying grace of martyrdom.

At the conclusion of this speech is worth mentioning — always with regard to freedom and free will -, God Father, to realize the mystery of the Word, He waited for the answer of the Blessed Virgin Mary, stuffed with grace, after having knocked on the doors of his freedom and his free will. Because Maria, The Immaculate Conception, was so, predestined, but it was by no means preordained. And Mary, Archangel Gabriel, he might say no, in the full and legitimate exercise of that freedom of the children of God which is a structural part of the very mystery of creation.

THE IMAGE OF THE CHURCH AS THE STRUCTURE OF SIN THAT MUCH DIFFERENT POPES SCARE FROM THE END OF THE NINETEENTH TO START OF THE NEW MILLENNIUM

About then my statement about the reduced visible Church in structure of sin which it produces sin within itself and releases it outside, I would like to call me at three different Popes of the twentieth century, from Pope Leo XIII that after a vision he wrote a prayer to St. Michael the Archangel by requiring the recitation in 1886 after each Mass in all the churches of Orbe catholica. The original prayer is very long and few know the full original text, while the one that was recited at the end of the Mass was its reduction. In the original wheel of’ AGAINST SATAN AND ANGELS, The Pope Leo XIII wrote:

«Church, Spotless lamb Bride, faverrimi enemies have filled with bitterness;, inebriated with wormwood; impious hands on all her treasures;. When the seat blessed Peter and the Chair of the peoples to the light of truth, of his own there, a throne of their abominable impiety, and the; Pastor struck the, they can disperse the flock» [Italian translation: "The church, this spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, she is drunk with shrewd enemies who fill her with bitterness and who lay their sacrilegious hands on all her most desirable things. Where is the seat of the Blessed Peter mail to the chair of truth to enlighten the people, there have established the throne of their abominable impiety, so hitting the shepherd, dispersing the flock ".

Request: What he saw in this terrible vision of the Pope Leo XIII, to be reached to write and prophesy that Satan and his cronies take control "of Peter," and from one point to follow the "Chair of the Truth", namely the papacy, without being able to prevail at the end of it? Or perhaps the Pope Leo XIII was not aware that the Roman Pontiff, supreme guardian of truth, He can never err in matters of doctrine and faith, enjoying a very special way of the Holy Spirit, which - I repeat - it can not act against the will and man's free, except for dropping God contradicts himself? I believe that Pope Leo XIII the prerogative of the Roman Pontiff knew them all very well, also because he was one of the Fathers who composed the session of the First Vatican Council, in which the dogma of papal infallibility in matters of doctrine and faith was solemnly sealed.

THE THE MYSTERY OF INIQUITY AND THE CHURCH AS SIN SIN PRODUCING STRUCTURE TO YOUR INSIDE AND OUTSIDE SPREAD

Since Pope Leo XIII proceed with a jump to the sixties of the twentieth century, when the young theologian Joseph Ratzinger, fifty years ago, he wrote:

"If we do not want to hide anything, we are certainly tempted to say that the Church is neither holy, neither Catholic: the Second Vatican Council could even speak not only of the Holy Church, but the sinful Church; though here, Member was reprimanded something, It is mostly that he was still too shy, We are so deep in the consciousness of all of us feel the sinfulness of the Church " [Introduction to Christianity, 1968].

In a situation like this, what can we do? Species considering that sixteen years after these analyzes of the young Joseph Ratzinger, the Holy Pontiff John Paul II, that while they had called him to head the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, back in October 1984, during his second apostolic visit to Germany, stated, "The world is experiencing the twelfth book of Revelation»? [see my old article, WHO]

Analyzing and developing certain themes, almost two years ago I wrote a long article in which I talked about certain issues under the title: "The fall: those ugly stories of the Vatican II that nobody tells to not damage the superdogma ... " [see WHO]. Three months ago, in another article, Instead I explained how we can and should we react before a visible Church suffers from a doctrinal and moral decay irreversible [see WHO]. Today, earlier this year 2019, after so write, After using in the past very strict tones, then move on to the irony and even mockery to say goodbye, sadly I have to take place in a way that not even erodes the severity of certain ecclesiastical smear that are now beyond being mere sinners, because they now constitute an entrenched group of untouchable power formed by diabolical figures festering living in sin. And their grave and shameful sin manifest publicly proud, because their sinful abominations go hand in hand with the power that they manage; a power that has made them become drunk and delirious omnipotence, just like the great whore narrated in the Apocalypse of Blessed John the Apostle [cf. AP 18, 2-3]. Before this Hell's antechamber the question which give adequate response is very simple, I dare say a truism, and it is the following: in practice, What we can and must do to imperative of conscience, motivated by the theological virtues of faith, of hope and charity? Because if we do not give an answer, while poor that either, then the talk is likely to be a talking's sake, speculation for its own sake, an end in itself analysis, Finally a sterile critical end in itself. And criticism sterile ends in themselves, Who does not ennoble the formula, and do not help those who collects, especially those who collect them it is a people of God more and more lost in search of answers, points of reference and reliable and safe guides.

In four years of a publicist The Island of Patmos [2015-2018], I have several dozen articles where I talk about the irreversible decline, explaining that it, once the threshold of no return, no going back, because it is impossible. However, certain themes already spoke in my book written between 2008 and the 2009 and published at the end of 2010, When certain facts now exploded in all their scandalous devastation they were still far from coming, just remember my analysis on omosessualizzazione the visible Church, which I came to compare to the outbreak of a real one universal nubifrossing. And God knows how many enemies I conquered through those lines, although today, the problems anticipated by me yesterday, They are then exploded through very serious moral scandals and global proportions, making turn upon my enemies more sick, in case some pious soul naive to think that some Ecclesiastical Authority has admitted: “Unfortunately, you were right and you had seen us right, it will mean that we will impose your tormentors to leave you alone”. Above all, a decade ago, about the inevitable scandals that would eventually explode, I explained how, exceeded the so-called threshold of no return, even by the Holy Spirit, the route would most could reverse, because the Third Person of the Holy Trinity can not subvert the laws of physics. It is indeed a “physical law”, as is that of the force of gravity, the fact that a process of decadence, once she entered its irreversible phase, It is no longer stoppable. About that, in my writing than three months ago, Critically bitter tone I took the example of the parachute:

"Certain subjects they would not hesitate to revolutionize the laws of physics in the name of their subjective truth and their equally subjective logic, but the question that they should ask themselves is very practical and very simple background: for a dreadful error which may also have competition both much criticized modernist both much criticized rahneriani, or even only for a negligent to say the least absurd, it happened that a parachutist would have stepped off the plane without having donned the parachute, because this is the current situation of the Church: launch a plane without a parachute. Well, the great masters of Aristotelian logic, the school and metaphysics, at this point should bring the best arguments to explain that this paratrooper, precipitating towards the ground by two thousand meters of height, It can still stop, go back, cater to wear a parachute and jump again. And if these pundits metaphysical answer that he has launched without a parachute because of the Modernists and Karl Rahner, I will say that this, It was also true, now it is irrelevant, because the cause was found and destroyed before he will branch out. If then, even worse, before the paratrooper who rushes without a parachute, those who can never be free of a "logical" answer for everything, They are attacked to say that is the Holy Spirit, at that point, I will say that the Holy Spirit is not Merlin, then invite them to explain how the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, before a free individual or collective act of the will which involves precise consequences, He will cancel its freedom and its free will to bring it back on the plane, let him wear the parachute and then let it run again, after meanwhile he disavowed the modernists and rahneriani, on account of which he has launched without a parachute […]» [the entire article is contained WHO].

A Pseudo Thomism CRITICAL AND AGGRESSIVE FROM WHICH THEN GOES TO ALLEGATIONS OF HERESY ANYONE TO ANALYZE PROBLEMS IN OTHER WAY, NOT USED TO NOTHING, It disperses EVEN MORE THE FLOCK AND IS ONLY DESTRUCTIVE

My poor experience and the results of work done over the last few years, they finally taught me, as I mentioned earlier, that the severe criticism, the battles against immoral clergymen proud of their immorality and especially placed up to the chief leaders of the Church, no longer serve any good. Not even the wise ironies and healthy jeers, longer they serve to stir a similar situation gangrenous, or if you prefer this fall without a parachute. I must say that I have come to this conclusion through prayer and meditation on sacred texts, among whom I was especially helpful the wisdom book of Ecclesiastes:

To everything there is a season, its time for every purpose under heaven.
A time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot the plants.
A time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build.
A time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance.
A time to scatter stones and a time to gather,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing;.
A time to search and a time to lose,
A time to keep and a time to cast away;.
A time to tear and a time to sew,
a time to keep silence and a time to speak.
A time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace [Ec 3, 1-8].

Let me be clear: I have neither thrown in the towel on ring Boxing, nor do I have raised the white flag before the enemy, least of all by roaring lion have become a castrato of the eighteenth century Baroque singing with the voice of a soprano unvoiced. quite simply, in tracing a work plan for the new year, I reflected on the fact that

"There is a time to tear and a time to sew, there is a time to be silent and a time to speak ... ".

And today we have to measure well, talk about what, to prevent the talk, but above all to denounce and criticize, it's just an end in itself, the only result of not the slightest dent in the acolytes of Satan, but at the same time, however disorienting ancòra more God's people very ill and lost, that needs to be sustained in the great test. And I doubt the People of God, in this huge debacle, It can be sustained by offering great lessons against the heresies of the Modernists and against the theology of Karl Rahner, explaining how important start from school and St. Thomas Aquinas, in conclusion: water the daisies in the garden to prevent them from wilting with the heat of the burning house, because what only counts, while everything burns, It is to save the good memories of when in the past the daisies were blooming around the house.

For this I ceased to argue with the methods lovers, useful to speculate on the truths of the faith and to achieve fully the same truths of faith, but not always effective in all historical and social situations. But mostly I ceased to argue with those who end up deifying the method, which is always and only a means to get to the truth; and it is said that this method, even if effective for centuries, it is always up to the return of Christ the Lord to the end of time. I refer to the school and St. Thomas Aquinas, and those who before the fall without a parachute from the plane so stubbornly insist that you must stop the fall, return the paratrooper plane, let him wear the parachute of the school and the double safety parachute of St. Thomas Aquinas, then do it again to launch, so that the launch and down to earth to be successful. Am I an anti-academic and anti-Thomistic? Never! I am a philosophical-theological authentic product and an authentic lover of the school and of Thomism. What I have to be logically and rationally aware of - as I have repeatedly and in vain for many explained in my writings - is that both scholasticism and Thomism require a precise language and precise speculative techniques which have now been lost for over half a century.. Only to give new life to their necessary and natural language - even before being able to think about the recovery of scholasticism and Thomism -, It takes decades of hard work, to play so do not know how profitable, whereas in the building while the whole house burns faster, that while there are, objectively and logically, priority lot more and more urgent. Concrete example and not subject to easy refutation: if today we talk about a school and metaphysical language of Thomistic system, the first not to understand are the bishops, many of which border on the theological illiteracy, formats such as are, most of them, on emotional facts sociologisms go through theology that have invaded the whole Church in the season of post-Vatican II. And as I wrote in another previous article: if in a library containing unique copies of precious books a fire breaks out and only a few lyrics can be removed from the flames, I sincerely believe that I have a duty and a moral obligation to rescue the texts of the Holy Gospels, Apostolic Letters and the Acts of the Apostles, certainly not the logic of Aristotle, the work of Saint Anselm of Aosta and St. Thomas Aquinas, because neither Aristotle, nor Aosta nor Aquinas there would be of no use without the Holy Gospels, Apostolic Letters and the Acts of the Apostles. And if someone tries to replicate the Aosta and Aquinas serve precisely to be able to read and understand the Word of God's Word, In this case, it should answer that for over a millennium, the heritage of faith of Revelation, was transmitted and all in all understood even before they were born Saint Anselm of Aosta and St. Thomas Aquinas, preceded by many and great Fathers and Doctors of the Church.

OUR DUTY AND PASTORAL THEOLOGY AND STARTING SEEDS EXCEPT THE HOLY GOSPEL AND THEY KEEP THE the senses IN THE PEOPLE OF GOD

On our Patmos Island he must therefore bear this dramatic and happy task: to rescue the foundations of the Holy Catholic Faith - the so-called "seed bank" [cf. WHO] - and with them the sense of faith the Holy People of God more and more lost and dispersed. It is therefore necessary to experience and live out God's people that authentic emotion Christological on which it is written:

"Landing, He saw a large crowd and he had compassion for them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd, and he began to teach them many things " [MC 6, 34].

Our task is to save what the Word of God taught, protecting his word against counterfeiting, from adulteration and from misinformation, aware that you can not live in Sodom and Gomorrah, even passive witnessing the abomination of sin, because it is in these situations that God the Father encourages us and stimulates us to the great value that the flight to safety, as opposed to those cynical and impotent remains immersed nell'abominio waiting for better times, or waiting for things to change. Father gave, escape from Egypt until the escape from Sodom and Gomorrah, their children and encourages them to flee to safety dall'abominio of desolation.

Much more complex, terrible and painful is the dramatic situation of us priests, if we think that maybe one day we may find ourselves even in the position to say no to those same Ecclesiastical Authority to which we promise filial and devout obedience, if the pilot were they there, or trying to impose anything contrary to the Holy Gospel; and that goes against the Holy Gospel, only the sophists unrepentant can groped to interpret it in a good part climbing above the oil sprinkled mirrors. E, an eventuality, for any priest is a painful tragedy which is difficult and only think, because it would be given rise to an agonizing conflict with the very nature of the priestly character, which is itself the result of communion and obedience Apostolic Authority. Even to this painful and agonizing question but no answer: when in fact we have been consecrated in the Holy Order, The ordaining bishop does not put us in his hands the petition of his personal subjective will or its pseudo theologies emotional, nor we asked us to stick to the content of his statements more or less correct and happy; in our hands it was placed the sacred book of the Holy Gospel. And when after the prayer of consecration and the laying on of hands, Bishop handed the paten with the bread and the chalice with wine, He told us:

«Receive the offerings of the Holy People for the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Understand what you will do, imitate what you celebrate, conform your life to the mystery of the cross of Christ the Lord ".

And the source of awareness which leads us to realize that we do and to imitate what we celebrate, so that our life is in accordance with the mystery of the cross of Christ the Lord, is the whole enclosed in the Holy Gospels, certainly not in worldly political-sociological courses now campaigning by many bishops who have decided to please the children of this world, up to mitigate or water down the Holy Gospel and the Apostolic Letters, in the event that these texts did not like and would not welcome the children of this world, entering and leaving the now hallowed halls in their capacity as devout atheists or perverts unrepentant who applaud shouting “long live the revolution!”, while at the same time the faithful devotees, as a veritable hemorrhage, deserting our increasingly becoming more and more numerous churches : "I am ashamed of this Church … I am ashamed to be Catholic ".

In the dark night, and in the confusion, It will be our support and aid the word of the Blessed Apostle Paul admonishes us:

"Well, But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel other than what we have preached to you, is anathema! We have already said it and now I repeat it: if any man preach any other gospel to you than what you accepted, is anathema! Indeed, It is perhaps the favor of men that I intend to earn, or rather that of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, do not be a servant of Christ!» [Gal 1, 8-10]

Because of this Today resonates in us the heartfelt invitation of the Blessed Apostle Peter:

"Keep sober, watch. Your enemy, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, looking for someone to devour. Resist him, firm in the faith, knowing that your brothers around the world suffer the same sufferings as you " [The Pt 5, 8-9].

Maybe soon we will make the end they did many Jews during the Second World War. And we will do different but similar end for the devilish work of those ecclesiastical Goebbels and complacent laymen who are now attached as polyps of the Chair of Peter, just like tells the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel of Pope Leo XIII. However, one thing is certain: in the future Nuremberg Celeste, to be bound hand and foot and cast into outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth [cf. Mt 22, 13], will be some current, devastating and deadly Goebbels, clergy and laity, not sure we devoted servants of Christ and his Church until the end, for the sincere belief in the life of the world to come and in the full knowledge that "many are called, but few are chosen " [CF. Mt 22, 14].

Amen!

the Island of Patmos, 1 January 2019

On the Solemnity of the Holy Mother

Dal Bello to Moro: holiness is not decayed Nobel Prize, canonizations are pronouncements of the solemn magisterium from which there is no turning back

19 September 2018/3 Comments/in Theologica/by father ariel

― Theologica: the essays of the end of summer of The Island of Patmos -

FROM THE BEAUTIFUL DARK: HOLINESS IS NOT decayed NOBEL PRIZE, CANONIZATIONS ARE SOLEMN PRONUNCIATIONS FROM WHICH THEN YOU DO NOT RETURN

Index — I. IF HOLINESS IS SEPARATED FROM THE FIGHT AGAINST SIN, BECOMES PURE PHILANTHROPIC GOODNESS - (II). ASPECTS OF THEOLOGY OF HOLINESS IN THE LIGHT OF THE MYSTERY OF CREATION AND REDEMPTION - III. ADVENT CHRISTIAN ERA AND BLESSED MARTYRS - IV. Those who proclaimed CERTAIN SAINTS AND BLESSED YESTERDAY, PROCLAMATION TODAY ABOUT LI - V. THE CAUSES OF BEATIFICATION AND CANONIZATION: THE FIGURE OF Postulator - WE. BEFORE THE ALLEGED THE MIRACLES POSTULATOR MUST BE AS BETWEEN Skeptics Skeptic, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A REALLY GOOD SERVICE - VII. BLESSED AND SAINTS IN RACE, BLESSED ARE CAUTIOUS AND SAINTS IN WAITING: THE CASE OF FATHER LÉON DEHON ACCUSED OF ANTI-SEMITISM. THE PROBLEM OF SAINTS WHO HAVE FAVORED THE HARASSMENT OF OTHER SAINTS: THE CASE OF THE HOLY FATHER PIO PIETRELCINA AND THE HOLY FATHER JOHN XXIII - VIII. Rejoice and exult, THE APOSTOLIC LETTER IN WHICH THE CHRISTIAN MARTYRS MENTIONED BY THE HOLY PONTIFF JOHN PAUL II ARE ENCLOSED UNDER THE FILM TITLE: "THE SAINTS OF NEXT DOOR" - IX. WE SINNERS IN THE SERVICE OF THE BLESSED AND HOLY CAUSES. It WOULD BE GOOD TO REMEMBER THAT SOME GREAT SINNERS wrote SOME OF FEES OF THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND EFFECTIVE church councils - X. THE CANONIZATION BEATIFICATIONS AND NOT THE PULITZER PRIZE AND THE NOBEL PRIZE. SOME DOUBTS ABOUT SOME OF LEGITIMATE Beatification ONGOING PROCESS, ALTHOUGH THE "conformism CHURCH" DOES NOT DISPUTE MORE - XI DURING THE PROCEEDINGS MUST ALL LISTEN, INCLUDING THOSE WHO BELIEVES they may forestall, BECAUSE NOT LISTENING COULD DO WORSE DAMAGE, SOMETIMES EVEN DESTRUCTION.

To enter the bookshop click on the cover

Dear Readers,

support our apostolic and theological work

Humility as a principle of realism epistemological

8 September 2018/in Theologica/by Father Giovanni

― The summer essays of The island of Patmos ―

HUMILITY AS THE PRINCIPLE OF REALISM epistemological

Humility is radically intelligence virtues, with which it, recognizing employees from being, tidy to being and below being, It opens at the Royal, It is subject to the real and to listen to his impulses, It leaves form from the real and adapts to the real: the conformity of intellect and thing. This equating It is act of the intellect, but the will wills the intellect to adapt. The first, Humility is essential to obey the reality, that the truth.

PDF essay print format
.

Author
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p.

It is curious that in the centuries-old confrontation between realism and idealism There has always stopped by both contenders, on considerations and confutations order of mere theoretical, moreover, often interesting and deep; but there has never worried by both sides to clarify the relationship between realism and idealism on the one hand and, correspondingly, on the other, the relationship between humility and pride, deepening and motivating the fact that while the humility gives rise to realism, l'idealism, especially in its pantheistic outlet, It is the result of pride. To tell the truth, dialectics humility – Pride is the traditional Christian ethics; but not so idealistic ethics, who prefers to oppose slavery to freedom. It is clear that what realism is pride, for the idealist is the boldness of thought, that stands beyond all limits and its irrepressible force rises to the infinite horizon of the Absolute, rather, which reveals their absolute hidden under the appearance of the empirical.

So for the idealist, the realist is naive, a slave to prejudice the existence of an external world, Natural laws coercing the freedom of the spirit and of a transcendent God, ultra-worldly, rewarder and punisher of a pipeline meanly interested and servile. Admitting being a transcendence towards thought, for the idealist would be to make slaves of this being; while he must be freely placed by the thought and regulated by the thought.

As there is no middle ground or mediation between humility and pride, so there is an intermediate position or mediator between realism and idealism, as there is no mediation between the yes and no, between being and not – to be. Some, come Leibnitz, Wolff, Schelling, Husserl and Bontadini, they thought that they are two opposite extremes, for which they are believed to be compelled to establish a median position; but to no avail, than to juxtapose theses contradict each other.

In tal modo, in the history of epistemology, or Knowledge of doctrines, there are essentially two choices or basic orientations: or realism or idealism. And that's because? Because knowing involves the relationship between the idea and reality. The alternative arises when we ask what is the object of knowledge. The object is either the idea or reality. If we place the object is the idea, We idealism. If we ask what is the reality, We realism. What is the right conception? You realism, because the idea is a means and not an end or object of knowledge. Indeed, we use the ideas to reach or grasp reality, which therefore it is the object of knowledge. The idea can be object of knowledge, but in the second bar, subsequently, after we know the real or the thing or body, reflecting on the inner half, which we used or we know the object size.

The path to the truth of knowledge is humility, which consists in subdue the intellect to things, to being, to the real. And this is precisely the realism. But humility leads to obedience, because humility is the virtue that makes us aware of being dependent on a higher. The soul - says Saint Catherine of Siena - "is so obedient, how humble and as humble as obedient" [1] [(c). 154]. We are at the bottom [humus] and he is at the top. But it is at the top not to oppress us, unlike ma, because you want to do good, It wants to raise him, give us what he. The humble is so open and willing to receive, to welcome the good that the top does give him, to comply with its directives, attentive to his commands or his incitements.

The humble, that recognizes that his subjection, He is ready to obey, that is, to do what the superior commands him. The humility leads to greatness, ie to participate thereof at which the upper is higher, accepting the good that is proper to the top and now, obeying, become his. Thus St. Paul says to "make every thought captive to obey Christ" [II Cor 10,5].

Humility is radically intelligence virtues, with which it, recognizing employees from being, being ordered and below being, It opens at the Royal, It is subject to the real and to listen to his impulses, It leaves form from the real and adapts to the real: the conformity of intellect and thing. This equating It is act of the intellect, but the will wills the intellect to adapt. The first, Humility is essential to obey the reality, that the truth. Humility, then, Consequently, It will be the act of the will with which it puts into practice the good known by the intellect. Humility leads to love. Vice versa, the Cartesian refusal to base knowledge and certainty on equating to external things, is a form of disobedience to the real, which it is a sign of arrogance. It is also a self-contradictory position, because his acclaimed desire to find the truth obliges him to practice the equating; but when he practices the equating to deny the equating, It demonstrates that the will is insincere.

Idealism thus introduces in thought, with denial of the principle of non-contradiction, beyond the Hegelian rhetoric of "reconciliation", un'intima, desired and incurable inner laceration, and then it introduces a principle of dishonesty and duplicity in thinking and talking. The rest, Descartes mocked the principle of identity, considering what empty and useless. Idealism, under the guise of "science" and even pretending to be the "absolute knowledge", which is nothing but the gnosis, It is so open to all the tricks of sophistry and more refined art of deception.

The humble and sincere desire, instead, obeys the real through the intellect. So says the love of truth. It involves humility and obedience. The will let the real act on intellect, that you implement it, that the fruitful, that determines. So the intellect rises, if it raises: vacuum becomes full, full object known.

ATTITUDE idealist

Idealism intellect does not submit, I order. It is not considered below being, but above. Being dependent on him because the being is being thought of him. This is the attitude of pride, which involves the motion exactly opposite to that of humility: while humility intellect submits to being, pride in the intellect wants to subject himself being. The lower wants to take the place of the upper.

Like Adam, does he decide, instead of God, what is good and what is bad [cf. Gen 3,5]. No longer, then the adjustment to the divine command, but the disobedience, which precisely, as taught by St. Catherine, "It comes from pride, that comes from love their own self, depriving oneself of humility" [2] [(c). 154]. We should also distinguish, Saint Catherine, a dual ego turn on itself: what she calls "self-knowledge", and from this comes the humility: "Humility comes from self-knowledge" [3]; "In the knowledge you will humble yourself, seeing you for you and not your being you will know from me" [(c). 4]. In this self-consciousness, my thoughts turn to my subordinates to be, which is proof of God. The knowledge self based realistic self-awareness, because I appear as a real, Act independently to think and not as a simple thought. Santa Caterina also speaks of another self-consciousness, which is "self-love", that gives rise to pride [(c). 38]. And pride, for its part, He takes off "knowledge of himself ", which it is the self-consciousness of healthy realism, based on knowledge of things, and guided by humility. Indeed, The place itself from self-self is not objective, Act independently to think, but it is the self-made absolute idealist.

Instead healthy realistic self-awareness leads to the discovery of God [(c). 128]. realism, which involves the adherence, l ’equating, obedience to the things, It gives the initial certainty of knowledge, ed opens, in humility, the eye of the truth on the ego, about the world and about God. Vice versa, "Love just blurs the eye of" [(c). 136], because I, considering themselves self-sufficient and first principle of knowledge of certainty, become self, It is not open to objective reality, but it closes superbly in himself and in his own ideas. Instead ontology born ideology. But by the same token, If the idealist thinks he sees, but it really is blind. It lacks what Santa Caterina calls the "holy discretion ', you can even call "discernment", namely intellectual virtue, possibly enriched with the spiritual gifts of intellect and wisdom, for which the intellect or reason, fed experience, and prudent in reflection, on the basis of objective values, distinguished, in concrete situations, right from wrong and good from bad. Conversely, l '' indiscretion 'of the love is its effect [cf. (c). 121].

With just attack me to my love as I was God. I do not recognize as a creature, but I absolutize my ego as if it were up to nothing. I do not know the truth, but "I am" the truth. My self, my thoughts are unfounded, but founding. My thinking does not require more of my being, but founds, because I identify my being with my being thought by me.

For the idealist the reality is the idea I have of reality. They are infallible, because my thinking coincides with being. Being, indeed, And It is thought by me, It is my idea, is the thinking being that I am. I'm not one that I can think of, but a thinking self. As the thinking being identical, because the idea is to be, It is thought to be, I become subsistent thought and by that subsistent being who thinks himself. absolute Self-Awareness. For the idealist I exist by myself, not another. Do not depend on anyone, but only from myself. I think of myself, not because I have drawn an external reality. The idealist does not take into account the fact that, if in the act of thinking about myself, I catch myself thinking, I think it is because an external reality. It - one that St. Thomas calls the essence of the material - it is the initial object of knowledge. So in knowing childbirth from it and not from myself thinking. It and not myself is the first certainty.

Doubt Thomist CARTESIAN DOUBT

It is true that spiritual certainty is stronger than that sensible things out of me. However, This noblest sure we get it starting from the humble but conclusive sensitive certainties, which are invalidated only by mental illness, so there's absolutely no reason to put them in doubt. Because of this, Cartesian doubt is unreasonable doubt, absurd and hypocritical, since it is not realistic humility to accept things as they are and the value of the ideas that represent them, but by pride of not wanting to lower to accept those humble although extremely solid certainties. Yet it is God Who gives us the wonderful show of nature and all sentient creatures, from which only [cf. RM 1, 20] we can get, by analogy, to spiritual discovery, ego thinking and God himself. So the deliberate undermining and discard those certainties, exchange them for illusions or false starting points, Descartes was an act of foolish pride and foolishness, masked by the pretext of founding and start knowing the certainty of the spirit and not from that of the senses. But so Descartes threw himself into the abyss - what Kant will call the "abyss of reason" [4] - then pretending to be rescued by God.

This is demonstrated by the history of thought that comes from him, Thin Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Husserl, Nietzsche and Heidegger. The rejection of the initial certainty of sense, perhaps presumptuously claiming to be self-assured, instead of humbly receive from the creatures and then by God, It is paid at the end of the high price of total skepticism and nihilism of modernity. Even St. Thomas argues the legitimacy and indeed the need for universal doubt about the truth [5] to give beginning to philosophy; but advances like simple hypothesis, completely absurd, not to be taken seriously and not exercise as it did Descartes. Because of this, for Aquinas there is certainty that they exist because you think, not because of doubts; and such certainty, however, is based on the original certainty of common sense. Instead, Also the Augustinian solution to the skeptical doubt Academic, similarly to the Cartesian solution, It is not exempt from a basic flaw. Sant’Augustine, indeed, how will Descartes, founds the principle of certainty in consciousness that, I doubt, I exist [«if I am not mistaken, sum»] [6], regardless of the fact that the question is not really thinking, but a simple swing thought jammed, so the inferred its existence from this doubt foolish, It can not be a truly founding act of certainty. St. Augustine also saves the certainty with the a posteriori argument, since it admits the veracity of the senses, while Descartes, that does not admit the, wrong even more seriously, remaining in its closed cogito.

We also observe that, also admitted and not granted that doubt is a thought, it is true that when I reflect on my thinking, I take myself as a thinking; but this does not entitle me to say that I think in essence. My being is not well founded or place by my thinking; ma, on the contrary, my being is the foundation and premise of my thinking. No, or I exist because I think, but I think they are. My thinking depends on me, but my being. It is true that if I, I'm; but even if I do not think. Only God is subsistent Thought, because it is subsisting Being. Only He can say absolutely: "I am". So, as taught by St. Catherine, self-love of self is an inordinate self-love, which deprives the love of God:

"He who loves Me is love private self messy love" [c.128]. Such love creates pride, which in turn generates the disobedience: "Disobedience is the pride, that comes from love their own self, depriving themselves of 'humility'[(c). 154].

REALISM AND Idealism

We realize that we know things. When we know, we intentionally identify with them. They come into us, in our spirit or in our mind clearly not in their being or in their materiality, but dematerialized, by means of an image or an idea or a concept. As we grasp the truth or reality in a judgment or intuition. But how is it that the same thing or reality, a spiritual materials, which it is outside of us, independent of us, becomes at once present to our mind, intimate thereto? Precisely through the idea or representation, that we form the essence of that thing, starting from sense experience, if it is material, or by analogy with material things, it is spiritual.

Instead, the wrong conception of knowledge is idealism, for which the object would be the idea, ie it is thought. So either you start from the idea and you reach the external things [7]; or else the thing itself or the reality or the entity is resolved in the idea or in the thought or in the thought or in the thinker [8]. Being is being thought. Being identifies himself with the thought. It is identified with the consciousness of thinking oneself. The inner being is the thought, not out of thought. But why this view is wrong? For two reasons. First, because if we have in us the ideas of things and of ourselves, it is not because our knowing departs from ideas of things or of our ego that thinks, but why, having previously contacted with the senses things, we formed the ideas of things we contacted. And reflecting on these ideas we produced, we become aware of ourselves, producing ideas and thinks things. So, our knowing does not start with ideas of things or from the consciousness of our self, but proceeds from the things. In second place, Being is thought once it is thought, but not before being thought. Being, so, It is distinct from my thinking. It is true that, thinking being, being intentionally gets me thinking, be thought. But at the same it remains distinct from my thinking; It is in front of my thought [obstructing finds], outside and independent of my thought. Being is the rule of truth of my thinking, which it will be true if it is appropriate or subject to being, to reality, things, if faithfully it represents them as they are in themselves.

The truth is in the realism of the subject Compliance the object; while the opposite occurs idealism: is the object that conforms to the subject, It is derived from the subject and depends on the subject. Because of this, the Church qualifies it as "subjectivism" [9]. But subjectivism is also gnosticism, which it is nothing but the theory of knowledge of idealism. Indeed, Gnosticism, as idealism, gnoseology is that according to which the human mind, divine by nature, He stands for itself the divine science. He says therefore, the Letter Rejoice and rejoice:

"Gnosticism supposed" faith in a locked subjectivism, which affects only a particular experience or a series of arguments and knowledge that you think will comfort and enlighten, but where ultimately subject is closed immanence of his own reason and his feelings " [n. 36, text WHO].

And what about the fact that we saw that the object of thought, for idealism, it is the same thought, It is the idea, which it is the coincidence of being and thought, ideal and real. Being is being thought. Being is thinking. E, consequently, thinking the same as being. But this is the same divine being and the object of divine knowledge. And then, in the idealistic Gnosticism human knowledge he elevates himself to the divine knowledge.

The idealism IS ONE GNOSTICISM

Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?

Tell, if thou hast understanding!

Gb 38,4

Maritain rightly spoke of «Hegelian gnosis» [10]. And it has detected as

"Rationalism inaugurated by Descartes came with Hegel at the end of his conquests. Everything is subjected to the empire of Reason which is, in the sense most definitely unique, Essence [beings] the divine Spirit, as the human spirit '.

Hegel expressed in triumph, in Conclusion of his Lectures on the history of philosophy [11], This final outcome firm Cartesian, outcome that he himself had brought about with his philosophical work. He is like the "discovery of God, He knows what ' [p. 412]. In this final synthesis, Hegel sums up the path of philosophy made by Descartes in his time, namely the elaboration of his system. philosophy Subject, Hegel, It is "the totality of thought, the intelligible world, It is the concrete Idea » [p. 413], "The ideals of all reality"[ibid.]. With Descartes, Hegel continues, "Penetrated in it" [ideality] "The principle of subjectivity, individuality and God as Spirit became real to Himself in the self ' [ibid.]. Because of this

"The modern age work is to understand this idea as the Spirit" [ibid.]. But "to proceed from the Idea that knows how to precisely know the Idea, the opposition must be infinite " [ibid.]. "In this way, the Spirit produced this spiritual world, as a nature, the first creation of the Spirit. The work of the Spirit is now to bring that 'beyond' in reality and in the self; which is done as self-consciousness thinks itself and knows the absolute essence that thinks itself. The mere thought surged in Descartes on this doubling " [p. 414]. Thus, "the idea is in its quiet restlessness" [pp. 415— 416]; "Opposites are identical in itself, because eternal life consists in eternally produce the opposition and the eternally resolve. Knowing the opposition and unity in the opposition unity. Here is the absolute knowledge " [ibid.]. "The finite self-consciousness" [Umana] "It ceased to be over; and in such a way on the other hand, the absolute self-consciousness " [Divina] "He holds that reality, that before she missed. The whole world history in general and in particular the history of philosophy, represent only this struggle », ie the person who denies himself and is reconciled with itself, "And they appear to have received them off at the point where the absolute Self-awareness, of which they have the representation, He has ceased to be something foreign, in which therefore the Spirit is as real as Spirit. Indeed, this is because it knows itself as absolute Spirit, and this I know in Science » [p. 416]. That's exactly Gnosis.

Hegel means that with idealism man infinity and God yes finish, so that you have what Hegel called "the identity of human nature and the divine nature ", ossia il pantheism. No longer the thing itself external to the subject, no longer a transcendent God and Abstract, but the God concrete and historical, which it is the same self-consciousness of the human subject. Indeed, Cartesian logic, which is expressed in cogito, It is not entitled to a subject, in addition to the subject, attuandone capabilities or forces; but it is the same subject, understood as originally [«a priori"] and essentially thinking and reasoning. In practice, as subsisting reason. But this is already the divine reason.

We find in the Cartesian concept of reasone, of knowledge and thought footprint obviously Gnostic. For he, In the Discourse on Method [12], It expresses a desire to "fix all its opinions to the level of reason '; He plans to establish a "universal science, that can elevate our nature to the maximum of its perfection" [13]; a thought, that does not take anything from the outside, but everything, even the sensations, from himself [14].

Descartes is certainly realistic in considering the corporeal world as external to the human spirit, objectively knowable and exists in himself as created by God, although knowledge is not based on the senses, but it's guaranteed by the veracity of God known a-priori as underwear to mind. In Descartes, so, the distinction between the human self and the divine self starts to become fuzzy and fogs, because the human ego, the cogito, no longer experiences a divine You ahead, come on-iecto, objective, discovered as a cause of the ego and creator of the world contacted by the senses, but as found by the idea of God cogito horizon of consciousness. So Descartes is not that I have the idea of God because He exists, but God exists because I have the idea. It is already the God of idealism, which will come up to Hegel. By contrast, in Descartes, why not accept as true anything but what it conceives clearly and distinctly. The interest of reason moves by the attention to the real to his way of conceiving the real. It is real only what is on the size, only what is rational, clearly and distinctly conceivable. What appears to obscure and indistinct is then rejected as non-existent.

We have here another blow against the theology, in which reason is in front of the darkness and in-distinction of the divine nature, although it is clear and distinct in itself. Again God is identical to the concept of God. But if the concept as I produce, as I'll end up identifying with my God I? This is the path that leads to Kant, Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. So, Descartes already in human reason implicitly considered divine or at least able to deify. No wonder, At that time, if the reason, conceived, It is capable of rising or transcend itself, so as to reach the level of "gnosis", ie the divine knowledge or divine thought subsisting and creator of man, for which man, in the words Dear, It has the power to create himself [«autoctisis»].

THE RISE of Gnosticism

So the subject no longer invokes the salvation from God, and it is no longer a gift of his grace, but it is saved by himself, because for itself possesses a divine power. The God decided thus reveals in Gnosticism the «inconsistency of claims to self-salvation, who rely on human strength " [n. 13 text WHO]. The man has no need of grace, because even the human ego, founded on cogito, He has in itself the principle of their car elevation Absolute. Nothing comes from man to lift; but he rises to God by the power of thought and will. It is also a theme Pelagian.

In Kant remains a residue of reality in the thing self external intellect. But here idealism goes a step further than Descartes. indeed, while, compared to Descartes, the thing itself loses value, but it continues to exist, in Kant becomes unknowable in itself and the intellect acquires too much power, because Kant even gives the power to shape the object of experimental knowledge, that, as is known, It is no longer the thing itself, but the phenomenon. There remain, however, moral knowledge, the critique of reason and the idea of God.

But with Fichte, here it is that idealism takes another step, the resolution being in thought. Descartes had deducted sum from the cogito. But it was the simple act of thought, a logical deduction, for which I know to exist. But that my existence is created by God, It is independent from me. Instead the me fichtiano "places" [sets] the non-ego not only logically, but also ontologically, then it produces himself. So we no longer have that I am created by God. From here it understands how Fichte was accused of atheism. He defended himself by citing God as absolute I, but I do not see how this, which it is the ego empirical foundation, may be its creator. That I am a deep or shallow, It is still the same I. So, the empirical I, how to teach Fichte, It has only to become aware of being a contingent manifestation of his absolute I and carry out the divine potential inherent in it. In this sense the Letter of the CDF God has pleased notes that "individualist reductionism of a neo-Gnostic tendency promises a merely inner liberation" [n. 11 text WHO]. But the ego of Fichte, as is known, I think adds to the ego Kant [I think at all] the dialectical factor of self-denial, as affirmation and position of not-I, opposite to the ego. Fichte express the 'existing self-contradiction, as we have seen, In the cogito Cartesian and in theological dialectic Kant:

"If the ego has set itself the absolute totality of reality, That must necessarily be placed in the non-ego the absolute totality of negation; and the very negation it must be placed as absolute totality. One and the other, the absolute totality of reality in the ego and of the absolute negation of totality in the non-ego, They must be unified by determining. Therefore the I partly determines and partly is determined" [15].

Schelling raises even more the ego of Fichte adding the denial of the non-ego by the ego identity of being and thinking, of being and becoming, of subject and object, the ideal and the real, Spirit and Nature, Theory and practice. However, as reported by Hegel, "Schelling concept called the common intellect category, whereas concept is concrete thought, in himself infinite ". He cites the same Schelling: "There remains, therefore more, if you do not represent " [the Absolute] «in an immediate intuition» [16]. But Hegel doubted the objectivity and universality of such insight. For this he is taking a decisive and final step of the ascent to the Absolute Promethean, started, without full knowledge by Descartes, instead persuaded to give the best evidence of what God had done St. Thomas. And this step is to argue that the essence of God can not grasp in a vague and indeterminate intuition, where everything is indifferent to everything and merges with everything, but only in logical and rational concept as self-consciousness of the Idea.

Hegel surpassing the previous step established by Schelling compared to Fichte. These had added Kant than the elimination of the thing itself, henceforth produced by the ego in the ego. With Hegel so we come to the end of Cartesian parable: that cogito who arrogantly outset surpasses the just and natural limits of the ego and humiliates the reality of things created by God, lowering and raising God himself, continue its transfer work to man the divine attributes, so that in the end the man has become God and God is gone. Hegel is the one that leads the Cartesian principle of cogito to the extreme; He has the audacity to explain clearly and consciously the culmination of the climb to the sky taken by the cogito Cartesian, with the famous principle of the "identity of human nature and divine nature" [17] sn the basis of the development of God, which is opposed to the front ''dare"Dogma of Chalcedon.

Inalready, the Pleased Deo warns us that the way to salvation which offers us Christ, "It is not a purely inner journey, on the edge of our relationships with others and with the created world " [n. 11, text WHO]. This is not from ego and close all the ego. "The grace that Christ gives us is not, as claimed by the vision of neo-Gnostic, a merely inner salvation, but that introduces us in the concrete relationships that he himself lived. The Church is a visible community " [n. 12]. It is open to reality, in the world, to the others, to God, to society. The Gnostic instead, closed in his ego, and build social un'area, a slap on their own, separating itself from the effective ecclesial communion, that only the realist can perceive and live, creates a cult for his service to a mass of gullible brainwashed, myopic zealots or clever flatterers. Gnosticism is an exaltation exaggerated ego, of knowledge and of human thought, as saying the Rejoice and rejoice:

"Gnosticism is one of the worst ideologies, so long as, while unduly exalts the knowledge or a particular experience, It considers that their view of reality is perfection. In tal modo, perhaps without realizing it, This ideology feeds on itself and becomes even more blind " [n. 40].

The Gnostic falls into this deception it speculates on thinking abstractly taken, in its absoluteness, without considering the conditions and the limits, in which it is exercised by man. Moreover, the Letter of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith God has pleased ago still note the characteristic of Gnosticism: his Interior absolute, which it resolves itself into an absolute individualism, so everything is ego, the ego and the ego:

"the reductionism individualist neo-gnostic tendency promises a purely inner freedom " [n. 11]. Freedom does not involve any link with an objective moral law, but it is resolved in a pure act of his own will. Because of this, Letter warns that the way of salvation that Christ offers us, "It is not a purely inner journey, on the edge of our relationships with others and with the created world " [n. 11]. "The grace that Christ gives us is not, as claimed by the neo-gnostic vision, a merely inner salvation, but that introduces us in the concrete relationships that he himself lived. The Church is a visible community " [n. 12].

Moreover, the Rejoice and rejoice notes that Gnosticism

"Sometimes it becomes particularly tricky, when you masquerade as disembodied spirituality. Indeed, Gnosticism 'by its very nature wants to domesticate the mystery', is the mystery of God and his grace, is the mystery of the life of others " [n. 40]. "They conceive a mind without incarnation, unable to touch the suffering flesh of Christ in others, plaster in an encyclopedia of abstractions. Eventually, disincarnando mystery, They prefer a God without Christ, a Christ without the Church, a Church without people " [n. 37].

Gnosticism is a disembodied spirituality because it solves being in thought and matter in the spirit. The same Cartesian method, with its distrust of sensuous experience and therefore of intelligibility of material substance, It shows its ancestry, perhaps unconscious, by Gnostic Manichean dualism of matter good- spirit bad, quoted from both the Pleased Deo that from Gaudete. But this ultra spiritualism turns into its opposite, as it appears from the materialism of Marx, who he says he converted from Hegel simply "putting a head that head that was instead of feet and putting in place the feet, that were previously in place of the head ', that is to say that, If Hegel derives matter from spirit, Marx derives the spirit from matter. They are not the ideas that guide the material world – economic, but this is to drive ideas.

Moreover, as notes the Rejoice and rejoice, I gnostico you ritesene in possession of absolute science, ie as encompassing the Science of. The Gnostic is omniscient, certainly not in the sense of knowing the details of all things - you realize that in fact he thought it would be madness - , and yet in a sense, that does not mean that does not denote an inordinate pride. The Gnostic believed omniscient in the sense that it is believed to possess the Science of Totality. If nothing is out of the being and the being it is being thought of him, it follows that there is nothing that is not the subject of the Gnostic thought. Being coincides with being thought of him; then there can not be a being that he ignores or transcending his thinking, including God. In this sense, the Said ed leap he says that

"The" Gnostics "judge others on the basis of verification of their ability to understand the depth of certain doctrines" [n. 37]. "Typical of the Gnostics is to believe that with their explanations can make perfectly understandable all faith and all the Gospel" [n. 39]. "The Gnostic balance is assumed to be formal and aseptic, and it can take on the appearance of a certain harmony or an order that encompasses all » [n. 38].

An example of this ideal is found in Gnostic Schelling, it states:

"My point of view is generally Christianity in the totality of its historical development, my goal is to only truly universal Church [if 'Church' may be the right word here], that only in the spirit must be built, and which may consist only in the perfect understanding of Christianity, of its effective fusion with science and knowledge in general» [18].

Hegel praises him Gnosticism, although subject, with these words:

"All these forms end up in troubled waters, but on the whole they have the same determinations as their principle and arise from the general and profound need of reason to determine and understand as concrete what is in and for itself» [19].

However, the final outcome of rationalism nefarious Descartes was not immediately felt by the Descartes and his contemporaries, which vice versa there remained admired, as they had been in front of a philosophical genius of unprecedented magnitude, and so happily she drank the poison without realizing.

Far-sighted, like always, It was the Church, than in 1663 Index put the works of Descartes. But unfortunately, such was the success of the messianic philosopher, that revolutionized all philosophical thought developed in the preceding millennia, hardly anyone, even among theologians, He heeded the wise warning of the Church, except Thomist, that, for their critical prudence, it is very difficult to deceive, even by the most cunning impostors. Those who remained faithful to the truth was considered an outdated, a barren school, a conservative stubborn and so it goes.

For the idealist, ie for the gnostic, also what appears under external, It is internal to the ego, consciousness and thought, as thought. In fact, the idealist does not realize or does not recognize that the thing itself, Although the act of knowing enters, as represented, horizon of consciousness, in itself, in its reality, It is out of our thought or our mind; And extramentally, as St. Thomas says. "It is the stone that is in the soul - Aristotle - , but the image of the stone ". It 'clear that our ideas are not external to our mind; but this does not authorize us to believe, with the idealists, that the reality matches our ideas, if not intentionally and accidentally in the act of knowing the true.

CHARACTERS DELL'IDEALISMO

It is idealistic axiom that is not given to be out of pensiero, but that being is always in thought. The being is always thought. Do not you think being, but it is thought, because being and be thought coincide. It is thought the thought, because being is thought [20]. Everything is at once being and thought. Now, But, only in God being coincides with the thought, because God is subsisting Being and Thinking Subsistent. Says St. Thomas:

"In God [21] on is knowing its substance '. In God, "the intellect, the object of thought [that which is understood], l'Idea [an intelligible species] and thinking are the same thing" [22].

But man is no distinction between his being and his thinking. The man is not, as he believed Descartes, a thinking subject - only God, in which being and thinking are identified, It may be this - , but it is a subject that can think. And if you think, He not for this is not a man, be able to think. God is essentially thought, It is essentially thinking. Instead humans thinking is merely an option, as essential, but that may be the simple faculty was, without passing upon. For the human intellect being or entity, created by God, it is independent of thought, It transcends thought and rule of the truth of thought. To be in the true, the human mind must adapt to being humbly, must obey the laws of being. It gave, instead, creator and the Creator of, not being as an object before Him and independent self. So He knows Himself and the world as a separate being from his thinking, but how to be immanent to his ego. Clearly for us the thought as thought is within our thoughts. But before they thought it can only be out, in external reality: what St. Thomas calls things outside. It is spiritually enters or intentionally, as a concept or idea or representation, in our thinking, once you think or know.

If everything is to be and thought, everything is idea, as they believe the idealists, and there is to be distinguished from thought; if the institution as such, including the divine, It is immanent to our thinking; if it is true what he says Rahner, that "the nature of being is to know and be known" [23]; sand being is "conscious being" [24]; if being "is always also known" [25]; if being "is the knowing subject itself" [26], It is as such and not just the divine being is identified with the thought, then we have pantheism. According to the idealist, we, thinking being, think God, because being is God. But on the other hand, since being identified with being thought, and our being is being thought, our being is identical with the divine being, which is precisely the be thought.

For the idealist, also not be thought, however, it is thought. And then there is not thought to be. It is clear, moreover, that if I think being, This is thought to be. But before you think or do not think so, I ignore it and it is not thought by me. Instead idealism, as the starting point and the object of knowledge is the idea and the consciousness that I have of themselves as thinking, the truth of knowledge is the conformity of the real being or idea, or self-consciousness. But now the identity of thought with being is the absolute knowledge, because it is a knowledge that has nothing that is outside or beyond this knowledge. It is the divine knowledge. And so by contrast with the identity of being thought is the absolute being, because this being is in place everything that thought can think. So is the divine being. And therefore the idealistic gnoseology involves pantheism, ie the identification of human thought with the divine thought, which is what the Rejoice and rejoice It is defined as "Gnosticism", the deification of human knowledge, of which we have the most conspicuous example of what Hegel, called "absolute science" or "Absolute Idea".

We have to say, instead, that the object of metaphysics is not the 'I', is not the thinking subject or self-conscious, but it is the body, that is before [obstructing finds] to me. The initial founding certainty from which the metaphysical and on the basis of which the reason constructs all his knowledge, is not that of their own thinking or doubting, as he believed Descartes; nor is God, as Hegel believed; but it is the certainty and the ability to know the external sensible things, as agreed upon by Aristotle. Certainly the spiritual knowledge that comes from the discovery of ourselves thinking, It will prove to be more robust than that sensitive, given the most ontological value of spiritual things than material. And even greater confidence of faith. But the supreme certainty of faith would be nothing, if it were the ultimate maturation of a certainty, although humble, which already begins with the perception of sensible things. The certainty of the self follows the certainty and knowledge of things, because it's just reflecting on our ability to achieve this original certainty, that we discover our self, as a subject with a mind that has known. We do not derive or deduce the knowledge of things from that of our self, as he believed Descartes, unlike ma, as agreed upon by Aristotle, we realize that we have a faculty of knowledge that draws on things, After that we reached; and the conscience of our know how we come to know the affirmation of our self as knower.

REALISM Lutheran

The Lutheran is a realist epistemology, because Luther to that there is a world outside, There is the self and God exists, He revealed in Scripture and object of knowledge of faith. This, for Luther, It is reality, for which he acknowledges that to be the truth, that the mind must be adapted to that reality. Yet Luther despised metaphysics. Come May? Because his realism is defective and eventually turns into subjectivism. Because? What do you mean? Why Luther is convinced that the certainty and truth are not given by reason, but by faith. He believes in the reality itself, created by God, independent of him; It does not reduce the real to his idea, how will Hegel; it is believed each creature of God and not absolute subject, how will Fichte and Schelling; for him there is a God in himself, incarnated in Christ, Judge and Lord of the world, and not as a simple idea, come in Kant.

Only Luther intends its realism as an immediate jump Heart from sense experience emotional or internal intuition of God's Word and of the mystery of Christ - what Kierkegaard called "the leap of faith" - without going through the mediation of reason and thus of metaphysics. So without going to the social mediation of the Church, that can only be accepted on the basis of a rational realism, for which the Catholic, He illuminated by faith and believe dall'apologetica, he recognizes the divinity of the Church from signs of credibility [27]. Indeed, metaphysics gives anthropology foundation and morals. And this in turn leads to recognize the Church as a human community, which gives evidence of historically enjoy infallible divine assistance in the preservation of the Gospel. Instead, the entity as such is not interesting to Luther, because his mind does not care to apply the principle of causality to the level of reality and of entities, in order to pass, as Saint Paul teaches [RM 1, 19 – 20], from the consideration of created effects [visible] that the Creator [invisible], supreme being. Not that he does not believe in the universality of thought. It perceives perfectly the universality of God's Word and the Gospel message and could grasp the universal human needs. Otherwise his message would not have been so successful. At the same time he felt a great need for concrete.

Luther believes in God the Creator and Savior. Slices hear his Word and want to preach. However, he believes in God because he knows demonstratively, with reason, that God exists, but because he feels in his heart, with that feeling that the Germans call "mood» [28], an original dark certainty, which we are not known to account and you do not give account. This irrational feeling will still be present in 'Feeling"Di Schleiermacher. Luther, the term "faith", so, not mean the acceptance of God's Word, on the assumption that one knows the reason that God exists, but it directed precisely to this "feeling". This is connected with the fact that, Although Luther feels God as something else and transcendent to itself, and thus he is staying in realism and avoid pantheism, in which instead will fall Hegel, It feels so intimately and habitually in him, that not even suggests the possibility of losing such a union because of sin, and precisely because of his belief, which he considers "faith", which always he has God in him and with him.

It is what the Church has long called "immanence", that is not - mind you - the pure presence of God in the depths of the soul; of that fact also speaks Sant'Agostino, which does not make it an immanent. But it's what speaks Feeding of the flock [NN. 10, 33, 35, 39, 62, 65,73, 80 text WHO]. It is therefore necessary to distinguish accurately immanentism and pantheism, although they may look alike. The immanence does not deny divine transcendence. It is the error of Luther. Instead pantheism there is the identification of human nature with the divine and the human knowledge with the divine, ie Gnosticism, the identification assumption of thought with being, of which we have already spoken. This is the error of German idealism [29]. It is clear then that with Luther realism is less to be replaced by a vague non-conceptual subjective emotion, strongly reminiscent of the '' transcendental experience 'Rahner. He also recalls that "experience" [n. 21, 22, 25, 39, 78, 79 text WHO] or that "feeling" no objective foundation, which are contradicted by PI went up of St. Pius X [NN. 10 – 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 38, text WHO]. Here realism is replaced by subjectivism.

A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE GOD OF SAINT THOMAS AND THE GOD OF HEGEL

humble Esaltavit

The highest result of humility in exercising intellect is since the conception that the mind becomes God, Why, the more the mind It is willing to accept the reality, the more the power of intellect, fertilized by real, suitable for a real and reaching out to the real, which it is the end and the good of the intellect, It has the possibility to be implemented and realize the maximum of its possibilities, supported also by the grace, to grasp the sublime truth and achieve higher learning, concerning the essence and attributes of God. The humility, as awe or equating of mind to the real, obedience to the royal reception and the real, It leads the mind to know that it by itself is not anything and that all that is and has, beginning with his own existence, him by God, who created it. It realizes that it has Being, but not And Being. It is not by itself, but on the other, that is from God. Without the Other, it would be nothing. Instead pride, impact and legacy of original sin, pushes the ego to consider itself self-founded and self-sufficient in being. On the contrary, Fichte come to interpret sum Cartesian as "I am being" and "I place my being '. The ego does not ask: why does it exist? There are just. Or it gives the totally insufficient responses, like that of Darwinism.

The humility, which it is expressed in realism, quenches fever and cancer of pride and leads the subject to reality and to the real dimensions of the sua existence, limited, weak and sinful. thus cleansed, the subject is in the best position to operate the best and to be raised by grace, who reveals the mysteries of the Godhead. Instead Cartesian ego can not think of having been created by God, but like an absolute I, the origin of reality and of thought, It purports to prove the existence of God by deducing it from a supposedly non-existent innate idea of God, forgetting that, if I can produce the idea of God, I can not for this cause God.

It is interesting to compare then what idea of God comes by two opposing methods of realism and idealism, choosing two emblematic cases, like that of St. Thomas and Hegel and considering the concept of God from three angles: God as Being and Spirit; God as Absolute Idea; and God as Sdefend assoluto. For both St. Thomas and for Hegel God is put on the plane of. Whether for one than the other God is the ego or absolute Subject. Whether for one than the other is absolute Idea, Absolute science, absolute Spirit. Except though, while St. Thomas being is distinct from becoming, for Hegel it coincides with becoming [30], which already implies an identification of God with the world and therefore the human ego with the Divine Self. For St. Thomas, It gave, absolute Being, identical to Himself, creates the world from nothing. For Hegel, It gave, synthesis of being and nothing, He becomes world by denying himself and determines how the world, who, denying himself, becomes God.

While St. Thomas, then the human ego is distinct from the ego divine, that God is a You respect human ego, Hegel God is the ultimate essence and substance of the human self, which is just a "moment" in the passenger and absolute ego contingent. The self I'm the cogito Thomistic leads to the discovery of the ego are divine as the absolute Thou who created me. L 'I I'm the cogito Cartesian Hegel leads me to realize that I am absolutely divine sense and that you who I have before me, I ask them myself with my thoughts and my interests. While for Thomas God is the purest Spirit [31], simple [32], identical to itself, infinite goodness, unchangeable [33], immortal, transcendent, independent of the world, Hegel God is essentially mutable, becoming, contradictory, dialectical, mundane, material, mixed with evil and deadly.

He says Hegel:

"The "if" [the cogito Cartesian] "Implements the absolute Spirit lives. This figure is that simple concept, which, however, abandons its eternal essence " [God is alien] "And there" [in the concreteness] «Or acts. It has in the purity of the concept split or the rise, because the purity is absolute abstraction or negativity " [becoming]; "Similarly it has an element of its actuality" [the world] "Or being in him in the same pure knowledge, because the pure knowledge is the simple directness, which it is so that there be ' [the concrete], as essence; each moment is negative thinking, the other is the same positive thinking. That there is finally, and just as the being of him - both as be it as a duty " [the good] "Reflection in itself, i.e. being— bad» [34].

In either case, God is the absolute Idea.

"The absolute Idea," says Hegel[35], and in this Thomas could agree - it is being, life that does not pass, Truth self conscious, and it is the whole truth ". In tal modo, both Thomas and for Hegel God, Truth is absolute, in that, come dice l’Aquinate, "The Divine Being not only complies with his intellect, but his own to understand»[36], identity of being and thinking.

Whether for St. Thomas to Hegel Idea God is the '' logical idea ' [p.936], the concept that God has of Himself and of things. It is the idea that God has of Himself and of things. It is the rational Idea of divine Reason [37].

"L'Idea divina - says Hegel [38] - it is the only object and content of philosophy. Containing itself any determination, and being its essence to return to itself through its determined or particolarizzarsi, it has different configurations, and the task of philosophy is to know in these ".

In Hegel the human mind is a moment the divine Idea; God thinks Himself in man as man; St. Thomas in the human mind is an analog participation Idea divine and man thinks himself in God as God. The divine Idea Hegelian, But, unlike that thomist, distinguishes in God the only idea - that is, the idea that God has of himself or Logos [The word] [39] - from the many ideas, corresponding to created things, It does not transcend the ideas of things as the uncreated transcends creation, but as the universal is realized in particular, or as the indeterminate is determined as determined, or as the substance is determined in the way of being. Because of this, Hegel in the divine Idea is syllogistic and dialectical, It is the method of knowledge [cf. p. 937], and the

'Concept of movement "[p. 937]; 'It is grasped in the concept " [p. 936], who "has everything and its movement is the universal absolute activity, ... is absolutely infinite force, when no object, as it is present as outer, away from reason and from her independent, could resist, It is compared to it of a particular nature and refuse to be penetrated by her " [pp. 937— 938].

Here one sees how Hegel gives to human reason a power which in reality is totally beyond its real possibilities and functions, it was also perfectly healthy as it was before the fall. Imagine in their present state, afflicted, weakened and blurred as it is by so many evils, defects and bad inclinations, which it is necessary to remedy the, in addition to a strict discipline of reason, an intense life of grace. Let's see how Hegel Pelagianism is joined to Gnosticism.

Vice versa, St. Thomas in the divine idea is the idea that God It has things that creates. This does not mean that in the divine mind there is a plurality of ideas, as it happens in the human mind. With one Idea, that is God thought to Himself, God sees all things [«God knows many ways:» [40]]. There are many ideas, as things you think of God as first thought to exist in external reality to God. And in this sense there are more ideas in the divine mind [41]; and it is the idea that God the Father to Himself, ie the Logos or divine Word, the person of the ChildrenO [42]. In both cases, God is absolute Science. For St. Thomas, "Given that the divine essence is its own Idea» [species intellegiblis], "Necessarily follow that his knowledge" [to understand] «both its essence and its being» [43]. For Hegel's absolute knowledge is the philosophy. It is the knowledge that God has of Himself as a man. What philosophy knows of God it is what God knows Himself. So human reason knows what Self knows the divine Reason, because basically, as Hegel says, the reason is only one: it is divine. Therefore man, as reasons, and me, He knows what God knows. The Cartesian logic was at its peak of his aspirations. From here Gnosticism Hegel. He says that philosophy Hegel

"It is the idea that thinks itself, who knows the truth " [ie the truth subsisting, personified, l '' I'm a I thinking "of Descartes], "The logic to mean that it is the universality validated the concrete content as by its reality. Science is, for this manner, back » [dialectically] "At its beginning" [pure being]; "And the logic is its result as spirituality: Assuming the judgment, in which the concept was only in itself ' [being abstract] "And the beginning, anything immediate, and then by the appearance, that there had ", [the empirical data] "Spirituality" [namely the Cartesian ego] "It has risen to its own principle" [ie absolute ego] "As its element '[44].

CONCLUSION

The man has an innate need to greatness. However this needs to be channeled and moderated, not to become excessive and source of tragic illusions. reasonable Aspiration, It is not to be infinite, dictated by pride, but to contemplate the Infinite, dictated by humility. Indeed, between human finitude and divine infinity exists an insurmountable climb. To try to overcome it is insane arrogance, It is what the Greeks call hubris.

As taught by the Fourth Lateran Council, "Between the creator and the creature you may not notice a similarity that, that no greater dissimilarity should be noted" [45]. The man, Although it created in the image and likeness of God, through faith and grace, but it can overcome the forces of reason and be allowed to participate in the divine life, but only up to a certain extent granted to him by God and no later than.

If enough reason to fully understand the concept the divine essence, no divine revelation and faith would be needed for add content to reason that it itself can not grasp. And even with all that the human mind, Also in heavenly glory, It remains fundamentally under the understanding that God has of Himself. The reason by itself can certainly know God by analogy and through the creatures. But one can not know the divine essence or essence quidditatively, in the words of Thomas de Vio said Cardinal Caetano. You can know the Infinite only finitely, not infinitely, as only he can know Himself.

Exists, it is true, irrational exaltation of faith and fideistic, that claims to build on the ruins of reason, as if it were the reason against faith and this would replace the reason the knowledge of God. What happens in these cases, At that time, It is that the mind is not actually illuminated by the Word of God, but it is deluded by human found vainly passed off as "absolute knowledge". S. Paul warns us against this scam: "Take heed that no man deceive you through philosophy and vain fallacy, according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ " [With the 2,8].

Varazze, 24 July 2018.

_____________________

NOTE

[1] Dialogue, (c). 154.

[2] Ibid., (c). 154.

[3] Ibid., (c). 9.

[4] Critique of pure reason, Laterza editions, Bari 1965, p. 491.

[5] The exposition of Aristotle's Metaphysics 12, edited by R. Spiazzi, 1. III, lect.I, n. 343, Marietti editions, Torino 1964, p. 97.

[6] cf. E. Gilson, Introduction to the Study of St. Augustine, Vrin, Paris 1969, p. 55.

[7] This is the Cartesian form.

[8] This is the form Hegelian.

[9] cf. the recent Letter Apostlica Rejoice and rejoice, of Pope Francis, n. 36.

[10] Moral philosophy. historical and critical examination of the major systems, Morcelliana, Brescia 1971, pp. 215— 220.

[11] III, 1, The Nuova Italy Editrice, Florence 1981, pp. 410— 418.

[12] Part II, n. 2.

[13] cf. J.Maritain, The dream of Descartes, Buchet Chastel,Paris 1932, p. 17.

[14] cf. E. Gilson, Introduction to the Study of St. Augustine, op.cit., p. 321. Gilson wrong, however, in attributing the same to St. Augustine, on the contrary, it admits that the external thing affects the senses and then in the soul: «Every thing, whatsoever that we know, engenders in our knowledge of its» [Trin., IX, 12, 18]. «None of that body, whether it is possible to understand, if not sense anything about that to be announced» [Trin., XI, 5, 9].

[15] The doctrine of science, Laterza Publishers, Bari 1971, p. 104.

[16] Lectures on the Philosophy of History, III,1, Editrice La Nuova Italy, Florence 1981, p. 387.

[17] Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion, Zanichelli Publisher, Bologna 1974, volume II, p. 366. G. Horses, THE DIALECTIC IN HEGEL'S CHRISTOLOGY, sacred Doctrine, 6, 1997, pp. 87— 140.

[18] Philosophy of Revelation, Bompani Publishing, Milan 2002, p. 1413.

[19] Lectures on the history of philosophy, 3,I, The Nuova Italy Editrice, Florence 1985, p. 27.

[20] cf. my two studies: THINK THE THOUGHT. CONSIDERATIONS ON THE DIGNITY, THE FUNCTIONS AND THE LIMITS OF THOUGHT, I, divinitas, 2001, 3, pp. 279— 300 THINK THE THOUGHT. CONSIDERATIONS ON THE DIGNITY, THE FUNCTIONS AND THE LIMITS OF THOUGHT, (II), divinitas, 1, 2001, pp. 43— 72.

[21] QUESTION, I, q 14, a. 4.

[22] Ibid. This thesis Aquinas was dogmatizzta from the Council of Florence 1442: «All are one in God?» [Denz. 1330].

[23] Listeners of the word, Borla Editions, Rome 1977, p. 66.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Ibid., p. 67.

[26] Ibid., p. 68.

[27] J.V. the Great, o.p, The sum of the Catholic apologetics to mind St. Thomas, Ratisbon 1906; R.— M. Schultes, o.p, Of the Catholic Church. lectures apologetic, Lethielleux, Paris 1931; R. Garrigou—Lagrange, ON, The revelation by Catholic Church, with goals, Ferrari Editions, Rome 1932; A. Benin - S. Cipriani, The true Church. The font of Revelation, Florentine publishing bookshop, Florence 1953.

[28] cf. G. Fagg's, Meister Eckhart and the German mystic preprotestante, Brothers Publishers Mouth, Milan 1946, pp. 192— 194; 201; 296; 298 ss.

[29] N. Hartmann, The philosophy of German Idealism, Mursia Publisher, Milan 1983.

[30] Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, Laterza editions, Bari 1963, p. 93; Science of logic, Laterza editions, Bari 1984, p.71.

[31] QUESTION, I, q. 36, a. 1, to 1m.

[32] Ibid., I, q. III.

[33] Ibid., q.IX.

[34] Phenomenology of the Spirit, New Editions Italy, Florence 1988, vol. (II), pp. 293— 294.

[35] Science of Logic, Op. Cit., p.935.

[36] QUESTION, I, q.16, a. 5.

[37] Ibid., I- II, q. 93, a. 1.

[38] Science of logic, on. cit., p. 935.

[39] QUESTION, I, q.34.

[40] Ibid., q.15, a.3, ad2m.

[41] Ibid., I, q.15, a.2.

[42] Ibid., q.34, aa.1— 2.

[43] Ibid., q.14, a. 4.

[44] Encyclopedia, op.cit., pagg.527- 528.

[45] Denz. 806.

What it is the scholastic theology and who are the fools who despise?

17 June 2018/1 Comment/in Theologica/by Father Giovanni

— Thelogica —

WHAT IS THE THEOLOGY SCHOOL AND WHO ARE THE FOOLS who despise?

Well, the enemies of scholastic theology are those naughty adults become, which now they teach in many Catholic and Protestant Theological Faculty, and all those presumptuous, that, from their narrow views or their revolutionary dreams, loftily show contempt, now with coarse language, Now with Byzantine terms, for scholastic theology, considering it a tangled succession, uncritical and full of prejudices and legends, abstract and empty theories, incomprehensible, vane, unnecessarily thin, overcome, sterile controversy, without development, no historical sense, alien to the interests and way of speaking of men of their time.

Author
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p..

PDF print format article

It is a frequent prejudice that scholastic theology It is a period in the history of Catholic theology now closed, possibly with Vatican II, that would have given rise to a new theology called by various names: "transcendental", "Narrative", «kerygmatica», "Existential" and others. Others speak generically of theology "modern", which uses the so-called "modern philosophy" founded by Descartes. They are the modernists. They already at the time of St. Pius X supported this thesis, judging scholastic theology as "ridiculous system long since gone" [cf. WHO]. Pio XII, in the encyclical The human race, disapproves of "contempt of scholastic theology", leading to "neglect and reject or deprived of their value concepts and expressions, that people of uncommon talent and holiness, under the supervision of the sacred Magisterium and not without illumination and guidance of the Holy Spirit, have been several times with secular work found and perfected for ever more accurately express the truths of faith " [cf. WHO].

The expression "scholastic theology", so, It is not just a historical category, but a spirit perennial category, a category theoretical or epistemological, which simply means what he says the word: the theology that teaching and learning in schools, where this term means exactly what the school is commonly understood: public institution or private educational and training, aimed systematically and methodically to communication and learning of knowledge or science. The instructor is the teacher or the teacher and the apprentice is the disciple, schoolchild or student. Please note that as a foolish contempt for scholastic theology, equally foolish is the contempt for the neo-scholastic theology, expression devised by Catholic theologians of the last century, tied at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, who founded the Journal of Philosophy neoscholasticism [cf. WHO], in response to the stress of the great Pope Leo XIII, that, with the encyclical Eternal Father [cf. WHO] the 1879, he promoted the revival of Thomism [1]. You can talk about the choice of the authors of their favorite, but there is no doubt that the expression itself is more than legitimate, signifying development capacity, of progress and its renewal of philosophy and theology school.

The scholastic theology is therefore one that can be and should rightly also call Theology "scientific", against a so-called "scientific theology", that would claim to use the concept of positivistic science instead of metaphysical science. Of course, It can cause problem to think that theology can be a science, because it implies evidence of principles, uniqueness of concepts, deduction and rational demonstration [2]. It should therefore be made clear that theology is not science in as it runs off the reason or rational evidence, because its principles and axioms of starting are the truths of faith; and yet it is science as syllogistically proceeds deductively or using convenience topics, for which the certainty of the conclusion of rationale, but express a matter of faith, whereby, if the conclusion is denied, it follows the denial of a dogma. For instance, who the hell is this divine mercy is not from the words of Christ, but it is a conclusion that can be drawn with any certainty, which it is not assurance of faith, although what Christ says about the damned is a truth of faith.

The theological intellect cultivation, But, both Aristotle and the Bible, It involves two degrees, the first subordinate to the second: the first is the science [GR. science Jewish there science]. In this position the intellect [GR. mind, eb. Bina Multiply], starting from the immediately intuited first principles of common sense, sets in motion the reason [GR. reason, eb. sure Cause], which, by means of the syllogism, reaches certain conclusion; from this rational degree intellect then rises to the second, what wisdom [GR. Sophia, eb. ok intellect], in which the intellect knows, but relishes what he knows and enjoys it. Science captures the true. Wisdom takes the real as good and beautiful [cf. Plato WHO, WHO e WHO]. Scholastic theology stops at the first instance, but it sets the conditions to ascend to the second, which it is precisely the mystical theology.

Unfortunately, But, as we well know, the idea of school, discipline and study always gives bother anyone, especially the lazy, to charlatans, the presumptuous, envious and false innovators. Expenses, when he made elementary schools, He has not seen, on school building wall, the words "Down with the school!»? Well, the enemies of scholastic theology are those naughty adults become, which now they teach in many Catholic and Protestant Theological Faculty, and all those presumptuous, that, from their narrow views or their revolutionary dreams, loftily show contempt, now with coarse language, Now with Byzantine terms, for scholastic theology, considering it a tangled succession, uncritical and full of prejudices and legends, abstract and empty theories, incomprehensible, vane, unnecessarily thin, overcome, sterile controversy, without development, no historical sense, alien to the interests and way of speaking of men of their time.

Now, “scholastic theology” is simply not, come they would have us believe, a historic season of theology, built in the twelfth century, sclerotized, according to them, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, mummificatasi in the nineteenth century and definitely dissoltasi, Rahner argues eat, with the Second Vatican Council, to be replaced by the theology of Rahner, how they think today many. This is why it makes no sense to oppose scholastic theology, some call "classical", in a supposed theology "modern", It would supplanted and that would be suited to modernity. There is quite an old scholastic theology and modern scholastic theology. It is obvious that today the post-conciliar theologian is required to practice the modern school and even to advance it, even if the old one can always revisit, develop or resume themes or ideas, which they had remained in a state of insufficient processing or unwinding or only sketch.

The term class, from which "classical theology", It involves the idea the clear distinction, neat and tidy: classification, important virtues of the Roman mentality. Greece has category, that, at the level of preaching, It implies the same thing, especially the conceptualization. The correspondent in Sacred Scripture is sure Cause, the word, the reason, act as a clarifier of the mind. So the classic text is comparable to the sacred text and then to the dogma. The first profane, rational, philosophical; The second one, religious and theological. The one and the other is inviolable, mandatory and intangible; It must be carefully and accurately understood and taught, jealously guarded and preserved in its integrity. It is some truth, founding, final, regulatory and absolute, It is perennial source of wisdom for all generations. It can be commented and depth, but not changed or improved. Played, but reinterpreted, because the meaning changes over time, but his way is always to.

So, pull off the pretext of history and of "progress", like the modernists, to change the meaning to the perennial truths of reason and faith, It is a scam worthy of the utmost contempt. The modernists, violators of the sacred, They confuse it a sacred duty to preserve sacred tradition and the sacred text with the petty and short-sighted conservatism of those who refuse to learn and to advance on the path of truth, open to the Holy Spirit's breath, confusing the immutability with immobility and the firmness with the stiffness of death. And there are, these, to speak out for Santommaso and scholastic theology!.

CHARACTERS OF THE THEOLOGY SCHOOL

Let's continue our discussion. So then as it exists a classical culture, There is certainly a classical theology, whose values, having a perennial and absolute character, They must be preserved and developed. It is therefore necessary that the theologian, wise admirer of healthy modernity, not blinded or led astray by the blinders of modernist myopia, does not deal with self-importance and arrogance the rich heritage, inestimable and unfading, classicism, if it does not return to barbarism and nihilism of antiquity.

Scholastic theology, as the word, It is nothing more than the theology that is learned and taught in school, understood precisely as an educational institution, officially recognized by the Church, aimed to education and communication or transmission method, systematic, socially or publicly organized knowledge. In the case of scholastic theology, the knowledge that is learned and taught theology is. So we understand how, in the light of this simple definition and logic, the talk about an extinction of scholastic theology by the Council, who on the contrary warmly recommends its continuation and progress under the guidance of St. Thomas Aquinas, It is a serious foolishness.

Of course, scholastic theology or school is not the only form of theology. You can become theologians and great theologians, even Doctors of the Church, without having attended an official school or academic theology, without obtaining an academic degree, much less without having taught theology at a school or faculty of the Church. The important, Certain, It is the study, which can be under the guidance of a teacher, but learning can also take place in an autodidact way, or by means of research or personal reading or meditation. We then lectio divina the monastic tradition. Or the knowledge of God can be done by internal experience in charity, as a gift of the Holy Spirit, and then we have the mystical theology. This theology can be practiced by anyone, man or woman, young or old, duct or induced, secular religious. In any case, the Catholic has a duty to submitting theology, the interpretation given by the Church of Divine Revelation.

Scholastic theology, instead, in the knowledge of what has been revealed, It uses the resources of human reason, as the logic, biblical exegesis, biblical science, the patrologia, the doctrine of the Church, l’agiografia, anthropology, natural ethics, the story, natural sciences, metaphysics and natural theology, using an inductive-deductive method, so scientific. Scholastic theology is the science of rational conclusions drawn from revealed data [3]. Scholastic theology seminar ensures the theological formation of the priest, in itself not obliged to achieve higher qualifications, unless he undertakes the career of teaching theologian in ecclesiastical faculties.

The scholastic theology is divided into natural theology and revealed or supernatural theology. The first is founded on reason alone and is part of the philosophy; the second is based on the dogma. The latter includes two fundamental disciplines: dogmatic and moral. The first considers the truth of speculative faith; the second, those practices. The preparation for theology revealed constitutes the fundamental theology or apologetics, which it serves as an introduction to the revealed theology, demonstrating the reasons for the credibility of Revelation, the reasons for believing and responds to objections. Scholastic theology, Furthermore, it is helpful to the Magisterium in the preparation of its documents, propose the topics to be addressed and problems to solve, in interpreting and defending the teachings, in environmentally critical pastoral norms imprudent or inappropriate, and segnalargli dangerous heresies in circulation, suggesting how to refute them.

FORMING THE THEOLOGY OF LUTHER SCHOOL TO WORK

Luther, instead, although was a doctor of theology, with its rebellion against the Roman Church, He denied his schooling, and claims to base theology exclusively on Scripture and on the biblical sciences, no interpretation of the Church, but on his personal judgment. He thought that the scholastic theology, subject to the doctrine of the Church, he had learned, he had not served to deepen the truth of Revelation, but unlike the deceived about the truth of the Gospel, as it mediated both by reason, he believed totally corrupted by sin, both by the Magisterium of the Church, he considered fallible. Obviously Luther, Despite his polemic against reason, to avoid falling into irrationality, It is well obliged to still use reason; however, the absence of a purified rationality and disciplined in the logic, ends up misinterpret the Word of God, that he believes, freed from scholastic philosophy, of contact, not get help from it.

Thus we have the paradox of the immense production the Protestant theologian, provided at university and academic level, Luther today, on the one hand affected contempt for the Catholic theology school approved by the Church, for example St. Thomas with his school, while the other has done nothing but build another school, however no doctrinal purity and total fidelity to the Gospel own Catholic school, despite the incalculable amount of intellectual energy expended and tireless studies over the centuries. It is a grave misunderstanding of the teaching of the Council believe that it promotes progress and renewal of theology with the order the abandonment of scholastic theology. It would be a provision senseless, not progress, but go back in the history of theology at the time of the monastic theology of the century. XI, or even the biblical theology and homiletics of the Fathers, before Abelard and San Anselmo fondassero and gave off the dialectics and scientific theology, which it is precisely the scholastic theology.

THE ORIGINS OF THE THEOLOGY SCHOOL

Scholastic theology has arisen as a result of intellectual rebirth of the century. XII to XIII, especially for impulse of Dominican, soon followed by the Franciscans, with the approval and the support of the Papacy. Hence the foundation of the theological faculty of Paris, Oxford and, in the fourteenth century, Bologna, after the founding of the University of Bologna in the eleventh century. Over the following centuries until today the Papacy has always taken care of the quality, the good performance and development of scholastic theology, ie schools and the Faculty of Church, in particular so that they conform to the dogma and could therefore properly use of reason, of philosophy and science for the introduction and justification of the revealed data and interpretation, the clarification, explanation, the defence, the deepening and spreading of the Word of God.

Like this, what, following this uninterrupted educational line, the Second Vatican Council and the Papal Magisterium promote up to the present day [4] regarding theology, it is not at all, contrary to what they would like the modernists of yesterday and today, the abandonment of proven methods, of the fundamental statements and perennial principles of scholastic philosophy [5], as instead the enlargement and the refinement of its sensitivity, its interests and its horizons, continued research, the consolidation and deepening of the acquired data, the recovery of forgotten values, correcting outdated views, vigilance against insurgents errors, the deduction of new scientific findings, opening new paths of investigation, the formulation of new explanatory hypotheses, greater attention to the values and defects of modernity, a greater mutual collaboration between theologians, greater freedom of thought, always in obedience to the Magisterium, in the escape from every exhibitionism and individualism, the improvement of the opening ecumenical, evangelizing and missionary, in the work of inculturation, in interreligious dialogue, interdisciplinary and intercultural, the use of a language more understandable to our contemporaries.

Scholastic theology, despite the common acceptance of the Catholic doctrine, embraces a plurality of currents and schools, reflecting different levels of theoretical perfection and a variety of settings, of guidelines, the emphases and preferences. According to the criterion of validity, the argumentative rigor and logical, as well as speculative perfection, the Church gives the palm to St. Thomas, without excluding other Doctors. Minding the fact of diversity, the main lines are the affettivismo Bonaventurian, which is distinguished Thomist intellectualism and voluntarism from these univocal Scotistic, distinguished in turn from voluntarism essentialist Suarezian. But within the same school Thomist not miss the nuances as between Capreolo and Gaetano, the first of which puts the existence of the person being in line, while the second places it in the line of essence [6].

THE SCHOOL medieval decadence

In the schools of theology sponsored by the Church there have been, in centuries, dangerous deviations, which, though for a time they could be kept at bay by the vigilance of the Church, afterwards, for the rise of universities and academic institutions independent secular or even hostile to the Catholic Church, for example Protestants, for their incompatibility with Catholic dogma, They gave rise in the long run to anti-Christian philosophies and theologies. I'm, these, for instance, famous cases of Abelard in the twelfth century William of Ockham in the fourteenth century.

Meister Eckhart was a doctor of theology, but not exercised teaching, but merely to preaching and writings. It was pious and even a mystical man. However he had some expressions they knew of pantheistic Christology ["I am Christ"], which earned him a conviction after death in 1329 by John XXII, conviction, But, to which he humbly promised to submit, in case it had taken place, and this act of humility he received the Pope's praise, that while he disapproved of some of his theses, and did, vain as some of our days, you are the pride of contesting the Magisterium of the Church and are able to avoid condemnation or the shameful protections afforded or their cunning, or the lack of their bishops.

As ad Abelardo, which resolved the moral appearance Subjective-inenzione rejecting the objective of content-, was condemned, on the recommendation of San Bernardo, by the Council of Sens 1141. Instead Ockham, smarter, Credit managed to collect illegally within the Church, although in constant contrast with her, for which he was sentenced in 1348. But that did not prevent his disciples, for several centuries, such as Gabriel Biel, in the fifteenth century, to get a space in the ecclesiastical theology, so that Luther, as is known, he boasted of being a disciple of Ockham, while the Dominicans, who were not easily duped [7], especially with Card. Gaetano in the sixteenth century, hard they fought his mistakes. But the occamismo, that such empiricism English origin, strong recommendation of the Lutheran, It survived to the present day, and of course in the Lutheran theology, It is led to the current modernism, especially in the current existentialistic, historicist, phenomenology and empiricist.

The concretism Occamistic also leads to materialism. The same transcendental idealism, however far dall'occamismo for his rationalist spiritualism, He has at the bottom a core Nominalist, evident in Kant, when for him the abstraction does not need to grasp the essence of things and the body universal reality, starting from the experience, but only to deduce a priori idea from another. Kant's doctrine of the phenomenon resembles the intuition of concrete Occamistic. Let's make a list of the errors of William of Ockham, pathogenic germs of thought of the following centuries until today.

Subject of metaphysics is not the universal body, but the concrete singular, immediately experienced.
The abstractive operation away from the concrete and then from reality.
With the abstraction is not understood Universal real essence, but only a vague general picture, that is designated by a name ["nominalism"], that collects and designates a collection of like-minded individuals to each other.
Since the universal has no objective reality, but it's only a name, do not exist logical necessity based on universal objective essence, but only empirical facts mutable and contingent, connected to each other by association of ideas. For that we can not give a definite rational demonstration, irrefutable and incontestable, but only probable conclusions and always revisable.
The truth is that because the intellect is adapting to the real, but because you will want it to be true.
So good is not derived from life, but it is decided by the will.
God does not want something because it is good, but something is good because God wills it.
So the moral law is not based on an objective human nature, universal and abstract, but only on the concrete nature: human nature is that date and individual human nature and the sum of the individuals. The moral law, so, It does not depend on the truth of man, but only by the will of God, that, if you would, It might rule as a good murder or adultery.
So for me, if I want to imitate the divine freedom, there are non-negotiable values, but I accept them only if I should.

PHILOSOPHY LAY AGAINST THE THEOLOGY SCHOOL

Scholastic theology, as we have seen, sorse initiative of the Church, in particular the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215, who ordered the bishops to get help from good theological education and the training of clergy. It was obvious that teachers should be priests, Religious or secular. This was the great chance for the birth of the Dominican Order. In fact, San Domenico leaned on this canon of the Council to kick off his Order of Preachers, sending his brothers to a doctorate in leading theological centers of that time, Paris, Bologna ed Oxford, and for them to form good priests and bishops to be placed at the disposal of the Pope so that he could send them to preach the Gospel throughout Europe.

In the Middle Ages, as is known, The philosophical culture and theological took place under the presidency and the protection of the Church, and it was practiced by priests and religious, because he was ordered to the cultural education of priests and bishops. The philosophy was exclusively at the service of theology and therefore the Faith. But in the Middle Ages, especially behind the stimulus of the Dominican, promoting the exploitation, with Santommaso Aquinas, St. Albert the Great and St. Catherine of Siena, the function of the lay, human and civil values, of science, arts and rationality, They began to make inroads, in philosophy and theology, even the laity. Example among all, although then very rare, was Dante Alighieri.

Wrong'exploit of secular culture, which he tended to escape the supervision of the Church, After the first signs with the Palatine School of Charlemagne in the ninth century Scotus Erigena, and the Court of Frederick II of Sicily in the thirteenth century, Humanism was the Italian fifteenth century and even more the Renaissance, which came to be a real return of Paganism, with its arrogance, his flesh, its debauchery and its superstitions.

The Italian of the '400 had Humanism, per pulse of Lorenzo de 'Medici, therefore outside of ecclesiastical academic institutions, his theological soul in the Platonic Academy founded by Marsilio Ficino, who became a priest 50 year old, but he established in the field of theology and mysticism hermetic trend and Platonic. Florentine environment here is therefore foxy flourishing political thought of Machiavelli and the pagan humanism of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, unnecessarily thwarted by Savonarola, true academic theologian, Although foreign academic institution of the Church, and even persecuted by Pope Alexander VI, eager to dominate sull'appetibile Florence by the Medici.

With the rise of the Renaissance, the Papacy loses gradually both the theological prestige both morally on European Christianity, so here is the multiplication of lay theologians and philosophers, that increasingly bring into collision with the theology of the Church, namely the scholastic theology, such as in the sixteenth century, materialist sensist Bernardino Telesio and Pomponazzi University of Padua, who denied the immortality of the soul with the claim to refer to Aristotle. In this climate, to complete the desolation of time, as opposed to paganism Renaissance, but unfortunately also to scholastic theology, making all lump everything, as is known, It missed that this becomes the Lutheran Reformation, further blow to scholastic theology, although this time it was, with Luther, a theologian formed in scholastic theology. But then Luther, After a start that seemed to be sincere and promising, made clear the Church to understand that under the cover of apparent fervent faith and trusting in the merciful Christ, He burned on the same impure flame of the proud and self-centered I renaissance.

The Council of Trent restores badly damaged scholastic theology and sadly maligned Luther, and starts, with a renewed recommendation of Aquinas' doctrine, a new vigorous and fruitful season of scholastic theology, that has its major exponent in Francis Suarez, whose system, as is known, tries to pull Thomas, Scotus and Ockham. This syncretism prepares the advent of Descartes, who, as is known, He was a pupil of the Jesuits.

CARTESIO ENEMY OF THE THEOLOGY SCHOOL

But with Descartes, in sec. XVII, the philosophy of the laity It becomes even more arrogant and, advancing the foolish but fascinating claim to have found the first incontrovertible principle of legal certainty and the truth is not in adherence or equating of the intellect to the sensitive entity known through the senses - Thomistics and Aristotelian the essence of the material —, but in an immediate and original - in reality nonexistent - consciousness of thinking. This awareness was therefore obtained from a previous experience of sensible things, but from the self-consciousness [«cogito»], Descartes would like to identify with the consciousness to exist («sum»), with the result that the cogito It comes to identify with sum [Hegel] or the sum It is "place" (sets) from the cogito [Fichte].

It is clear that this conception of the principle of knowledge, which implies an idealistic conception of the principle of being, It is the total subversion of philosophy and theology school; not only, but it is also the subversion of the bases of reason and Christian faith. Which it is even worse, despite assurances to the contrary Descartes. Although therefore there is talk of a Cartesian school and attempts have been made - for example Malebranche and Leibnitz, until Hegel, and Gioberti, The 800 ontologists, Bontadini and the modernists - to build a theology on the basis of cogito, these attempts have failed or illusory, and for this reason the Church, while on one hand the Index of the works of Descartes in 1663, since then he has done nothing but recommend, until Vatican II and beyond, a scholastic theology based on Aristotelian-Thomistic vision.

Because of this, it is extremely regrettable that oggi like today the Cartesian idealist influence, through the work of the modernists, without significant interventions of ecclesiastical, It is penetrated in the same academic institutions of the Church, with the consequence of forming priests, bishops and theologians self-styled "progressive", no character and no personality, as by the wind beaten reeds, cowards and opportunists, or ambitious and vainglorious, prone to serve and to seek consensus from the world. Cartesianism is so transcendental idealism to the German origins of the nineteenth century, I still live as this idealism is jointly development of Lutheranism. But it can not be considered true theology school, ie scientific, because it has no basis either in reason nor faith, but it is one that Antonio Livi rightly calls a "dubious religious philosophy"[8].

But Descartes is also the Enlightenment origins and the Masonic doctrine, powerful today as well in the world. It is also the origin of Husserl's phenomenology. Heidegger comes from Husserl. Severino is an idealist eternalista. How all'occamismo, it is still alive English empiricism and existentialism. Marxism arose from opposition to Hegel. Idealism in turn was and is the inspiration of modernism, of which the Council was able to capture the positive aspects, eliminating the poison, so that the scholastic theology today can make use of these instances purified by the Council.

IF WE WANT TO KEEP THE DOGMA, WE MUST CONTINUE AND IMPROVE THE THEOLOGY SCHOOL

Today, in educational institutions themselves, educational and academic of the Church, there is almost nowhere the intention of making scholastic philosophy in continuity, albeit progressed, with that of past centuries, and often it is lost or despises the very concept of scholastic theology, as we have defined it in accordance with the Magisterium of the Church. and believe, with Rahner, that the scholastic theology or "neo-scholasticism", as they call, it ended with the Second Vatican Council: which in reality it is totally false, since, as it is known outside of those who do not know, just that great Council's what, unlike all other, recommended St. Thomas, Prince of Scholastics [9].

It is to be noted, however, that discipleship Thomist It does not always require absolute uniformity of thought, but it gives space to a certain diversity of opinions. For instance, the concept of the person's livelihood can be approached or essence or existence. In the first case it appears more clearly the element of the immutability of the essence and therefore immutability of the moral law; in the second case, instead, It appears lighter concreteness and existential mutability of each person, so it is easier for the right application of the moral law in concrete cases.

Starting from the immediate post-council have so began to assert itself, in the schools of the Church, of forms and methods of theology, which, although still obliged to organize legally and technically schools, They are in fact deliberately refuse to stand in continuity, albeit progressive and innovative, with the previous scholastic theology, start with the sad result of bad schools, modernist, seedbeds of heresies, for the absence or falsification of values, the principles and methods of ancient centuries, safe and proven, the previous scholastic theology. In the fifty years since the Council there have been several attempts to renew, to correct, modernize and improve teaching, teaching and the content of theology in the Church institutions, but unfortunately it is mostly initiated and produced a fake renewal, which it is actually decadence and barbarism type modernistic, mostly influenced by Protestantism and German idealism.

A clear sign of this serious cultural degradation, is almost universal scorn which was held metaphysics, especially in its realistic setting, What is that of St. Thomas, that is the one recommended by the Church. On the fundamentals of metaphysics, which are those most original, spontaneous, evident and incontrovertible of reason, conquer the most crass ignorance, instead of which we are content of the fantastic creations, of fables and mythology. Obviously great is the damage for the understanding of the dogma, that is falsified or emptied of meaning, since it is mostly formulated in metaphysical concepts.

Beyond dell'orpello structures, of erudition historical and technical services, the scientific level, intellectual, and wisdom is often descended below the medieval one. Heresies prenicene or Protestant, that they thought had been superseded for centuries, You were repeated again, and indeed they are now in vogue, as if the Church in all this time nothing had taught or clarified. Modernism, that seemed to have been defeated by St. Pius X, instead he hatched under the ashes, and he returned into the open worse than before, after the Council, falsely presenting himself as his interpreter. The theological trends, now dominant in ecclesiastical institutions, that today contend for the succession to scholastic theology, I am liberation theology of Schillebeeckx and Rahner's transcendental theology. Both, aside from their own characteristics, repudiate speculative theology and are subject to influences and Protestants Masonic.

Modern Theology, under the pretext of preaching and evangelization, on the thrust of Luther, followed by Barth and Bultmann, It resolves theology 'kerygmatica», thus reduced or pastoral [Rahner] or praxis of liberation [Schillebeeckx]. Instead, the theology, as a science, or speculative and demonstrative knowledge, systematic deductive ordered a complete set, logically connected, fixed propositions, certain, precise and unchanging, It is repudiated or as impossible or as a medieval residue or as a set of antiquated formulas, abstract, ahistorical and rigid, unable to affect the concrete realities.

Another feature of modernist theology is its historicism, [Kasper, Küng, Cricket, Strong and Bordoni], dependent on its denial of an immutable truth and supra. Not so much to reduce theology to the history of theology, which would already be a mistake, but it is a serious mistake, concerning the same formal knowledge production: the same to theology is not a reason or infer or prove, but a recount, a recount. The event" [Event] It is replacing the concept and then the dogma. This is not to say that a dogma can not have as a historical fact contained, for example the crucifixion of Christ, But historicism is the very act of knowledge that is an "event"; from that becoming or mutate the same formal object of the act, and then the impossibility of an immutable truth.

A sort of theological stream recently in the context of moral theology in particular in relation to the wider problem concerning sexual and family ethics, is the so-called queer theology (queer = odd, bizarre), but better known by serious theologians' pornoteologia ", according to an expression coined in the early seventies by Father Cornelio Fabro. It is indeed a trend pseudoteologica obscene and heretical, which replaces the natural law, judged "abstract", "Outdated" and "rigid", with blind obedience to the instinctual drive and subjective sexual pleasure, it 'libido' Freudian, according to which everyone is free to choose the "sexual orientation". It deals with, at the bottom of, a brazen shooting of the old Epicurean pay, always tempting for men fleshly, hypocrite with theological varnishing [poor theology!], where there is nothing divine, but only the pure exaltation of pleasure.

In front of such barbarism and degradation of theology, under the most vain and specious pretexts and false appearances of "odernità post-conciliar", then we must say very clearly that the Second Vatican Council, whose address in theological studies find a bright orientation and a powerful stress and application encyclical Faith and Reason of St. John Paul II [cf. WHO], to which was followed by the encyclical Light of Faith [cf. WHO] and the recent Apostolic Constitution of Pope Francis The joy of truth [cf. WHO], with its reference to St Thomas Aquinas, authoritatively confirms the relevance and importance of scholastic theology for the formation of the clergy and to deal constructively with the values and errors of modernity.

Varazze, 17 June 2018

_____________________

NOTE

[1] See the commemoration of this event in the Proceedings of the conference sponsored by the Diocese of Perugia in 2003, published in Perugia in 2004, "The Christian philosophy of the century and the Magisterium of Pope Leo XIII".

[2] Cf the monographic number of Two Thomas, The fate ecclesial theology as a science, n.40, gen.-apr., 1/2005; A.Livi, True and false theology. How to distinguish the authentic "science of faith" from an equivocal "religious philosophy", Leonardo da Vinci's publishing house, Rome 2012.

[3] Cf A. Gardeil, The revealed and theology, Editions du Cerf, Paris 1932.

[4] See the recent Apostolic Constitution Pope Francis "Veritatis gaudium" on the Reform of Ecclesiastical Studies.

[5] CF. G. Matthew, SJ, The thesis of the XXIV Santommaso philosophy Aquinas approved by S. Congregation of Studies, Typography of the Pontifical Gregorian University, Rome 1947.

[6] U. Degl'Innocenti, Disagreement with the Capreolo Gaetano about personality, in The problem of the person in the Santommaso thought, Libreria Editrice of the Pontifical Lateran University, Rome 1967, pp.122-154.

[7] It is necessary to arrive at the sec. XX, with the current Schillebeeckx, for Dominicans lack of critical sense and victims of modern prejudices.

[8] True and false theology. How to distinguish the authentic "science of faith" from an equivocal "religious philosophy", Leonardo da Vinci's publishing house, Rome 2012.

[9] CF. Wished for Total, 16 WHO e Education, 10 WHO.

«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:

The epistemology of theology Walter Kasper, that these days also delights to give to others of the Gnostics

24 May 2018/3 Comments/in Theologica/by Father Giovanni

— Theologica —

Gnoseology Theological WALTER KASPER, THAT OF THESE TIMES YOU DILETTA EVEN TO GIVE TO THE GNOSTIC

Following the Hegelian dialectic, Walter Kasper has moved away from Christianity even more of Luther, because Luther, at least, had seen, albeit clumsily, the risks of a superb reason and, albeit so arrogant, the fundamental importance of obeying the Word of God, while the Hegelian dialectic turns God into a syllogism and dissolves the Mystery in the development of history.

PDF print format article

Author
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p.

The way we think about moral action and our own moral conduct depends on our conception of reality and how we conceive the knowledge of reality, that is, from our "epistemology". This applies to everyone, and therefore also applies to the famous theologian Walter Kasper. In this essay we will see how it works in him this report.

For many decades, Cardinal Walter Kasper, as the guide of the ecumenical activities of the Church, It carries out a way of doing ecumenism, that does not close the separated brethren to full communion with the Church, but instead it leaves them in their errors and their separateness, as if this condition was not a fault to be repaired, but simply the sign of a way of being a Christian different from the Catholic and equally legitimate, indeed complementary.

But it has happened and it happens that not only Protestants do not convert to Catholicism, but many Catholics, attracted by Luther's errors, and since we are no longer correct as before, and the cessation Catholic work to convert the Protestants, It got the idea that the Church has corrected his judgment on Luther, and he found that he was right, or at least his way of conceiving Christianity may be subject to optional choice for Catholics. So these Catholics feel empowered to choose at least some of Luther's positions, in the belief that they can continue to say Catholics, or perhaps they think they can be considered "progressives" and "advanced". But the more subtle pitfall is the fact that some of Luther's errors are presented as Catholic truth, so many unsuspecting and gullible fall for Catholics. And they drink the poison without realizing. One of the most skilled players of this massive fraud is Karl Rahner.

Now we need to find a way out of this situation, because the Catholic faith is fading, while it is increasing the influence of Luther. It should therefore be that the Supreme Pontiff latches this interpretation modernistic ecumenism and promotes the implementation of authentic ecumenism, as per the true teaching of the Council.

The relationship between metaphysics and the doctrine of the Church

In the theology of Walter Kasper, as in any theological system, all it is resulting from the consequential cohesion of the parts connected to each other: if it undermines the foundation, everything else collapses, like the statue of Daniel's vision [Dn 2, 21-31]. Everything starts from the knowledge. If this is healthy, everything else holds; otherwise everything collapses. We dedicate this paper to its then gnoseology, no mancar to show the truth of this assumption. We say that it is false to say that "the Church does not advocate a particular metaphysics" [1], however since it is recommended for ages that of St. Thomas Aquinas. But it does so on the basis of the belief that metaphysics is some science, perennial, incontrovertible, objective and universal, important to know, unfading fruit of human reason as such, suitable for all people and all cultures, in every time and place.

The Church does not believe in a metaphysical date, but in metaphysics as such, as it does not promote the reason of Tom or Dick, but human reason as such, of any human, at all times and in all places. Because of this, in its educational institutions, cultural and academic, The Church promotes the metaphysical and epistemological in his prime in his stride, wanting free from errors and defects, in the discussion of freedom, research and teaching. It knows that there are different forms, systems or metaphysical thought horizons, some valid, it admits in its schools, especially the system of St. Thomas, but then also to, eg, St. Augustine or St. Anselm and St. Bonaventure, or Alexander of Hales and of Blessed Duns Scotus or Francis Suarez; while others, instead, dangerous, it looks at them with suspicion or reserve, as for example that of Scotus Eriugena or William of Ockham or Cusanus or Ficino, or Campanella or Descartes or Leibniz or Wolff or Blessed Antonio Rosmini, though veneri the sanctity of the latter. Other systems it definitely rejects them, although in its majesty, urge theologians to recover what they can be valid. They are the doctrines that are at odds with the realism of sound reason, and thus contrast with the faith, such as the ideas of Giordano Bruno or Spinoza or Kant or Fichte, or Schelling or Hegel or Heidegger or Gentile or Severino or Rahner.

As for heretics, the church, when he condemns errors, He asks theologians to highlight in them what remained of the common heritage of faith, in the hope that they will correct you and want to meet Church. With all men, believers and non-believers, the Church communicates on the basis of natural reason, in order to introduce them, if possible, the mystery of Christ. However, there are several different metaphysical or, just as there are different opinions or different. Indeed, we repeat it, metaphysics is a science and not an opinion, as well as, for instance, They are not opinions geometry, physics, botany, geography a l'anatomy.

The Church recommends the use of metaphysics of St. Thomas Aquinas

The church, therefore, between the different metaphysical produced in the past, as a result of appearance of theological accommodation of Saint Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century, He has chosen and has certainly preferred a metaphysical date, precisely that of St. Thomas [2], but not as he had chosen opinion among other questionable doctrines or deciduous. This of course does not mean that the metaphysics of Thomas is defect or not improvable, or can not sorgerne a better future [3]. This preference of the Church is motivated by the excellent manner in which St. Thomas knows how to motivate the harmony between reason and faith [4], in order to the elaboration of a apologetica, a rational theology and natural ethics, and the interpretation of Scripture and the formulation and explanation of the dogma.

Before the appearance of St. Thomas, the Church gave eagerness certainly that Scripture had annotated and interpreted using healthy and rational philosophical concepts, while the dogmas that had been previously defined, as for example the Christological dogma, They had been formulated with the use of metaphysical categories, duly adapted, derived from Greek philosophy, as indeed they had already made the Fathers of the Church and St. Augustine using the Platonic philosophy for the development of their theology.

But before St. Thomas no theologian had not risen who he had been able to organize such wisdom all the theological knowledge into a single rational system. This need began to be felt from the thirteenth century [5]. We had in fact noticed that the biblical teachings and dogmas that the Church had made from them, although they were scattered documents that had occurred over the course of centuries and although many of these documents had the object of reflective narration made the divine action in history - for example the transition from the Old to the New Covenant, the Incarnation and the Redemption, the founding and development of the Church -, however, they contained also the speculative truth, rationally connected to each other; universal truths, immutable and eternal, rational and revealed "Heaven and earth will pass; but my words will not pass " [Mt 24, 35], truths that relate especially to God, That, in its pure spirituality, immutability and eternity, Himself is beyond space and time, transcends history and evolution of the world, although, with the Incarnation of God's Son, God has united to Himself in Christ humanity a single unit of one Divine Person, and consequently, through this man Jesus, He has joined Self, "No confusion" and or without mutation ", as it deduced from the Christological dogma of Chalcedon, every man, the story, the time and the world.

Because of this, the Second Vatican Council He was able to say that "by his Incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some fashion with every man" [GS 22], rahneriano certainly not in the sense that all men are in grace, but as Christ offers everyone the possibility to join him and thus to save, as we know from the Gospel and dogmatic teachings concerning the condition for salvation. And 'what it says Christ: «When I am lifted from the earth, I will attract everyone to me " [GV 12,32]. But not all are attracted.

The Church is careful from imposing to all the people of God, like its official doctrine, any theory, changing idea or choice, contingent or limited to the field of special or dell'opinabilità, it is a political trend, a current cultural or artistic work or worship or devotion or spirituality or way of living the faith and moral conduct. But it leaves it to all full freedom of choice. That, instead, on the authority that was conferred by Christ, It imposes absolutely to all believers, under penalty of eternal damnation, only what, Christ's command, It is universally necessary and obligatory for the salvation of all. But nobody prevents her from proposing even well-founded human doctrines and universally valid, connected with the truths of faith, in order to facilitate learning [catechesis] or to introduce them [apologetica] or draw conclusions or to facilitate the development dogmatic [speculative theology or morality] or to allow good comments to Scripture [biblical exegesis] or foster devotion and sanctity [spiritual theology].

In the name of this discretion, who it is also his duty, The Church especially recommended to pastors and theologians, St. Thomas [6], obviously not because its doctrine is necessary for salvation, but for the validity, the utility and the universality of his thinking in order for those purposes. Because of this, of Aquinas' doctrine, Pius XI said that the Church has made her, has stated that he. And Thomas was called by the Church A doctor of the Church.

The analogy entity according Kasper

Kasper thinks he can make a connection between analogy, dialectical and historical thinking. The idea is not bad; but unfortunately the result, as we'll see, it is disappointing. He says:

"The structure of ' “in-above” It is characteristic for both the analogy, both for forensics, both historical thinking. Now if we compare dialectic analogy, this does not mean that 'analogy of being both the 'form of Catholic thought' [7]. He can not and will not be given 'the form of Catholic thought' for the reason that the Church did not support a certain metaphysical. The Church must witness to the Gospel and certainly accomplishes this task using human language. It therefore needs, to this end, of philosophy as a critical-methodological reflection and as being human experience interpretation. Such thinking is still deeply historical " [8].

We observe that it is true that the analogy unites and connects the body immanent, mundane, all’ente transcendent, divine. But the immanence-transcendence ratio is very distinct in the case of the dialectic and history. The dialectic, indeed, He does not know a transcendence, because it remains on the floor and uniqueness is limited opposition between being and non-being, between affirmation and negation. It remains on the mundane plane and opinions. To ascend to God, intellect do not need opposites to each other, besides all limited scope of appearances, such as dialectical, is because God, although transcendent, We are not opposed to the world, It is not the enemy of the world, ma, on the contrary, It is in harmony with the world, It is in communion with it, having created him; and both why, to explain worldly certainties, we need a foundation first and most certain and not fluctuating as dialectical. If the foundation falters, you will indeed?

To go up, therefore the world to God, we need a concept that, although it applies to the world, has the dual function of being a part in continuity with the notion of God and thus predicable of God; but on the other it is necessary that the notion or the level that reaches this concept is not too low and does not remain at the level of being worldly, in order to express the transcendence or the superiority of God over the world. Otherwise, instead of reaching God, we would only have an idol or a pagan god. Moreover, We must be sufficiently universal notion, that is applicable to all things, because God must explain the existence of the world. We must therefore use the broader concept and more universal that we possess. But this concept must also be sufficiently high, because it must not only explain the existence of material things, but also the spirit world. It is therefore necessary that it abstracts, transcending him, from material things and then also from space, by time, from becoming and history, to consider the spirit, which it is immaterial and, although it can work in history, However touches reality and values sovrastorici, immutable and incorruptible. The simple historical thinking is not enough to obtain or have a concept of God. For although no doubt God created the history and governments, and although He is incarnate in Jesus Christ, and lived among us, It remains in Himself immutable and above history and historical human nature of Christ is distinct from the divine nature.

Moreover, the aforesaid operation abstractive, as evidenced by the Cardinal Gaetano [9], It involves three degrees of overcoming of matter: physical, mathematical and metaphysical [10]. At the end of this operation, we hold the notion that has all the above requirements: analog notion, metaphysical and transcendental being as a body [even out even] and its properties transcendental [one, true, good, beautiful, res, something]. The thought of Gaetano is important in showing how the intellect proceeds in achieving metaphysical knowledge. This is an elevation of intellect, for which it, forming the entity metaphysical concept, It is able to build speculative theology, conceiving God as the First and Supreme Body. Because of this, remained famous exhortation of Gaetano: «Learn to lower the temper, and another order of things to come».

This is the best term to distinguish God and the world e, while, to move from world to God and God to the world. It is to be noted that here the intellectual movement has nothing to do with the 'tipping', which speaks Kasper, because this is not about to swing between yes and no, but to go from a lower yes yes to another supreme. Denying the possibility to use a single entity analogue concept to join God and the world, God and history, Kasper demonstrates a misunderstanding of or did not understand what l 'analogy of being, Why, Certain, while the real body is manifold, the entity concept or analog is one [11] or it's nothing, although also both internally diversified, precisely to reflect the multiple reality entity. This lack of unity of transcendental being perceived Kasper explains some errors.

First, the rejection of systematic theology. He has in mind the rationalist systems and immanentistic idealistic and does good to refuse. But he is wrong in rejecting the system as such, it is rather an essential need of reason and science. Wise to order, as St. Thomas says. And theology is a science and wisdom. And as such, theology is not a simple converging, meet and discuss among theologians; It is not a simple exchange of views; It is not simply a personal or joint search. These are certainly good things. But theology, as a service to the Magisterium of the Church and souls reception and introduction of the same Magisterium, It must have a school form, methodical, educational and training, particularly for the formation of the clergy. It is transmitted to the disciples notions already acquired, certain and definitive, useful to the ministry and to the life of piety, based on the dogma, on Scripture and Tradition.

The problem for the building of a systematic theology It is based on what principle or from which. The error of the idealists was not what we wanted to build a unified system, Deductive and universal. The mistake was to be based on cogito Cartesian, instead ENTITY. And systematic theology is precisely founded on God as Being first and highest, come The very being of self-subsistent,.

This explains this statement by Kasper:

"Theology must remain anchored to the foolishness of preaching, open and not closed to dialogue, which here it becomes the reference opening and the temporary nature of our situation eschatological, and it makes it impossible for a large theological system » [12].

This setting occamistica leads to undesirable consequences in the dogmatic theology, who is deprived of his sources, which are precisely the teachings of the Church, of Scripture and Tradition. Dice Kasper:

"There is no official index of the Church dogma […] So the question is sometimes naively mail, those dogmas properly exist, can not have absolutely reply » [13].

We respond by saying that it is not naive to ask how many and what are the dogmas and it is not impossible, but it is of vital interest for the salvation, answer with certainty to this question, as it is entirely legitimate to ask what and how many are the vital organs of the human body. And this question answers the Church itself in its official documents, especially in the teachings of the Popes and Councils. For this purpose, But we must first have a right concept of "dogma" [14], consistent with Catholic doctrine, distinguishing it from the upper degrees and lower than those of the data revealed. The highest degree are the same explicit teachings of the Lord contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, which are the same sources of Revelation, and are therefore the foundations of dogma [15], which instead they are infallible interpretations of God's Word, proposed by the Church. Dogmas are the articles of faith. It is summarized in the Symbol of Faith. Their number in quality are contained in the Catechism and are illustrated by dogmatic theology.

Second, in the line of epistemology Occamistic, (c)he was also Luther's, Kasper can not get over and unify the multiple structure of thought, sign, this also, who did not understand the analogy entity, because the very notion entity is the most universal and the one that, as we have seen, allows the intellect to unite God and the world. This explains the dialectic mentality and historicism Kasper. Indeed, is the dialectic that the old thinking, by their very essence, They have a conceptual foundation duality: the dialectic, It makes a comparison between the yes and no; the historical development, It has the act-power duality.

Third, taking the Hegelian dialectic It comprises two harmful consequences, already present in it, namely on the one hand, a pernicious opposition between the true and the real, on the other, the hypocritical glance ['Tipping'] between true and false. The consequences are very serious in theology, even blasphemous: on the one hand the hostility between God and man, lacking a concept of bodies linking the One side; on the other, horrible covenant between Christ and Belial, for explaining why Christ, when it is not recommended to be between yes and no, states that 'more than this comes from evil " [Mt 5,37]. This "more" is the addition of a third term, The "synthesis" of the Hegelian yes and no.

Note well that the aforesaid oscillation has nothing to do with the vibration signals of the doubt was, in which thought moves disadvantaged between yes and no without being able to decide, because it has no reason for either the one nor the other. But the desire of the subject is to find the truth and to stop in it, It does not care if it is in yes or no. Instead the hypocrite oscillation is studied and desired, with the express purpose of deceiving and appear or bring up what is not. The hypocrite language does not advance a choice between yes and no, but claims to simultaneously affirm and deny. He believes dispensed from observing the principle of non-contradiction.

The oscillation of which speaks Kasper therefore it involves a transgression of the principle of non-contradiction, already present in the smart Hegelian dialectic, master of duplicity, and in no way required by honest and loyal dialectics Aristotelian-Thomist [16], which entails not a pairing, but a simple comparison between affirmation and negation, in order to clarify, if possible, what choice do, in what similar to doubt, with the difference that here the thought moves constantly between the two poles, while in dialectical thinking he stops weakly and temporarily in one of the two.

L’idea, married for Kasper, under the pretext of the "mystery", God is above and independent of the principle of non-contradiction, It had its first signs in the thirteenth century with the theory of "double truth", that what is true in philosophy may be false in theology and vice versa. William of Ockham, for its part, admits that God, of absolute power, does nothing inconsistent, but it can do so in the creation, or from the ordinary, whereby, if he wanted, adultery could be at a time licit and illicit.

But those who believe that the contradiction is resolved in God, always under the pretext of mysticism, is Nicholas of Cusa in the fifteenth century, with its famous coincidence of opposites. We observe that if God's yes and no overlap, then it means that no longer holds the command of Christ to keep them apart and do not join them, which of course is blasphemous

Luther and Hegel start here and unfortunately Kasper follows them when he adopts the Hegelian dialectic. Thus God is in contradiction with Himself and verified nonsense that we saw about the theory of the divine attributes kasperiana. The moral consequences of this "mystical theology" you can imagine and are now before our eyes. We will see at the end of this essay.

On his already mentioned line of thought, Kasper also states:

"Christianity, its universality, He can not bind to a particular philosophy, indeed break and put in crisis every philosophical category. Just biblical theology, as noted Fuhrmans, rightly he brought to light that Christian thought is historical and dynamic thinking ' [17].

We answer remembering that Christianity is a supernatural life, that comes from a divine truth revealed by Christ to human reason, that is cultivated, polite, purified and raised from philosophy. Of course, Christian truth is not deduced from the truths of reason, or you can have the claim to establish it or prove it. However, the exercise of reason, preferably educated by philosophy, It is an indispensable condition for the knowledge and understanding of Christian truth, which is added to those already known by reason, and then the very existence of Christianity, which it was founded by Christ for the good of man, rational animal.

So, in reality, Christianity, although for its essence transcends all philosophy and is not the birth of any philosophy or any human mind, It is, however, substantially not bound to a particular philosophy, but the philosophy, as to its existence or at least to its better to be. And the least we can say is that Christianity is bound to the use of right reason, as a condition for the possibility of the same Christianity, because it is implementation of man as a reasonable. Nothing, however,, in this context, prevent the Church, to choose, between the various philosophies, one that most favors access of reason to faith. For this reason the Church, as I said above, It recommends the philosophy of St. Thomas in a special way.

The Christian thought can never be reduced to a "historical-dynamic thinking» but it is also a speculative-systematic thought, necessary to the formulation of dogmas and theological sciences. This exclusivism Kasper is because its not a simple honest historical thinking, but it is a thought historicistic, denier of the immutability of truth, according to the modernist form, He paid in the past condemned by Pope Pius X.

The philosophical relativism leads to dogmatic relativism

This lack of perception of the universality of philosophical knowledge reduced to a contingent multiplicity of "thought forms", ie changing views, relativized to the changing historical contexts not only theology, but also the dogma, given that the Church, to define a dogma, uses notions of natural reason justified by the philosophy.

Kasper means the universality of Christianity not as founded on universal truths - the dogmas of the faith -, but on what he calls "original catholicity" or "ecumenical", which embraces in itself, moments as 'special', he calls "sectarian" [18], the two dogmatic Catholicism and Protestantism. Just that one wonders what would be the content of this Catholicism sopradogmatico. Evidently here also there is the background of Denken Hegelian, which is the all-encompassing dialectical totality of thought, which denies, synthesizes and surpasses itself in moments of imaginations, which are the dogmas or the "confessions" of the various positive religions.

Kasper rejects the idea of the Church as widespread community in the world, effect of the preaching of a unique and universal truth - the Gospel -, that, starting from Rome, as the center of the mission, See of Peter's Successor, spreads in concentric circles around the world, but as a "polyhedron with many faces» [19], ie as a collection or federation of various particular and questionable interpretations of the Gospel, perhaps in contrast with each other.

Clearly here the influence of epistemology Occamistic [20], in which the universal unit does not radiate from the essence to all common - one in many ―, but it is just a collection of individuals at the same level, independent of each other and connected to each other only in a blurred image. It is a universality non-formal or speculative, but merely material and collective, as when we say: a "universal consensus" to say: "of all".

Kasper would like to highlight the fact the dogmatic progress, but it intends to modernist manner, not as a clarification or explanation of an immutable truth, but as dialectical overcoming a contrary view of the past. Indeed, as we'll see, According to him, to interpret the Word of God, you should not use the philosophy of St. Thomas, but the Hegelian dialectic.

For Kasper dogma does not reflect an objective reality, external to the subject, ma, the idealistic manner, "The dogma has value only insofar as it expresses the inner" [21]. It is not mediation or interpretation of the infallible Word of God made by the Magisterium of the Church, once and for all, but one of the Magisterium thesis, which must be screened and controlled, comparing it with Scripture. It is the method of Luther: "The dogma - says Kasper - must be understood in light of the testimony of Scripture" [22]. He approves Rahner, which states that "a dogma may very well be true and yet humanly premature, guilty, dangerous, ambiguous, tempting, reckless" [23]. I do not comment. According to his dialectical language that says and does not say, the dogma can be simultaneously "permanent" and "temporary":

"A dogma is the provisional form in which the eschatological-definitive truth of Christ becomes an event. Tentative is the term with which you want to express the character of anticipation of their dogma; so it is not to be understood in its opposition to 'final', but in the original sense of the word, as a precursor of the advance flake» [24].

We observe again that the universality of the Gospel and of Catholic dogma message It is not given, as he believes Kasper, from simple pragmatic convergence, dialogic or dialectical, constantly evolving, a plurality of special "forms of thought" and inconsistent and conflicting ways to understand or interpret the dogma, the Gospel and the Tradition, but by the universality of a certain number of precise content of faith, unchangeable and absolutely true, universally shared and effectively and commonly shared and accepted by all the faithful.

We must therefore support the exact opposite of what is claimed Kasper, namely that Christianity, precisely because of its universality and to better promote this universality, and its spread in all times and all places, especially in its most cultured forms and high, It is institutionally and essentially bound to the debtor and philosophy and precisely, between the various philosophies, to the one or ones that best help the reason to access the knowledge of faith. Indeed, the Christian knowledge, as knowledge of universal openness, intended for all men, It can only be rooted in what is universal in human knowledge, and this is nothing more than the effect of the cognitive faculty that characterizes the man as a man, ie that faculty which all possess, and which it is precisely the reason. Now, as you know, philosophy is precisely the supreme knowledge of reason. That, in the words of St. Thomas, and the perfect operation.

On the basis of what has been said, it will be evident that then claim that Christianity "breaks and breaks all philosophical category" It is a serious slander to Christianity damage, which can be output from the lips of Luther in a fit of fury against the Catholic Church, that surprises and shocked to read in the book of a Catholic theologian, besides all today Cardinal. A denial of this serious false history Kasper, he who gives so much importance to history, one must say that a "loose and put crisis every philosophical category" were, if anything, the barbarians, that in the dark ages of medieval assaulted and destroyed the abbeys, where the monks kept the treasures of classical and Christian culture.

The "historical thinking" according to Kasper

The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations [Shall 33,1]

According to Kasper, in theology should replace the "old thinking" to the metaphysical thought. But what exactly he meant by this expression, we have already met? Here we find the core of his gnoseology. The "historical thinking", per Kasper, is not only the thought or knowledge of the one who narrates the historical facts, but it is especially true think like this, ie thought consistent with reality, because the reality is Kasper history. As we have already seen, the old thinking, so, for him, It is not as pertaining to think of other forms of thought, come, for instance, metaphysical thought. No. On the contrary, metaphysical thought is not even a real thinking, because it assumes as an object of unchanging reality, that do not exist, because for Kasper, as Heraclitus, all wetsuit: panta rei. And therefore, even in the moral field it is not given a science or a moral theology, whose object values or absolute duties, universal and immutable, but also a moralist, to be consistent with the reality of human action and determine the rules, It must make use of historical thinking, He must be thinking "historically", ie variables must devise standards, mutable, objectionable, conditioned, contextualized, because these are the actual rules of human conduct, whereas belief that human behavior can be regulated by universal and abstract principles, perhaps on metaphysical foundations, It is an illusion deleterious, which stiffens the action taking away its own dynamism, his freedom and his openness to progress [25].

But Kasper not only changes the object of the concepts - and this may be right, if they are related to changing things -, but changing the very concepts, changes their meaning, it is never absolute,, but always historically conditioned, and then change their meaning even the dogmas of the Church, as conceptual formulations. this change, per Kasper, not only involves an evolution in the history and diversifying among different cultures and religions, essentially it consists of a "swing" or simultaneous duality of meaning between the two opposite poles of the contradiction, because Kasper takes the Hegelian conception of reality as a 'dialectical', that is, contradictory. It is that reality and then the truth is expressed precisely through the junction of the yes and no.

Let's see how Hegel himself explains this process:

"The task is to implement the universal spirit nell'infondergli, removing certain thoughts and solidified. Moreover, it is much more difficult to render fluids thoughts solidified, which render the fluid sensuous existence. ... Thoughts become fluid, when the pure thought, this inner immediacy, It is recognized as a moment, or pure certainty of self abstracts from itself. ... It must abandon fixed in his autoporsi: both the hard concrete of pure, which it is the same I in opposition against the separate content, both fixed and of the different, which, places in the element of pure thought, part of that ego unconditioned " [26].

Kasper applies this method in theology, so that, speaking of the divine attributes, it follows that God is both knowable and unknowable, being and becoming, simple and differentiated, immutable and mutable, eternal and temporal, impassive and liable, powerful and powerless, finite and infinite, immortal and mortal, heavenly and worldly [27]. Kasper speaks here of the Person of Christ, and apparently confuses the human nature of Christ with the divine, as he had already done Hegel [28].

Let's take an example of this method Hegelian dialectic in the manner in which Kasper would convince unit, in God, power and impotence:

"God is so supreme in its power and freedom, which can also afford to give up everything without “lose one's face”. And so the power is affirmed God's own impotence, His lordship in bondage, his life in death " [29]. It is so absurd that says, that not even worth refuting.

Analysis Lutherans

Kasper, the wake of Hegel, echoing the heresy of Marcion, God opposes the identity and the "abstract" to the God of the Old Testament "concrete" and dialectized [ie Trinitarian] New, namely, Christ, develops dialectically Lutheran setting of the historical transition from the Old Testament God angry and punishing God, sweet and "compassion" of the Gospel. So does the praises of Luther, Christology against the "metaphysics" of St. Thomas, he finally discovered, after sixteen centuries, the true face of the evangelical Christ. Indeed, he attributes to Luther the merit of representing

"A break with a whole set of metaphysical theology bases. The Reformer is not starting from a philosophical concept of God to understand the cross, but tries to understand God right from the phenomenon of the cross. This new approach we find expressed in the same “Disputa in Heidelberg” the 1518: “It is named theologian worthily, he who considers the intellect the invisible things of God through the things done, but the party seeking the intellect things visible and rear of God through the suffering and of the cross”. […] The hidden mystery of God should not be located beyond: such a God not interested in speculative. We must not penetrate the mysteries of the divine majesty, but be content with the God of the cross. God can only be found in Christ; if we look for it outside of him, we will find only the devil. Starting from these premises, Luther comes to an entire Christology reversal » [30].

It is false that "God can only be found in Christ". We find God through reason, before you find Him, it's better, in Christ. Luther and with him Kasper fact forgets that we may not know that Christ is God, if we did not already know that God exists, that God demonstrated by reason [RM 1,20], She already knew, and Moses [Is 3,14]), before Christ appeared in the world.

There is no question of "to seek God outside of Christ". No Christian savvy dreams crazy like that, but it is starting to seek Christ by God, Why, if reason does not find God above, as Creator of the world, starting from the things of the world, then Christ is not; and he that believeth, as Luther and Kasper, finding Christ independently or against a previous rational knowledge of God, meets only a false Christ, namely the "god of this world" [II Cor 4,4], that is the devil.

There is nothing wrong with investigating philosophically Divine Nature regardless of Christological dogma. This is nothing more than rational theology. This survey is useful to interreligious dialogue and is very useful to clarify the meaning of the Christological dogma, and preserves us from falling into the confusion that Kasper is between human and divine attributes attributes.

The meaning and purpose of the dialectic

Kasper thinks the cognitive instrument of theology is the dialectic. It lacks the concept of theology as a science [31], and then as a speculative science. On this point he is closer to Luther than to Hegel, which equates dialectics with speculative science. In addition to this, Kasper serious mistake is to believe that for the interpretation of Scripture and dogma is better to refer to the Hegelian conception of dialectics, rather than that of Aristotle. Indeed, the enormous advantage that, in the order of the above-mentioned purposes, offers the Aristotelian dialectic than that of Hegel is that, while the former is a school of humility for the reason, educating them and adjusting it on the floor of the argument and then abituandola likely to correct any errors or avoid false appearances, the Hegelian dialectic, that solves the real opposition in the thought and in the effects of the will, encourages the arrogance of the subject lured to be a moment of the 'Absolute dialectical. And we know how all biblical ethics is nothing more than a contest between humility and pride, between Christ and Belial for the rule on the heart of man.

Following the Hegelian dialectic, Kasper has moved away from Christianity even more of Luther, because Luther, at least, had seen, albeit clumsily, the risks of a superb reason and, albeit so arrogant, the fundamental importance of obeying the Word of God, while the Hegelian dialectic turns God into a syllogism and dissolves the Mystery in the development of history.

Kasper still insists in these terms:

"The Church must gather the wisdom of all peoples and of all times, also of all the forms of thought, because your ad is getting bigger and surpasses every thought. Theology, so, It has precisely the task of destroying every form of thought, di integrate, and to overcome it in another. For that theology must always think dialectically " [32].

We observe that the theology is not the sum of more theologies between them diverse and much less conflicting. The theologies of the various authors or of the various schools are different manifestations of theology as such, ie as a science in its universality. Theology must not destroy or exceed any single form of thinking, but rather recognize, integrate and enhance it and, in his welcoming universality, He must comply with them and promote them all and ensure that communicate with each other in a mutual complementarity.

Theology must think dialectically yes in formulating new and exchange opinions or criticisms of the same, but must above all be in continuous research and make work of science, reaching certain conclusions and demonstrated, universally shared, that one day the Church could elevate the rank of dogma, as it happened to some theses of Thomistic theology.

"Dialectics, per Kasper, It is only the faint image of the dialogue and properly translated into a monologue what usually happens in the dialogue: the passage through the many aspects of the truth, which it is fixed in its non nonobjectivizability » [33].

We say that the dialectic is not only monological ― relevant to the subjective opinions dialectics -, but also dialogue, in the sense that it governs the discussion or dialogue between two thinking, as for example it happens in Dialogues Platonic or as happens systematically, after the boost given by Abelard in the twelfth century, in medieval theological treatises, called Highest, use school. In them, the teacher solves a problem, the Question, through the comparison of opposing hypothesis, the method of It did not, for which the teacher motivates its scientific opinion or questionable whether it was, responding to the contrary objections.

For example, when St. Thomas, in Question IX Before Pars from the QUESTION He wonders if God is immutable, but it examines some opinions that say that God becomes, ma, concluded the examination of these opinions, formulates his judgment, resting on the Bible, stating with clarity and certainty, without ambiguity or reserves, what a god (a.1) and only God (a.2) It is immutable, unlike a Kasper or Rahner, for which, on the basis of '' oscillation 'dialectic, God is an immutable and mutable time.

The Hegelian dialectic

Kasper inspires its conception of the dialectic to that of Hegel. Let's see his thoughts. The dialectic, for him, an action of "substance-subject ', that is, the "spirit" or "self":

"The substance is the movement of the put himself or because it is the mediation of the becoming-other-than-self with itself. As a subject, it is the simple and pure negativity is, precisely what, the cleavage of a simple two-part or opposing duplication; this, around you, It is the negation of this indifferent diversity and its opposition; only this equality that reconstitutes or reflection within the other being in itself - not the original unit as such, nor immediate unity as such - is the real. The real is the becoming of himself, the circle, which presupposes and has its top end and that only through the implementation and its end is effectual » [34].

But for Hegel God himself is dialectical, namely it becomes historically:

"The life of God ... until degrades all'insipidezza, When lacking the seriousness, pain, patience and the negative labor. In itself, that life is the intact equality and unity with itself, that he has never seriously engaged in being more and nell'estraneazione, and even in the overcoming of this estrangement. But such itself is the abstract universality, in which, that is, It is independent of the nature of it to be for itself, and then, in general, dall'automovimento of the form. ... The true is the whole. But the whole is only the essence of which is completed by its development. The Absolute it must be said that it is essentially result, that only at the end it is what is truth; and precisely in what consists its nature, being effectuality, subject and become himself " [35].

Still Hegel:

"The purpose implemented or existing effectual is movement; It has become now in its deployment; but just this unrest is the Self; and it is equal to that to that simplicity and immediacy of the beginning because it is the result, because it is what is returned in himself. But that was back in himself is precisely the Self; and the Self is the equality that relates to Himself " [36].

The dialectical movement, Hegel, It is the movement of the spirit for which, in history, accidentally it becomes substantially, the relative becomes absolute, death becomes life, the false becomes true and nothing gets to be, by virtue of '' immense power of the negative ", for which the self opposes itself to itself and, denying this opposition, I know again. But the opposition dialectical negation-affirmation, Hegel, It is not limited to the realm of thought and language, but concerns the same be, the real, under the well-known principle of identity of being idealistic in thought.

Denial is act of the spirit and therefore is an act, the will and language. But as Hegel being is spirit, the negation is primarily a practical act under the real, ie it is a cancel or, as expressed Hegel, It is a "remove" [Repeal]. But then out of nowhere "magically" being resurrected.

Here is the "magic" of dialectics:

"What accidental it may, separated from its scope, that what is bound and in his only real connection with another, gains its own particular existence and its own distinct freedom, everything is the immense power of the negative; it is the energy of thinking, Pure I. The dead, if we want to call that unreality, It is the most terrible thing; and hold fast the dead, This is what we will require great strength […] That life that endures death and maintains it, is the life of the spirit. It gains its truth only on condition of finding itself in the absolute devastation [ …] The spirit is strong because he knows this sol to face the negative and dwell with him. This pause is the magical force that turns negative in being. It is the same as was said above Subject, while in his element it gives existence to definiteness, It exceeds the abstract immediacy namely, generally, only existent, and is therefore the true substance, being or the immediacy, that does not have the same outside himself, but it is this same " [37].

So says Tomas Tyn, o.p. this dialectic of an Absolute, effect of "negative" which combines life to death, being nowhere. It promises a vain and impossible to reconcile them, which can not be other than an oscillation between the one and the other, one staying between yes and no, a serve two masters:

"The faces are opposed to one another irriconciliati, fleeting moments of piercing dialectic, elevating herself to absolute principle, after giving the identity between being and nothingness, nihilisms two - one equivocante " [Hegel] "Of an all based on nothing, the other univocante of a whole that, indifferent as to its particular moments, stalemate fails to found, because it is already, for immediate identity " [Schelling] "Indifferently everything - that the dialectic would claim to unite in a third and absolute nihilism, for which nothing at all coincide with the whole of nowhere " [38].

According to the Hegelian dialectic, Kasper makes his, it is never possible to make statements or net and absolute negation, always accurate and in any case, both the dogmatic and in the moral field. You have to express themselves so that what we say can be interpreted in the opposite direction to that which appears. Our yes must betraying a no. Under the yes there must be no. This judge twice, with a judgment poster and another underlying or underlying or hidden, but not enough to avoid recognition, opposite judgment at first, it said in greek ypò-krinein, hence the Italian term "hypocrisy". Because of this, the theological language Kasper, become customary a real moral imperative. It is to bargain with the false, hiding it under the real, so the little fish that he hears us, abboccando hook, ingests the poison. Indeed, according to these principles and these winding streets, any proposition, also dogmatic, is maneuverable and unambiguous, It can go subject to conflicting interpretations and moral produce adverse effects, opposed to those that appear on the surface.

But what, for the Hegelian dialectic is not to create scruples or upset, rather it is normal thing, allowing you the freedom of thought and theological pluralism, as for example the coexistence of Catholicism and Lutheranism. On the contrary, for Hegel is the precision and uniqueness that are a sign of a naive, one-sided and incomplete real, which takes no account of its historicity and its contradictory dialectical.

The duplicity erected into a system

lying lips, speak with a double heart [Shall 12,3]

No one can serve two masters;: or hate the one and love the other or to the one and despise the other [Mt 6,24]

The opposing the no to yes may be disobedience or act of virtue. Disobedience, if we say no to God. Virtue, If we say no to sin. But there can also be the theoretical denial, when we say no to a thesis. And even here there can be honest or dishonest: the honest, if we say no to fake; the dishonest, If we say no to the truth. Christ commands us to say yes to that is yes and no to what is not. We must not contradict the truth and we must condemn the false. Who is halfway, It comes from the devil. This is the duplicity, represented in the Bible by the forked tongue of the snake.

This is the meaning of the words of St. Paul:

"What I decide, I decide according to the flesh, so to say at the same time “Yes, Yes” e “O, no”? God is faithful, our word to you is not “Yes” e “no”. The Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you, I, Silvanus and Timothy, It was not “Yes” e “no”, but in him was the “Yes”. And actually all the promises of God in him have become “Yes”» [II Cor 1, 17-20].

The dialectic, as we have seen, plays with the yes and no with. It can be a dangerous game, when we want to be clever or if we want to deceive others. There are rules that both the dialectical thinking of the scientific. They are at once logical and moral rules rules. Aristotle, who cured honesty in speaking [39], He took pains to make a list of fallacies in thinking and talking, to 'directories sophistical ", to warn against dishonesty in thinking and talking, ie against the duplicity and hypocrisy. Now, unfortunately Kasper declares no admirer of healthy dialogue Aristotelian, used by St. Thomas, but that of Hegel, who is a teacher sum of ambiguity, malicious insinuations, fascinating tricks, sophism, misconduct and dishonesty in reasoning and conclusion.

Kasper connects the analogy does the Thomist conception, but the dialectic of Hegel, so it is no wonder if he, as we have already seen, It falls into a false concept of analogy. We continue now the discussion in relation to this duplicity of the Hegelian dialectic, which, far from lend itself to interpret Scripture, falsifies the roots.

Kasper is in favor of the analogy, but it does not have a fair concept. He says:

"The analogy argues exist between absolute and finite identity and difference. It combines identity and diversity, negation and position in an oscillating center. This center, however, It is not a concept of being that includes God and the world, which could bring, in truth, to some form of identity philosophy, but it means, in the sense of the analogy of proportionality, only a correspondence [no identity] the proportions of the two analogati " [40].

Some observations. God and the world exist. Yet God is no different from the world. It can therefore be preach in either case. But the meaning of being in the two cases is different. So we have something - being - we preach around in many ways, senses or different meanings. To on pollacòs legòmenon, as Aristotle said. The being is said in many ways. It is always being for each entity, world and God, so we have a single concept, but with a plurality of different meanings. Between God and the world there is no identity, but similarity and diversity. They are not the same thing. They are two different realities, differentissime. Two things can not be at once the same and different. One can not affirm and deny at the same time the identity or the difference. God and the world do two. Yet they are included in a single concept being analog. This is because the notion itself contains its differences, without, however, completely abstracting from them.

The affirmation and negation do not fit in the analogy, but in the dialectic. In the analogy there is no question of finding a "swinging heart" between two opposite, but rather to move the intellect attention among the various analogati, for instance, in considering the analog concept of life, from the vegetative life and climb to the divine life.

In the analogy is not together with the yes no, not "oscillates" between the yes and no, because it would be duplicity, but every analogatum is in the order of Yes, as well as in Christ, who is the supreme analogatum "There was just so" [II Cor 1,17]. The analogy is placed on the floor of the diversity, the similarity, concordance, of the relationship, of the comparison, the proportion.

Kasper is right to connect through dialogue. But it is wrong to link it with the dialectic. The latter requires a choice between the yes and no, even if it comes to the truth by comparing two opposing views. Dialogue instead says exchange, communication, integration, correction, enrichment, mutual complementarity.

Continue Kasper:

"Man can think only in that double movement" - swinging - "which means continuously transcend the finite to the infinite and continuous infinity materialize towards the end. Such a thought must be characterized as a historical thought; it is in a never-ending dialectic of past and future, of freedom and necessity, in a dialectic always disposed over itself and, as such, It is circumscribed than any static thinking. As the radicalization of transcendental problematic, it also captures the absolute first as an internal moment in this historicity " [41].

The ascent of thought towards the transcendent and universal abstract, and the return in the concrete singular and immanent, apply to moral thought, which must establish the concrete action, not for what metaphysics and speculative theology, that, After a climb to the sky, includes, in Static Thought, ie stable and unchanging, the "things above" [With the 3,1]. It is false, therefore, that man can think only in thought "historical", Whereas, in addition to everything what Kasper mean by this expression, as we have already seen.

The then conceive of the Absolute as "internal time of historicity" of consciousness, He knows a lot of idealism. Certainly God is present and intimate to the conscience of every man. But present it in these terms gives a false image of the same Absolute, That seems to be a thought, albeit sublime, but still a simple human idea, immanent to the historical limits of consciousness, when in fact the eternal and infinite God transcends them indefinitely.

Continue Kasper:

"The modern interpretation of the principle of analogy […] They make their own transcendental approach and intend analogy as explication dell'autocompimento spirit, which can only express the finite horizon of infinity no longer be objectified and therefore no longer expressible uniquely " [42].

Although this is "modern interpretations of the analogy", yet they do not understand what is the analogy, which does not suppose any idealistic transcendentalism and no "self-fulfillment of the spirit", but simply the analog-transcendental being notion. Because of this, to know the real analogue in theology does not express "the finite only in the horizon of the infinite", but expresses analog being horizon.

Theology does not at all part of the concept of God, to know the world in the light of that concept; ma, on the contrary, sensitive part of the experience of the world to go up to God as cause and creator of the world [RM 1,20; Sap 13,5]. It is true that God can not be objectified, that is knowable concepts. It is, Certain, not uniquely, but analogously.

The dialectical conception of God

Dice Kasper:

"The absolute must be known only in and with that oscillating position and negation center. What in scholastic theology it is juxtaposed in such a way as relatively extrinsic the way this position e the way of exclusion, here it becomes, instead, unique global movement of thought, indeed it becomes the exercise of the spirit itself. The absolute is then known only as dialectical movement of the spirit and not in a so-called analogue concept » [43].

Kasper at some point, Comes Clean and shows very clearly that his "analogy" is nothing more than a red herring, that actually conceals the Hegelian dialectic synthesis between yes and no, the knowing and not knowing:

"Is it not true that man, also and precisely in its opening endlessly, still remains finite spirit? And in this finite spirit can he think of the infinite? Or will not know and fail to realize at the same time?» [44].

As there is double vision in the physical view - for example, see the drunks or myopia -, so there is one in view of the spirit. And as the first is abnormal and unpleasant, so it is even more unpleasant abnormal and the second. This, however, is not inevitable and there is no taste to try, as it seems they try Kasper.

With a double view, God thus appears twice: eternal and temporal, immutable and mutable, impassible and suffering, punisher and an accomplice of sin, merciful and cruel, etc.. Kasper completely misunderstands the relationship between positive and negative theology theology: It does not include that it is not absolutely simultaneously affirm and deny the same divine attribute. What would that say yes and no, that Christ gives to the devil. It deals with, instead, just as medieval theology teaches him unjustly despised, own accurately separate, no contrast, the moment of positive theology from that of the negative, for the fact that the second is constructed on the basis of the first, in that, while that asserts a divine attribute in its absoluteness - eg. the goodness -, the second one denies evidently not as such, ma, placing itself in terms of our human way of conceptualizing and how we can understand the divine goodness. The favorite method preserves the transcendental content of the concept of goodness, but he denies the finished way in which goodness is realized in our human knowledge [45].

In front of the divine Mystery, the concept is not in contradiction with itself, but on the contrary it is stated in its maximum power and rises to its highest dignity, certainly not with his way of being finished [46], but in its theological content. Here Hegel was right against Schelling. And the concept, in the moment in which this warns its limit, realizes to be infinitely surpassed by way of being divine. And this experience makes him realize that he had reached God, Why, if not warned to be exceeded, what it conceives would not God, but an idol. On this point Schelling had a point.

The God of Schelling and Hegel

Kasper proposes a theology, which brings together the idea of God in Schelling and Hegel, despite the strong contrast that divides. But both are derived from the Lutheran conception of God, and this explains, in my opinion, this fact join them together. It remains, however, that, while Schelling focuses attention on God is concealed, Mystery absolute and undifferentiated ideal-real identity, subject-object, unknowable and inexpressible, «coincidence of opposites», the God of whom you can say everything and the opposite of everything, "Foolishness of preaching", an Absolute that, as is known, It appears to Hegel "the night - as he says -, in which all cows are black ", Hegel considers the God who makes history and appears in consciousness void contrary species, the God has revealed, the Christ event, the Logos, the reason, the Word, the concept, l ' "concrete Universal".

Kasper, As for Schelling, in its conception to its, the reports in these terms:

"The infinite not objective, native to, It may not be able objectively, but only in an absolute way. This transcendental knowledge, however, It is not simply beside the objective knowledge, but it includes it and makes it possible to, thematizable is not in itself, It should not be objectified and then distorted. It can only be discovered in the dialectic, in quell'oscillare and in that switch between " [47].

This knowledge "absolute" is the dialectic ever, come in Hegel: the synthesis of the yes and no, affirmation and negation, with the difference that while in Hegel the Absolute can and should be designed rationally and determinately, whereby, as Hegel says "the mystery is unveiled», absolute knowledge of Schelling is indifferent to conceptual distinctions, leaving them in their opposition, and therefore it gives the impression to appreciate the mystical and divine experience darkness, but when this knowledge is expressed, It falls in the '' tipping 'between yes and no, we have already seen. It is basically the coincidence of opposites Cusano, even though we have already seen.

Even for St. Thomas, Certainly, God is the Absolute, but this does not prevent that we can have a concept, although imperfect, Essence of God, expressible in language, already according to reason and even more by faith. This concept, produced by our reason, albeit it illuminated by faith, certainly can not understand or embrace exhaustively the divine essence in its infinity. Yet the limited can know the truth. While, St. Thomas does not deny that our word is lacking, when we consider, especially in the experience of charity, the infinite goodness of God. It thus does not deny the mystical experience. But it is careful not to base it on the oscillation between the yes and no. Instead, it comes from a yes to God said with all his strength and on the basis of the truths of faith.

Stay anyway, as we have seen, we can conceive of God by resorting to the concept of being analog, the fact that Scripture teaches us that God is "the One Who Is" [Is 3,14], so, as St. Thomas observes, God is a body, the essence of which is to be absolutely and infinitely. In this sense, God is the Infinite and the Absolute. analog speak concept, for the fact that, as Scripture teaches [Sap 13,5], we can know that God exists and therefore we can farcene a concept, starting from the consideration of entities, that the things, which are effects of his creative power: "In fact, from the greatness and beauty of creatures by analogy perception of their Creator ". For if all things have in common that exist and have being, a being whom participate, without any of them is to be the essence, the reason compels us to admit that, having received them being, there must be a Being, What I have given them, that is, that has created, a Being who, to explain the existence of entities, in turn has received being, but that is pure and infinite Being, what St. Thomas calls the very being of God by itself, subsisting, It gave.

Once, therefore, that we have formed the notion of being most universal, we can be able to preach be both things, than of God, but we must bear in mind that we are speaking in the two cases not univocally, like them and God's will could be preaching in the same direction, but very different in two ways, ie analog, Why, while things were being, ie they are finished, God is the infinite. For this, Aquinas says that while the reality has created that which it has to be, God is His. And on the other hand, exaggerating the difference between the creature and the Creator and falling being nell'equivocità for mysticism and a false sense of mystery, We can not say that being is not predicated of God, by virtue of the "transcendence" of God and of his superiority over all human concepts. This is the error Schelling, in which also he falls Kasper.

The God of idealism proposed by Kasper oscillates between the ambiguity and the 'uniqueness. This trend is in nuce already in the God of Luther, that connects the Augustinian conception of God within the conscience and the light of consciousness, source of eternal truths, col Dio in Ockham, which is a God who does not take account of our certainties, then a God, on which attributes you can equivocate, because his inscrutable and absolute will not command what is good, but what He wants it to be good. Whereby, if God would allow adultery, it would be legitimate. Indeed, per Ockham, since it does not admit the existence of universal essences, It does not exist a human nature, governed by universal moral laws, valid for every individual, that the good man is not the observance of these laws, but simply the fact that every single man fulfilling the will of God in his particular situation and men's variable man. The duties of man are not motivated by a reason, which does not give certainties, but only to opinions, and the mere fact that God wants it so, and might want otherwise.

The God of idealism approved and recommended by Kasper and he considered better and more biblical than that of St. Thomas, It is a conjunction of the Lutheran conception of God with the Cartesian, through Kant and Fichte.

The Augustinian God in consciousness is reflected both in Luther that Descartes, but while in Augustine consciousness comes into herself to open up to external things that lead to God and the visible structure, institutional and sacramental of the Church led by the Vicar of Christ, with Luther and Descartes, the God in the conscience becomes, to quote Kasper

"The modern principle of subjectivity, the process in which man becomes conscious of his freedom as autonomy, and if the starting point makes, and measurement means for a whole conception of reality " [48].

God and history

The proposal is clear kasperiana: It is to replace, interpretation of Christian revelation, Thomist philosophy with that idealistic, despite the age-old recommendation that St. Thomas made by Popes, to the requirements of Vatican II and the following Pontiffs, like St. John Paul II in the encyclical Faith and Reason and the repeated condemnations of idealism by the Magisterium of the Church since the nineteenth century. It's evident, also, in Kasper, the intent to favor Luther behind bestowed praises to Schelling and Hegel.

We consider some significant statements by Kasper. He believes that

"Hegel's philosophy ... offers to the theologian of the conceptual tools that help him, more than it has been unable metaphysical traditions of the past, to understand the advent of Christ and to reflect on God no longer philosophical and abstract terms, but concretely, to think that God as the God and Father of Jesus Christ " [49].

Let's see what would be the second Kasper these 'conceptual tools', they do know the Christian mystery better than St. Thomas. He says:

"A God who is now thought within the horizon of subjectivity, It can not be understood as the supreme Existing, perfect and unchanging. This leads, after several attempts undertaken by Scotism and medieval nominalism, as well as by thinkers such as Meister Eckhart and Cusanus, a de-substantialization the concept of God ' [50].

Kasper praises Hegel because it has come to conceive the Absolute

"Not as substance but as a subject, as it alien another by itself " [51]. "The whole (It gave) It is nothing but the essence is accomplished through its evolution " [52]. "This historical understanding of God - says Kasper [53] - it is mediated at the level Christological and reaches its peak in the phenomenon of the cross, in an attempt to understand the death of God "

"The event of the cross - Kasper continues talking about Hegel - is the outward description of the absolute Spirit story»[of God]; "For it takes place in a God “split”»; the death of God means that he denies himself: "In this self-alienation death is the highest summit of finitude, the supreme denial and therefore to the greater manifestation of God ' [54].

He also says Kasper:

"By its very essence the absolute Spirit puts himself in its difference from itself. According to Hegel, this is philosophical exegesis of the biblical said: 'God is love'" [55].

It is evident here dialectic interpretation of the mystery of the Cross, which has nothing to do with what the doctrine of the Church and Scripture teach on the subject [56].

Consequences in anthropology and moral

If the house is founded on quicksand of becoming and uncertainty, no wonder whether it might not have a firm structure and ensure a safe living space. And in fact the kasperiana anthropology and morality based thereon leaves us at the mercy of the waves agitated history, without a fixed destination and without a sheltered harbor where refuge, it's not what takes place in the dialectic of our subjective consciousness. Shortly it helps us recall an "Absolute" like us embroiled in the events, in misfortune and in the darkness of this mortal life, so much so that it is not clear if it is he who comes to our aid and we must help Him.

Dice Kasper:

"The man is facing an insurmountable mystery, indeed he himself is an impenetrable mystery. You can not derive the essential lines of our existence " [57].

It resolves the delicate problem of the essence of man, as well as the goals and the laws of his life with a cheap mysticism, which it is nothing more than a convenient but shameful flight from responsibility. In tal modo, abandons the serious moral issue in the hands of any charlatan. For a Catholic theologian of the thing, then, It is even worse, considering the rich and millennial doctrinal heritage, which have about anthropology and Catholic morality.

The reduction of man, made by Kasper, a mere possibility to implement the grace, a mere vessel of grace, It may give the impression of high spirituality, but it is actually a straightforward imposture, rather it is an absurdity, because grace is a perfection of nature: if there is no perfectible, may not even exist the perfection it should refine it.

He says Kasper:

"The infinite distance that separates man from God, the creature from his Creator, and whose mediation foretells in the person of man as a question and as hope, It can not be filled by human possibilities. By its very essence this mediation can come only from God. In his personality, man is only grammar, power oboedientialis, pure and passive possibilities of this mediation » [58]. "Anthropology is, as it were, the grammar of which God uses to self-expression; but the grammar as such remains open to set out the most diverse and finds its concrete determination only in human life of Jesus " [59].

The man before God is not just a passive "grammar", but it is a free creature made in his image, with very specific purposes and regulated by precise laws, whose obedience is accountable to God; It is not a tape recorder, but a personal active subject, an interlocutor able to answer yes or no, and that God calls you to say yes.

In ethics descending from anthropology kasperiana everything is possible and the opposite of everything. Nothing is stable, nothing is universal, anything you need, nothing is absolute. But everything becomes, everything is historicised, everything is relative, everything is diversified, everything is contextualized, everything is particular and concrete.

The disturbing note of this historicist and relativist ethics They should put us on alert and make us aware of the importance of good metaphysical and theological foundations of morality, if we do not want human conduct, abandoning the streets of the Gospel, falls to the level of 'one man Wolf.

Varazze, 24 May 2018

_______________________

NOTE

[1] The Absolute in history last Schelling's philosophy, Jaca Book, Milan 1986, p.492.

[2] Cf G.Cavalcoli, St. Thomas and Christian philosophy, in The Christian philosophy of the century and the Magisterium of Pope Leo XIII, in Proceedings of the Perugia 29.V-1.VI 2003, by the Archbishop of Perugia, Perugia 2004, pp.323-332; AA.VV., Thomas Aquinas and the object of metaphysics, Armando Editore, Rome 2004.

[3] And 'now that the conviction of rahneriani Rahner has supplanted St. Thomas or St. Thomas both of our time. this conviction, pace of rahneriani, of course it is based on a misunderstanding of the fundamental truths of reason and faith.

[4] See the great encyclical Neptune Paul II Faith and Reason the 1998.

[5] Cf E.Gilson, The spirit of medieval philosophy, Ed.Morcelliana, Brescia 1964.

[6] Some texts on the importance and relevance of the thought of St. Thomas: G.Mattiussi, XXIV The thesis of the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas approved by the Congregation of Studies, Typography of the Pontifical Gregorian University, Rome 1947; J.Maritain, The Angelic Doctor, Desclee De Brouwer&C.ie, Paris 1930; A.Fernandez –M.Cordovani – M.Maggiolo – R.Spiazzi, The mission of Thomism, Old Editions S.Sisto, Rome-Naples 1967; C. Jacon, The major thesis of Thomism, Patron Editions, Bologna 1967; P.Relative, Thomistic therapy for the modern problematic from Leo XIII to Paul VI, Logos editions, Milan 1979; J.A.Weisaheipl, Thomas Aquino.Vita, thought, works, Jaca Book, Milan 1988; N.Sarale, St. Thomas Aquinas today, Publishing Civilization, Brescia 1990; A.Livi, Thomas Aquinas. The future of Christian thought, Arnoldo Mondadori Editore, Milan 1997; R.Spiazzi, The thought of St. Thomas Aquinas, Dominican Studio editions, Bologna 1997; R.Garrigou-Lagrange, The Thomistic synthesis, edited M.Bracchi, Preface of A.Livi, Editions Faith&Culture, Verona 2015.

[7] Here Kasper argues with him Przywara.

[8] The Absolute in history, op.cit., p.492.

[9] As is known, Gaetano was commissioned by Pope Leo X to order Luther to recant. Unfortunately, the mission failed because Luther would have liked to defend themselves, but at the most learned and pious Dominican Cardinal, obedient to the Pope, He was not permitted to discuss with Luther. At this point Luther would not hear of correct and remained attached to his ideas, as he would do for the rest of his life. Who knows that instead, if the two had been able to talk, to Gaetano it had not been possible, with its exceptional persuasiveness, to open a chink in the consciousness of Luther about the importance of metaphysics to interpret the Word of God. Cf. on this interesting topic in-depth study of the Dominican historian Charles Morerod, Today Bishop of Lausanne, Cajetan and Luther 1518, Friborg, Switzerland 1994.

[10] Cf J.Maritain, Seven lessons of Being and the first principles of speculative reason, Who are you, Paris 1934, pp.88-96.

[11] It can not be divided in himself or multiple, though it has multiple meanings, it must cover the full breadth and extension of being and being out there than nothing. This was already the error of Henry of Ghent, nel sec.XIII, who thought that there were two similar analog entity notions between them, one for God and for the world. Cf E.Bettoni, Philosopher Duns Scotus, Publishing Life and Thought, Milan 1966, pp.67-69.

[12] The Absolute in history, op.cit., p.504.

[13] The dogma in the Word of God, Shepherd-Morcelliana, p.48.

[14] Denz. 1507, 3020, 3074,. 3540; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n.88-90; Cf "the Code of 1917: «Christ has given the obligation, as she, And during the presence of the Spirit, doctrine revealed reverently and faithfully exposing» [Can.1322§1]; Melchiorre X, On the theological, New York 1786, pp.88-93; R.-M.Schultes, history dogmatum, c.I, Lethielleux, Paris 1922; A.Gardeil, The revealed and Theology, Éditions du Cerf, Paris 1932; S.Cartechini, Dall'opinione to dogma. Value of theological notes, Editions "La Civilta Cattolica", Rome 1953; Y.Congar, The Liver and Theology, Unpaste, Tournai, 1962, pp.54-71; F.Marín-Sola, Homogeneous evolution of Catholic dogma, Madrid-Valencia 1963, cc.III to IV; G. Cavalcoli, The question of heresy today, Viverein editions, Rome 2008, pp.215-223.

[15] Cf Conc. Vat.II, Cost.Dogm. God's word,cc.II and III.

[16] Of which speaks Maritain in the aforementioned September Lessons, pp.45-50.

[17] The Absolute in history, op.cit., p.61.

[18] CF Martin Lutero. An ecumenical perspective, Queriniana, Brescia 2016, p.54.

[19] He misunderstands this proposal by Pope Francis, which did not relate to the essence of the Church, whose organizational center is clearly the Pope, but ecumenism.

[20] See the interesting analysis of the metaphysics of William of Ockham in T.Tyn Metaphysics of substance. Participation and analogy entis, Dominican Studio editions, Bologna 1991, pp.243-258.

[21] The dogma in the word of God, Ed. Queriniana, Brescia 1968, p.47.

[22] Cit., P.137.

[23] Ibid., p.65.

[24] Ibid., p.148.

[25] Because of this, admission, supported by Card.Kasper, of cases in which Holy Communion may be granted to divorced and remarried, it is not founded, As I have argued on this site, that is at stake here simply ecclesiastical law, but it depends on whether he, because of his historicist epistemology, It can not accept the indissolubility of marriage as absolute and universal value.

[26] Phenomenology of the Spirit, New Italy, Florence 1988, vol.I, p.27.

[27] See the steps Kasper in my book The mystery of the Redemption, Editions ESD, Bologna 2004, pp.321 and 325.

[28] DIALECTICS IN HEGEL'S CHRISTOLOGY, in sacred Doctrine, 6,1997, pp.87-140. It's not about The interchange of properties, because Kasper attributes the non-human to the divine nature as it is united to human nature in the Person of Christ ("God is dead", "God suffers"), but in the divine nature as such. For him, as Hegel, God is essentially human. Regardless man, God is not God. According to the idealistic coscienzialismo, God is God in human consciousness as thought by man. Everything in consciousness, nothing out of consciousness. AND, at the bottom of, the cogito Cartesian developed by Fichte.

[29] Jesus the Christ, Queriniana , Brescia 1975, p.231.

[30] Jesus the Christ, Ed.1981, pp.250-251.

[31] A.Livi, Vera and groundwater theology. How to distinguish the authentic "science of faith" as an equivocal "philosophy of religion", Leonardo da Vinci's publishing house, Rome 2012.

[32] The Absolute in History, op.cit., p.493.

[33] Ibid., p.503.

[34] Phenomenology of the Spirit, op.cit., pp. 14,15.

[35]Ibid.

[36] Ibid., p.17.

[37] Ibid., p.26. The defect of the Hegelian theory of knowledge is the fact that the starting point of knowledge is not given the apparent affirmation, ie the sensitive thing that fronts the experience and reason, ie the object, ma, on the contrary, by its negation: the object is an opposite to the subject, so the real is the fact that the subject, denying the object, identifies him again to himself. Cf. my article The denial of the truth of common sense in Hegel, in the certainty of truth, Collection of contributions by various authors by Antonio Livi, Leonardo da Vinci's publishing house, Rome 2013, pp.143-148.

[38] Metaphysics of substance. Participation and analogy entis, op.cit. p.875.

[39] It is strange that Luther has accused Aristotle of being a sophist, while the great sophist was him.

[40] The Absolute in history, op.cit., pp.493-494.

[41] The Absolute in history, op.cit., pp.491-492.

[42] Ibid., p.494.

[43] Ibid., pp. 494-495.

[44] Jesus the Christ, Ed. Queriniana, Brescia 1975, p.65.

[45] So, When Jesus said that "only God is good" [MC 10,18], evidently it does not deny that the creatures are good [Gen 1, 10,13, 18, 21, 25] in their way over; but simply it means that only God is absolutely and infinitely good. Cf J. H.Nicolas, God known as unknown. Test of a critique of theological knowledge, Desclee De Brouwer, Paris 1966, pp.145-146.

[46] It should be infinite also the mode of being of this concept. But here there is only one proper Concept, which is the Logos.

[47] The Absolute in history, op.cit., p.491.

[48] Jesus the Christ 1981, p.253.

[49] Jesus the Christ 1981, p.256.

[50] Ibid. p.253

[51] Ibid., p.254

[52] Ibid.

[53] Ibid.

[54] Ibid..254-255.

[55] Ibid.

[56] See my treatise The Mystery of Redemption, Dominican Studio editions, Bologna 2004.

[57] Ibid. p.65.

[58] Ibid., p.346.

[59] Ibid., p.66.

The philosophy of Martin Heidegger and Nazism

8 May 2018/in Theologica/by Father Giovanni

— Theologica —

PHILOSOPHY AND MARTIN HEIDEGGER Nazism

In 1933, the year that Hitler came to power, Martin Heidegger became rector of Freiburg University and assumed the role of official philosopher and most authoritative of the National Socialist Party, whose passport he retained without any repentance to 1945, even as early as 1934 he resigned, But not for a withdrawal from the Nazi doctrine, but because he said, Nazism, in fact he had failed to its essence, and for having given up his radicalism "spiritual".

PDF print format article

Author
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p.

I prepare to deal with this sensitive issue philosophy and theology for our page Theologica, They have often echoed in my mind the words of the late Cardinal Giacomo Biffi, which for years he was my bishop when I lived in Bologna and doing my ministry at the Theological Dominican:

"We we encounter often in the prophets of nothing, who have nothing to say to man as man, but they say it with great commitment and wealth of means, aggressive announcers of the existential vacuum, which they try to camouflage with the glitter of a purely formal rationality, bearers of a culture of death, attempting to establish themselves as masters of life ' [Exploring design, LDC 1994, p. 308].

Some words accompanied by the admonition contained in the Book of Wisdom:

The wicked invoke upon himself death with words and deeds; deeming friend, they consume themselves for it and conclude an alliance with it, because they are worthy to belong [1,16].

In the large international debate on Martin Heidegger [1889–1976] being from seventy to this part has not been investigated so far and reflected enough on the binding of this philosopher with Nazism. Bond to which Heidegger, as rector of the University of Freiburg, It gave a lot of importance on the theoretical level, talking about a spiritual "national socialism" and praising Adolf Hitler as "the guiding thought".

This approach helps us to understand on the one hand what were the intellectual roots and basic impulses of Nazism, on the other, makes us better understand the practical consequences of the metaphysics of Heidegger. In particular, considering what are the practical consequences of Heidegger's metaphysics, we will understand why Heidegger had admiration for the Nazi doctrine.

It will then be necessary to recall briefly the existential ontology principles Heidegger, comparing them with the doctrine and the Nazi program, Hitler summed up in his famous work my fight, which however, beyond the historical-political-national program of socialist-statist orientation, He has experienced a profound spiritual and moral backgrounds, rooted in traditional self-consciousness show that the "Christian nobility of the German nation" had matured for centuries, especially starting from the formidable push given to it by Luther, who had the brilliant idea but diabolical, harbinger of immense popularity among the Germans, which is still going, to conceive a German way of being Christian - so far nothing bad -, but from this he developed the poison of the conflict with the Apostolic Roman, in the stubborn conviction of having rediscovered or found the authentic Gospel - in practice a re-edition of Marcion's heresy - proposing himself and imposing himself as a prophet, Doctor and Christian reformer of the German people, But he was able to conquer only partially, why more, until today, It remained a Catholic part of the population that has kept, often between suffering and humiliation, fidelity to Rome and to the previous Catholic tradition, often wrongly accused by Protestants of little patriotic spirit, when in fact it is the German Catholics to keep up the centuries the Christian honor of this great and noble nation.

Humiliation suffered like the German Catholics on the occasion of Hitler's rise to power. Indeed, while Catholics, for their loyalty to Rome, They were accused of anti-patriotism, Protestants educated by Hegel, on the basis of Luther, urged to regard the state as the supreme manifestation of God's will, They had no trouble paying the Führer absolute obedience, which, as we know, he came, for many of them, to follow him into a terrible war of aggression in Europe, accompanied by the extermination of the Jewish religion Germans. To this it can be said with certainty that the Hegelian doctrine of the state is one of the theoretical foundations of Nazism.

Nihilism HOW THE SOUL OF Nazism

The nihilist tendency of ancient Manichaean-Zoroastrian origin, and it is linked to the existence cyclic conception, present in the pagan world, both West and East, for example in India, with the ancient symbol of the swastika. The return to the starting point cancels all the intermediate motion, although it is true that in antiquity, for example in Plato and in Pseudo-Dionysius, the circle is the symbol of spiritual perfection, reflecting on itself.

You can not be excluded however, that the coincidence of the end point with the starting point can be understood as the correspondence of the efficient cause with the final cause, which would be a sign of wisdom. But unfortunately, it made the swastika was taken by the Nazis to signify the eternal opposition of life and death, which it is also a principle of esoteric Masonry [no life without death, no death without life].

Even the ancient dualist and gnostic conceptions of reality They have a nihilistic aspect, as they consider the matter as a non-being and how bad. From this point of view, Pythagoras and Plato are not without a tinge nihilistic.

Nihilism as a negation of God, enters into Christianity Marcion, with his contempt for the God of the Old Testament and in the history of Christianity occasionally reappears, such as with the thirteenth century Cathars. Pessimism Lutheran towards reason and free will is certainly a nihilistic character.

German Idealism, which it reduces to be thinking and the object to the subject, certainly it has a nihilistic aspect, in that it denies the external reality or dissolves in the idea, to conclude at the end with atheism, forgetting the fact that it is starting from the things that we know that God exists. But if being is reduced to the ideas of the subject, it is clear that the subject does not come to God, but rather it ends in their own world, God makes of himself and left with absolutely nothing in his hand. It is the sad story of Nietzsche.

The interesting thing is that the history of nihilism It goes hand in hand with hatred for Jews, because of being biblical enhancement created and uncreated. Indeed one notices that each nichilista is always an anti-Semite, and it is logical, because no people, like that of the ancient Israelites, It has a sense of reality, whether the material created, whether that divine spiritual.

To define nihilism Nietzschean-Nazi collochiamolo in the bigger picture and appropriate nihilism in general. nihilism, indeed, It has many forms. It, in general, is the tendency to denied being, be it material or spiritual, mundane or divine, be your own or others'.

nihilism, like every movement of the spirit Practical, It is the practical application of a theory. Let us then first the theoretical basis or gnosiological. It relies on God and human action. The theoretical nihilism is the belief that being there; being is nothing, is worth nothing. Everything is nothing. It is well expressed by the bitter lamentation and dejected of Ecclesiastes: "everything is vanity". This is also the Buddhist nihilism. However, in Qoheleth, the vanity of which he speaks is the vanity of this world. It is always affirmed the existence of God, What it gives meaning to the world he created.

The Nazi nihilism appears as a power to be, be expanding, be aggressive, and yet it supposes that framework epistemological. However for it that there is no point. There is originally just nothing. Nothingness is the bottom of all things. Everything is appearance. Everything is subjective, there is nothing objective. Metaphysics is illusion. Nothing is intelligible. Of everything you can be doubted. To affirm and deny the same thing. It is also found in the Greek Sophists and the Skeptics.

Diversa form of nihilism is that Hegelian, for which being is contradicted or canceled by nothing. Being coincides with the non-being. The being can not be without non-being. Being is, and at the same time it is not. everything becomes, everything passes and everything returns.

Another form is nihilism Leopardi: It is located itself from nothing, all things come from nothing and return to nothing. The more comes from less and less to the back. Everything is absurd, at random, without meaning or reason. There is nothing for which it is worth living. This is a pessimistic nihilism; Instead the Nazis is optimistic. It is a hymn to life, but it ends with the tragic death, It is a "being-towards-death".

Nihilism theological. For the Nazi God is man's expansion as will to power. God is not in the Nazi as a You who is the ego, but as an original force, intima, profound and fundamental ego. The Nazis did not simply deny the existence of the Christian God creator, but actively suppresses, kills him, cancels, as taught by Nietzsche.

Note the difference nihilism Hegelian. For him, God is the identity of being and non-being. He is therefore nothing and be at once. The world is not something, but it's nothing. God is everything and nothing. So God does not create, that does not take the world out of nothing. But the world belongs to the essence of God, which it is to be and not be at a time, true and false, good and bad. God negates itself as well as the not-be denies being. God can not exist without the world. As the being is identified with non-being, so God is identified with the world.

The practical nihilism is a form of contempt or hatred of reality, who appears hateful and bad. Hence the desire or attempt to cancel it as an enemy, to replace it with his own will, with their own ideas or a fictional world invented by us.

L '' death instinct ', of which Freud speaks, l ' "being-towards-death" [his death] by Heidegger, the rise at the expense of others, the argumentative or quarrelsome, the spirit of contradiction [1], the violence, the spirit of oppression - like the "will to power" [Will to power] by Nietzsche - the will to dominate, the murderous desire, Promethean spirit, the will of God undo, are forms of nihilism. The Nietzschean nihilism and Nazi so has the character of an aggressive nihilism, for which being is evil and must be destroyed. It is the hatred or contempt for reality, to be so for the true and the good. It's destructive will, Will death, to cancel, to destroy, to kill. This is the most severe form, that borders on insanity, as it has happened to Nietzsche, according to its well-known formulas: "The truth is a lie"; "We must trasvalutare all values".

It is clear that no nihilist seriously believes that being does not exist or is it a dream or is contradictory, because it is such an absurdity, which it is not even thinkable. There is but the Heraclitean-Hegelian reduction being to become. And it is at the bottom of Heidegger's idea of being, except that it tends to nihilism with his belief that being "appear" out of nowhere.

But also the idea of an absolute becoming You can be expressed in words, but you can not really think. The right idea of becoming is only that of Aristotle, as a passage from potency to act. But here we are always being on the floor and there is no contradiction.

THE BIRTH AND THE END OF THE TRAGEDY

The Nazi enterprise was designed and built under the sign of a tragic conception of life and in particular hero, fighting for a hopeless cause, knowing in advance that will be defeated and yet it throws in the war. It is inspired by the Nietzschean conception of life and the superman, whose principles are already present in the work youth The Birth of Tragedy, scholarly work of philologist and expert on Greek literature, where even then it appears Nietzschean theory of the spring of the Apollonian serenity, which represents the rationality, from an original fund of darkness, chaotic and unbridled, the Dionysian, that is the self-understanding of the ego.

In further production Nietzschean, with Behold the man, It appears the myth of Fate, fate [skill], that will have great importance in Heidegger and Nazism. At the same time processes the famous Nietzsche's superman theory and the will to power, from which man's perspective on the one hand is intended to death, while the other wants to endlessly their own power and self-affirmation, whereby, on one hand likes Fate [love Fati], the other he feels himself as Doom instead of God, he suppresses [death of God] to assert himself. Zarathustra in Thus spake Zarathustra And the superman model, that rises to the heights of truth and thence compassionately among men to teach them to rise to where he came down, waves become aware of their infinite power, that at the same time is running toward death, in an eternal cycle of life-death and death-life.

My thesis is that the great tragedy of the modern age begins Luther and ends with Hitler. But today the virus capable of throwing us again into this tragedy - the "throwness” [thrownness or "alluvial", as he calls Heidegger] - it is still alive, and is the theology of Rahner, who, for its explicit declaration, in the last years of his life, Heidegger said that was "his only teacher".

In 1933, the year that Hitler came to power, Heidegger became rector of Freiburg University and assumed the role of official philosopher and most authoritative of the National Socialist Party, whose passport he retained without any repentance to 1945, even as early as 1934 he resigned, But not for a withdrawal from the Nazi doctrine, but because he said, Nazism, in fact he had failed to its essence, and for having given up his radicalism "spiritual".

The concept that Heidegger He had become the ideal Nazi was taken from Nietzsche, who, although it did arise the spirit from the body, However it presaged and advocated a progeny of lords and masters emerging on the mass of the weak and not lemmings biobased, how it will be later in the racist Nazi, but for the strength of will, for which, as already said Hegel, "The will wills itself».

Another ingredient of the ideal Nazi It was the idea of humanizing mission, liberating and salvific the German people, as God's chosen people among all peoples to teach the world the true concept of God and the divine freedom.

Hence the belief descended that it was up to Germany, by divine right, dominion over all peoples: Deutschland üabout Everything, through the war of conquest, on the biblical model of how Israel, divinely, He conquered the promised land driving out from it or taking prisoner the people that was there.

Hence the Nazi anti-Semitism: considering themselves Germanic people divinely elected, he could not tolerate another chosen people beside him, such as that of the Israelites. The idea was a materialization racist idea of liberating mission-dominatrix, of spiritual. In this sense Heidegger refused to accept such popularization, for which his eyes Nazism leaked so his spiritual elevation.

LUTHER AND THE MISSION OF THE GERMAN PEOPLE

Basically the idea was already launched at the time by Luther with his pamphlet To the Christian nobility of the German nation on the improvement of their Christian status [To the Christian Nobility of the German nation on the amendment of the Christian societies]. With Luther, the German people was discovered, against Roma falsifying Pharisee of the Gospel and against the Jews the terrible God of the Old Testament, the true preacher of the Gospel of God's mercy for all, without work and without merit, that the German soldiery Lutheran lay the people of Rome with the sack 1527.

With this bellicose exaltation and irrational Luther of the German people took revenge, first, against that pagan imperial Rome, which in ancient times had tried to subdue him; then, against the Rome of the Popes, who had exploited and humiliated him.

Luther, with his inner God, irrational and fatal, It is well placed, with a violent polemic against papal Rome, in the wake of a previous spiritual tradition appeared in the fourteenth century with Meister Eckhart, who, without falling in the excesses of Luther's anti-Roman, but nevertheless undermining the full doctrinal communion with Rome [2], inaugurating a specifically German way of making theology, based on category Gemüth, that is, as a pre-rational and mystical “feeling”. [3]. The term Gemüth is very difficult to translate, because it represents a complex of psychic factors per se distinguished from each other, but that all together are expressed in Gemüth. It could be likened to the Biblical term "heart". It involves refinement of inner eye, of taste and discernment, depth of intuition, moral wisdom, purity of conscience, strength of conviction. But Luther, breaking with Rome, He has misled the German people from its true mission of the civilization and the Church, mission had already made light in previous centuries with his holy, such as San Bonifacio, San Bruno, Saint Hildegard, Santa Gertrude, St. Albert the Great and the Rhenish mystics. Instead Luther exalted his people in a wrong way, injected in him the pride of the virus, who, over the following centuries, due to a shift away from truth and Christian faith, She led him to the madness of Nazism and the catastrophe of World War II.

There remains so for centuries the belief Germans to be God's chosen people, that goes hand in hand with the conviction of owning their own powerful and revolutionary theology, expression of intuitive genius and German warrior, contrary and higher than the rational and moderate Latin or Greek, considered weak or decaying. And this conviction to be healthy people, strong and elected goes hand in hand through the centuries, up to Nazism and at the same Karl Rahner, with the conviction of the primacy of philosophy and German theology of all other philosophies and theologies of humanity.

So in the fifteenth century it appears the German Theology, self-incensing of Germany and its theology, by an unknown author, Theology of the dark and the depths of the ineffable mystic momentum, work which Luther oversaw the publication. That, with its tendency immanentist, certainly contributes to the constitution and to the fame of Luther's theology.

The famous thesis Cusanian from the coincidence of opposites in God it has been exploited by idealists, probably bad interpreting the thought of the good Cusano, to endorse their absurd contradiction of God, the yes and no.

The German Lutherans noticed than they could use in their favor the cogito Cartesian since its first rising, although it was invented by a Catholic: see for example Leibniz. In fact, the Cartesian ego, beyond its apparent rationality, It goes well with the self Lutheran. Just ask the immediate inner object of self Cartesian God's Word, as did Luther, instead Cartesian innate idea, And that's it. It is true that Luther was essentially a realist of the biblical realism. But his was a interiorista realism, of type Augustine, wary of the experience of sense, so the transition was not difficult to idealism.

He took this step the Kantian epistemology and since then, up to Nietzsche and Heidegger, the subject or I became master of being, in defiance of Luther, knew that while preserve the Catholic biblical realism, This same St. Thomas Aquinas and William of Ockham, who was master of Luther. In fact, for Aquinas and Ockham, as the Bible teaches, being is not product or ego expansion, but it is created by God.

In the seventeenth century now appears Jakob Böhme, twisted and paradoxical philosopher of Abyss, unfathomable abyss and cruelly merciful God, origin of heaven and hell, of good of evil. bohemian, brilliant visionary and daring, by overactive imagination, ignorant of scholastic philosophy, but so much the better, It will be considered for excellence from the Tedeschi philosopher teutons, and prepare the idealism of the nineteenth century rise, especially with Fichte, Hegel, Holderlin and Schleiermacher, where Gemüth becomes the Gehfühl, sentiment of the Absolute. The Gemüth It is also present in Kant, He also speaks of the abyss or "abyss of reason" [the precipice of the reason] [4].

Even the jew Spinoza, although jew, It is co-opted by idealists, especially by Hegel, as "the one from which we must begin to make philosophy". The fact that Spinoza was rightly expelled from the synagogue as wicked after being hit by cherem [from Hebrew boycott, excommunication] It was for the idealists a title in more than glory, confirming them in their anti-Semitism.

Hegel and Schelling see on Giordano Bruno, Prince occult magical Renaissance, an inspiring and precursor of idealistic pantheism, with particular reference to the opposition of being with non-being, that, according to the Nolan, It would be a magical power source. Hegel draws inspiration from there for his dialectic and the "power of the negative". Bruno, although not German, It is adopted by idealists as a new element to the "German philosophy".

The Gemüth reappears as the background of consciousness in Husserl, master at a time of Heidegger and Edith Stein. It is paradigmatic for the German culture and the history of European civilization and of the Church, the story of the relationship between these three great figures of German philosophy. Edmund Husserl e la Edith Stein, Jews, Martin Heidegger, anti-Semitic.

Husserl, early in his philosophical research, provoker was of great expectations in many spirits who long to know the truth, disappointed and dissatisfied relativist historicism, from petty positivism and flat Psychologism era. She also felt the need to return to epistemological realism, spoiled Hegelian idealism. So it was that Husserl launched the popular program: «let's get back to the things themselves!».

And to implement this program, for which it would be enough to go back to St. Thomas Aquinas, as a few years before Leo XIII she had invited him to do, Husserl conceived a very ambitious plan, which is to actually establish a new science, the "phenomenology", which finally, after the crisis of European Sciences, He would ensure definitely the way to humanity, the principles and contents of «philosophy as science».

At first Husserl spoke of a wfood show, intuition or experience of being as objective essence, It looks like 'phenomenon', matter of fact, immediate manifestation or revelation and some of the universal truth, spiritual and logical consciousness.

So far Heidegger and Husserl followed Stein. But later, both the first and the second began to take the distances. Heidegger, sensitive on one side to the issue of the concrete existing subject and the other being the thematic cha appears in Presocratic, He started his existential ontology, while Stein, after Husserl, failing to promises, Descartes wanted to re-evaluate and then embraced the idealism, He discovered the Thomistic realism and welcomed him, much to write an opera metaphysics "Finite Being and eternal being ' [be his finite and eternal] with which brought to light the fact that man, starting from the knowledge of things, in its finitude he is in front of the eternal Being, i.e. God, so it was to refute subjectivism self both Husserl and Heidegger, closed both to the objective reality of being, and then ego encounter with God: Husserl, the fact that for him to be, devoid of its independence from the consciousness, it was reduced to being a mere "correlated" or "phenomenon" of consciousness; Heidegger, because it had to be reduced to finiteness and temporality of the fragile sinner and deadly.

The comparison between the outcome of Heidgger's existential journey is interesting and that of Stein. This would have died a martyr at Auschwitz in 1942. Heidegger, Instead of the perfect actor who had always been, it was to the end and, because despite the bad impression he had made with Nazism, He keeps talking about him, He heard again, with incredible mystifying skills, gather around him the attention of both atheists and naive believers.

Like this, after the ignominious end of his revered Führer, He had the nerve to show up in the shameful 1946, with its famous Letter on Humanism, his, the theorist of «being-towards-death», like the lawyer of human dignity, "Shepherd of being ', refusing with sliced chaste virgin outrage the winking and vulgar proposal of his worthy appears Sartre, atheistic existentialist, to join his "existentialism", because he, these Heidegger, was "being philosopher", concluding in the famous phrase: "now only a god can save us", but that really is not the Christian God, but the ”sacred” of Hölderlin and therefore, all over again, the god of the Nazis.

FURTHER EVENTS OF GEMBEATH

The Gemüth she finds himself in Heidegger and with Nazism. It is certainly close to Gefühl of Scleiermacher and is subtended to Geist Hegelian. Side, in the same Critique of Pure Reason, use this term; but the Italian translator, not knowing how to make it, uses the term "spirit".

The Gemüth It is also closely connected to 'Experience, as a spiritual or inner experience, in Hegel, Heidegger e Rahner: one with an emotional connotation moral act; while this is an act purely gnoseologic. The recurring motif of the Gemüth And the belief that the conceptual reason is not the primary function and profound epistemological man, but that this primary function lies in-prioricamente, more in depth, previously and pre-categorially in spirit or in the consciousness. For this dark ego likeness unintelligible and-priorico with self-consciousness Cartesian, Descartes, although Catholic, but actually self-centered, find much success in the rise of egocentricity German idealist, until you get to the ego absolute ego Fichte and Nietzsche, He says on the ashes of the God who killed.

The German theology, in its troubled history, constantly oscillating between two opposing tendencies, among which never finds peace: that gnostic Dio gnostos, cognizable, rational, understandable, and conceptualization, which finds its highest expression in the God-concept Hegel, where the mystery is revealed; and the agnostic of God agnoston, Pagan misteriosofia, incognizable, irrational, unintelligible, Non-conceptualize, absolute and impenetrable mystery.

This God is in Heidegger [the “sacred”] e in Rahner. It is not the true God, but rather "a" god, or "the" god, which suggests a polytheistic background. Is this the God of Hölderlin, Heidegger and Nazism, not devoid of references to the ancient Germanic mythology.

German theologians have always It made a huge effort to understand and respond to the analog-participatory notion, which it is the guarantee to access an authentic notion of God, which is biblical, that avoids both Gnosticism polytheistic that agnosticism false mysticism. It is the Pauline notion of God, for which God is knowable, but incomprehensible; He can speak with truth and by analogy, ma, to experience mystique summit, it is better to remain silent.

The German feels the need of the mystical, Of feel God with him, and is a great desire; he knows that God is in the depths of consciousness, more inward than my innermost, but it lacks policy, of humility and immerse sobriety in these abyssal depths and unsearchable, so you lose recklessly darkness, but nevertheless it claims to prophesy or prophesy, when in fact pronounced with oracular air gibberish, that naive listen avidly and are the subject of endless discussions and interpretations, never get away from a spider hole.

It 'amazing, but also disgusting, to about, cunning with which Heidegger, after the defeat of the Nazis in which he had played a leading role, without giving any sign of repentance, He managed to rebuild the image, for many years vanished behind the exaltation of Nietzsche, of the profound inquirer of being [5], so as not to disdain to speak of God "Savior of mankind" and of man "shepherd of being" and "being home", except to maintain a friendly contempt for Christian theology, which he haughtily calls "ontotheology", vulgar and coarse, whereas yes, his God was the "divine God". And this would be the one who Rahner called "his one true teacher".

HEIDEGGER AND Nietzsche

Nietzsche does not spare criticism of the German people, but always on the assumption it assumes that it is a "race of lords', in which he serves as a superhuman guidance of the new humanity without God, his vate and Führer philosophical, as Hitler will be the political Führer. The ambitions of Heidegger will not be different. Heidegger claimed to have discovered once and for all, after the first flashes of Anassimandro, Heraclitus and Parmenides, the sense or the truth, after that since then, before him, It was the "error history", Christianity included. And in a written note in 1933, refers to Hitler, that, according to him, «has awakened a new reality that puts our thinking on the right track and gives it shock force» [6].

The first contact with metaphysics Heidegger him in his early essay of 1916 The categories and important teaching of Duns Scotus, where he meets the uniqueness of being Scotistic, as well as the intuitionism and voluntarism of the great Franciscan theologian. These basic orientations will always remain in Heidegger, even when he, in contact with the metaphysical Parmenides and Heraclitus, lose the light of the Catholic faith, in which he was raised, so as to have had the thought, quickly abandoned, to become a Jesuit. He succeeds in fact in his mind the presumption, which from now on will not abandon mostly, typical of idealistic gnosticismo, to have achieved a degree of speculative intelligence greater than that offered by Biblical realism epistemological and Catholic theology.

The metaphysical interest remains, but they seem to act at the same time the Lutheran influences, like that of the’ "Anguish" [Angst], of alluvial [thrownness], of concern [worry], of guilt [fault], of concentration on the ego as an existential concreteness [To be there].

The loss of faith however due to Heidegger's absolutization of metaphysics at the expense of theology. Metaphysics no longer leads to God, but it folds in on itself and about man, on To be there. It is the awareness that transcends the body be [the "ontological difference"]; but this "being" [be] is not the ' to be very, It is not One Who Is [Is 3,14].

For Heidegger, being is not the entity act, but the entity denial. Meeting the thought of Nietzsche, they, in his monumental work 900 pages on Nietzsche, It developed during a decade [1930-1940] in full the rise of Nazism, It comes to conceive of being, its accompanying, as an irrepressible impulse, as absolute will to irrational act of war.

The truth, on the basis of Nietzsche, adequacy entity is not already, but revelation or appearance of the entity willed by the subject. The truth is not the principle but the effect will. It is not true that exists, but what I want there. The truth coincides with freedom. The same concept reappears in Heidegger, and it is found in Rahner.

Being, as in Duns Scotus, It is not analog or diversified, but unique. It is autocomprensione. It is not hierarchical, but horizontal. Transcendence is not a climb, but an extension, an exit by itself, a ' "ecstasy". The institution does not conceptualize, but it appears; and precomprende [preamplifierännis] and is experienced. As in Duns Scotus, It is is not connected to the intellect, but at will. not the abstract, but the concrete. No universal, but the individual. The real is the good. From here it will be out Heidegger the idea of truth as freedom, it will reappear on Rahner.

Being, the sense or the truth per Heidegger, it is possible, be able to do, trend, want, Act, become, finiteness, presence, time, event, vita, freedom, history. The being is not nothing before, but it emerges from nothing. The being is the thought, the experience, the hidden. Even non-being, evil and false come in being. Becoming is better being. I am in the totality [To be there]. The human being is the agent in the world.

To change, become, change is better than store. Man is a "historical" being. Being is "event" [Event]. The will is always on the move, without fixed destination; establishes the law and decide on good and evil. No law in the situation; but the situation creates the law. Therein lies the freedom. "I want" instead of "you must". Destroy and create. "freedom for nothing in the freely willed necessity of an eternal return" [7]. Thought is rammemorante [souvenir] because thinking is to find the original, what was lost. The future return of the past. There is no progress, but a circularity.

When everything becomes, nothing becomes. In ethics Heidegger, as in that of Nietzsche, there is no passage or progress from death to life, from least to most, but an eternal, esperante and hopeless conflict between life and death. As in the myth of Prometheus, the god's liver regrows and is increasingly consumed by Raven, or the Sisyphean task, he must always start over after reaching the top.

amor Fati, according to the Nietzschean perspective. And Plato: "All that is great is in the storm" [8]. Emerging on the other is better than serving others. Violence is a sign of strength. The strong raises no weak, but dominates. Hate is the weapon of victory. The winner is always right. The loser is always wrong. The fact coincides with the right and with good.

Nazi Germany He became convinced that the German people had from God [God with us] the sacred mission of establishing in Europe, under the guidance of the Führer, by the use of force and a lightning war of conquest [flash war], a new "millennial" political-spiritual revolutionary order [III Reich] «socialist» ["National Socialist"], involving the elimination of the Jewish people, as it was considered the maximum representative of the religion of the transcendent God slave, from which he had originated Christianity.

Anti-Semitism, before being hatred for the Jewish people, It is hatred for their sacred text, ie the Old Testament, and then for God's transcendent creator and legislator, who punishes sin and requires repair by a sacrifice. As with the heresy of Marcion, the Germans with Luther rejected this God to replace it with the God of Christ. Except that the hostile conception of the Old Testament God turned against the Christian God falsandolo. In fact happened with Luther that, always in the line of Marcion, He claimed to enhance the mercy of the Christian God, remedial works are no longer needed, so that the moral law is relativized and made optional, Christian freedom became a pretext for the license and the life of grace began to be taken in a pantheistic sense, while the human dignity exalted by Christ began to be so inflated, which eventually ended in atheism. The first result was that of Hegel; the second was to Nietzsche.

National Socialism THE ENTERPRISE

The Nazis believed of having completed the Lutheran Reformation liberation of consciousness, which through Hegel reaches Nietzsche [9]. Heidegger was the greatest interpreter of this spiritual evolution, why was the philosopher who gave the National Socialist culture of its theoretical basis. The theological basis of Nazism is the Nazi's belief that he has God with him. This belief develops Hegelian idealism pantheistic with the doctrine of the state deities. As for ethics, Nazism assumes the Nietzschean conception of the will to power. Based on Nietzsche, Heidegger to Nazism instead provides the conception of man and his destiny as self-understanding in athematic emotional situation and pre-historical understanding of itself as there, project and decision of its existence the creator and ruler of the world as being-towards-death. Hence the great army of the Nazi invasion of Europe project in order to occupy what Hitler called "living space" of the German people, which she belonged to him by right, so he was allowed to occupy it by force. This program was also my fight.

To achieve this end Hitler Nietzsche applied the lesson gradually increase aggression without a clear deadline, but in an indefinite and insatiable, up to the limit of his strength, ie until the final collapse. And so indeed it happened. A tragic path toward death through the exercise of will power. Does not it came to conquer a domain in Europe, it was expected and encouraged or welcomed by the European. Yet the principle Nietzsche was just what the "race of lords', exponent of the superman, by fate he had the mission to subjugate the peoples decadent, still enmeshed in bourgeois ideals of democracy and equality, short of '' inauthentic existence ", how to tell Heidegger, if not exactly into the trap of religion, morality and spirituality. So the firm's basic Hitler there was the doctrine of the Nietzschean will to power, Heidegger interpreted as a Nietzsche as the essence of the German man - the "blonde beast", as he called Nietzsche -, destined to rule over the world and jointly as the totality [be] self-designing [design] and "thrown" [thrownness], the "cure" [worry] and in guilt [fault], Emerging from nowhere [Not] and straining toward death.

As Germany during Nazism was risen to the level of a major world power with its culture, its industry, his technique, its economy, its social organization and its armed forces, as well as with its colonies and the alliance of Italy and Japan, that he had been able to attract to himself, and not lack sympathy for Hitler in various European environments, However the war effort of the conquest of Europe from France, to England, Scandinavia, to Russia, of the Balkans, to North Africa, associated, moreover, the elimination of the Jews, He could not not look at every healthy mind madness. Because of this, must say that, if Heidegger put this enterprise, this can be explained - and it could not be otherwise - than with the principles themselves, fundamentally nihilistic and atheistic its metaphysics, especially of the central phase, that said support for the superomismo atheistic and nihilistic Nietzschean. I believe that the same Nazis, Heidegger and Hitler included, already they knew at the beginning that it would end badly.

So why undertake it? Here we enter the heart of atheism and nihilistic say SIC et simpliciter of nihilism, Why, as we have seen, Atheism is every nihilism. However, we must remember that the nihilist denies being so good is not absolutely, since, as we have seen, this is impossible. Beyond the flamboyant expressions, they do impress fools ["everything is nothing", "Being is not being", "everything is vanity", etc. ..], the so-called nihilist is actually nothing more than a vulgar and miserable little man desperately clinging to itself, is none other than the son of Adam sinner, well attached to the goods of this world. Certainly it is moved by a deadly and destructive spirit, that is the very essence of sin. In fact, the ideological climate dell'heideggerismo, the nietzschianismo and Nazism are those at the bottom of the tragedy, described by the same Nietzsche, whose words have remained famous'The tragedy begins», signifying that it was about to enter a tragedy. It would be the tragedy of the First and then the Second World War. But the tragedy of the virus is not completely eradicated. It remains dormant in the folds of history even today. And it would not take much to wake it up..

TRAGEDY CAN START AGAIN

The thought of Heidegger He was later hired by Rahner, as basic inspiration, during his theological training in the twenties of the twentieth century, during which he eagerly followed the lectures Heidegger. So Rahner, at the end of his life, after trying to make Thomas, in the years 1939-1941, an idealist, precisely he stated openly that Heidegger was the '' only his teacher '.

And indeed, Rahner although he never specifically mention, it is not difficult to see Heidegger's influence in theology, in metaphysics, in epistemology, anthropology and ethics Rahner. In theology, the unintelligibility and ineffability of the divine mystery of theology Rahner, closely resembles the "nothing" Heidegger, from which it appears to be, nothing that is not simply non-being, but belongs horizon impenetrable and ineffable being hidden.

In metaphysics, being as self Rahner, caught a priori as transcendental horizon of categorical understanding, It is certainly being Heidegger's self-understanding of man in the world, a-priori condition of the possibility of knowledge and experience of the world. In epistemology pre-understanding [Anticipation] athematic Rahner being corresponds to preamplifierännis by Heidegger. The theming or conceptualization is the later and derivative, of an empirical nature, original essence of self or identity transcendental experience with being, in which being coincides with thinking. In this way God no longer distinguished from the ego and from God, because the one and the other uniquely represent the horizon of, in which the be, albeit it finished as a human being, It coincides with becoming and with the will as a divine being.

Rahner speaks of God but, as do Heidegger. But we might ask who God is and if it is the true God, Being subsisting, immutable and impassible, knowable “by analogy” [Sap 13,5] e «through what has been made» [RM 1,20], creator of heaven and earth, distinct from the world, that the God of Jesus Christ? It would seem, because the attributes, the way and manner in which God is known stand in stark contrast to the true God. Il Dio in Rahner, man summit, a-thematically, immediately and originally experienced, unintelligible and unmentionable mystery, It is more like Nietzsche's superman to the true God of reason and faith.

The ethical issue, in Rahner it appears as "spirit world". The man appears to be [To be there] of being, so how historicity and self horizon as the transcendence. As spirit, man is freedom which does not act on the basis of a moral law dictated by a human nature fixed and defined; but the acting subject freely determines his own being destined for death. Human action, per Rahner, It is not governed by objective moral laws, universal and immutable. Since the action is in the concrete and the changeability and variety of circumstances, It is going to every single person, concrete subject, conscientiously decide what to do. The single person, so, according to Rahner, It has a duty, the right and responsibility to add, to his will, changing it, to the ineffective abstractness of the moral law, that element of concreteness, which makes it operational, but for this same changing.

It may so happen, according to Rahner, that a divine command, for instance, like that of mercy, failing in its abstractness a character of absoluteness, may be replaced, in certain cases, in the name of "freedom", from the practice of violence. Thus Rahner, with a perfectly Nietzschean style, with these disconcerting words, It is actually to justify violence: «The realization of freedom ... is already a restriction of the scope of the freedom of another and of its essence and this inevitably. No one can act freely, without thereby using 'violence' and exerting physical force on the other» [10].

In fact Rahner even get to talk a "transcendental violence needs', which, 'Condition of possibility of creaturely freedom, it must also be recognized as a natural theologically, willed by God and inherently non-sinful" [11].

As for the meaning Christian Death, Rahner, who does not believe the immortality of the soul, but he believes that with death the whole man dies, not even conceive of a life after death, but according to him eternal life is the death itself, as "personal self-fulfillment" and as the moment in which man reaches his "fulfillment" and "freedom reaches its own definitiveness" [12]. It's the same idea of Heidegger the human being as "being-towards-death". It is the same Nietzschean and Nazi idea of death as a heroic act of free will in wanting what Destiny wants [skill] which is a command of the Führer.

The tragedy of the virus therefore they are not dead, but only sleeping. De facto, as noted by Pope Francis, It has already started the third world war, which, moreover, does not destroy the bodies, as the other two, He destroys souls with mortal sin. Not triumphs physical death, but that inner, under the appearance of life. Rages inner tragedy under the guise of peace and normality.

What we should meditate deeply is how it was possible that a great people like the German people, so rich in human and spiritual qualities, so ancient Christian traditions and civilians, He was able to be seduced and carried away by a crazy madman like Hitler in a criminal enterprise absolutely crazy to want to subject the world to Germany, together with project sacrilegious to suppress the People Messianic and Priests, from which he was born the Savior of mankind.

That what's this, such ideas, such interests, such impulses, what purposes, what mistakes, such illusions, such pretexts, such bad examples, such bad teachers, which will led him to so much? You should answer these questions, and we will see that viruses that have poisoned is not dead.

Today it is rumored that Hell God does not exist and does not punish, actually Hell, and the rage of Satan we are experiencing them within the Church. Today that the "primacy of conscience" is proclaimed, we are more than ever tormented by conscience. Today, in full rhetorical dialogistica, We are fiercely closed to those who do not think like us. Today we imagine ourselves to be caressed by a God "compassion" we invented, because we want to have permission to sin without being punished. Never like today souls, which according to Rahner would be all in favor, They were actually so devoid of grace. From what we understand? From ignorance guilty. Never in fact, as today we have had access to so many means and so effective to instruct us in faith. Yet never before has it has come time to deny or to ignore the very foundations of existence, knowledge and life, and they have pullulato many heresies among theologians themselves, bishops and cardinals.

Germans, who failed to conquer Europe and the world with weapons, they did not abandon the intention to take over the world. But now try to conquer subjecting it to Luther and his followers, until Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche and Heidegger. Rahner is the Trojan horse by which Luther should subjugate the Church and the world to Germany. The obstacle to this is certainly the papacy. Against him now focus all the powers of evil. You notice that the Roman Pontiff today warns shots, sometimes falters, it seems to collapse, He feels the seduction, He is surrounded by children of the Devil. It should rally around him, urge the supervision and help in the tremendous struggle against Satan.

Varazze, 6 May 2018

NOTE

[1] K. Löwith in cit, op.ct., p.294.

[2] Cf A.Colombo, op.cit., p.65. A phrase probably exploited.

[3] Cf K.Löwith, As Hegel a Nietzsche. The revolutionary break of the century. Nineteenth, Einaudi Editions, 1993.

[4] spirituality Essays, Pauline Editions 1969, p.308.

[5] Ibid., p.309.

[6] Rahner's passages can be found in mine Karl Rahner. The Second betrayed, Editions Faith&Culture, Verona 2009, pp.134-144.

[7] cf. the Heracliteus polemos pater panton.

[8] See his propositions condemned by Pope John XXII in 1329 (Denz.950-980).

[9] Cf G.Faggin, Meister Eckhart and pre-Protestant German mystic, Brothers Publishers Mouth, Milan 1946, pp 192-194; 208; 296; 298ss.

[10] Critique of pure reason, The third, Bari 1965, p.491.

[11] See her famous Letter on Humanism the 1946.

[12] Cit. the A.Colombo, Bloodhounds. From the wrong side of history, Lindau Editions, Torino 2017, p.65.

The German episcopate and Eucharistic intercommunion with Protestants. Peter washes his hands like Pilate: "Find a unanimous solution among you"

6 May 2018/7 Comments/in Theologica/by father ariel

— Theologica —

The EPISCOPATE German and intercommunion MASS WITH PROTESTANT. PETER WASHES HANDS AS PILATO: "FIND A SOLUTION BETWEEN YOU UNANIMOUS"

If the Bishops of Germany, unanimously they were to agree to give Holy Communion to Protestants, what will happen tomorrow, if another episcopal conference, unanimously, decide to unite in marriage same-sex couples? What will happen if another, unanimously, decide that it is permissible to abort the fetus of a baby found suffering from malformation, not considering it right to give birth to a creature affected by imperfections? What will happen if another, unanimously, It decides that it is an act of charity to end the life of a terminally ill and suffering that has no life expectancy? Since when, unanimity, It is a guarantee of sound doctrine and profound respect to revealed truth?

PDF print format article

Author
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

Contrary to those who for years are stealing the reviews on the subject contained in the articles of Fathers of The Island of Patmos looking from mentioning the Authors, doing then pass certain analysis as their own, we have proven Christian intellectual honesty and always mention when we appeal to any past or present author, well it was a minimum sigh. This is the reason why our writings published on the page Actuality abound with numerous citations in brackets, those on the page Theologica notes at the page bottom or between the lines of text.

This introductory preamble just to sing two anthems: the first, to tenants who after the harvest they look from saying where they harvest the grapes. The second, to excuse me if I quote below the expression of an author that at the time I just can not remember the name, this thing that prevents me from giving the legitimate paternity to a phrase not mine, which is as follows: "The Supreme Pontiffs have placed the tiara, the laity and theologians have worn '.

When you feel discomfort, or subjective discomfort human, we must keep it, to limit talk privately with those who can possibly help. This not only because the emotion is not to be publicized, but because it is not appropriate or prudent to do so, less still it is to download their any inconvenience on others, in a very special way when - like the writer of these lines -, He has called for the sacrament of grace and mission to be guides and teachers, not sowers of confusion. But when the discomfort is objective, because based on public facts, often painful or even dangerous, in that case, manifest discomfort, It can be an imperative following awareness obligation to explain what is right and what wrong, if anything, even preaching to that slice of the People of God made slothful by bad shepherds to feel discomfort and pain before certain grave problems affecting society and the Church. All this with all due respect to those who try to eliminate certain problems at the root saying: "Nobody has the truth in your pocket". Phrase that said and then read in a certain way consequently leads to say that at the bottom, the truth, it is questionable, but above all relative. If anything, it is true that no one owns the truth, of which we are called to be faithful servants and announcers, or as St. Thomas Aquinas: "You're not you who possess the truth, but it is the truth that has you " [cf. Of the truth]. For this reason, wriggling from certain discussions or answers with ambiguous phrase "No one has the truth in your pocket", statement is false and dangerous in itself, place the Church, which is a, santa, catholic and apostolic, the truth is the trustee and custodian, so that, far from having in his pocket, have it still in custody by the will and divine mandate. And we, that we are certainly not its masters, But we are his faithful servants, guardians and announcers. So, who announced this truth and defends it from error, It is not acting in this way because with style Pelagian O legalistic He believed to have in your pocket, but precisely because it must serve, defend it and proclaim it. No one who is true guardian and herald of truth may omit to specify and order the error, why in the world, with the truth, there is also the anti-truth that wants to impose on the truth, often so violent and destructive, but mostly untrue.

THOSE IN QUESTION AND LAY unconscious EVERYTHING REDUCED FOR A CLASH OF THE PARTY AND THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF progressives

The ongoing controversy unleashed these days the German Episcopate on giving Holy Communion to Protestants, It is a delicacy beyond any ordinary, because once again, these indomitable and irreconcilable barbarians, touch on beyond Rome and above Roma heart engine that drives the whole Mystical Body which is the Church: the Most Holy Eucharist. And before this problem, all of the theological and ecclesiological, as well as canonical and disciplinary, i laiconi floundering between an online journal and between a blog and the other, They are reducing their style as the whole issue to a political conflict.

Aware of speaking to that effect to the deaf, I repeat that certain major issues are theological and doctrinal, then face them with the typical spirit of the political tussle, eventually reducing everything to a struggle between the so-called party of the conservatives and the progressives, It can only encourage the de-consecration of the sacramental signs and reduce the Church of Christ to a battlefield on which collide animated subjective moods at the base by pure ideology, not rarely even by personal problems of certain people who would need a good spiritual director, of a good confessor, but sometimes certain of a good psychiatrist.

This inevitably leads to some lay people who stood on his head the tiara placed by the Supreme Pontiffs, to cause further damage to the Church and to the People of God, never as lost and confused today.

GREAT DECEPTION THAT ALL PLAYED BY PARA-COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL ON POST-A LANGUAGE NOT JUST HAPPY ADOPTED BY THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL

briefly summarize the overrun problem German then proceed with the analysis of the fact: The German Bishops' Conference discussed the possibility of giving Holy Communion to married Protestants with Catholics, adopting in this sense, the technique of the so-called "sliced salami". Indeed, each time in the Church were granted limited special pardons and as many limited permissions to experiment, these concessions were then adopted practices, almost always it spreads beyond all limits of what had been granted. A concrete example of the many that serve as a paradigm? Soon said: the liturgical reform etched in Holy Council [cf. text WHO]. Please read this carefully and then make an evaluation: which are written, indicated and granted all liturgical aberrations, many of which are flush with the sacrilege of the Holy Eucharist, who for four decades we've made in many of our churches to the nefarious work of an army of exotic creative priests? In the text there is no trace, let alone legitimacy of the worst now institutionalized liturgical abuses in the fearful silence of the bishops who do not ensure, They do not prohibit and not awarded on the proponents of certain aberrations; if anything, they take strong dislike and make life bitter for those few priests who dare complain as this is not good and what is the duty of bishops oversee and stamp out certain practices in the clergy. Therefore, if the text of that reform does not permit grants what is now plain for all in many of our churches, where does the problem, or rather the catch? Arises from the fact that the documents of Vatican II - as I explained more times [cf. per es. WHO] - use a new language, which affected, for the strong influence exerted by the Teutonic theologians, the typical style of German Romanticism decadent. To this is then added the optimism of Pope John XXIII, convinced that we must not always judge and condemn, but rather talk. Through this set of things we can finally reach the documents that express profound concepts, valid and useful, together with urgent and necessary reforms such as Holy Council, but omitting to clarify through the precise standards that what is right and what is wrong, What is allowed and what is prohibited, if anything, even adding fines and penalties for offenders, the so-called "Anathema sit», often it used in documents of previous councils, who have not been any less of councils meta-council Vatican II, even if in the opinion of the whole foolhardy many theologians, with this last session of the Council seems finally to be born suddenly, after two thousand years of history, the Catholic Church.

The certainty and clarity of the doctrine and canon law, It is not only protecting the deposit of faith, of truth and thus the doctrine itself, but also valuable protection for ministers of the sacred ed i believers of Christ, in order to avoid those kinds of injustices and abuses that almost always take life by the poor lack of clarity. In fact, when we hear the "revolutionary" cry "enough of this legalism, with this doctrinal hardness, with this "cult" of canon law!», always it ends up failing both the certainty of the law also erected to protect the members of the Body of the Church, is the clear doctrinal definition of what is lawful and unlawful, right and wrong, what is the truth and against what the other hand is false and erroneous. A quel point, when the lack of clarity leaves room for ambiguity, here is i ministers of the sacred on the one hand and believers of Christ on the other hand, they will end up becoming victims suffering of the free will of those who can make the biggest voice and impose itself despotically.

WHERE CAN REACH THE SIN OF MURDERERS Catholic Faith;? UP TO beatify and canonize I POPES IN THEMSELVES HAVE DESTROYED THE TEACHINGS

The capocomici of this terrible theater had among other things need to beatify and canonize then all the Popes of the post-conciliar. But beware well: not because nothing interests them the elevation of these Pontiffs to the altar glories, but because through them they wanted dogmatise and finally canonizing the para-council and then the post-council. And all this they did it with a spirit evil delinquent, because the same people who wanted at all costs Blessed and Saints these Popes, are also the same people who are questioning the Humane Vitae imminent Holy Paul VI; They are the same who have destroyed over the past five years the teaching of St. John Paul II, not hesitating to define the Familiar Consortium as a document dated, passed, but above all the result of sexual phobia inherent in the moral rigor of the Supreme Pontiff. but yet, just how much of what they believe, teaching and acting accordingly, but especially undermining and destroying the teaching of these blesseds and saints Popes, They wanted at all costs to canonize John Paul II in record time, instead of waiting for him as for his other predecessors, as prudence of the Church he imposed once, Thirty years after death, before opening a long process, finally reaching, no earlier than half a century after their death, the first stage of their beatification.

It is thus clear to what kind of dangerous and destructive criminals we ended up in the hands? It is therefore clear how, these dangerous and destructive criminals, They are wreaking serious damage in the Church, favoring the worst decadence and self-destruction inside, after replacing the clear language and certainly with the "poetic hope", Finally replacing the much-despised "harsh and strict law", with their staff and free will tyrannical?

It was old overall context of fifty this weak language, uncertain, apparently permissive and open to all the disparate hypotheses, you have to read the recent case of the German Bishops, but staging political clashes between the party and the conservative party of progressives, as do the so-called lay people engaged who are put at the head of the tiara deposed Popes.

All this is at the so-called "salami technique", of which it is granted a slice, but later, a slice behind the other, It is sliced and taken everything. The same goes for the repeated proposal farfetched which presses on one of the greatest destroyers of the Church of Brazil and as such a major contributor of uncontrollable bleeding of his faithful, Cardinal Claudio Hummes, pressing to have - obviously to experiment ― i sources try married ordained priests for the region of the Amazon where there is the greatest shortage of clergy. I say then, hypothetically: we allow the well 'experiment, only to see at a glance how the Amazons will also become Belgium, Holland, in Germany, France and so to follow.

BISHOPS OF GERMANY HAVE DISCUSSED ON THIS ON WHICH THERE IS NO REASON TO DISCUSS YOUR OWN, WHILE THE CARDINAL REINHARD MARX PLAYING AT Vestal Virgin

Of the twenty-seven members who make up the Episcopal Conference of Germany, plus the Exarchate Professor of Germany and Scandinavia and the Military Ordinariate, for a total of twenty-nine diocesan bishops, who are joined by a total of forty-one auxiliary bishops assigned to the holders of episcopal chairs of these twenty-seven dioceses, seven diocesan bishops in total have sent a letter to the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, S. AND. Mons. Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, and the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, His Em.za Cardinal Kurt Koch. The signatories to the question are sent to Rome His Em.za Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki, Archbishop of Cologne [cf. WHO], followed by Their Excellencies Rev.me Ludwig Schick, Archbishop of Bamberg [cf. WHO]; Konrad Zdarsa, Bishop of Augsburg [cf. WHO]; Gregor Maria Hanke, Bishop of Eichstatt [cf. WHO]; Stephen Oster, Bishop of Passau [cf. WHO]; Rudolf Voderholzer, Bishop of Regensburg [cf. WHO]; Wolfgang Ipolt, Bishop of Görlitz [cf. WHO].

The request for clarification addressed to Rome by seven bishops concerns an exemplary question: "Such a decision, It could be addressed by a single episcopal conference?». The answer, which it is neither a journalist nor be confined to disputes between secular party, it is easier than you just imagine. Indeed, seven bishops that the question they put, the answer to the same question are very familiar: a single episcopal conference, such an argument can not even dare to face him. What this escaped to all journalists and all lay with the tiara on his head that dipped in fish to comment on this story from them reduced to succulent "party struggle".

A quel point, His Em.za Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Monaco of Bavaria and President of the Episcopal Conference of Germany, lowering himself in the role of vestal virgin - role that however well poorly suited to its physical shape, which attracts more an obese brewer Bavaria instead of a Prince of the Church -, even dares to argue the 4 April in these terms: "I'm surprised by the initiative [no. Seven German bishops], because the pastoral resource discussed in February by the Assembly of Bishops of Germany was only a draft and not a final text ».

The answer, for many who unfortunately have not understood or understood, other socket instead perhaps even for good, It should be read in three optical delicate linked to the foundations of ecclesiology, the foundations of dogmatic sacramental, to the fundamentals of canon law. And based on these three foundations, the reckless Vestal Virgin Bavarian should know that they had not even dare, to discuss such a thing, all the more so if they wished then change it into an eventual indecent Proposal addressed to the Holy See, if not worse, in a real ratification of the Episcopate of Germany, which before due to Martin Luther, Then centuries later because of the para-conciliar and post-conciliar, it is not always clear that they are Catholics only insofar as they are with Rome and especially in Rome. And these days, to speak to certain vestal virgins Teutonic concept of "Rome" and especially "in Rome», You run the risk of blowing away the dust from their surface to immediately emerge the Lutheran romanofobo hiding under.

The Vestal Virgin Bavarian, It should first of all know that for the Bishops gathered in the assembly is not permissible to discuss - to give a concrete example - the legitimacy of women's ordination, because a similar theme can not be discussed, it is a topic that has been closed once and for all through a precise document [cf. Priestly ordination, text WHO] which is expressed so definitive, What this implies that recourse to the second degree of the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, which it is expressed by means of three different grades, so both defining is definitive [cf. To protect the faith, § 2, text WHO]. Just as we can not argue on the possible legitimacy of abortion in certain special cases and restricted, equally applies to euthanasia, for adultery lawful and so to follow. Always to make some concrete examples: the bishops of any national conference can come together to discuss whether it is appropriate or not to join in marriage of same-sex couples, because the discussion has not really any reason to exist, because there is nothing to discuss. As it is not lawful to discuss whether the case would be better to reformulate the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary or of her Assumption into heaven in body and soul, because those who formulated those dogmas, He has formulated them well; and dogmatizzando these two mysteries of faith, It closed any possible future discussion, even for the restless German episcopate and large insidiatisi German experts like a cancer in the Second Vatican Council, within which, not having been able to play on the substance of the doctrines, They played on language style. And at the moment no one noticed, nobody understood the ambivalent language and not decided, where on the one hand and the other urges are not threatening to those who transgress it, would be a great gateway to the great de-future construction generated an unprecedented chaos, based on the destruction of the legitimate apostolic authority and the imposition in place of the authoritarianism of the flag theologians and laity with the tiara on his head.

And by the way that certain lay which it is not quite clear on their role within the Church, They are born to those movements that right under the eyes of the Blessed Paul VI and St. John Paul II have ended up giving life to real churches within the Church, complete with their own liturgies and catechisms, spreading wrong idea heretical and often based on non slight confusion they are doing on the common priesthood of the faithful acquired in Baptism, and the ministerial priesthood acquired the Sacred Order; and here I refer to the Neocatechumenal. To say nothing of the pneumatology of certain self-elettisi lay personal delegates of the Holy Spirit, which it is not easy to clarify that charisms bestowed by divine grace, They are such only if recognized and regulated mainly by the Church, then practiced in the Church, for the Church and under the watchful eye of the Church; and here I refer to certain fringes of the charismatic and the Renewal in the Holy Spirit. All this has produced in the Church that very well explained at the time the Venerable Pope Benedict XVI, lamenting the "clericalization of the laity and the secularization of the clergy". Well, Perhaps these were the expected results and desired by the Second Vatican Council that addressed the discourse on the mission of the laity in the Church? If we read the decree on the laity in the Church, between its rows there will find nothing that can justify only distantly certain follies put standing by Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez or by certain charismatic fringes [cf. Apostolate, text WHO]. Where do, so, certi “monsters”? Soon said: the para-conciliar and post-conciliar of the great “interpreters” e “actuators”. Needless to say, if at the beginning of his pontificate, Saint John Paul II, towards these phenomena degenerative state for the last decade, It used the same clarity and severity used towards those who favored the distribution of contraceptives in the countries of the African continent, we would never come after fifty years to the current situation today to the out of control, with ever higher numbers of pastors who ask the bishops to be removed from parishes where lay groups they have completely occupied for decades the scene, imposing on priests liturgical directives, catechetical and pastoral, except make his life a living hell if they dare raise objections; and the fierce and terrible are women, also said the priestesses. All this with no little certain aggravating: under Pope St. John Paul II, these movements was even allowed to open seminars and training future priests, which generally are not the priests the bishop, but the priests of the movement, formed according to the criteria of the movement, often formed even by the laity, and obedient in fact not the bishop, but the movement.

Eh, There had occupied a little 'less of condoms and a little 'more than was triggered degenerative level within the Church!

PLAY ON SEMANTIC NUANCE IS AN OLD TECHNIQUE OF GERMAN THAT HAS GONE BIG AND SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH

Had it not been for some careful theologians, including Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, It would be passed with subtle semantic nuances so-called "wild collegiality" in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church The light, in open break with all previous magisterium and the tradition of the Church, thus changing Pietro, holder by divine mandate an absolute record, in a first among equals [the first among their own peer]. Discovered the time to catch, in the text of The light the numbers were well placed 22-24. Afterwards, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, to n. 883 fu printed: "The college or body of bishops has no authority, if it is not united with the Roman Pontiff […] as its head "As such, this college "is also the subject of supreme and full power over the whole Church: this power can not be exercised without the consent of the Roman Pontiff ".

All that was concocted during the para-council, though never assimilated and ratified by the Vatican Council II, has been realized, however, in the large "interpreters" post-council and "actuators", including the claim to exercise a "wild collegiality" in open defiance to all the previous magisterium, the tradition of the Church, and to the teaching of the same Vatican II.

Cardinal Reinhard Marx, It has therefore clear in itself the Eucharistic mystery and the Eucharist as the "core of the mystery of the Church"? [cf. Church of the Eucharist, text WHO]. The teaching of the acts are in fact clear in affirming: "The Eucharist objectively creates a powerful bond of unity between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches, which they have preserved the authentic and integral nature of the eucharistic mystery. At the same time, the emphasis on the ecclesial character of the Eucharist can become an important element also in dialogue with the Communities of the Reformation " [cf. The Sacrament of Charity, text WHO]. Well, reading these words, what will the Cardinal Reinhard Marx? Can you grasp that while those Orthodox are referred to as "Churches" separate, aggregations born from Lutheran schism are referred to as 'Community'? It is clear to Cardinal Reinhard Marx of difference for us Catholics that runs between Orthodox and Protestants? The Orthodox, separatisi from Rome for the "shape" of and a son inserted in the symbol of faith of Nicea-Constantinople, They enjoy apostolic succession and profess the substance of our faith, beyond different rites in their outer shape and accidental beyond various "shades". The Protestants, that preserve within itself a definite Christian heritage, They are not separated from us by external accidental or the "nuances", but so they are the deep substance of the sacraments and the very way of conceiving the Church, to read and to announce the Holy Gospel. Moreover, the Protestants, do not recognize the primacy of Peter over the universal Church and its full and absolute power, do not recognize the Ministerial Priesthood, do not recognize the transubstantiation and the real presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. Or maybe you think, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, that all these are only semantic nuances? But if the Presiding Bishop of Germany has some gaps, then, instead of wasting time and perhaps even the Catholic faith in some theological faculties of Germany, could always visit one of our brave missionary sisters that with a few, short and simple words prepare children for First Communion in the most remote villages in Africa; and transmit the purity of the faith to believers of Christ certainly much better than some bloated doctors disaster of German theological faculties.

In the Holy Eucharist we are called to be perfect in the unit [cf. GV 17, 20-26], not in the fragmentary diversity of multiple pseudo-churches, because the Word of God founded only one true Church entrusted to Peter, assisted by the College of the Apostles [cf. Mt 13, 16-20]. Furthermore, I understand that in Germany you recite in the Profession of Faith: « … the one, saint, catholic and apostolic church». And in German, if I'm not mistaken "the one'Followed to mean "one", "single", "Unique". This is to remember that Martin Luther destroyer of unity and communion, He was not scheduled yesterday and can not become an emblem of the "good reform" even today. Therefore, though some of his followers married to a Catholic spouse yearn to receive the Holy Eucharist, It must first be clear what is essentially and actually the Eucharist, then they have to undertake a proper catechesis, Finally abandoning errors heresiarch Luther and his followers and enter with a sincere act of faith in the Catholic communion. Only then, They can receive the Holy Eucharist, We remember that it is a free gift like all thanksgivings, it's not a “political right”.

perhaps it needed a priest and Italian theologian to remind members of the German episcopate filled with doctorates, and at the same level from clinically affected anthropological Overall Genius and the complex of the culturally superior race, what are the basic rudiments of the Catechism of the Catholic Church that in fact they have been shown not to know the substance of their talk and act?

HOW DO I TELL EYEWITNESS: GERMAN BISHOPS HAVE TRIED TO formalize WHAT ARE LONG TIME IN TOTAL contempt AT THE CHURCH TEACHINGS AND TO READ CANONICAL

In the past I stayed for several months in Germany and for some time in the Archdiocese of Monaco of Bavaria, already straight at the time Archbishop Reinhard Marx, created Cardinal then a few years later by Pope Benedict XVI. They are therefore an eyewitness of all their abhorrent abuses, to which I attended and which many times I refused to participate. Then I will offer a few examples, which is already reported in my book 2011 in the process of reprinting. Let's start from the Eucharist: in total disregard to what has clearly the Education Redmptionis mystery [cf. text WHO], at the Abbey of Sankt Bonifaz where I was staying, in the heart of the Bavarian capital, I was shocked to see people who were taking the Eucharist with their own hands and dipped in the chalice of the Precious Blood of Christ, unconcerned that here in the document cited, to n. 104 It is imposed: "The host into the chalice Do not allow yourself to communicating intinct itself". Also in the church of this abbey, I saw a woman, after the Holy Communion of the faithful, altar to purify the sacred vessels and a lay lay the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle, while the concelebrants were sitting on the presbytery. It's still: i have seen, churches in the archdiocese of Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Women who actually held the functions of the deacon, I saw lay proclaiming the Holy Gospel during Mass, and once, during a concelebration, after a layman had proclaimed the Gospel, I saw him get on the presbytery, a woman dressed in a strange black robe that begins to make the homily. When the brother sitting next to me, murmurs: "But who is this ... what does?». He answered me: "It's a bishop Lutheran, every so often we do these ecumenical exchanges ». At that point I stood up, I took off my neck Stole, I laid it on the chair and left way before the whole assembly ". then when, after Mass, the other priests asked why the foreign priest had gone away, they replied: "Ah, never mind, it's a Roman priest, people closed!».

Not being able to submit to certain abuses, because where I was visiting was not allowed to celebrate Mass in private in some chapel, because I had to be the obligation of concelebrations coerced and put up with all their worst abuses, through the good offices of two elderly Jesuits in Rome, I went at the Faculty of Philosophy of the Jesuits of Monaco of Bavaria where I placed at the disposal one of their several chapels to celebrate Mass.

One of my main problems It was also and above all tied to the Most Holy Eucharist, because it was widespread use in the Bavarian parishes that Protestants, spouses or companions divorced united in a second marriage to the Catholic, They went quietly to receive Communion. All this is to clarify, that Roma specializes in pretending not to know and not to know, that Cardinal Reinhard Marx and the assembly of the German Bishops, except for seven that raised a question to the Holy See, they simply tried to "ratify" and then to "legalize" and "formalize" what is in fact already do for many years. All this while Roma continue to pretend not to know and not to know, committed as it is today to speak only of two basic mysteries of faith: refugees and migrants.

PETER WASHES HANDS AS SAYING Pontius Pilate: "TRY TO BE PLACED BETWEEN YOU AGREE"

And so, early May, a delegation of the German Bishops It met with S.It is. Mons. Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The delegation was composed by Their Eminence Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Monaco of Bavaria and chairman of the German Bishops' Conference, Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki, Archbishop of Cologne, Their Excellencies Rev.me Felix Genn, Bishop of Münster, Karl-Heinz Wiesemann, Bishop of Speyer, Rudolf Voderholzer, Bishop of Regensburg, Gerhard Feige, Bishop of Magdeburg, Father Hans Langendoerfer S.J. in his capacity as Secretary of the Episcopal Conference of Germany.

This meeting ended in a stalemate redolent indecency, through which we understand to what extent under this pontificate Rome is no longer the heart of the Church Mater et Magistra, but only a bored and helpless spectator. Indeed, the Supreme Pontiff Francis I, far from giving or to give an answer on an issue that touches the heart of the Church and the center of its unity, He did respond to appreciate "the ecumenical commitment of the German bishops and asks them to find, in a spirit of ecclesial communion, an outcome possibly unanimously ' [cf. WHO, WHO]. In short, he sent them home after having told him in clear substance: "You try to agree among yourselves unanimously" (!?).

Needless to ask a question, although unfortunately I must put it: If the Bishops of Germany they had been at odds over key issues that haunt this pontificate, namely refugees and migrants, the Supreme Pontiff, He has been slow to give a clear and precise answer, if anything, well seasoned with one of his sour jokes against those he said variously "hard-hearted"?

I think that in two millennia, we can not afford "the luxury" to respond to Jesus Christ with the same question of Pontius Pilate:

«[…]”I came into the world: to testify to the truth. Who belongs to the truth listens to my voice”. Pilate says to Jesus: “And what is the truth?”» [GV 18, 37-38].

While the house is burning and everything collapses, while the lay people who have worn the tiara placed on their heads by the Supreme Pontiffs and while several journalists improvvisatisi ecclesiologists, theologians and canonists, reduce everything to a clash between the party and the conservative party of progressives, We take note that the Successor of Peter, just like Pontius Pilate, after being asked "but what is truth?», He responded to the bishops of Germany telling them: «And now, Try to make arrangements between you unanimously " (!?).

If the Bishops of Germany, unanimously They should agree to give Holy Communion to Protestants, what will happen tomorrow, if another episcopal conference, equally unanimous, decide to unite in marriage same-sex couples? What will happen if another, unanimously, decide that it is permissible to abort the fetus of a baby found suffering from malformation, not considering it right to give birth to a creature affected by imperfections? What will happen if another, unanimously, It decides that it is an authentic act of charity to end the life of a terminally ill and suffering that has no life expectancy? Since when, unanimity, It is a guarantee of sound doctrine and profound respect to revealed truth? These are the questions that, S. AND. Mons. Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, who spoke on behalf of the Pope to the delegation of German Bishops, It should respond to all of us; and it should do it right in his capacity as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, knowing that in the fourth century, the majority of the bishops, They had accepted the Arian heresy. Come May, in that case, an absolute majority did not constitute any guarantee of truth in deference to the mystery of Revelation? there, This it must explain the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

These are the facts, it is not humoral opinions dictated by some kind of sympathy instincts, dislike or closing worse reasoning. And before the matter of objective fact, It consists of Peter who washes his hands like Pilate, I have no more to own more, because I know better than to say the least, but especially, and especially when it comes to Peter, It avoids above all, to say more than they should.

From the island of Patmos, 5 May 2018

A prankster Vatican postage stamp to send a letter on the question of ecumenical Mass

12 February 2018/4 Comments/in Theologica/by Father Giovanni

— Theologica —

A STAMP VATICAN JOKER TO SEND AN MISSIVA THE QUESTION OF ECUMENICAL MASS

It is therefore necessary that the Church rejects the false ecumenism, of which we have here traced the contours, and instead of leading the separated brethren to the unit Cattolica, risks turning and grinding Catholic unity around Christ in a messy and chaotic jumble of separated brethren under the "prince of this world"

Author
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p.

PDF print format article
.

Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p. pleasant uses this stamp to send the letter below … [see in Vatican Post, WHO]

The so-called ecumenical church, which we have been hearing about for some time, it is not clear expression, because it is not always clear whether it refers to a Mass compatible with ecumenism or a facile ritual, syncretistic, confusing and equivocal, thereby disabling same, illicit and wicked, that under the pretext of ecumenism, auspichi hybrid concelebration between Catholics and Lutherans.

The issue is very delicate, because the Mass is and realizes the summit of ecclesial communion, and the source and summit of the Christian life, to express ourselves with the Vatican Council II. And for this it is necessary that the celebrants, the concelebrants and the faithful who participate are in full communion with the Church, fully accepting the doctrine and the moral and legal discipline of the Catholic Church, something that many non-Catholic Christian brothers, in particular the Lutherans, of which we are concerned here now, They are still far from accepting. Indeed, the Second Vatican Council, in reforming the rite of Holy Mass, It gives it a ecumenical cut: without naturally suppress the sacrificial aspect. Then the Mass new world order It presents certain aspects, absent in the old order, that emphasize and resume the own aspects of the Lord's Supper Luther, as the convivial aspect: today we speak fluently of the "Eucharistic banquet" or the "Eucharistic syntax", as a memorial of the Last Supper.

Anyway, the understanding ecumenical church in the first of the meaning mentioned above, What it is completely legitimate and may well express just what the Council intended to do with the liturgical reform: close as possible to the new rite in what is valid in the Lutheran Lord's Supper. Indeed, the Council, in reforming the rite of Mass, It gives to it an ecumenical cutting: without naturally suppress the sacrificial aspect. But more than that the Council could not agree to Lutherans, without betraying the essential meaning of the Mass. Now it's up to the Lutherans approach the Catholic Mass, assuming those elements desired by Christ, Luther in his time left, believing to reform, when in fact only deformed.

The second conception of ecumenical Mass, instead, is that desired by the pro-Lutheran modernists, such as Andrea Grillo, which recently, denying in the Munera magazine that transubstantiation is a dogma [1], It claims that the Catholic and the Lutheran interpretation are two different possible interpretations and legitimate Eucharist, but neither can claim to be the only real condemning the other [see article, WHO], which he made it followed in a second clarification, WHO]. It is the classic method of the modernists, steeped in opportunism and duplicity, that, in the name of pluralism or ofupdating, in reference to a given step or judgment of Scripture, alongside the Catholic interpretation to another heretical, moreover, giving preference to this, while the other is called "outdated".

The Catholic-Lutheran Press

This important topic it emerges from Joint statement of the Lutheran World Federation and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity at the end of the year the Common Commemoration of the Reformation, the 31 October 2017. In it it is covertly expressed the wish that Catholics and Lutherans can celebrate together the Eucharist, overcoming existing divisions. It states: "With an eye toward the future, we are committed to continue our common journey, led by the Spirit of God, towards the growing unity desired by our Lord Jesus Christ. With the help of God and in a spirit of prayer, we intend to discern our interpretation of Church, Eucharist and Ministry, striving to achieve a substantial consensus in order to overcome the differences that are still a source of division between us ".

And how to "overcome differences still dividing sources»? The Council's Decree Reintegratio it clearly says: it is necessary that we Catholics, under the guidance of the Pope, father common Christian, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, we help brothers Lutherans to take away those "obstacles" and "gaps", I'm still hinder full communion with the Catholic Church, so that they "are fully embedded" in it [n.3].

As for the program to "discern our interpretation of Church, Eucharist and Ministry, striving to achieve a substantial consensus ", in it are touched three points of the utmost importance, concerning the ultimate goal of ecumenism, as it is apparent from'reintegration of unity': that the Church, in her maternal care, by means of his ministers, calling all to submit to the sweet yoke of Christ, can get, with a patient, tireless and wise educational work, stimulating and corrective, assisted by the Holy Spirit and led by the Pope, who calls everyone to the fullness of Christian life, that those brethren who are not yet in full communion with her or have strayed, reach or come back to the fullness of communion, in the common celebration of the Eucharist and fraternal, gradually freeing himself from all obstacles and impediments that hinder the achievement of the noble goal.

The Church must be able to present to the Lutherans with an attractive face, so that they feel they have enticed to enter into it in that full communion which still they lack, because it achieves better than their ideals evangelical, that while they pursue, and it is free from those problems from which are afflicted. If we Catholics show pliable towards their flaws and almost admired them to, Lutherans will feel of the samples of Christianity, think of being on the side of reason and will refrain dall'accostarsi in Rome.

Undoubtedly Luther maintains the concept of Church, though at that time (church) prefers to "community" (community). They, at the beginning, when it was still a Catholic, He not aimed at breaking with the Church, but reform it; and some of his idea was too good. It is at the time of rupture with the Roman Pontiff, head of the Church, he fell into a wrong idea of the Church, believing to reform it, so always he thought they had found the true essence of the Church, deformed, according to him, from the papacy, while the real de-trainer was him.

However, he retained some genuine elements of the Church. Thus the Church was for him the community of the baptized, in which he preaches the Gospel and administer the sacraments. It is the people of God led by Christ and the Holy Spirit. However, the ministers are not priests, but shepherds, employees to the cult and the leader of the community, and theologians-exegetes, masters of Sacred Scripture.

No apostolic succession and no ecclesiastical hierarchy, so no Papacy. Issues to be addressed, At that time, as mentions Press, It is the essence of ministry, which involves the concept of Church, because the essential difference between the Catholic concept of the Church and the Lutheran, It is precisely the fact that Lutheran ecclesiology lacks the priestly ministry, replaced by a purely functional office teacher, overseer or president Assemblyman, no weirdness; but this is a very serious gap, because there is no concept of a sacrament, missing the Magisterium and lacks the universal government of the Church, ie the papacy.

The misconception Lutheran sacrament, which rejects the nature of grace channel - ex-works operated ―, but he sees only as a visible sign of this grace, brings with it the defects and misery if not the squalor of the cult and the absence of sanctification and spiritual progress; the absence of teaching carries with it the uncertainty and doctrinal relativism, the ethical and doctrinal disorder, and the lack of apologetics and missionary momentum; the lack of the papacy, principle of moderation, Unit, harmony and plurality and true ecclesial development, It produces a systematic conflict intra-ecclesial, the violence of controversy, the opposite extremes, the mania of change and the intolerance for tradition, the proliferation of sects and dependence on political power.

But the most profound contrast between the Catholic and the Lutheran ecclesiology It has its source first in the contrast on the concept of the Eucharist, and then in Lutheran denial of the mystery of transubstantiation. Because of this denial the Lutheran Community is reduced to nothing more than a simple disciples of Christ now. Instead, the true Church is supernatural communion of persons, which originates, climax, foundation and raison d'être from the Eucharistic communion and the Eucharistic celebration. ln this sense, the Church is the Mystical Body of Christ. It is significant that Luther is entirely missing the ecclesiology of the Mystical Body.

The Catholic Mass and the Lutheran Dinner

For us Catholics, the Mass is not only a memorial, but also sacrifice. This aspect is missing in the Lutheran Dinner, because Luther refused to connect the Dinner with the Sacrifice of the Cross, because it thought that this was sufficient for the remission of sins, without adding human works, which he was believed to be the Mass.

We Catholics have always responded to the Lutherans that the Mass that Christ has commanded us to celebrate - "do this in memory of Me" -, It does not pretend to add absolutely nothing to the infinite value and more than enough of the sacrifice of the Lord, because it would be really, as Luther believes, absurdity and impiety, but is only a sacramental participation, willed by Christ Himself, its unique divine Sacrifice, which extends and applies the strength and effectiveness in space and time, until the end of time. But unfortunately that ear Lutherans do not feel there.

However, it is comforting to the common faith of Catholics with Lutherans in this memorial of the Lord's Supper occurs mystically, but really the active presence and comforting the crucified and risen Christ and his Spirit in the community formed by the priestly people, in which the minister who presides at the celebration, after reading and discussion of the Word, which confirms the divine promises and feeds the hope, repeating the words of the Lord, He recognizes together with the community and the active presence of the Spirit communities, of grace, forgiveness and mercy of God for his people in prayer and on the way to the resurrection.

However, Lutheran denial the memorial of the Supper is also priestly sacrifice, riattualizzante so the bloodless sacrifice of the Cross for the remission of sins and the purchase of eternal life, It is a serious disobedience and exception to the will of Christ, why in the Supper Christ instituted the priesthood just as the power to say Mass, ie Transcendent bread into the body and the wine into blood, precisely to offer them in sacrifice to the Father, in order to compensate for the offense of sin and obtain mercy.

It is clear then that priesthood, Mass and transubstantiation a sin offering and reconciliation, They are an inseparable plexus and logically related values, for which the refusal or at least insufficient loyalty that Luther has opposite thereto have meant that on these important points he has reformed, but destroyed.

The interpretation of the words of the Lord

The fact the Real Presence, it is true that Luther admits, also strongly against the symbolism of Zwingli and Calvin, but it not fully intends to mean that Christ wanted. This presence is in fact not only spiritual, but also substantial and material, because a human body is composed of matter. Now there is the Eucharist real body of the Lord, in substance so. And the bodily substance is material, although certainly not the exact same matter of the body of Jesus in heaven, but it is a way to be the subject.

This presence among us, mysterious but real, the subject of Christ's Eucharistic Body, It is saved in the dogma of transubstantiation, Why, in the words of consecration, the substance of the bread is changed into the body of the substance of the Lord. Whereby, when we do the Communion, we really "eat his flesh", matter of his real body, combined with the divinity of the Lord. Here it is appropriate to talk, in the words of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, the "holy matter", material saving, eschatological and immortal, what will be one of our resurrected body. Here then is the saying of St. Augustine: «Blinded thee? Dear you leveler». And Santa Caterina: "" My lips are red of the same blood of Christ ".

Instead, in "impanation» Lutheran, that is, "Christ in the bread ', or as well as is usually called, "Consustanziazione", ie the substance of the bread along with the substance of Christ's body, You do not see how it can save the sense of the term neutral "this" [hoc, tuto] for "this is my body", which clearly indicates one substance, or transubstantiation in progress, the time in which it is taking place, ie the transition from the substance of the bread to the substance of the body. At the end of the process transustanziatorio, the altar there is no more bread, but there is one body of Jesus. If it were true instead the thesis of Luther, Jesus would have to say: "I'm coming into this bread".

To say that Christ is in the bread, albeit with his grace in celebrating community, says nothing special, but simply sets out the principle of natural theology that God is in all things and in all souls in grace, although not involved in the Supper or Mass. To say that it is a special presence in the bread in the wine is still not enough, as we have seen, to explain the words of the Lord.

Of course, after the consecration we continue to see or to feel physically sensitive aspects of the bread and wine, those who are called in philosophy damn it and liturgy are called species. But we know by faith in Christ's words that, after the consecration, what appears bread, It is not bread. It's not that, properly, the senses are deceived: they see objectively true damn it.

It is our reason that, used to know that under the accidents of bread is the bread, alone, if it was not informed by faith, It would never imagine that it can happen that the accidents exist without their substance, metaphysically though it is not impossible, because among them there is a real distinction and thus separability, so in this case, by itself, although substance and accidents make up a single thing, one can exist without the other, although they still need an ontological support, replacing their natural substance, and in the case of the Eucharist, God Himself, That being miraculously supports the Eucharistic species, until their corruption, when Christ's presence is less and returns the substance, but once this corrupt, some bread.

Another interpretation of the words of Christ, which perhaps it could be traced Lutheran, But this absurd time, is the following: "I am the bread". In reality, We can not preach a substance to another substance. I can not say: "Paul is Peter", no. Paul is Paul and Peter is Peter. The substance or the person can not be preached, but it is only one subject.

The thesis Manuel Belli and Father Timothy Radcliffe

We discuss now a recent interpretation of the Eucharist proposed by Manuel Belli, the guest 17 Last January in the journal by Andrea Grillo gifts. Belli summarizes his remarks into three themes: the eucharist connection with the embodiment, the one with the meal and the one with sexuality [see article, WHO].

In the first consideration Belli supports the view that after the consecration the bread is no longer bread, but the body of the Lord, He thought it would be a "semi-magic". Instead, According to him, as Calvino, the bread remains bread, and it becomes only a "symbol" of the Lord's Body. Vice versa, It must say firmly that the believer's assume that after the consecration the bread is no longer bread, but the body of the Lord, It is not "magical thinking", but it is the substance of the Eucharistic faith.

considerations semi-magical They would be supposed from what Belli is to say to the believer. Says Belli:

"The Catholic tradition uses the" transubstantiation "to express the notion that the bread and wine are no longer such, but they have become the body and blood of the Lord. But we would like to stick to a level of observation: it is not difficult wrecked in semi-magical considerations: "The priest says this is my body; I do not see no body and no touch but only the bread and wine; let us take it for good!».

I note that here confuses Belli first of all the believer col unbeliever. Here he probably believed to express the consideration of the believer. In reality it is what sees the non-believer. In fact, the believer says: I see the accidents of bread and wine, but I do not see the substance, because I know that in those accidents there is the body of the substance and the blood of the Lord.

Secondly Belli, in addition to denying Here the mystery of transubstantiation, confuses wickedly and profanely the miraculous operation produced by the words of the consecration with a magical operation, demonstrating a horrible confusion between the divine action of transubstantiation and the magical operation, which it is a miracle - this second - which is the case with the Demon competition. Indeed, which it consists in the miracle of transubstantiation? In fact that God, in order to nourish the souls of grace food, He does exist the accidents of bread and wine without their substance, something quite superior to the natural law, he wants that accidents are always soggettati in their substance. Vice versa, the magical operation, which in itself is a mortal sin of superstition, consists in the fact that the wizard, by means of an implicit or explicit pact with the Devil, It operates prodigious effects, but in the natural accounts, using secret laws of nature, in order to damage the next. If true the Eucharistic consecration what it says Belli, Mass would not be true Mass, but satanic ritual.

Is not it, says Belli that, before or after the consecration, "Senses see only bread and wine" ". It is not so. Not the senses, but the intellect sees and understands the substance of things; the senses feel only the accidents of bread and wine. It is true that if the senses warn me of the bread and wine accidents, Normally I expect my intellect will grasp the substance. But in the case of the Eucharist, I know by faith believing that these accidents do not hide their substance, but the substance of the body and blood of the Lord. Unlike the case of the non-believer. He only has the natural power of knowing (senses and intellect), but it lacks the light of faith. Because of this, they, looking at the consecrated Host, It is not able to know how to see only the accidents of bread, but he thinks he sees also the substance of the bread, namely the bread itself, because it lacks faith, he would know that instead under those accidents there is the body of the Lord. Believing, therefore, that after the consecration of the bread remains bread, denotes a substantial lack of faith in the Eucharist. For Belli, instead, the consecrated bread is nothing but bread, But you remember, track, relic and a symbol of the Lord's Body. According to him the Eucharist secret lies not in believing that under the species of bread is the body of the Lord, thought, this, it would be magic, but in seeing that bread remains bread, the symbol of the Lord's Body. In fact, says:

"In this perspective, the celebration of Mass is not only a kind of inexplicable magic that is present the body of divinity. It all depends on how you look at that bread. It is all that we have the body of Jesus, and not cheap. Only an empty intellectualism would think that a symbol is actually just a series B. We live by symbols. And the body of Jesus is nothing more than a good bread broken. And the body of Jesus is nothing more than a good bread broken ".

Second Belli offers the Eucharist as a "meal". Unfortunately Belli on the wrong foot, ie with a false or at least insufficient definition of the Mass: "The Mass is a ritualized meal. A Mass first of all you eat ". Absolutely not. A first Mass the celebrant, in union with the people, Dio Padre offre, in the Holy Spirit, the divine sacrifice of the body and blood of the Lord for the forgiveness of sins.

The Mass certainly ends, if we are worthy, and if we are ready, with the Holy Eucharistic Communion with Christ and with the Church, that is granted thanks to the sacrifice of Christ on the altar reactivated by the celebrant. The Mass is therefore not only "eat", but is first and foremost offer, to listen, obtained, supplicating, ask and give forgiveness, praise, glorifying, to worship, contemplate, be silent, to thank. The eating and the shouting leave them to the taverns and Hermes Ronchi [see our previous articles, WHO, WHO].

The holy Mass, it may be compared to a feast, It is certainly ritual memory Last Supper, It must never be approved in all respects, SIC et simpliciter, this memory. It's this one, the heresy of Luther, We remember that it is not a "precious diversity", as we have heard repeatedly call recently, but it is a serious heresy. For this is completely incongruous, however enticing, The lecture made by liturgists dishonest, who observed that he would not make sense to sit at the table at a banquet without eating, as if to suggest that it would be pointless to go to Mass without receiving communion. The obsessive insistence with which some claim at any cost that Communion is granted to divorced and remarried, It depends on this concept fetishistic Communion. But that's the point: that the Mass is not primarily a feast, but a religious sacrifice and worship. The essentials of the Mass is clearly indicated by the following recommendations of Saint Peter in his First Letter. Addressing the faithful, for he says:

"Turn to Him, living stone, rejected by men, but chosen and precious to God, Ye also, as lively stones,, for the construction of a spiritual building, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God, through Jesus Christ " (The Pt 2, 4-5].

It is true, however, as it adds Belli:

"When we take food or when we do not take, We are in one way or another telling us, of our lives, meaning that we see or we can scarcely see. A Mass will not eat much, but what you eat should have a nourishing. What we give the power to satiate our existence? Sit at the table of the Eucharist requires you to answer honestly the question about what we are really looking for in our existence ".

The location, shape and arrangement of the altar of the Mass new world order reflects a biblical wise criterion, for which the call to sacrifice happily is synthesized with the image of a banquet. It's not just the altar only altar the old order, but neither is the board of tavern of certain liturgists sbracati, eager to be admitted to the famous Price Lutheran. But nevertheless Belli loses again share with scams dialectical following:

"In the Middle Ages they were codified the fundamental precepts of the Church, including the go to Mass at least on Sundays. The risk is that in the story have become 'it takes' to say he has faith, even something to offer to God. The reversal would be consumed: by the invitation to sit at the table where God offers, the Eucharist would become what we owe to God '.

First, it is false that the Mass Sunday festive, Memory of the Resurrection of the Lord, It was established in the Middle Ages, while it has been reported since the Acts of the Apostles [At 2,42; 20,7], by Barnabas and Saint Ignatius of Antioch in the second century. In second place, Mass is exactly, pace of Luther, "something to offer to God", and none other than Christ Himself to the Father, immolated on the cross for the priest's hands, while Paul invites the faithful to join the offering of the priest:

"I urge you, siblings, by the mercies of God, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God; which it is your spiritual worship " [RM 12,1].

Moreover divine worship must be voluntary yes and possibly attractive, pleasant and joyful; in this beautiful liturgy and sacred art play an important role; but remember that - and we are always there - not so much to join a good meal among cronies, but rather to fulfill a strict duty of justice - have cost the blood of Christ – to the Father, to repair our faults and to compensate in Christ for the offense of sin, sdebitarci for our sins and then to unite, to this end, the atoning sacrifice on the cross.

The certain joy befitting the celebration of the Eucharist. God does not want the musoni, but appreciates a cheerful giver [cf. II Cor 9,7]. However, remember that if the Holy Mass is the memory of the Resurrection of Christ and pledge of our, more root is memory and participation of the Cross, that leads to the Resurrection. Through the cross to the light. Instead, a thought of useful and interesting Belli is as follows:

"The body of Christ what to do with my desire? What I want to happen when I sit down at the table of the Eucharist? If we want to meet God, then this table will have a satiating power. If we want without him, and we are satisfied with a good sermon fun, rather than an emotionally involving singing or a particularly extravagant gesture, sooner or later we will participate Eucharist hungry, and it will be a practice that does not tell us much. It should be a little 'mystics in order to live the Eucharist ".

In the end, the Eucharist as "eros", and here there are further doubts. The term eros to designate the Eucharistic mystique is totally unhappy, misleading and unsuitable, because it corresponds to a concept charged love understood as unrestrained sexual craving, a term that does not even exist in Scripture, so l 'eros repugnant sacred author, but to which eros It corresponds Testament yadàd, hafesh, and in the New Testament "lust" [epithymia: GC 1,14; Pt II 1,4; The Gv 2,16; RM 7,7]. The healthy concept of love instead, goodwill, it is expressed, in Ancient Testament with Ahab, ahabhah, raham and in the New Testament the term agàpe O filia. Of course the Bible has nothing against sexual love in himself, what a fact they are blessed in marriage. However it is realistically aware that the fallen nature stimulates the sexual instinct to sin.

Sexual love, In the Song of Songs rises to various mystical meanings: the union of Israel with their God, the union of the Church or the Virgin or of the soul with Christ. Clear, instead, citing the words of the Father Timothy Radcliffe, sexual union would like to find a symbolic function also to signify the mystical value of the Eucharist. Belli pressed then to quote the words of consecration of Radcliffe: "Take, this is my body ", Review and:

"It is a phrase, that no difficulty could be contextualized in what a man says to his wife, or vice versa. Write T. Radcliffe: "I would like to mention the Last Supper and sexuality. It may seem a bit 'strange, But think for a moment. The Last Supper, the central words were: “This is my body, offered for you ". The Eucharist, like sex, It is centered on the gift of the body. Have you ever noticed that the first letter of Paul to the Corinthians moves between two themes, sexuality and the Eucharist? This is so because Paul knows that we need to understand one o'clock in the light of the other. We understand the Eucharist in the light of sexuality and sexuality in the light of the Eucharist ' ".

Continue Belli commenting Radcliffe:

"So there is an erotic component of the Eucharist which should not be overlooked. Between two lovers there is a body of code that exceeds the word order. Donating body means trusting the other person who can rely on a fidelity that words are not always able to express. There are times and moments where even the words could be a source of misunderstanding: the mutual gift of the body expresses that the other is for me beyond the understanding now that I could have from a verbal or intellectually ".

.
It should be noted very clearly some things. Before: It is not true, as would have us believe Radcliffe, Saint Paul in the First Letter to the Corinthians connects the Eucharist with sexual love. In this letter the Apostle speaks of marriage but [cf. c.7] and the Eucharist [cf. 11, 23-29], but separately and together with many other topics, such as Christian wisdom, [cf. cc.1-2]; the function of the preacher [cf. cc.3-4]; a case of incest [cf. c.5]; the appeal to the pagan courts [cf. c.6]; virginity [cf. c.7], the problem of idolotiti [cf. cc.8-9]; lessons from the history of Israel [cf. c.10]; women's clothing, [cf. c.11]; gifts of the Spirit [cf. cc.12-14]; the resurrection [cf. c.15].

The Radcliffe builds his mystical Eucharist on a false foundation. Secondly, it must be said that the approach that he makes between the Eucharist and sexual union is totally foreign to Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church. Thirdly, It is a forced juxtaposition, unseemly and sacrilegious, because the gift that Christ makes of his body in the Mass It has absolutely nothing to do with the mutual gift of self that occurs in the conjugal union - as it would like to support Radcliffe -, because Christ in the Eucharist is not given in this way, but only come food.

The aberrant speeches by Andrea Grillo.

On this delicate issue, during these last two months, Andrea Grillo has intervened three times in the European Cultural Magazine, with misleading speeches, that hide the attempt to relativize the dogma of the real presence of Christ on the altar, after the consecration of bread and wine. This unfair and devious operation clearly betrays the project wicked, carried out by some supporters of so-called inauspicious ecumenical church, to create an unholy mess of Catholicism and Lutheranism, that Rome will never accept. Indeed, Grillo would give us to drink that what happens on the altar after the consecration of bread and wine, It is simply an indeterminate or undefined Real presence, without further explanation or clarification. So we do not know in what sense this Real presence and who or what it is Real presence. And Grillo is vague on purpose - not very good gimmick -, because he knows very well that, if clarify, would discover the cards and appear in full light the trap in which he would have us fall.

We explain therefore its proceedings. First of all, they, with incredible effrontery, against the explicit teaching of the Council of Trent [cf. Denz. 1642], It denies that the doctrine of transubstantiation is a dogma. He says this in his article real presence and transubstantiation: conjectures and clarifications, released 17 last December in his blog European Cultural Magazine. [cf. WHO]. In fact, says: «Transubstantiatio is not a dogma, and as an explanation has its limits. For example contradicts the metaphysical ". This statement of mine, in its brevity, It does not in any way deny that the Eucharist realizes the presence of the Lord in his Church, but only he wants to distinguish dogma fidei - ie the affirmation of the real presence - from his explanation in terms of transubstantiatio.

At this distinction leads to a long debate that especially in German theology - especially in J. Auer - it made it possible to accurately distinguish between "object of faith" and "theoretical justification of that object". At this same conclusion reached, among others, Also Giuseppe Colombo [cf. sacramental theology, Milan, Glossa, 1997], when he said that transubstantiation "is considered […] not a distinct truth from the real presence, in the sense of itself as a proper object and separate the Catholic faith; but simply as a possible explanation, but in any case not necessary, of the real presence ".

The Grillo error in all this sophistic argument It is to consider the dogma of transubstantiation like a simple, relative, possible and not mandatory "explanation of the real presence" without specifying what, whereas in reality, according to the dogma of the Council of Trent, transubstantiation is a miraculous, by virtue of which it takes the real presence, which it is not a vague and unspecified "real presence", as if it were an absolute self-enclosed, nor is the presence of Christ as such, but it is real and substantial presence of his body and blood under the species of bread and wine, though undoubtedly, to coincide, we also have the presence of his soul and his divinity.

To obtain a certain presence of Christ among us, there is no need of the Mass, just call on his name. But it is not his presence real, their Holy Mass, for which Christ is simply not present with his grace, in a spiritual and invisible manner, but it's really here and now on the altar under the species visible Bread and Wine, though his glorious body transcends space and time and we see the Lord not with the eyes of the body, but with those of faith.

The Real Presence, therefore, It is certainly the object of faith. But it is not primarily or exclusively the dogma content to believe, transubstantiation as if they stay out, almost optional with explanation and theological interpretation of the Real Presence, as if you could also choose another - apparent reference to "impanation" Luther -, while the real presence would be the only thing the subject of dogma. Not at all. The dogma to believe instead is that at the moment of the consecration takes place transubstantiation, which is the cause of God's real presence and not at all a simple and relative, human or metaphysical explanation of the real presence.

To about, We have to do Grillo another note grave: to deny, as he does, that the dogma of transubstantiation put into play metaphysics, It is simply foolish and denotes Grillo - who also is a person of undoubted intelligence and culture -, a frightening ignorance of metaphysical [2], since it is known from the time of Aristotle that the analog concepts of substance and accident are precisely fundamental concepts of metaphysics, known to the rest of the simple natural reason, on which the Church relies on the definition of the dogma of transubstantiation.

Very out of tune, Furthermore, and utterly foolish are the words with which Andrea Grillo, in a previous article, under the pretext of "broaden" the meaning of transubstantiation to its effects and its ritual context, orante, liturgical and ecclesial, instead it ends up support for enhancing those aspects, to put aside the consideration of transubstantiation, too "intellectual", when in fact the opposite is true throughout, being such devoted and affectionate regard their intellectual and inexhaustible source of existential faith of personal communion with Christ and the Church, Bread of eternal life and pledge of future life.

The Grillo fact makes the following argument, a more obscene other:

The concentration on the "substantial presence under the species' has profoundly distracted by other forms of presence of the Lord, in the Word, in prayer, in the assembly [cf.. SC 7];
The "substantial presence under the species' reduced the weight of the" ecclesial presence "of Christ's body, which remains the primary effect of the Eucharist;
The attention to the "substance" has led to a practice of the accidents that oscillates between indifference and ritualism, risking to lose the symbolic logic of ritual sequences;

We add these other indecencies, with their rebuttal, from the article The bell at the consecration and transubstantiation the 6 last November, always in European Cultural Magazine.[see article, WHO].

A substantial part of the last century theological doctrine realized that the "theology of transubstantiation", while preserving with great precision the "content" of the faith in a polemical context, He fails to safeguard the "form" and determines a progressive divorce between form and content, causing negative repercussions on the level of content strictly.

I answer. The "form" of the Mass rite, for Grillo, It would be the set of parts of the rite as a liturgical assembly in prayer, while the consecration would be "matter" or "content" of the Mass. Now, the opposite is true: is the consecration to be the form and the original center and creator of the Mass, the culmination and the summit of the celebration of the rite, although it is true that the celebration is in turn aimed to offer the holy sacrifice to the Father in Christ and in the Holy Spirit and to build community and ecclesial communion. The human material of the rite, which is formed, vivified, built, sanctified and spiritually and eucharistically shaped by consecration, is the same community of the faithful from celebrating.

The transformation of the Eucharistic rite replaced with "formula on the matter" - that is to say the words of consecration of bread and wine - the sequence 'prex / ritus "which consists of" anaphora Eucharist / Communion rite ". In this way, the centrality of the wide dynamic between prayer / sacrifice / communion has been replaced by the close relationship between the words of consecration and matter Eucharistic.

I answer. The traditionally given primacy of the moment of the consecration throughout the whole ritual, It has not "transformed" original nonexistent primacy - in the words of Grillo - the whole ritual ["shape"] the moment of the consecration ["matter"], but precisely it represents the centrality of the propulsive moment of transubstantiation, from which they radiate profluiscono abundant and healthy water, that flow from the altar and fertilizing, with their grace, the surrounding land [cf. This 47, 1-12], ie the community of the celebrant and the participant.

This transformation was marked by controversy over the Mass as "sacrifice / communion": having clearly separated the sacrificial dimension from that of communion - in response to the clear separation of the Lutheran communion sacrifice - we created the theoretical foundations for this isolation of the "consecration" not only from the "Eucharistic Prayer", but also by the "rite of communion".

I answer. The church, the Council of Trent and Vatican II has not "clearly separated", but closely linked to "the sacrificial dimension" with that of "communion", since transubstantiation, operated dl celebrant in persona Christi in the words of the Eucharistic consecration, has precisely as its own and immediate effect, to prepare the heavenly gift - Blessed Sacrament - to offer to the Father for the forgiveness of sins and the food of eternal life for the celebrant and the faithful.

It is true the other way. It is from the believer concentration, devoted and adoring of the mind and heart of the individual and the community in this most sacred mystery, gushing "other forms of presence of the Lord, in the Word, in prayer, in assembly "and is the fruition want in Holy Communion, you want in the Eucharistic, It comes the ecclesial presence of Christ's body, bloom higher feelings and suffering Christians, and the mind receives light and celestial energies, to make big business of charity, while the Eucharistic accidents, touching the mystical elements of the event, arouse the symbolic logic of ritual sequences.

It must be said, however,, vero ad onor, that the conclusion of Grillo, After the nonsense about transubstantiation, It is surprisingly voluntary; which, on one hand we are glad, the other leaves us greatly perplexed about his ability to reason coherently, since he would have to put in mutual exclusion, and not join two theses that to each other punches; all the while reiterating what cricket is still endowed with brilliant intelligence. He saith:

«To conclude: Transubstantiation is a term that historically has had the function of "safeguarding a" contained in the polemical context. This function must today be conjugated with a different instance, which is to retrieve the "most appropriate forms and rich" of that content. For this recovery the notion of transubstantiation appears not only as an ancient wealth, but also as a new poverty ".

A final consideration of a pastoral nature. Undoubtedly, you may wonder what sense can have Holy Communion to children, introduced by St. Pius X, considering the need to use, to explain the mystery, a word so unusual as transubstantiation and categories so abstract and philosophical, like that of substance e accident and things like, What they can understand of transubstantiation, though here fell even Luther, who also did not lack faith, intelligence and biblical culture. Well I will not dwell here on pedagogical indications, known to all of the children catechists. I'm just saying - and this should be obvious - it is not absolutely necessary to use or teach in any case, and with all the technical term with its metaphysical explanation. To understand this, enough to remember that the term was coined only in the Middle Ages and there was no need of that term, because even the Apostles at the Last Supper and the Church of the following centuries many had understood very well what, in that solemn occasion, Jesus had done and what to the Lord's command, the Apostles had the power to do. There are therefore suitable words and concepts to induced and simple minds, to let them understand, according to their intellectual capacity, thereby it is meant by the technical term. It would be enough, for example, say that after the consecration, those that were bread and wine, They are no longer bread and wine: these seem, but they are actually Jesus. What is essential is to understand and believe that the child it feeds the body of the Lord.

From all these considerations the conclusion is clear that acting together with brothers Lutherans in the Eucharistic celebration, as it seems to want an ecumenism senseless and blasphemous, of the canonical formulas identical, but giving them different meanings, false or opposing or without the word or concept to reality corresponds with or without the spiritual power necessary in everyone the concelebrants to give saving efficacy to the formulas, or without everyone orthodox believe what they say, it was not ecumenical agreement, would Eucharistic communion, it would not be saving experience, It would liturgy and divine worship, but attack the Eucharist, contravention of the will of Christ, offense to the Church's Tradition, gibberish, empty recitation, fiction, lie, misunderstanding, mistaken, impiety, sacrilege, profanation, tomfoolery, mutual teasing, horrible deceit between the most sacred and sublime moment of fraternal communion with God, perhaps with the gall to invoke the Holy Spirit. But then there is quite a risk that intervenes another spirit, contrary, wicked and deadly. You do not have the latter's name.

The mystery of transubstantiation, Source of Catholic piety

Messe aside these follies sacrilegious, Now we do a serious talk on the devout and loving gaze of faith, we must have, the mystery of transubstantiation, to which we want to invite the brothers Lutherans, It is the source and guarantee of abundant fruit in order appreciation of the mystery of ecclesial communion, as the summit and source of all personal and communal Christian life, main source of Christian piety, forming the minds and hearts of the Saints [3], as a sweet refreshment of their soul, driving them to a continuous spiritual progress and the greatest feats of charity.

The transubstantiation it is also the reason why the Church preserves the sacred species in the tabernacle for adoration. Indeed, this, until it becomes corrupt, They contain in themselves the Lord's body. Vice versa, the insufficiency of the Lutheran conception of the real presence is evidenced by the refusal of Eucharistic Lutheran, because according to Luther, the ritual of the Last Supper is a simple banquet, in which it makes sense to consume the entire meal. It's obvious, At that time, for Luther, given that the actual presence is the impanation, ie the presence of Christ in the bread to be eaten, ceased Dinner, It would not make sense to keep the bread, from which the rest of Christ has departed, having been present only in the Supper.

Because of this, Eucharist in the Catholic view, transubstantiation, involving the permanence of the Lord's presence under the Eucharistic species in the hosts eventually advanced after Mass, is another issue that Luther, under those conditions, do not place it, and the question of the place, ie the tabernacle, in which it retains the Blessed Sacrament.

Even in such a case one can express this fact or with a learned formulation or popular form. In popular language it can certainly say that Jesus is in the tabernacle, and it is the same Jesus who is now in heaven. Instead, if we want to express ourselves in order to respond to those who eventually were to ask how is it possible that Jesus in the tabernacle, if it is true that the body of Christ, besides being in itself in heaven, It is found in all the tabernacles of the world. Then, It should be noted that properly, in the tabernacle, there are only the sacred species of body. But the Eucharistic body of Christ is not contained in one place, because then it might not be in all places on earth. However, because under the species it is no body, for which the species and the presence of the substance to fashion body combine to form the consecrated host contained in pisside the tabernacle, in scholarly form one must say that in the ciborium there are only species as placed, while the body It is not placed. Instead, in popular form it can simply say that Jesus is in the tabernacle [4].

An ecumenism wandering in the fog

One thing that arouses amazement is the conduct of ecumenical activities of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity since its founding in the immediate post-council today. In fact, it pursues an opportunist line and inconclusive, which contrasts clearly with that indicated by wise and precise 'Reintegratio. The responsibility of this bad run is certainly the Cardinal Walter Kasper, theologian influenced by Hegelian historicism, who for many years he was head of pontifical that organism. But even now that the management is given a few years to Cardinal Kurt Koch, things do not change. my di that it is? It is obstinate and inconclusive, even harmful to persist in a number of mistakes and violations of the directives'reintegration of unity'. Let's make a list:

replacement of the paradigm "separation from the Church" with the paradigm "mutual separation". The birth of Lutheranism was not a mutual separation between the Church and Luther: Luther has separated from the church, but the Church has separated from Luther, and said this must be remembered that the true Church of Christ a, are not multiple ;
Attention exclusively to charity and provision of the problem of truth. Instead the ecumenical problem is basically a problem of truth. Luther himself was opposed to the Roman Pontiff not so much for reasons of moral reform, but rather because he thought he had rediscovered Rome against the truth of the Gospel;
Failure to distinguish between full and imperfect communion communion. The Lutherans have to go from an imperfect communion with perfect communion;
Silence on the need for Protestants remove barriers to full communion with the Church. But this is one of the essential tasks of ecumenism;
Replacing the 'reunification' category, as if the Church a was divided - the image of the broken vase - the category of the way of Protestants towards Catholic unity according to the paradigm of the parable of the prodigal son;
Marginalization of the following statement Reintegratio: "Only through the Catholic Church of Christ, which it is the universal help toward salvation, you can get all the fullness of the means of salvation. In fact the only Apostles with Peter as its head we believe that the Lord has entrusted everyone the assets of the New Covenant, to form the one Body of Christ on earth, which should be fully incorporated who have in some way belong to the people of God " [cf. n. 3].
Because it is silent about the superiority of Catholicism to Lutheranism and on Luther's errors, Catholic faith and Lutheran faith are considered by many to be two different ways, mutually complementary and at the same level, equally legitimate, to conceive the Christian faith;
speaking generically of "divisions" is not enough. It should be specified what these divisions, if you actually want to remedy them. The always remain vague and never lay their cards on the table, is useless. We must not tire of reminding the brothers Lutherans, albeit in a more reasoned way, charitable and evangelical, As the church is doing for five hundred years, what are the errors that they must abandon, without losing hope of convincing them. In the words of St. Thomas Aquinas, "The truth is invincible '. Sooner or later triumphs. According to St. Paul, Jews welcome Jesus as the Messiah at the end of the world.

For this relativism or surf vague or fish in troubled waters, Today many parts no longer speak of faith, but of "faiths". There is not one fides, but more faiths, as if it were of different opinions, none of which can claim to truth and certainty, excluding the false. Everyone cultivates his backyard. What the Catholic "false" appears in the Lutheran, is simply a "different" and vice versa. In this way the Catholic, feeling entitled to choose between Catholicism and Lutheranism, It can be pushed to opt for this, having an ethics easier and permissive, with the assured salvation and sin always forgiven, while the Lutheran, not feeling corrected by the Catholic, It is brought to remain in their own errors.

Then there is the Catholic who defends openly the heresies of Luther, continuing to be considered and to be considered a Catholic and indeed advanced, progressive e reconcile. The conversions to Catholicism Lutherans have become rare, and certain priests or bishops unwise even go so far as to advise against. Other Catholics advanced or if we prefer grown ups, They assure us that recent studies have found that the condemnations of Luther uttered by the Council of Trent are no longer relevant or are the result of misunderstandings or, as S.E.. Mons. Nunzio Galantine, of 'prejudices'.

Some other examples of contravention of the directives'Reintegratio. We find on the site Week news the 30 Last October unsigned article: "Reform. But differences remain ', the following considerations:

"From the Catholic point of view, the purpose of all the dialogues must be ultimately "full visible unity". This does not mean that Protestants should simply give up all their traditions and rituals and enter the Catholic Church. But it means that Catholics and Protestants form, also from an institutional point of view, a church. However, it remains open speech, even by Catholic, on how in practice a unit of this kind should be declined. It is still valid that said the Ecumenical Bishop Feige in German Gehrard 2014: today in ecumenism we still not clear how un'dea full unity can manifest concretely visible. However, it is obvious that unit does not simply mean uniformity. On the part of the Protestants in the past years it has preferred to speak repeatedly of "difference reconciled", to describe the purpose of ecumenical dialogue. Such a unit would be conceivable even without a visible unity " [cf. item, WHO].

Some observations.

Please note: We need the full visible unity in full communion with the Catholic Church. Protestants do not give up at all those values that already link them to the Catholic Church, but only - and it is quite understandable - those deficiencies and impediments, ie errors and heresies, which are obstacles to full communion.
Says the article: "Catholics and Protestants form, also from an institutional point of view, a church". This is not exactly the case: Protestants are indeed in the Church, but not in full communion with it, as are Catholics, that the Church in full and perfect way is only the Catholic Church. For Protestants, to be in full communion with the Church, missing catholicity.
"However, it remains open speech, even by Catholic, on how in practice a unit of this kind should be declined ". The answer would be easy, if consultasse theReintegratio I did exposition.
"It's always good what he told the German Ecumenical Bishop Feige in Gehrard 2014: ecumenism today we have not a clear idea of how the full visible unity can manifest concretely ". In no way. You Feige has no clear idea. The thing is very simple: the brothers Lutherans, embracing the Catholic profession of faith, enter into full communion with Rome.
"However, it is obvious that unit does not simply mean uniformity". If by 'uniformity' means the common acceptance of the truth of the Catholic faith, it is obvious that it is necessary uniformity: a fides. If this uniformity it is to be extended beyond this boundary, where instead there is freedom of opinion and theological pluralism, it would fall nell'uniformismo, which it is not the environment of the Catholic Church, but of political or religious dictatorships.
"On the part of the Protestants in the past years it has preferred to speak repeatedly of" difference reconciled ", to describe the purpose of ecumenical dialogue. Such a unit would be conceivable even without a visible unity ".

I reply that the underlying problem of ecumenism It is not to reconcile differences and diversities: Here there is nothing to reconcile, because they are in their essence in harmony with each other. So here it is simply enriching values to recognize and respect. As for the visible unity, it is the normal expression of faith and compulsory, which certainly it is in the heart, but it must be proclaimed with his lips.

The ecumenical problem is rather that of the persistence of brothers, roaming around the truths of faith and they are inclined to have a hostile attitude towards the Catholic Church, "The pillar and bulwark of the truth" [The Tm 3,15], with which they are not in full communion. Reconciliation presupposes the common acceptance of the truth. Between true and false there can be no reconciliation. The false is the principle of division and hostility; It is the true principle of unity and conciliation.

Ecumenism is certainly a blessing in itself given to the Church and of our separated brethren with Vatican II. But it, to bring the benefits it promises, It must be understood and put into practice in the precise sense indicated by the Council, ie substantially as the Church's appeal to his children scattered in misfortunes and tragedies of this world to return to the Mother friendly, caring and generous, from which have strayed, believing to seek freedom and happiness that they have not found.

It is therefore necessary that the Church rejects the false ecumenism, of which we have here traced the contours, and instead of leading the separated brethren to Catholic unity, risks turning and grinding Catholic unity around Christ in a messy and chaotic jumble of separated brethren under the "prince of this world".

"How to go astray from God, return with tenfold zeal to seek him, so long as, who afflicted you with so many calamities, It will also give, with salvation, everlasting joy ' [Bar 4 28-29].

Varazze, 12 February 2018

________________

NOTE

[1] What completely false, as it is clear from the definition of the Council of Trent against Luther: Denz.1642, teaching reiterated by the encyclical The Mystery of the Faith of Blessed Paul VI 1965, nn.24-25 and Catechism of the Catholic Church, n.1376.

[2] Poor European culture!

[3] One example among many that could be adduced, we find in the fiery words of the Venerable Father Giocondo Pio Lorgna, Dominican (1870-1928), uses to express his intense devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. Cf. my article P.Lorgna: priesthood, Eucharist and life, in sacred Doctrine, 6,nov.1988, especially pp. 710-714.

[4] Good analysis and theological explanation of how the Eucharist can and should speak of the presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament to the place, cf Lessons on the Eucharist held by the Servant of God Father Tomas Site arpato.org.

We dropped into the home an enemy that we hang you with ropes that the Church and the European states have provided: a historical reflection, social and theological on the Islamic faith

1 September 2017/13 Comments/in Theologica/by Drafting

— Theologica —

WE DRAGGED IN HOUSE AN ENEMY THAT hang you ROPES WITH THE CHURCH AND THE EUROPEAN STATES HAVE PROVIDED: HISTORICAL REFLECTION, SOCIAL AND THEOLOGICAL ON ISLAMIC FAITH

Unfortunately, it pains us to admit it, with some very imprudent gesture, the Holy Father delivered, the new invaders of Europe now in an irreversible phase of de-Christianization, house keys. While in, to us, in this situation irreversible and without human possibility of return, we just have to wait for the opening of the Seventh Seal according to the account contained in the Apocalypse of Blessed Apostolo Giovanni.

Authors
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p. – Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

YOU CAN BUY THE BOOK BY CLICKING: WHO

.
.
«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:

NOTEBOOKS AND NOTEBOOKS

BUY NOW

€22,00

BUY NOW

THE WAY OF THE THREE KEYS

SECOND EDITION

€25,00

BUY NOW

FREEDOM DENIED

€25,00

BUY NOW

I BELIEVE TO UNDERSTAND

€28,00

BUY NOW

DIGRESSIONS OF A LIBERAL PRIEST

€18,00

BUY NOW

SATIRICAL CATTLEQUIRES

€22,00

BUY NOW

THE SADNESS OF LOVE

€18,00

BUY NOW

WAR AND IDEOLOGICAL PROPAGANDA

€28,00

SATAN AND BECAME TRINO

BUY NOW

€30,00

BITTER HERBS

BUY NOW

€18,00

ARIANISM

BUY NOW

€22,00

The aspirin of moderate Islam

BUY NOW

€22,00

THE CHURCH AND THE CORONAVIRUS

BUY NOW

€24,00

Nothing trouble you

BUY NOW

€18,00

PIUS XII AND THE SHOAH

BUY NOW

€25,00

Sect Neocatechumenal

BUY NOW

€18,50

THE SIGN OF CAIN

BUY NOW

€20,00

FROM PROZAN TO PROZAC

BUY NOW

€24,00

THE GOLPE OF THE POLITICALLY CORRECT

BUY NOW

Popular

Marco Perfetti, alias “I can not remain silent”: the...10 December 2025 - 16:07
«We in the Vatican, here in the Vatican…». Silerian donkeys ...11 May 2025 - 10:59
The Sacrament of Marriage by Father Gabriele Giordano...13 May 2023 - 12:26
It is being distributed “Sadness of Love”, ultima...30 August 2022 - 15:24
The anti-covid vaccines19. That moral and that Christian charity ...29 July 2021 - 22:08
ANNOUNCEMENTS! "The sect Neocatechumenal. Heresy became ....15 September 2019 - 20:09
from the large “Sabrina” played by Audrey ...15 October 2019 - 19:16
Once upon a time there were the Eucharist and the Priesthood ...28 March 2019 - 0:54
I Neocatecumenali, to conquer Asia thanks ...31 July 2019 - 22:31
The Motu Proprio of Benedict XVI on the Mass is abolished..7 May 2020 - 19:27
Eventually it was discovered. The ghost-writer of the Supreme Pontiff ...16 July 2021 - 15:28
"Fideism idiot in power" … God save us from the ...30 March 2020 - 14:53

Recent

Marco Perfetti, alias “I can not remain silent”: the...10 December 2025 - 16:07
«We in the Vatican, here in the Vatican…». Silerian donkeys ...11 May 2025 - 10:59
The Sacrament of Marriage by Father Gabriele Giordano...13 May 2023 - 12:26
It is being distributed “Sadness of Love”, ultima...30 August 2022 - 15:24
Francis of Assisi mystical saint, not holy, And...7 October 2026 - 12:05
«My free song» in a world that reacts before….30 September 2026 - 22:49
The unbearable lightness of those monastic privileges...29 September 2026 - 19:39
The decline of monasticism. The priest and that denied kiss...29 September 2026 - 19:36
France. Baptisms of faith or reactive baptisms? – France....28 September 2026 - 8:39
Prostitutes advance you into the kingdom of God - Prostitutes...26 September 2026 - 16:49
The symbolic language of the liturgy -The symbolic language...26 September 2026 - 14:34
Can a priest ordain another priest? From the bubbles of the fifteenth century...15 September 2026 - 12:14

Comments

Donate

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:
The Island of Patmos Editions Association

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