Comments are closed.
The website of this magazine and the editions take name from the Aegean island in which the Blessed Apostle John wrote the Book of the Apocalypse, isola also known as «the place of the last revelation»
«God revealed the secrets of others ALTIUS»
(in higher than the others, John has left the Church, the arcane mysteries of God)
The bezel used as the cover of our home page is a 16th century fresco by Correggio. preserved in the Church of San Giovanni Evangelista in Parma
creator of the website of this magazine:
MANUELA LUZZARDI
This epidemic is revealing and unveiling the hearts of many. Here I completely agree with this and have supported it from the first moment. This epidemic is a moment of Grace. Not to be wasted.
Until a nice discussion with the famous Antonio Socci, another who does not like to be contradicted and poses as an all-rounder on matters of religion?
To tell the truth, I contradicted him more than once and I always remained his friend.
Antonio Socci is a talented professional journalist, he is a devout Catholic with often sanguine ideas deriving from his character and his Tuscan-Sienese cultural background; ideas that can be discussed, but he never posed as a theologian. He has addressed and addresses criticism where he deems it appropriate to address it, but he does not do so by giving theology lessons.
The new bq, not a very popular site, I presume, from father Ariel, hosts a photo of the blessing given by the Archbishop of Milan to the new hospital at the fair in front of about a hundred people, distanced, but not too much. Without causing excessive controversy, However, I must agree that there are churches that can accommodate dozens and dozens of people, a few hundred faithful, spaced two/three meters apart. In the Cathedral of Asola, my little town, counting one person per desk ( can accommodate 6/8 people at least), there can fit at least sixty people. Counting even the smallest seventy; leaving someone standing or bringing chairs a few meters apart, I underline some, it easily exceeds one hundred seats. Weekday liturgies are attended by at most 50 people. The closure, be it the government or the bishop, It's perplexing to say the least. If the problem was the holiday mass, it would be enough to set a limited maximum number of faithful- to es. buttonhole 100 they fit with distances of 4/5 meters- and increase the number of masses to at least 6. The doubt about the behavior of the CEI remains and is strong.
Honestly, I don't know if you listened to mine 25 minutes of video, obviously not.
My reflection begins by clarifying, not based on my opinions, but on the basis of the deposit of the Catholic faith, what is the role of bishops in the Church, from whom they received their mandate and what theirs is power of pastoral governance.
Now, one of two things: or she just didn't listen to what I said – but in that case you should spare us your comments – or it's just not clear to her that she, like any believer, he should not dare to propose what bishops should do in matters of pastoral care, liturgy and discipline of the Sacraments, what is right for them to do and how they should do it.
Evidently, when from the beginning I explained this and clarified that the Church is not a parliamentary democracy, she really didn't understand and persists and insists on saying ” … in my opinion … I believe that … I think that …”. Or she comments on a video reflection that she hasn't really listened to.
Of the two one, or both.
In the end: she, as a faithful Catholic, can't doubt, as he states in conclusion, of the entire college of bishops of this country, Why, then, it would be good, for consistency, to really change our compass of orientation.
I didn't listen to his video. In fact I commented on another article, that of P. Scardocci. I mentioned it in my email, but I made no comments on the video. I am sorry. I make comments, as long as I am allowed, about what I read, not on other items. So, not on his. In my email, Anyway, I don't notice any type of speech in my opinion, I believe that, I think that…I don't think it's right, in fact it's not right that I do “put in your mouth” words I didn't write. Italy is diverse, but the density of faithful per celebration is known to the various bishops. A mass for 100 people in the Milan Cathedral, eg, it absolutely does not clash with rules that are even more restrictive than the current ones. E’ a fact. I do not claim to have the authority of bishops, I owe them obedience within certain limits. But I can make critical observations. E’ the minimum, I don't consider them so ignorant of the concept of density and laws. For the rest, both they and you have the right to think differently. The masters of the Church, it should be remembered, they are not the faithful, but not even the priests. E, as the cardinal secretary of state replied to Napoleon, you won't be able to destroy it.
Stubbornly and persistently contesting the pastors of the Church, as if it were his right and freedom to tell them what to do and the best way to do it, she throws between the lines a tragic and dramatic episode in the history of the Church, different as such from the inappropriate quote made by you at the end of the comment.
This is the tragic and dramatic fact: after having taken the Supreme Pontiff Pius VII prisoner in 1806, during the journey to France Napoleon told Cardinal Ercole Consalvi … "In few years, I have destroyed the Church!». The Cardinal replied to him: "No, Majesty! we priests were unable to destroy it 17 centuries, you won't be able to either.".
With this sentence he first of all reiterated the divine nature of the Church and the fact that, for when unworthy and sinners, the shepherds are its faithful guardians.
Apart from this, mi tip: but if you are so angry with priests, because he doesn't join the Anticlerical Lay Anarchist Association?
I don't have anything against priests, quite the opposite. They were in too much of a hurry- the bishops- in closing the masses- among other things, the decrees speak generically of celebrations, because the State cannot prohibit participation in the Mass, on the basis of the Concordat- to the faithful. My sister goes to work in the factory, the banks are open, My accountant's office is open and it is not possible to celebrate a birthday. mass for 20, 30,40 faithful in churches of 2000 sq.m. ? Mathematics is not an opinion. I'm not a theologian, ma, if we put it on this (useless) piano, you are not a mathematician. The obligation of communion in the hand, for the few who have had or the very few who still have the opportunity to communicate, then it is absurdly ridiculous and tragic, because it favors the spread of the virus. I am silent about the attempt of some, Bassetti in the first place, to close the churches (when in the central south there was a very low percentage of infected people): a clear obscenity. There are some prelates and probably some priests who are more royalists than the king. Some people are fearful, someone is conniving with the enemy. I didn't use the term clerical atheists or anything like that. Ma, the bishops, they have made mistakes and some of these are serious and obvious. Easter Masses could be reopened to the public, at least, in adequate spaces and with limited numbers. They asked for it ? It doesn't seem like it. However, they can do it independently, I read well. They don't? The most free: I am free to judge them badly. I don't dramatize, but I have the feeling that they have submitted to those who don't want people to go to mass.
Making ordinary people lose the habit of stopping, inoculate the feeling that faith and mass are not essential, make the little ones and the weakest understand that Power can sanction those who participate in mass, like a common criminal: here's the goal. Without priests how can I hope not to get lost (eternally, but not only)? They hide them, I take it out on governments?. If they hide, Who should I blame?? My mother is in the hospital rehabbing; if he got sick or I got sick, I hope you won't believe me, nephew of a hospital chaplain priest, I follow the decrees of the bishops and do not call a priest for confession! I don't want a church without priests or even a church that values the laity, in case the exact opposite. I understand the needs, but they have to be real. We can't stay at home forever; I risk more at the supermarket or in a half-empty church? Mathematics and physics, medicine too, they say in the supermarket. Therefore the bishops ( and you too)they made a mistake in their assessments. Now, with a limited number if necessary, Holy Masses reopen to the public, at least for Easter. I don't care if the celebrant is a saint or a sinner, if he's a fagot or takes beautiful girls to bed, whether he is educated or ignorant. I live with my sister and there are cases in her company: there is always some risk. Less risk at mass than at home, believe me. Happy Easter everyone.
"I don't want to" … "I want" … but he realizes what is serious about what he is saying?
You are considering the Sacraments of grace as your right to "I don't want" … "I want" …
Nor can I invite you to reflect on what is serious about what you say, because I have already done it several times and with extensive explanations, but you don't listen to anyone other than yourself and your completely wrong reasons, then he replies by increasing the dose.
I agree that the Church is not a democracy and that it is a top-down structure. But I believe that the problem is not so much obeying or not obeying an ecclesiastical directive, but the problem is one of opportunity. The hierarchy can do whatever it wants with the sacraments (this is the message, like it or not, which basically comes from your articles in recent days), but he cannot expect the poor demented lay people to feel abandoned, they do not express this discomfort in their own way. I believe that in all of this there has been a lack of charity towards the faithful. Now you will tell me that it is the faithful who do not have charity for the poor suffering shepherds, etc. etc. But objectively one cannot be surprised if the faithful perceive the hierarchy as a jumble (because in fact the hierarchy itself has long since lost the top-down sense of the Church, turning into a mess, that is, in a shapeless mass) of terrified people locked in their buildings. The Holy Father's message for Holy Week was nothing short of glacial. Here, if I can summarize, I would say that in this whole matter there has been a real lack of charity, the Hierarchy apparently failing to fulfill its mission of announcing and bringing Christ to the world, that is, in simple words, to be Pastors with a capital P. Let us not be surprised therefore if more and more lay people are wondering what the usefulness of such pastors is.
Dear Antonello,
although I always ideally “identified” – in the sense of inspired – with the figure of the Blessed Apostle Paul, Today I feel very much like the Baptist preaching to the desert sands.
You see … the faithfuls, or many of them, they are so caught up in their pain, more than understandable, to the point of being deaf to any reasonable words addressed to them. For instance: I have been writing for months and months and explaining that we are faced with a great and painful test of faith. Proof that, in the last two months, it has become even more acute with the coronavirus pandemic.
Contrary to some “typical subjects”, for my psychological structure and my spiritual formation, ecclesial and theological, I always start with a question: “Where did I go wrong”. Now you understand how angry I can get sometimes, starting from this setup of mine, towards all those – I don't want it: including you – which start from the completely opposite principle: where they went wrong and where others go wrong?
Does it seem possible to you that on the one hand there is a population of faithful made up of blameless, vilified and martyred virgins and on the other a bad Pontiff, of bad bishops, of bad Priests?
I really ask you: it seems possible?
We Pontiffs, Bishops, Presbyters, mi tip: of whom we are product and fruit, if not of the People of God? Or perhaps he knows another place from which Christ chooses us and to which he sends vocations?
You want Pontiffs, Bishops and Priests chosen from Archangels, Angeli, Cherubim and Seraphim? And then blame Jesus Christ, who evidently got it all wrong and who persists in choosing his own shepherds among his people instead.
In short: It really pains you to have to admit that we are the perfect image of you, oh saints, spotless and mournful faithful without blemish and without sin?
I was saying that for months I have been saying that we are subjected to a great and painful test of faith, before which many find nothing better to do than to blame – as you can also see from the comments sent and published here – with the Supreme Pontiff Francis.
The reigning Pontiff is a man burdened with undoubted defects and limitations, he often has the gift of non-clarity and ambiguity, he is no stranger to unhappy expressions or exits at all … and all this, During the years, I wrote it and explained it, without refraining from criticizing the man Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his difficult character.
Like it or not like it, with all due respect to conspiracy theorists, of supporters of irregular conclaves, to the point of heavy accusations of heresy and apostasy from the Catholic faith leveled against him, the Supreme Pontiff Francis, by grace or by misfortune, by blessing or deserved punishment he is the legitimate Successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter and the Vicar of Christ on earth. As such we owe him filial respect and devoted obedience, he was also the worst Pontiffs in the entire history of the Church.
There are people who accuse me – when they do not know where to stick – to use foul language. Obviously I do it on purpose and certainly not due to an inability to control, exactly like in this case, in which using a clear euphemism I tell you that, in this moment of great crisis unprecedented in the history of the Church, with an ongoing pandemic and discouragement, fear and moods skyrocketing, attacking Pietro is equivalent to taking a P38 and shooting yourself in the balls.
So the question you should ask like many others to whom I preach like the Baptist in the desert, it's this one: How can I pass this test of faith? E, if I can't, it would be good to ask: why, I can't get over it? Maybe I'm wrong, in something?
The church, in the most difficult moments of its history it has always been saved by unity. And unity has never been painless but often paid for with pain and blood, a unity that is first and foremost unity with Peter and under Peter. And who does not understand or refuses to understand this, it damages one's soul and damages the Church.
In the end, regarding his complaint: «The Holy Father's message for Holy Week was nothing short of glacial», I can answer you that I cried with a broken heart, when instead I saw him alone, limping, with a suffering look, in a deserted St. Peter's Square, before the Blessed Sacrament to pray to God to avert this pandemic, giving plenary indulgence to the seriously ill, to those who assist and look after them. A terrifying image: the church, the whole, is about to enter the Garden of Olives where we are all called to consume a passion that will be very painful and will last who knows how long before we can recover. And in the face of this terrible and dramatic evidence, you really have nothing better to do than lose yourself in the blind whining of these great ones, emeritus and dangerous nonsense?
I respond to Father Ariel's answer here, since I don't know why your response lacks the option to respond, as there is elsewhere. In the meantime, thank you for your consideration of my comment. Although as usual very verbose. By the way, Wouldn't it be better to summarize some of your articles which are actually sometimes too long and redundant? Returning to what you answered me, I point out that you didn't go into the merits of what I said. THE gist of my speech is the lack of charity. On both sides, obviously. As you said, the Church has always been saved by unity. But what a sign of unity we give if we abandon the faithful (suspending celebrations,confessions and double locking themselves in the house, in spite of the trumpeted outgoing Church) and you are the first to take the beating (figuratively) the same faithful who first of all express their strong discomfort? I think that's the mistake you fall into in your recent articles, both to confuse those who rail against the Pope from morning till night with the many who today feel uncomfortable and embarrassed and for the attitude of the hierarchy in this pandemic and who until yesterday were not at all critical of the bishops and the pontiff. The fact then that priests and bishops are chosen by the people of God, which people apparently almost seem disgusting to you, is not a good enough reason to say that pastors have “almost a right” to be mediocre. Shepherds must take care of caring for the flock. As for asking yourself "where am I wrong", I assure you that from your articles and your responses to comments, such psychological structure that you claim to have, it doesn't show up at all. In fact, just the opposite appears. Just look at what he wrote two lines later:«We Pontiffs, Bishops, Presbyters,..». That is, let me understand, because from what you write it seems so... You are pontiff? Perhaps it was better to say «we priests, bishops, pontiffs...» at least. I conclude regarding the accusations of scurrility. Beyond the scurrilous, allow me and don't want me to, She appears at times (scientifically or not as you say) trivial. Certain attitudes could be effective among the Roman "underproletariat"., but if through your site the intention is to reach the different areas of the Italian peninsula, maybe it's time to change your approach or you'll end up being long gone (certainly not for everyone) mistaken for scoundrels instead of theologians.
1. Read your message;
2. read my answer;
3. Please read the reply you sent to my response again.
Having done this, I ask anyone who reads us: pretzel, or I do not preach in the desert as I have complained?
But most of all: this is how people react when they feel deeply touched.
E’ that's all, in chronological order, just read.