• Author
• Recent Posts

Father Gabriele

Gabriele Giordano M. Scardocci
Of the Order of Preachers
Presbyter and Theologian

( Click on the name to read all its articles )

Latest posts by Father Gabriele (see all)

• The Devil among crime news, itching and reality in the 2024 - 10 April 2024
• Abortion, the new dogma of our time with the cry of freedom, Egalitarian, fraternity … - 16 March 2024
• Journey into the night with Nicodemus - 9 March 2024

- Church news -

THE SENSE OF THE FAITHFUL AND THOSE CATHOLIC ALABARDIERS GUARDIANS OF THE TRUE FAITH WHO ARE IN FACT LUTHERANS AND MODERNISTS WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THAT THEY ARE

The outlandish theories of the Catholic halberdiers reach terrible practical and pastoral conclusions, but above all they end up being, in concrete facts and in their approach to faith, of the perfect Lutherans, without realizing it is, unaware that many of their critical reasons are the same as Martin Luther's. Certain subjects fall into Lutheranism in one way, in modernism on the other hand, except to feel and believe the only ones, alone and authentic guardians of the true faith and the authentic Catholic tradition.

Author:
Gabriele Giordano M. Scardocci, o.p.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

.

keyboard lion with a hobby of theology and Church history

Lately I've been reading several theological proclamations around the net. A little’ it's my fault, because I'm a cyber preacher friar, so cyber teologo who surfs the net and often comes across rather strange theological theories. I tend to let it go, because they are funny theories and I read them with the aim of laughing a little’ after a day of preaching or academic research.

.

Recently some bizarre theories of the “legions of misunderstood only bearers of the true Catholic faith, apostolic, romana ”have raised doubts even in the most devoted and balanced lay faithful. Therefore I thank these halberdiers who are the only holders of the Catholic faith, because they provided me with a assist to make a brief review of ecclesiology and to provide genuine reflections on a theme that perhaps has escaped a bit’ out of hand; precisely for this reason it can be proposed to those who perhaps want to deepen it for the first time. The theme in question is the sense of the faithful.

.

With this Latin meaning, translatable into "the sense of the faithful", it means the feeling of all the faithful, that is, their subjective faith and therefore their reaction on the arguments of the faith proposed by the bishops or by the pope or by a council that are expressed in the Magisterium. Now, according to the halberdiers of the authentic faith, I would be a liar and an ignoramus on this issue. But it gets worse: I would lie not knowing that I lie. So it was necessary that these super masters, a great day, the sleeves had to be rolled up, get on the chair of their personal blog, take their virtual chalk and write on the smart-saccenza blackboard to explain to me that the sense of the faithful has an almost genuine role in the interpretation of the Magisterium and its development. This consideration is the foundation for one of the halberdiers to be able to claim that, in all this genuineness, his sense of the faithful it almost played a fundamental decisive role also in the evaluation of the acts of the ordinary magisterium of Pope Francis, such that rejecting them all together would be - listen, hear! - a prudential act, because all those who obey the Pope would do nothing but align themselves with anti-Catholic positions.

.

These sentences thus written they can mean everything and the opposite of everything. Also the reference to the magisterium of the Second Vatican Council, cited several times both in this case and in various telematic exchanges, it is so labile that it seems non-existent. In short, the basic ambiguity of the cybernetic theologians halberdiers of the true faith consists precisely in avoiding defining precisely what the sense of the faithful. Subsequently, this non-concept is filled with subjective interpretations e, at least for what I read on the net, charged with a certain feeling of defiance and distrust towards the ecclesiastical authorities when they exercise the authentic or ordinary magisterium. Therefore the cat-space halberdiers venture into theological and liturgical interpretations vitiated by fallacies and basic prejudices, gives real anti-dogmas. The basic theory, in conclusion, it seems to be the one for which a group of faithful is enough, also conspicuous, that strong in their being fully faithful to the Church and exercising a correct one sense of the faithful, only for this reason should they be able to correctly offer the correct analysis of the Magisterium documents, even to establish in a definitive and no longer questionable form, which document of the Roman Pontiff is of the ordinary Magisterium, extraordinary and authentic and which is not.

.

Theologians still debate these issues today, trying to understand the value of a certain papal and conciliar document, ma, net of a few exasperations, they would hardly proclaim their personal views as absolutely true and authentic, and starting from these to proclaim oneself i Catholics, apostolic, Romans than their opponents who would be incompetent, of heretics who understand nothing. In short, without the halberdiers even noticing: we are in the liberal democratic system of the parliamentary republic, complete with majority elections and proactive and abrogative referendums. Only the solemn formula is missing: "In the Church, sovereignty belongs to the People who delegate it to the Supreme Pastor and to the bishops".

.

I also add that clearly, in today's world where freedom comes before any other right, everyone thinks and says what they want, nonsense and falsehoods included. The right to say and think nonsense about the Catholic faith is one of those inalienable rights approved and even encouraged by the secularist and atheist culture. Halberdiers too, on this liquid and secular line, they say and think what they want. I take the liberty of asking him: for case, on your sites, you are organizing the fair and the supercazzole contest and you are competing for the first place? This is just to clarify, because I would gladly leave it there without any doubt.

.

The introductory irony phase is over (which I took from reading the splendid Adverse Heresies of Sant’Ireneo, neo-doctor of the Church), I pass a bit’ to clarify to the faithful Catholic faithful what is meant by sense of the faithful which they too have and offer to the Church as a service and path in truth.

.

Già San John Henry Newman he had dedicated a theological essay on this subject entitled «On the consultation of the faithful in matters of doctrine». The English saint and theologian, careful student of the fathers and of the history of the ancient Church, shows some heroic examples of faithful groups who in their sense of faith transmitted and preached the correct faith; this especially in the very first centuries, these faithful, resisting Arianism, until martyrdom, they rebelled against bishops and priests opposed to the Nicene doctrine. And here is already that the aforementioned halberdiers will be there to rub their hands, grinning in front of the screen and saying “Ah! You see I was right?”.

.

Obviously the meaning of Newman's study - converted to Catholicism in 1843 - was that of a Catholic theologian who wanted to provide dignity to the conscience and coherent profession of the entire body of the faithful, and therefore also of the laity. Why in fact write an essay of controversy towards the Roman Church, see Newman yes 16 years he was an attentive apologist and scholar of the sources of the faith, in an Anglican environment always ready to criticize him and hopeful to see him return Anglican again to prove the absurdity of Roman Catholicism?[1] And above all, why never offer arguments contrary to priestly authority and its teaching within the Roman see, even if Newman himself after his conversion had been validly consecrated a Catholic priest 12 years before that essay? The answer must obviously be sought in the words of the author himself, when it states: "There is no doubt that in this case they were not asked for advice, opinions and judgments, but we only wanted to ascertain a factual situation, that is, their beliefs were used as a testimony of that apostolic tradition on which alone any doctrinal definition can be based "[2]. What Newman then points out is that:

.

«By saying this, so, I am certainly not denying that most bishops were Orthodox in their internal beliefs; nor that there was a certain number of clergy who stood alongside the laity and acted as their centers and guides; nor that the laity actually received their faith, in the first instance, by bishops and clergy; nor that some portions of the laity were ignorant and other portions eventually corrupted by the Aryan masters, who took possession of the seats and ordained a heretical clergy; but I still want to say that in that time of immense confusion the divine dogma of our Lord's divinity was proclaimed, applied, maintained and (humanly speaking) preserved, much more from the Church of the learned that from church docent; that the body of the episcopate was unfaithful to his office, while the body of the laity was faithful to his baptism; that the Pope, sometimes, the patriarch, the metropolitan and other large offices, sometimes the general councils, they said what they shouldn't have said, or they did what obscured and compromised the revealed truth; while, other parte, it was the Christian people who, under Providence, it was the ecclesiastical strength of Athanasius, Ilario, Eusebio di Vercelli and other great solitary confessors, that without them they would have failed "[3].

.

I still imagine halberdiers rubbing hands again, squeak louder than before “Ah! I am still right so now I will make the act of faith to fill in the social and all my speeches of insults and rude responses against those post-council pretexts!" What to say: a person who can be said to be sufficiently familiar with the basis of the history of the Church knows very well that over the centuries there have also been popes, bishops and cardinals who have not always behaved in the odor of sanctity, rather, not a few have had reprehensible moral conduct. Sometimes even at the level of exercising their role as pastors they have not been perfect, or to be honest: they were real disasters as far as making concrete decisions e, in some cases, also in the ways of communicating some important dogmas of our faith, what this of which the Supreme Pontiff Honorius I and the Monothelite question of 634 it was a classic example.

.

All these examples in no way can they be adduced as evidence of a certain superiority of the sense of the faithful with respect to the ordinary Magisterium. Indeed, those that Newman quotes and that I take back, they are pastoral choices and ways of life that are absolutely deplorable; but the English theologian acknowledges that, beyond these reprehensible actions, the faithful are formed in the faith by the overwhelming majority of priests, bishops and popes who are wholly orthodox to the correct doctrine of dual nature. Because in their consecration the bishops received the character of the fullness of the apostolic priesthood, hence the state grace that allows him to express himself, under certain conditions, places and times, as authentic and certain teachers of the faith. The imposition of hands that the sacred order confers does not confer an aura of holiness and preservation from future very serious sins, it was not even a sort of sacramental space shield that parried any kind of moral and spiritual imperfection. Therefore these teachers of the faith need at the same time to consult the faithful, because clergy and faithful together contribute to the development and knowledge of Catholic dogma and doctrine. Newman himself - in spite of the exploitation that the indomitable halberdier can still make of him - explicitly writes:

.

“I certainly think the Church teaching he is happier when he has such enthusiastic partisans around him as those represented here, that when he cuts the faithful out of the study of his divine doctrines and the sympathy of his divine contemplations, and demands from them one fides implied in his word, that in the educated classes will end up in indifference, and in the poorest in superstition ".

.

Here then is cooperation and collaboration in consulting the faithful it is the focal point of Newman's entire essay. There is no Church docent without a church docta: the development of correct faith therefore always takes place as a path of ecclesial unity, without creating schisms, false dilemmas and who knows what other devilry, in order to babble nonsense about the primacy of common sense against the "heretical" magisterium of the Supreme Pontiff Francis, of which some brain-disconnected subjects come to maintain that his own election to the sacred throne is invalid. Yes, because the halberdiers continually write against the magisterium, establishing with factual and concrete arguments that the sense of the faithful it is superior even to the details offered by it. That is, in their odd theory it seems to me that I can clearly infer that the sense of the faithful it is a kind of epistemological force that, linked to baptismal grace, it can also come to affirm authentically and indisputably which document can be called authentic magisterium and must therefore be obeyed, and at the same time which document is instead the pure opinion of the pope or the bishops and which can be disregarded if not indeed attacked on social.

.

In tal modo, perhaps not realizing it, they fall into the Protestant error of free examination: only while Protestants apply this theory to Holy Scripture, these free defenders of Catholicism and of the one faith with a spatial halberd, they apply it to Tradition and to the Magisterium texts. If these are all hoaxes in what way, At that time, the faithful walk with the teaching Church (who teaches the truths of faith) without falling into the extremisms seen so far? Let's see in synthesis precisely how the Second Vatican Council defines the meaning of the faithful. In particular he talks about it in the The light in the part dedicated to The sense of faith and the charisms in the people of God:

.

"The holy people of God also participate in Christ's prophetic office by spreading his living testimony everywhere, above all through a life of faith and charity, and by offering God a sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of lips acclaiming to his name (cf.. EB 13,15). The totality of the faithful, having the anointing that comes from the Saint, (cf.. 1 GV 2,20 e 27), cannot be mistaken in believing, and he manifests this property of his through the supernatural sense of the faith of all the people, when "from the bishops to the last lay faithful" shows his universal consent in matters of faith and morals. And indeed, for that sense of faith, which is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, and under the guidance of the sacred magisterium, which allows, if he is faithfully obeyed, to no longer receive a human word, but truly the word of God (cf.. 1 Ts 2,13), God's people unfailingly adhere to the faith transmitted to the saints once and for all (cf.. Gdc 3), with right judgment penetrates it deeper and more fully applying it to life " (LG. N. 12).

.

Starting from this text, let's try to clarify the gross errors mentioned above. The first mistake made in the aforementioned "ecclesiological theory" was that of distinguishing the bishops, the cardinals, dad, in short, all the clergy from the simple lay faithful. An error that was not even committed by Newman as we have seen. In short, the lay faithful do not have a different sense of faith than that of the clergy, which would be more genuine or more true, even if the clergy, in its totality, continually complied with actions contrary to Catholic morality. And here is how I anticipated, the beauty of Catholic doctrine which, in terms of receiving the Truth from the Holy Spirit, places the entire ecclesial body on the same level.

.

The second mistake it consists of contrasting the Magisterium and the Sense of the Faithful: this is outside Catholic logic and theology precisely because of the sole origin of the revealed data: the Trinitarian God in his ad extra missions. God does not offer the truth in pieces, crumbling it according to the people, of times and needs, from which it would follow that God offers, to the Holy Father Francis, the whole Catholic truth about the dual nature of Christ, while to Mr. Rossi of the parish of Tor Lupara he teaches that Jesus is only God or that he is only man, so Mr. Rossi can oppose his personal sense of faith against the Pope's Magisterium. The council teaches precisely that the sense of the faithful comes from listening to the sacred magisterium, which offers guidance on Sacred Scripture and Tradition. Hence Catholic doctrine as regards the authentic teaching of the faith and the interpretation of biblical texts, precisely for the task entrusted by Jesus himself to the apostles and for the power of the keys offered to Peter and his successors, it places the bishops as the first teachers of the faith, and not on the same level as the lay faithful. Which obviously will be able to rightly be formed, study books on exegesis and theology, but they will never be able to assume definitive and authentic interpreters of these texts: it is not the task assigned to them by God.

.

Finally, here is a practical consideration and daily to propose. The penetration of the whole Church to the divine mysteries, as the council writes, clergy and lay faithful who are guided by the Magisterium, it has no military or, on the contrary, only organizational value: in fact, following the Magisterium is what is needed to transform the Word of God into a lived word. To pass from professed faith to lived faith and therefore to active Charity.

.

Follow the Magisterium therefore it does not consist in the act of mimicking the words of others, like puppets or Sicilian puppets, but listen with devout reverence and a critical filial spirit to the word of Jesus to be incarnated today to give the face of Christ to the suffering and those who are far away. For this that once again a sense of the faithful who stood as the definitive interpreter of everything, it would create a fragmentation and fragmentation of the same data of faith, generating as much confusion and chaotic vision of charity. Indeed, again Mr. Rossi might believe that since Jesus has only divine nature and is not really risen because God cannot die, then it would do well to act accordingly and then stop believing in the resurrection of bodies. As a result, also to stop taking care of his body and hurting himself, because if he believes that the body does not rise again, Mr. Rossi can also mutilate himself.

.

This chaotic vision which at the same time would not help to actualize and concretize even the spiritual works of mercy, including that of advising the doubters. In fact, if the Magisterium is no longer an authoritative source of Truth, Mr. Bianchi in his staff sense of the faithful he could also consider it a duty to invite his best friend to carry out a schism and a distancing of the Church and to distance himself from Jesus, when faced with a doubt, for example, about the Trinitarian nature or even about a single and daily moral action.

.

The bizarre theories of the Catholic halberdiers - for which I pray a lot that they convert and soon return to full personal compliance with the doctrine - they reach terrible practical and pastoral conclusions, but above all they end up being, in concrete facts and in their approach to faith, of the perfect Lutherans, without realizing it is, unaware that many of their critical reasons are the same as Martin Luther's. This is why I wanted to dedicate an article to him, to try to avoid a form of the "dictatorship of relativism" disguised as a more genuine expression of the Catholic faith, to prevent certain subjects from falling into Lutheranism on one side, in modernism on the other hand, except to feel and believe the only ones, alone and authentic guardians of the true faith and the authentic Catholic tradition.

Rome, 17 February 2022

.

.

[1] I write it in a note as if it were said in a whisper. Now a doubt arises after these considerations: indeed the praetorians of the faith know the figure and the historical context of Newman? Or they confuse him with the best known actor and performer of The Spaccone? To me honestly the doubt remains.

[2] John Henry Newman, On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine., [Rambler, July 1859.], EEook Edition, paragraph 1.

[3] Paragraph 3.

.

.

______________________

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

.

.

.