The Supreme Pontiff at high altitude: "Martin Lutero was smart». Of course, as it was also Jack the Ripper
Latest posts by Drafting (see all)
- The delicacy of the ancient scorpion: a commendable ironic comment by L'Osservatore Romano on the Sanremo Festival - 3 February 2022
- A precise and decisive note from the Bishop of San Remo-Ventimiglia on the Song Festival now reduced to a porcine event - 2 February 2022
- About the note from the Holy See on the Zan-Scalfarotto bill: tomorrow evening Father Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo will be a guest at the Dritto e Rovescio program on Rete4 to discuss the topic - 23 June 2021
I think it's helpful to know the island goers friends the last work of Father John Cavalcoli, an essay of 36 page report entitled ” Against Luther, why should we not die Protestants” available on:
https://www.amazon.in/Contro-Lutero-dobbiamo-protestanti-Italian-ebook/dp/B077TVTZZG
The Vatican Tosatti reviews the essay on his blog:
http://www.marcotosatti.com/2017/12/07/contro-lutero-un-nuovo-libro-di-padre-cavalcoli-per-non-morire-protestanti-da-cattolici/
As I wrote long ago, Pope Francis is a great admirer of Dostoevsky, and in the work of Russian writer evil and good are often thought of as two sides of the same reality, so it happens that the great criminal coexists potentially with the saint in the same person. It '- per me – a big nonsense, which, moreover, is rather widespread even in the Catholic culture, but Dostoevsky, great writer, It is in such deep end and to be able to spacciarla for real. I'm not talking here of the case of the "great sinner" becomes "holy", on which, moreover, it is often indulge in a manner caricatured. S. Augustine, eg, It was never really a "great sinner" in the usual sense, but one who lived a youth worldliness period sentendone progressively all the weight and vanity, period in which others would have shrugged. Nor should we imagine, in my opinion, Saul when "persecuted" Christians are let go to cruelty, or in everyday life not already betrayed signs of magnanimity S. Paul.
So, is not only "political" or wise and benevolent Jesuitism what he puts into his mouth absurdly flattering judgments of Luther (or other unfortunate characters) but a portion of its personality that makes it difficult to undeceive and causing it to carelessness. This also explains that to assume that Luther was, at least initially, in good faith in its criticisms of the Church: but all the signs are telling us the opposite, namely, that from the beginning, Instead - perhaps darkly and even lying to himself, because there was something morbid in him - Luther same laying the foundations of his great "self-justification", which perhaps he would have been buried in the folds of history if it had not become a tool of worldly powers that made it explode. This also explains some of his theatrical gestures towards that "neighbor" that political correctness now called "other", whether the migrant, il protestante, the Muslim, l’ateo; gestures but end up - beyond his intentions - to make mercy a representation in which the most important role is played by the worldly gratification.
Eh! The things you have to say as they are. very clear and concise Summary. Is it possible that the Pope does not know these things that the believer can misinformed’ easy to learn and study alone? For example, in a recent BBC documentary on reform (seen as a positive active against the ogre represented by the Catholic Church “….who commanded all aspects of social life of the time….” as if the Church is made by people not of their own time, and the company is often not “unbelievers devotees” , Father says Ariel eats) a German scholar has quietly said the word “sola” in “sola fide” in Luther's translation of the Gospel does not exist in any previous biblical text. E’ a pure invention. A drop of truth in a sea of rants of a TV presenter and Professor of history that a quick search then revealed to me convivesse for decades with his partner omesessuale. And you thought.