COVID PREVENTED US FROM PUTTING WATER IN THE STOUP BUT THE CLERICALLY CORRECT US “ALLOWS” TO BLESS GAY COUPLES AFTER THEIR CIVIL UNION IN THE TOWN HALL

The presbyter who staged and presided over everything was quick to justify that only two people were blessed. E, if after Eucharistic Communion the two "loving newlyweds" went up to the altar to receive an apron, symbol of the service they provided to this group of LGBT Catholics on the move, this "was not a liturgical gesture", It stated, even if everything happened within the sacred liturgy and not in the smoking room of the bar not far from the parish church, because when certain types of priests think they can make fun of others by believing they are more cunning in practice, they end up losing both the sense of the ridiculous and that of human decency.

- Actuality -

.

Author
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo

.

PDF print format article

.

.

To delve deeper into the topic we suggest reading this book written by Fathers Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo and Ivano Liguori (to go to the shop click on the image)

It is neither paradox nor oxymoron but simple reality: by order of the Italian Episcopal Conference, it was forbidden for two years to put lustral water inside the holy water fonts of churches to avoid spreading and contagion from Covid-19, only in recent days has its use been reinstated. A wise and prudent choice already adopted in past centuries during the great plagues. Similar caution was not applied to other cases linked to more serious epidemics. And so, directly in the diocese governed by the President of the Assembly of Italian Bishops, two proudly practicing homosexuals who shortly before sealed their "civil union" in the nearby municipal building of Budrio in the province of Bologna were welcomed into the church and blessed.

.

We "old priests" born under the pontificate of the Holy Pontiff Paul VI and raised under the long pontificate of the Holy Pontiff John Paul II, we were used to the idea that the worst virus was sin, forge of all the worst pandemics. Today I must acknowledge that we were wrong. In truth, it was only the holy water piles, to be potential vehicles for viral infections and pandemic development.

.

In the light of ecclesial and ecclesiastical logic I would like to point out that I doubt he was adequately informed on Cardinal Matteo Maria Zuppi, by the priest-comedians of this sacrilegious drama, because it is a sacrilegious act, there is little to go around it. If he had been informed, I doubt he would have consented, above all knowing what media hype certain gay antics have always aroused, expanded, in the specific case, from the delicate role covered by the Metropolitan Archbishop of Bologna, which is President of the Italian Episcopal Conference. For this I believe a priori in the total innocence of Cardinal Matteo Maria Zuppi, who was certainly the first victim of this drama, which I dispatch for him, because he is a good man, fair and always very welcoming and caring towards priests, ever since he was auxiliary bishop in Rome.

.

Let's summarize the news and then move on to comment on a word and a concept that has now become taboo: sin. On 11 June it happened that two young men made their "civil union" official in the Municipality of Budrio in the province of Bologna. The time to cross the square to reach the parish church of San Lorenzo, where they were awaited by a cheering crowd and by 14 concelebrating priests, probably everyone clerical gay friendly. Presiding over the sacred liturgy was Gabriele Davalli, Diocesan manager - unbelievable, hear! - from the pastoral care of the family and archpriest of one neighboring parish, who had followed the two "loving newlyweds" during their journey in the LGBT Catholic group.

.

Some brothers of that presbytery they contacted our editorial staff with clarification:

.

«In case the person responsible for the drama wanted to correct the situation once the damage had already been done, saying he only blessed two people, know that all the annexes and connected typical of wedding ceremonies were present, give flowers to the photographer to shoot the two in the front row under the presbytery " [cf.. WHO].

.

And as they predicted it went just like that: the presbyter who staged and presided over everything was quick to justify that only two people were blessed. E, if after Eucharistic Communion the two "loving newlyweds" went up to the altar to receive an apron, symbol of the service they provided to this group of LGBT Catholics on the move, this "was not a liturgical gesture", It stated, even if everything happened within the sacred liturgy and not in the smoking room of the bar not far from the parish church, because when certain types of priests think they can make fun of others by believing they are more cunning in practice, they end up losing both the sense of the ridiculous and that of human decency. What else to add: every comment to such a lot of hypocrisy clerical chic it would be superfluous, so we conclude with a question destined to remain unanswered, and then move on to more serious things. I don't know who formed the presbyter Gabriele Davalli in fundamental theology and Catholic morality. But, since it was definitely me who was badly formed, that among my precious formators I also had the Cardinal Carlo Caffara, in a calm way, indeed in a timid way, with the blush that burns my cheeks, because as you know I'm a shy country boy, in a subdued way I dare to ask: Gabriele Davalli, after having admitted to Eucharistic Communion two gays declared fresh "newlyweds" and after having given them the apron, symbol of the service provided before the end of the Holy Mass, were you aware or not that in the evening, the two, they will surely have celebrated by hugging each other, with a lot of ceremony and blessing received in the morning during the Holy Mass? Or do you think maybe, dear gabriele davalli, that in the evening they went to bed reciting the Holy Rosary to the Blessed Virgin Mary asking for her intercession to have the support and strength necessary not to fall into shameful sin? This, it would be what I would ask Gabriele Davalli if I were his bishop, which obviously, by his grace and by my grace, are not.

.

The sad truth is that one diocesan responsible for pastoral care for the family and thirteen other priests gay friendly who concelebrated by turning the Eucharist into a sacrilegious theater, they actually blessed sin and publicly confirmed two people in mortal sin. And if anyone is able to prove me wrong - at the head of all the Metropolitan Archbishop of Bologna, which as I repeat I consider completely not guilty, as well as a good and just man - come forward and show me otherwise. Above all I wish that, bishops in the lead, tell me publicly - not with the classic regretted private letter - that the Catholic theology and morality with which I was trained I can safely throw them down the toilet and then flush the drain. But above all I would like them to explain to me that everything that until yesterday was an ugly mortal sin, today it has become love to be welcomed and blessed. After they explain this to me, publicly, the next day I will return my mandate to the exercise of the sacred priestly ministry in the hands of the bishop who gave it to me and I will retire to private life.

.

In civil society being homosexual and practicing homosexuality is not a crime. I add: and it never could be, I would be the first to take to the streets to protest, if anyone tried to prosecute homosexuals as such in any capacity. Homosexuality is not a disease, at the limit it can be a more or less serious psychological disorder or discomfort in those who live it badly or in those who do not accept it and who therefore suffer from it. As a Catholic priest and as a theologian I have always recognized people the right to live the sexuality they want and not to be discriminated in any way for their sexual choices and practices., the Catechism of the Catholic Church also says so, which incidentally it is good to remember:

.

2357 ― «Homosexuality refers to relationships between men or women who experience sexual attraction, exclusive or predominant, towards people of the same sex. It manifests itself in very varied forms over the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychic genesis remains largely unexplained. Relying on the Holy Scripture, which presents homosexual relationships as serious depravities (cf.. GN 19,1-29; RM 1,24-27; 1 Color 6,9-10; 1 TM 1,10) Tradition has always declared that "acts of homosexuality are intrinsically disordered" (cf.. Human person, n. 8). They are against natural law. They preclude the gift of life from the sexual act. They are not the fruit of true emotional and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.".

2358 ― «A non-negligible number of men and women have deeply rooted homosexual tendencies. This inclination, objectively disordered, constitutes a test for most of them. Therefore they must be welcomed with respect, compassion, delicacy. In their regard, any sign of unfair discrimination will be avoided. Such people are called to carry out God's will in their life, e, if they are Christian, to unite the difficulties they may encounter as a result of their condition to the sacrifice of the Lord's cross ".

.

For me the question is entirely theological, since I am a priest and not a theologian master chef. If God did not prevent Adam and Eve from committing original sin, we can perhaps prevent us, to men, to commit sins? Because, whether some of my worldly brothers like it or not gay friendly, ready if necessary to disguise a farcical "marriage" between two men as a blessing that as such is not denied to anyone, in any case, the fact remains that for Catholic morality and the law of God in which it is rooted "acts of homosexuality are intrinsically disordered". Once the act has been condemned, that is sin, regarding single homosexuals instead, that is, the sinners, Catholic morality clarifies: «[…] they must be received with respect, compassion, delicacy. In their regard, any mark of unjust discrimination will be avoided ". All this always repeating, as it regards the sin, that certain acts "are not the fruit of a true emotional and sexual complementarity" and that "in no case can they be approved".

.

Sodomy is a grave sin against nature created and ordained by God. So if certain priests knew and practiced the basic elements of Catholic theology and morality, if they simply knew the Catechism, rather than disguising the "sham marriage" of two men as a "blessing", they should be aware that sin is part of the exercise of man's full freedom and free will, but that sin disfigures the soul of the sinner and causes scandal to the community of believers. Therefore, the sin, yes, it is part of the full exercise of human freedom, but it is not, however, a right and no one, especially within the Church, can claim it as such, not even the couples of homosexual "loving newlyweds".

.

Several times in my public writings, but also during my private conversations with those confreres who use me as a spiritual director or as a confessor, I found myself explaining the substantial difference between sin and sinner, especially to young priests who have come out of set of that science fiction film to which our seminars all peace are now reduced, joy and love. We priests, as sanctifiers, teachers and guides of the People of God we not only have the duty to reject sin, because on our priestly consciences there is the imperative and the obligation to fight it. The sinner's speech is different, which is ours where it is our duty to welcome, assist and love, especially those who commit the gravest sins, because above all for them Christ shed his redemptive blood on the cross. So, if instead of welcoming the sinner we reject him as such, we would betray and profane in the worst way the holy mission that Christ God has entrusted to us through the institution of the ministerial priesthood.

.

The underlying problem is that an army of sixty-eight presbyters and sixty-eight grandchildren raised by them and raised to an overdose of unspecified peace, joy and love, they no longer know the difference between sin and sinner, which is a fundamental and substantial difference. Useless as it may be, because nothing that is structurally ideological can be scratched, Let us now try to understand well the mortal danger posed by the terrifying sin propagated by LGBT lobbyists, which I talked about at length in my long private conversations with Cardinal Carlo Caffarra. This danger - which I repeat is deadly and terrifying - is given by the fact that groups made up of self-described Catholics “LGBT Catholics” they are making their way within the Church and parish communities, by making a fool of bishops in a grandiose way, foolish priests and nuns. And they are making their way not to be followed and cared for spiritually, not to heal their fragility and wounds, not to try to heal their souls from the epidemic virus of sin, but to be legitimized and confirmed in mortal sin. This is a trap in which an army of bishops, foolish priests and nuns are falling like fish into the net. For a decade now the LGBT lobby has entered the Church like a Trojan horse to claim and demonstrate that the first to make a mistake was first and foremost God in creating us male and female. They are not at fault, always cloaked in victimhood and pain, it is the Church that with its “retrive” e “cup” morality dares to prevent two gays or two lesbians from loving each other, thus denying - in their opinion - the very essence of the Holy Gospel, which is love and only love. Of course, that the Holy Gospel is love, However, it would be enough to ask ourselves and understand what true love spreads, because the love he announces ends up bleeding on the cross with four nails planted in his flesh and with a crown of thorns on his head, something completely different with porcine and desecrating riots the various gay pride, who also recently gave us the sadomasochistic Madonna and Christ on stilettos. Or perhaps the Holy Gospel, in the name of an unspecified "love", it allows us to bless the union of two men, to celebrate them in church and to admit them to Eucharistic Communion, so that they can return to their bedroom in the evening, “blessed” and “sanctified”, to sodomize each other in the name of love? Perhaps this is the love announced by the Holy Gospel?

.

It was for this reason than in 2009, that wise man of God Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, despite being covered in all the worst insults, criticized and insulted throughout the press gay friendly of the left radical chic, he forbade a choir composed of 25 declared homosexuals to gather in the premises of the Bolognese parish of San Bartolomeo della Beverara. Because it is one thing to welcome the single homosexual, which must be accepted, respected, loved and cared for spiritually, always. Another thing is to allow groups of unspecified Catholic homosexuals to be established directly within ecclesiastical and ecclesiastical structures., which, as experience teaches us and as usual, has almost always happened, they first of all question the doctrine and morality of the Catholic Church. Because it is the Church, who must bend to the whim of their sin, welcome and legitimize it, finally bless him. This is something the Church will never be able to do.

.

Every now and then some bishop accuses me of using strong tones, others, much more numerous, instead they ask me to give public voice to what they cannot always say in strong tones. And how could I not use strong tones, in the face of an increasingly dense army of priests who are no longer able to distinguish even the sin from the sinner? But the problem isn't them, I'm the one who's tough. And in the visible Church imbued with an unspecified love, harshness is not permitted, because we are no longer "the salt of the earth" [Mt 5, 13] but the sugar of the earth. As a result, bless in the church during the liturgical action two homosexuals who return to play leapfrog in the evening, this is a truly good and right thing, at least for all those who have decided to become sugar of the earth.

.

Every historical season has its characters, but in circumstances of this kind we certainly miss the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II. Because in more or less similar cases, which have now occurred in numerous dioceses around the world, he would not have hesitated to call the respective bishops before him. And in a spirit of authentic Christian charity the room attendants, before their entry into the hearing, they would have recommended: "Excellence, before going to the Supreme Pontiff, pass by the Vatican Pharmacy, purchase and wear the diaper, because it would definitely be embarrassing, for her as for anyone, piss oneself in front of the Holy Father". Today things have changed, we have the Paduan presbyter Marco Pozza, for friends Don Spritz, that in jeans and untied sneakers goes to interview the Holy Father and having nothing better to do post a greeting message for a couple of his gay friends on the occasion of their wedding, only to correct the post shortly after by changing the word “marriage” with “civil union”. However, what only matters is not to appear before the Holy Father with a Roman cassock on and a respectful ferraiolo on the shoulders, because in that case you can run the risk of being electrocuted with a glance. But it would all end with a lightning glance, because to make someone piss on one would need the strength that the Holy Pontiff John Paul II knew he had when necessary, but above all his holiness would be necessary, because only the Saints, when the case requires it, they even manage to make you piss on yourself for the salvation of your soul.

.

My beloved and venerated Carlo Caffarra, I feel holy envy for you, that you were called in September 2017 to the Father's House, where I would like to be too, thus sparing myself the abomination of desolation that awaits us, why now, certain of our fearful and improvident bishops, loving towards sin but angry towards those of their priests who always dare to condemn sin, for some time they have been making us truly aspire to the great grace of death.

the Island of Patmos, 16 June 2022

.

.

______________________

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

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

n Agency. 59 From Rome
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

.

.

.