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
I answer both . To say that a text by a mystic and doctor of the Church is a serious clue to believe Judas in hell does not mean that it actually is, nor that it should constitute a magisterial foundation.
The speech seemed to me and seems to me to be very clear. I advise both of you to re-read the story for the future management of the site “The wolf and the lamb” by Phaedrus.
… I would be the one who «turn the omelettes»?
But she reads what she writes and then reads what is answered?
In the form of a sneaky and specious question you asked questions that contain all the accusations made by certain circles of pseudo-Catholic heretics and apostates to the reigning Pontiff, who daily accuse of various things, among which:
1. ideologize mercy;
2. to have affirmed that Judas is also saved;
3. these seeds cannot be the fruits of the true Church of Christ;
4. etc …
But she, he really thinks he is a crafty one who can play with words, to then say … no, I did not say this, it is he who turns the omelette?
Here is what she wrote and what I replied to her:
orenzo said:
15 June 2021 Everyone 9:40
What if the Gospel, instead of being proclaimed as it was handed down to us, it is ideologized by teaching that it is only mercy, that Judas is also safe, that sin can be good ... ?
If this seed is sown, its fruit is still the Kingdom?
_________________
Father Ariel replied:
15 June 2021 Everyone 13:52
She is able to state with certain and absolute faith that Judas is truly and definitely in Hell?
The Church has never stated this, at some time in history, because none of us can know God's judgment, nor can the Church know if Judas, in the last minutes of life, he made an act of profound repentance to the point of being condemned to expiation in Purgatory up to the point of parousia.
her instead, what news does he have, about that?
Finally, we communicate them, my Brothers and I, that if in certain existences, from sin he was not born, more than good, the very highest good, today we would not have an apostle like Saint Paul and a holy doctor of the Church like Augustine, but only sour characters who ask specious questions like yours, consequently manufacturing armies of reactive atheists disgusted by certain completely aberrant ideas of Christian faith, which, however, do not reflect the doctrine and perennial magisterium of the Church.
You cannot think of yourself as a Christian and contemptuously dismiss mercy, because if "God" is the name "Mercy" is his surname.
I beg you: do not learn arrogance from Father Ariel!!!
I write that some doctors of the Church teach “that Judas is also safe”, and Father Ariel what he does?
Turn the omelette over by writing: “She is able to state with certain and absolute faith that Judas is truly and definitely in Hell?”
the, that I certainly cannot state that Judas is definitely in hell, I repeat quoting the words of Jesus, reported in the Gospel, and which raise more than one doubt about the certainty that Judas, as some doctors claim, be safe, I find myself accused by Ariel of being “sneaky anti-Bergogliano” and that I invoke “much more in the name of God, justicialism”.
So I ask you: it is logical to accuse those who say that it is wrong to say that “Judas is safe” instead of having attested that Judas is certainly in hell?
Don Ettore,
I am called into question by you and by Father Ariel and therefore I answer.
The thesis you bring seems to me somewhat superficial. I was in the novitiate, I read the Dialogue, we had an in-depth week on this. I later prepared a lecture from Dialogue. Whereby, already the veiled accusation of nostalgism that we hear, if anything, addressed with the joke "... in my day you could read Catherine other than you who only study Protestants" landslide in the face of evidence.
That said, the ecclesiological foundation you hold is, as to the fact of faith, inexistent. Honestly, it seems strange to me that you don't remember the difference between the various propositions of the Magisterium and the phrases of mystics and even most holy Doctors of the Church. In this second case, the theological work of these authors, in addition to not being a matter to be accepted of fide, it can even contain, really, theses not accepted today by the Catholic faith. In fact, keep in mind that in the third part of the Christology of St. Thomas Aquinas, the Common Doctor argues about Mary's non-immaculateness from sin, resolutely rejecting what would later be proclaimed as a dogma of the faith, that is, the dogma of the immaculate conception of Mary.
To having to apply your argument, I should ineffably deduce that the The ineffable god it was wrong when the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was proclaimed.
In short Don Ettore, to avoid making gross future mistakes, I recommend a good rereading and review of the value of theological and magisterial propositions.
Let me also recommend the document Nature and task of theology of the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and the document of 2012, Theology today. Perspectives, principles and criteria.
A fraternal greeting
Dear Brother,
i'm sorry, but you have given proof of theological ignorance at this moment.
1. you know the difference between divine revelation and private revelation?
2. do you know what are the founding elements of the deposit of the the Catholic faith?
3. you are aware of the fact that certain writings of mystics and mystics are not contained in the deposit of faith and the Church has never asked the faithful to adhere to them with an act of faith?
4. you know the difference between pronouncement on a dogmatic level definitive e defining?
And I do not go well.
Therefore, if I'm arrogant, you have given a public test of ignorance, and the two Dominicans that I "have at home" can confirm you first ahead of all, as Dominicans and as talented theologians, that the great doctor of the Church of St. Thomas Aquinas himself, teacher of grace e teacher general, deals with dogmatic issues, in an admirable way and at the moment also unsurpassed, But, the same corpus from the QUESTION, it is not a dogma of faith and is not inserted among the revealed scriptures.
So think that the writings of Saint Catherine are, as for your saying "great mystic as well as doctor"?
Finally, we should ask ourselves what concept you have of holiness, therefore of beatifications and canonizations, who have never beatified and canonized all the speeches, the writings, expressions, the inner phrases or private revelations of the blessed, beate, saints and saints.
And I don't express this as a personal opinion, this is the doctrine of the Church, that maybe you don't know e, if you know her, you have shown that you know her badly, despite having been placed to direct a Higher Institute of Religious Sciences.
Because of this, today we have sunk into the decline in which we have sunk at the ecclesial and ecclesiastical level.
The Church cannot declare with certainty through the magisterium definitive (much less defining) that Judas is in Hell because he cannot know the fate reserved for his soul and has no elements to be able to pronounce on the matter. If any mystic or mystic has seen him in Hell in any of his visions, this cannot in any way affect us in the least and I do not intend to pay any attention to it, least of all credibility, urging the faithful not to take certain things as revelations of fide.
It is not a dogmatic foundation, but a very serious clue to be able to keep Judas in hell, since S. Catherine is one of the greatest mystics of the Church as well as a Doctor. The Dialogue of Divine Providence was a fundamental text in the Dominican novitiate and I think it still is today. The rest, he has two Dominicans in his house whom he can ask.
If she was a little bit’ less arrogantly harsh in answering the objections of readers who simply ask alternative questions would gain a lot.
And what Saint Catherine of Siena expresses is a dogmatic foundation of the Catholic Church?
Tell us … tell us …
Reverend Father Ariel
I bring them back to the traitor Judas
what S says. Catherine of Siena, or rather what S. Catherine of Siena heard from the Eternal Father: “This is that sin which is not forgiven either here or there, because the sinner did not want it, despising my mercy; therefore this is more serious to me than all the other sins he has committed. It anointed the despair of Judas I was more sorry and it was more serious to my Son that it was not the betrayal that he made me. Thus they are condemned for this false judgment of having placed their sin greater than my mercy; and therefore they are punished with evil and eternally crucified with them " (s. caterina from siena, Dialogue of Divine Providence, (c). 37).
????
Orenzo,
if you want to play the sneaky anti-Bergogliano go to the delusional site of the schismatic heretic Alessandro Minutella, who … there is no tripe for cats and she is not persona grata.
She is so ignorant and arrogant to the point of quoting a passage from the Holy Gospel that she has not read and if she has read it she has not really understood it.
I repeat then the question: where it is written that Judas is condemned to eternal damnation? You think you can read in these words a statement that he was plunged into Hell?
Finally, know that the justice of God invoked by you does not at all correspond to your ruthless and inhuman justice, in fact there is no mercy without justice and justice without mercy. She invokes something else in the name of God, justicialism, which has nothing to do with divine and human justice.
Digital illiterate!
– “The Son of man goes away, as it is written about him, but woe to him by whom the Son of man is betrayed; it would be better for that man if he had never been born!». Down from, the traitor, he said: "Rabbi, maybe it's me?». She answered him: "You said it". ” (Mt 26.25,25)
– “Then Jesus answered: «He is the one for whom I will dip a morsel and give it to him». Dipped the morsel, She took him and gave it to Giuda Iscariota, son of Simon. So what, after the morsel, satan entered into him… Having received the sop, he immediately went out. And it was night. (GV 13. 26,27a,30)
– ” Judas bought a piece of land with the proceeds of his crime and then rushing forward he ripped open the middle and poured out all his entrails.” (At 1.18)
Perhaps, however, you are right and Jesus is wrong when he said: “It would be better for that man if he had never been born!”
God's name is “Mercy” and his surname is “Justice”: a god who was only mercy would be the god of quaquaraquà.
She is able to state with certain and absolute faith that Judas is truly and definitely in Hell?
The Church has never stated this, at some time in history, because none of us can know God's judgment, nor can the Church know if Judas, in the last minutes of life, he made an act of profound repentance to the point of being condemned to expiation in Purgatory up to the point of parousia.
her instead, what news does he have, about that?
Finally, we communicate them, my Brothers and I, that if in certain existences, from sin he was not born, more than good, the very highest good, today we would not have an apostle like Saint Paul and a holy doctor of the Church like Augustine, but only sour characters who ask specious questions like yours, consequently manufacturing armies of reactive atheists disgusted by certain completely aberrant ideas of Christian faith, which, however, do not reflect the doctrine and perennial magisterium of the Church.
You cannot think of yourself as a Christian and contemptuously dismiss mercy, because if “It gave” is the name “Mercy” is his surname.
What if the Gospel, instead of being proclaimed as it was handed down to us, it is ideologized by teaching that it is only mercy, that Judas is also safe, that sin can be good… ?
If this seed is sown, its fruit is still the Kingdom?
You are extraordinary in everything, obviously in the contents, first of all, but also in graphics and creativity, for example, I find the image of the dog dressed as a Dominican friar beautiful, an elegant and incisive way to remember the Order of Domeni canes (dogs of the Lord). Indeed, in the coat of arms of the Dominican Friars, there is a little dog.
P.S.
I grew up attending the convent of San Domenico in Bologna
Dear Father Gabriel God bless you. His article is perfect, clear that everyone can understand. My answer reflection, my spontaneous reaction is that objectively though, if we wanted to apply the indications in full and directed to us in our lives, written in 4 canonical gospels and within our reach, i.e. possible for us, we should be saints. ,? Dad, this is true. Anyone, all of God's people can perhaps actually apply some teaching principles given to us by our Lord Jesus, but only a few, many are omitted and also by those who live the Faith more intensely. Even many clerics fail and deviate, so let alone. Therefore dear Father Gabriele, I believe that living the gospel is almost impossible. God Bless you and thanks again for your article.