The real problem is no-vax or anti-vax, or our bishops who have lost the sense of aequitas in the name of politically correct piousness?

- Church news -

THE REAL PROBLEM ARE I NO-VAX O ANTI-VAX, OR OUR BISHOPS WHO HAVE LOST THE SENSE OF AEQUITAS IN THE NAME OF POLITICALLY CORRECT PLEASURE?

.

In a time of emergency, with suspended work activities, companies closed, people locked up in the house in full lockdown, many in despair and depression, the worst thing that could be done, under pretexts of freedom and false rights to information, was to broadcast live on television the quarrels of virologists who gave themselves idiots and incompetents with each other. Already a pandemic is a traumatic event for the population, then let's put the politicians suffering from voting bulimia who acted the way they did, together with representatives of the scientific world who went to argue on television in front of millions of Italians locked up at home, and the disaster was soon made.

.

.

.

PDF print format article
.

.

.

Today, the worst loneliness of priests, consists in finding themselves abandoned by their bishops committed to carrying on the poisonous ideology of the poor and migrants with rare and pandering flattery

After the publication of the two articles by our editor Ivano Liguori [see who e who], I had the opportunity to discuss with several readers about social media, which I recently called an overflowing sewer psychotic and quarrelsome [see who]. Social media which, however, are also an extraordinary tool for exercising our sacred priestly ministry and for carrying out fruitful pastoral evangelization actions.

.

The topic we have addressed it is delicate and sensitive, for anyone to read and reflect - without limiting themselves to just reading the title and subtitle, as in the style of many compulsive internet users -, it will not take long to understand that the issue goes beyond the anti-covid vaccination itself and beyond the controversy anti-vax e pro-wax. Indeed, for the first time, we found ourselves in front of bishops who threatened to suspend from the exercise of the sacred priestly ministry those presbyters who did not want to vaccinate. Let me be clear: the vaccine refractory are very few, because almost all the members of our Italian clergy are all vaccinated with prima, second and many even with the third dose, including myself.

.

The rigor of some bishops has struck us and induced to debate on a topic that, if desired, could be the subject of psychiatric analyzes related to the problem of schizophrenia and borderline psychosis, but if you want to call her bishop-schizofrenia. Also for this reason Fr.I almost feel annoyed to reiterate that we Fathers de The Island of Patmos we are all vaccinated and that to the frequent questions posed by the doubters and the fearful we have always answered that at the moment, the only possible and effective remedy to stem the pandemic is vaccination, which in conscience we have always recommended. Although aware of how simplistic and reductive it really is, as well as misleading, stamp as no-vax all people who refuse the vaccine, placing them hastily in the category of anti-vax, within which, however, there is everything and more, with all due respect to those who tend to provide a unique image.

.

In daily contact with people I didn't take long to see how often they are referred to as no-vax subjects simply frightened and disoriented by a continuous daily bombardment of news often in radical contradiction to each other. And when, in a moment of serious emergency, public opinion begins to be told about everything, to follow shortly after with its exact opposite, then complaining about the results of this action should make some comedians feel inconsistent, if not worse: ridiculous. It should never be forgotten that in the midst of an emergency, the mass media did not scruple to put virologists on the screens in prime time who called each other idiots.. We have heard distinguished scholars placed in the direction of our most renowned clinical and research centers affirm after a few weeks, or a few months, the exact opposite of what they had previously stated, without ever clarifying, with scientific and convincing dignity, that in front of an unknown virus one is forced, Not today, but always, to proceed even by trial and error, because what might have seemed appropriate initially, it later turned out not to be correct thanks to new studies, analyzes and findings on the nature of the infection and its transmission. It would be enough to explain that no man of science is superficial enough to say one thing today and the exact opposite tomorrow, because the best researchers in the world were all busy trying to understand the virus and its effects. Then, when you thought you knew him a little, the problem of variants has also emerged to aggravate everything. So it is not that scientists delight in making claims and shortly thereafter declare the exact opposite, the problem is that in the face of what one does not know, we have always proceeded also by hypothesis, attempts, processes of exclusion and so on. This is how science works, not from today but always.

.

Instead of being informed and instructed to do so, then reassure yourself with precise and correct scientific information understandable to the great mass, given by men of science and not by new showmen, instead we are found to assist on the Rai and Mediaset networks, from evening to evening, a talk show lasting an average of three hours where scholars and politicians did their utmost to make precise and sure statements, the following evening in a different program, or the same evening on a different TV channel, other scholars and politicians claimed the exact opposite, if not worse: branding as wrong and harmful what is indicated by their other scientific colleagues.

.

To understand this act you need to know at least a little from inside the editorial offices of certain television programs, where cynicism and indifference reign supreme. For this reason it is necessary to clarify that when some conductors have placed in front of the cameras some virologists who gave themselves incompetent and idiots with each other, thus fomenting divergent opinions and indecent television brawls, they have by no means acted in this way - as they immediately justified themselves - to give voice to all the different opinions. Also because of the opinions, more or less political, more or less scientific, these authentic masters of cynicism don't care about anything. To move everything, in public as well as commercial television, it's just the god-index-of-listening, to which they are ready to really sacrifice everything, completely devoid of any ethical and moral sense. Or to clarify: if they are aware that news could be biased and dangerous to the point of disorienting public opinion, but destined, however, to raise the audience ratings, always and in any case the option will be the choice of the audience rating, because to the showdown, of truth and public opinion, all in all he cares little or nothing. In conclusion, who is the listener? Soon said: an element that must contribute to creating profit.

.

I am perhaps invoking censorship? No, I am trying to clarify - and I intend to do it well and without misunderstanding - that in a moment of emergency, with suspended work activities, companies closed, people locked up in the house in full lockdown, many in despair and depression, the worst thing that could be done, under pretexts of freedom and false rights to information, was to broadcast live on television the quarrels of virologists who gave themselves idiots and incompetents with each other. Already a pandemic is a traumatic event for the population, then let's put the politicians suffering from voting bulimia who acted the way they did, together with representatives of the scientific world who went to argue on television in front of millions of Italians locked up at home, and the disaster was soon made. And on all of this, who was able to reap the benefits by spreading conspiracies in flurry and bringing to the fore high priests of pseudo-science who would not even be suitable to work as ushers in any avant-garde study and research center? Soon said: subjects such as the managers of the network conspiracy ByoBlu. It's this one, if you allow, it is neither the fault of the gods no-vax nor of anti-vax, that they are who they are and that we know well, especially those ideologized to the maximum and illogical power, capable of being more socially harmful than a mildew that attacks the vines and destroys the grapes. The responsibility lies with whom, in full pandemic, with the Italians imprisoned in the house, continued to think about their portfolios of electoral votes and the media that operated according to the logic of god-index-of-listening.

.

The church, today sick of piacioneria with the desperate aim of regaining that credibility that has been inexorably lost for years, for its part, he thought it appropriate to put the heavy load on it. And so we found ourselves with several bishops who came to threaten to suspend from the exercise of the sacred ministry those very few priests who are refractory to be vaccinated. But even in this case, a precise distinction must be made: a priest who made his own false theories, illogical and anti-scientific, or that despite the denials by the Holy See affirmed and urged not to get vaccinated because the fetuses of aborted babies were blended inside the vaccines, or claiming that the vaccine alters human DNA, or worse that a microchip by the strong occult powers that govern the world, that tomorrow they can make us sick or die on command when they decide to thin the world population… soon said: a priest who affirmed and spread such things, he must be immediately removed from contact with the faithful and limited in the exercise of the ministry, because it can mislead many people, with all the consequences that could derive from it. Certainly draconian measures, but sometimes necessary, in various situations entirely limited to vaccines alone. Why a priest who advised against cancer patients to practice chemotherapy in case of need, because he said it would aggravate cancer for the sole purpose of making the pharmaceutical multinationals rich, or the priest who would suggest to a man with prostate cancer or a woman with breast cancer to contact a good homeopath as soon as possible, as oncologists are only capable of doing harm, acting in this way would demonstrate that he lacks the human and Christian balance required to be able to adequately carry out the ministry of pastor in the care of souls, bringing all the damages of the case to the believers of Christ, that it is the duty of bishops and priests to protect and safeguard, certainly not expose you to serious risks.

.

Having been in the ministry for years as confessor and spiritual director of numerous priests, how many priests have I known who make arguments of this kind or who spread similar theories? To tell the truth, I don't even know one. Or rather yes, I know one, he is not a presbyter but a titular archbishop, S. AND. Mons. Carlo Maria Viganò, in front of which my heart weeps seeing how a serious man, honest and faithful servant of the Church, such he has been throughout his life, is reduced today to being the pusher of the most absurd and idiotic conspiracy theories. But we are talking about a case that is as extreme as it is rare.

.

Another issue is fear, because in this case I can say that I am afraid of the vaccine, above all because of the avalanche of contradictory news and information that for months and months have targeted our national community, I have known several. In this case, But, one must seriously ask oneself: before frightened presbyters, what good bishop reacts and acts by threatening them to proceed against them with canonical sanctions? As you can see, I have outlined two different cases without any penalty of misunderstanding, which require different actions and very distinct provisions on the part of the bishop, the task of which is not to punish the priest by considering him guilty of fear, but to help the priest overcome his own senses of fear. Above all, what struck some of our bishops capable of showing sensitivity only towards the poisonous prevailing ideology of the poor and migrants, with all the genuflect flattery of chance, was the at times truly disturbing lack of aequitas.

.

Father Ivano Liguori remembereda in one of his two articles [see who] than certain zealous bishops, ready today to threaten to suspend vaccine-resistant priests from exercising their sacred ministry, not long ago, always in full pandemic, have seen cases of priests who have gone to sign for the proposal referendum on euthanasia, then posting on social media a photo in which they were portraits smiling in front of the signature collection center with Marco Cappato. Not only, none of these priests was threatened with suspension from the ministry or if pastor removed from the parish, because the bishops of these priests ignored it, moved by an omissive spirit that, to use an old biblical expression: cries for vengeance before God. At this point I would like to join the theologian with the old and rusty jurist in me ...

.

One of the main foundations of Roman law is the principle of aequitas, from which the so-called “principle of proportions” O “practical sense of proportion”, all in order to arrive at a truly just right and therefore a judgment that is truly fair. Our Roman Canon Law, o Ecclesiastical law, is based on the principles of ancient Roman law. A bishop who sets out to follow the blatant schizophrenias of contemporary society, of the politically correct or of the prevailing piousness, demonstrate that you are acting in an emotional or passionate way, bad thing to say the least for any bishop, who cannot be ignorant to the point of forgetting that wise maxim of Aristotle which is the foundation of law and truly just justice: "The law is reason devoid of emotional passion". And from the lack of aequitas, hence a sense of proportion, serious and harmful episcopal schizophrenias can arise.

.

We depict everything with this example: when some parts of the Roman Missal were recently corrected, including the prayer of Our father, there were several presbyters, especially the elderly, who initially found it difficult to dispense the politically correct quote rosa saying "Pray brothers and sisters", even more they had difficulty saying "do not abandon us to temptation" in the prayer of the Our father. And so, in many Italian dioceses, was unleashed there Gestapo-Episcopal and delivered shortly after the ban list of priests who continued to say "Pray brothers". Not because they snubbed the sisters, but why "pray, brothers»Has always had a universal and above all all-inclusive connotation, within which they were all enclosed, not just "brothers and sisters", but all human categories. And this with all due respect to those who immediately specialized in beating the Italian episcopate except to comply and smooth the hair of his German electorate, which contains the best of the worst of everything that is no longer Catholic in the episcopal sphere. This is why it is not clear, wanting to be precise in distributing the quote, why they didn't insert this formula: “Pray brothers, sisters, children, young, Senior citizens, disabled, terminally ill … up to the whores and whores”, who deserve prayers and invitations to prayer more than ever. Not to mention the sexual differences, because the universal Church has always prayed - and always will pray - also for “gay, lesbians, transsexuals, etc … etc …”. This is why I do not understand why all these categories have not been included and instead we are limited only to praying for our brothers and sisters. quote rosa of the sisters. In short: yet another German (I confess to God, the Almighty, and all brothers and sisters …). Clarifying and reiterating that "pray, brothersWas as comprehensive as the terms are homo O Humanitas.

.

Like this, some elderly parish priests who never dared to breathe a sigh outside of what is written in the Missal, least of all adding or subtracting anything as they wish, after the information sent by the members of the Gestapo-Episcopal they felt recalled by the bishop, or by whom for him, with the peremptory invitation to scrupulously adhere to the new formula. However, while these cases were occurring through the work of certain bishops - and unfortunately there have been many - the members of the intra-ecclesial sect of the Neocatechumenal Way, they continued undeterred to do in theirs kikoliturgie all they wanted in liturgical abuses of every kind. But all these things, certain subjects that have their motto as their motto on their episcopal coat of arms “politically correct for ever and ever”, they didn't see them and didn't really want to see them. Simple reason: because if the bishops recall old parish priests, these bow their heads and obey instantly, as it must be, given that to the bishop, all of us priests, we owe filial respect and devoted obedience. However, if they recall the Neocatechumenals, who instead only obey their ignorant and arrogant lay mega-catechists who take orders from Kiko Argüello in matters of doctrine, faith and liturgy, the bishops know very well - and this time I say it with the expressive style of Benedict XIV - that the calls of the bishops can not give a shit emeritus. Having said this, I repeat: if a priest embraces euthanasia this does not eliminate the problem of no-vax, just as it is completely obvious that one cannot expect to react or justify oneself or certain wrong and dangerous situations by saying that others do or have done worse. However, it is true that for aequitas and sense of proportion, before shooting and publicly condemning a priest who does not want to vaccinate just because he is confused and afraid, care is taken to publicly reproach a priest who has gone to sign in favor of the referendum for euthanasia. Because otherwise, if not, you run the risk of condemning the poor peasant girl who dared to kiss her boyfriend with half a centimeter of the tip of her tongue out of her mouth, but being careful not to condemn the daughter of the powerful feudal lord who goes to orgies with three or four men together, but over which, however, the episcopal lions who, if anything, also complain about gods Keyboard lions, therefore condemning those who do not say "Brothers and sisters" and pretending not to see - again to put it in the style of Benedict XIV - that the Neocatechumenals do whatever the fuck they want with the liturgy, following the directives of the layman Kiko Argüello rather than those of the bishop who is the successor of the Apostles, as well as supreme liturgist on whose valid Eucharist celebrated the lawful validity of all the Eucharist celebrated by us his priests depends.

.

Now someone try to blame me. Already, it is true, throughout this speech, undoubtedly serious, rational and logical, I wrote and said twice the shameful and vulgar word "fuck."!». Yup, I used this word in the same way that one of the greatest Supreme Pontiffs of our modernity used it, which many bishops would do well to be inspired by, thus showing to have - under this noble organ often mentioned by Benedict XIV in his intercalary - also the balls. Acting then, Consequently, like men with balls, not like capricious and touchy maidens who play strong with weak and whores with strong bullies, in this increasingly dramatically de-virilized and feminized Church of ours.

.

the Island of Patmos, 20 January 2022

.

.

THE LATEST BOOK BY FATHER ARIEL IS IN DISTRIBUTION

To go to the shop click on the cover image

.

.

.

«You will know the truth and the truth will set you free» [GV 8,32],
but bring, spread and defend the truth not only of
risks but also the costs. Help us supporting this Island
with your offers through the secure Paypal system:









or you can use the bank account:

payable to Editions The island of Patmos

IBAN IT 74R0503403259000000301118
in this case, send us an email warning, because the bank
It does not provide your email and we could not send you a
thanks [ isoladipatmos@gmail.com ]

.

.

.

.

.

5 replies
  1. orenzo
    orenzo says:

    Dearest father Ariel, riguardo ai vaccini ed in conformità a quanto scritto nellaNota della Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede sulla moralità dell’uso di alcuni vaccini anti-Covid-19, 21.12.2020”:
    1. essendo io persona debole ed esposta come indicato al punto 5,
    2. non sussistendo oggi le situazioni indicate ai punti 2 e 3 che renderebbero lecito l’uso di vaccini non etici, non intendo cooperare al male vaccinandomi;
    3. ho inoltre fatto presente all’oncologo che mi ha in cura e che mi ha messo in guardia sul rischio di finire, come minimo, in terapia intensiva nel caso mi infettassi col covid, that, in conformità con quanto stabilito al punto 6, avrei provveduto a farmi vaccinare non appena disponibili i vaccini etici

    • father ariel
      father ariel says:

      Dear Orenzo,

      prendo serenamente atto che come cattolico lei ritiene di poter smentire ciò che in materia di etica e morale la Chiesa ritiene lecito o non lecito riguardo la vaccinazione e il contenuto dei vaccini, all’interno dei quali non ci sono i feti dei bambini abortiti frullati dentro ma sono stati usati alcun embrioni provenienti da aborti spontanei congelati negli anni Settanta.
      Le ricordo che la Chiesa Cattolica dispone di facoltà, istituti e centri clinici di bioetica in Italia, in Europa e in varie altri parti del mondo.
      Lei però ritiene di poter smentire tutti costoro, ed è un suo diritto farlo, se vuole farlo.

      https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20201221_nota-vaccini-anticovid_it.html

      • orenzo
        orenzo says:

        Vorrei inoltre farti notare un’altra cosa: when you write that, per produrre i vaccinisono stati usati alcun embrioni provenienti da aborti spontanei congelati negli anni Settanta”, prendo atto che la tua conoscenza delle tecniche per arrivare alle attuali linee cellulari embrionali umane derivati da aborti, è di poco superiore a quella di chi parla difeti dei bambini abortiti frullati”.

        • father ariel
          father ariel says:

          Non l’ho detto io, lo hanno detto gli esperti di bioetica della Santa Sede consultati dalla Congregazione per la dottrina della fede prima che questo dicastero desse il suo responso sul tema.

          As a result, la Congregazione per la dottrina della fede nel suo documento ha chiarito:

          "The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally legitimate is that the type of cooperation is evil (passive material cooperation) procured abortion from which the same cell lines come, by those who use the resulting vaccines, è remota. The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not binding if there is a grave danger, like diffusion, otherwise irrepressible, of a serious pathogen:[3] in this case, la diffusione pandemica del virus SARS-CoV-2 che causa il Covid-19. È perciò da ritenere che in tale caso si possano usare tutte le vaccinazioni riconosciute come clinicamente sicure ed efficaci con coscienza certa che il ricorso a tali vaccini non significhi una cooperazione formale all’aborto dal quale derivano le cellule con cui i vaccini sono stati prodotti. È da sottolineare tuttavia che l’utilizzo moralmente lecito di questi tipi di vaccini, for the particular conditions that make it so, it cannot in itself constitute legitimacy, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and presupposes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of it ".

          Quindi io mi attengo ai responsi, ai chiarimenti e alle disposizioni della Santa Sede, anche perché non posseggo né una sapienza né una power superiore a quella della Santa Sede, I …

Comments are closed.