The Bishop has the moral obligation to respond to the unfortunate position of the Mayor of Bergamo to sign in favor of the abrogative referendum on legal euthanasia

- Church News -

THE BISHOP HAS THE MORAL OBLIGATION TO RESPOND TO THE WASTE POSITION OF THE MAYOR OF BERGAMO TO SIGN IN FAVOR OF THE ABROGATIVE REFERENDUM ON LEGAL EUTHANASIA

The Mayor of Bergamo on euthanasia: “Over the last few weeks, I have reflected for a long time on this signature which I have affixed with conviction and as a believer. I don't think that the signature and the religious belief are in contradiction "

.

Author
Ivano Liguori, Ofm. Capp.

.

.

PDF format Print article

 

.

.

.

Marco Cappato (of the Luca Coscioni Association) with the Mayor of Bergamo Giorgio Gori at the signing banquet for the referendum on euthanasia [picture from The Corriere di Bergamo, edition 2 September 2021]

When a politician he professes himself a believer and proudly defends the manifestation of sin in all its forms, not only can he not consider himself a believer, but not even to remain within that Catholic ecclesial communion so often boasted in newspapers and televisions to tempt unwary Christian voters.

.

The recent story of the Mayor of Bergamo Giorgio Gori appears sensational, not so much for its political position, very clear and evident to all, but for his alleged position as a believer, that cries out for vengeance in the sight of God and in Catholic common sense. The mayor told reporters with some pride and with clear words:

.

“Over the last few weeks, I have reflected for a long time on this signature which I have affixed with conviction and as a believer. I don't think that the signature and the religious belief are in contradiction " [see: WHO, WHO].

.

Some from the so-called silent ecclesiastical high spheres, because, as it seems, capable only of tearing up their clothes for the poor illegal immigrants who die in the waters of the Mediterranean Sea - for which we all regret with Christian pain -, should reply without further delay to this improvised "believer". Indeed, applying its own logic one could similarly affirm: as a believer I cannot prevent those with a different perception of life from having an abortion. I can't stop a woman from prostituting herself, nor to those who acquire its sexual services to favor prostitution in this way, including that of minors. And why stop taking drugs? As a believer, I am in favor of free drugs. Or is it not free, anyone, to take drugs as and when he wants? To these statements which are intended to be entirely logical, then the justifications follow. However, these are justifications that do not stand on a logical level, to be exact these: legalized abortion prevents clandestine abortion. Legalizing prostitution will take away the business of the underworld. Similarly, legalizing drugs, a large turnover of business will be taken away from the mafias. I find it really strange that no one has yet launched the workhorse: legalizing euthanasia will prevent the various Dj Fabo from having to go to a Swiss clinic and pay a large sum of money for their "end of life".

.

But it, if a quiet citizen who is in his cottage sleeping with his wife and children, finding himself in the middle of the night with thieves in the house and having a regular firearms license, he opens the fire and leaves one dead on the ground in the living room, in that case the voices are raised in unison of the politically correct which praises the "poor thief!». It does not matter, what could have happened to that father of a family and his children, he didn't have to just shoot, because you don't kill a thief inside the house, or better: only in certain ideological cases is life sacred, namely that of the thief, not, however, that of the aborted child. To a thief who committed crime in an incorrigible and dangerous way for the life and safety of others, one can only tell, with a smile, the phrase used in the Ash Wednesday liturgy: "Get converted and believe in the Gospel". But if he decides not to convert, without hesitation he will stun the father of the family and his son with beating, to then rape his wife with his other accomplices. Things that have happened several times and are narrated by the news and by judicial documents [see WHO]. These are cases before which the unanimous chorus "Do not kill" always rises, the same choir which, however, does not rise in front of the counseling centers where chain abortions are practiced.

.

The Blindness of Modern Moderate Totalitarianism we can read in all its destructive wickedness in these words of the mayor of Bergamo who shows off a confused and unhealthy faith to endorse the abrogative referendum on legal euthanasia which is in contrast with both divine Revelation and the Magisterium of the Church. Blindness of a person who considers himself to be a "believer" but whose creed is certainly not that of the Lord of Life. Blindness of a "believer" whose faith more resembles Auguste Comte's liberalism with the abusive Enlightenment claim of giving man divine prerogatives, or of the socialism of Henri de Saint-Simon who sees in the positivist faith a secular salvation that has got rid of God.

.

For this, We Fathers de The island of Patmos, in our capacity as priests and theologians we ask H.E.. Rev.ma Monsignor Francesco Beschi: can a believer who does not listen to Sacred Scripture and the voice of the Magisterium [which is expressed in the Apostolic Letter Good Samaritan and in the Encyclical Gospel of Life] still be said to be such, so much so as to represent a scandal for the faith of many weak and confused Christian brothers? It's possible, in the face of so much proud and persistent manifestation of sin, do not intervene forcefully, perhaps even with a canonical disciplinary action that sees excommunication as the just medicinal penalty for the offender who favors and supports the killing of a human person, thus violating their dignity and respect due to the living God and Creator? [See. Catechism of the Catholic Church NN. 2276-2279].

.

At this moment it would be right and right ask this public figure to account and reason for this, who impudently supports the culture of death and proclaims himself a believer. Just as it would be consoling to hear from the Pastor of the Church who is in Bergamo a word of strong condemnation and dissociation from the words of a faithful who, on the one hand it proclaims itself as such, on the other hand, it incurs the grave error and crime that exposes many to sin.

.

Who knows how many Bergamo Catholics, because of these words spoken by their Mayor, "Believer" and "Catholic", they will be encouraged to sign in front of market stalls or in the offices of their respective municipalities by endorsing this law? Who knows how many, on this Sunday, they will come to make Holy Communion receiving that Christ who in the sick person forced to euthanasia will still stretch his arms on the cross and torn by man's sin will offer himself as a victim to the Father to save us from the satanic deception that wants to do without God? The first, among these sacrilegious communions, it could be that of the Mayor of Bergamo himself, "Believer" and "Catholic" in favor of euthanasia?

.

The Bishop of Bergamo should think about it, especially considering that the Blessed martyr Saint Alexander, patron of his diocese, he did not remove the pains of witness in martyrdom for Christ. Therefore the Bishop does not withhold the pastor's testimony and save his Church from ravenous wolves, that it is not only the smugglers who transport illegal immigrants, several of which unfortunately destined to die in our waters. The ravenous wolves are also certain First Citizens who pride themselves on signing up for the culture of death and who after doing so proclaim themselves believers.. At least, the smugglers, they do not proclaim themselves believers and do not declare that their activity is not in contradiction with religious belief.

.

Laconi, 4 September 2021

.

.

______________________

NOTICE TO READERS

dear,

October is the month of expenses for us because we have to pay the annual dedicated-server for an amount equal to 2.500 Euro, plus various other subscriptions for graphic-editorial services used as indispensable work tools for this magazine, all for a total amount of 5.200 Euro. Every year we have always managed to meet the expense with the offers of the readers that constitute our only support. We are therefore grateful to all who, believing in our apostolic work, they will also want to offer us a small contribution.

In the space below you can find all our foreign countries.

Ariel S. Levi Gualdo

 

.

.

«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 system PayPal:









or you can use the bank account:

payable to Editions The island of Patmos

IBAN IT 74R0503403259000000301118

CODICE SWIFT: BAPPIT21D21
in this case, send us an email warning, because the bank
It does not provide your email and we could not send you a
thanksgiving:

isoladipatmos@gmail.com

.

.

.

 

.

.

.

 

About Father Ivano

Ivano Liguori Dell'Ordine dei Frati Minori Cappuccini Presbitero e Teologo ( Click on the name to read all its articles )

21 thoughts on "The Bishop has the moral obligation to respond to the unfortunate position of the Mayor of Bergamo to sign in favor of the abrogative referendum on legal euthanasia

  1. Well no, dear father Ariel, my source is not a QN article, but it is Msgr Paglia himself, to which the QN has published a much more detailed interview than the concise statement of poor Mayor Gori; which, as far as we are concerned, it is enclosed in that ending (“I do not believe that the signature and the religious belief are in contradiction”) which presumably is the basis of the request for intervention by the Bishop of Bergamo by the author of the article. But the incontrovertible fact is that that phrase also beautifully summarizes the position expressed by Monsignor Paglia, and therefore also of that institution of the Catholic Church competent in the ethical field which, from its very name, has Life as its purpose. Indeed, decriminalize assisted suicide through a referendum or want to regulate it through a law passed by a large majority, inflicts exactly the same moral vulnus in the social body, with more, in the second case, the aggravating circumstance of the Church's blessing concurrence. Which is why I am returning to my initial question: he really thinks that calling the bishop of Bergamo into question is decisive? And I add: he really thinks he is safeguarding the Church by protecting the indefensible Bishop Paglia?

    1. I don't know how old she is, but I suppose she is very young.
      The Italian Catholic Church, did not mediate perhaps, the suo time, in every way, with the political forces who wanted the abortion law?
      Stefano, which is his concept of “mediation”?
      I also explained to a television program conducted by Giuseppe Brindisi the substantial difference between “mediation” and “compromise”.
      Here, you confuse mediation with compromise, simply because it does not know, to the base, the meaning of the words in the context of law, of political science and also of ecclesiastical law.

      I'm so tired of arguing with people who don't want to understand, to the point that, in agreement with the Fathers, our webmaster is working to remove the comments forum. Established that they are a useless waste of time with people who strike and retort off topic and who claim to have account and reason even if you explain to them that they do not even know the meaning of the words they use and on which they raise questions.

  2. Dear Father, no intent to denigrate your precious work and even less to throw arrows or, worse, sketches, but following it with passion for years and having and read its publications (not all), the last recently on vacation the updated reissue of “Satan became the triune God” he almost always finds me in tune with what he writes and says but it is the often opinionated tones that abundantly distribute ignorant attributes (even if said in the sense of one who ignores) and more that often make me uncomfortable. You cannot always agree and disagree is not a crime liable to insult or censure because you think you do not respect or worse it denigrates your life's thought or work. I only mention (not literally but only the meaning) his own, per me, not shareable affirmation: Latin is right to eliminate it from the liturgy of the Church as few know the language fully and then how can the Chinese understand an idiom so far from their hearing or understanding much better in their local language. If so, why try to learn English as it is used as an international language for international relations? I personally think abolishing Latin is nonsense, missals have always been bilingual, one column in Latin and one in the local language. It always remains an enrichment for those who want to deepen it. Without resentment or rancor or worse still to pass as a judge, which they are not, I look, meditate and record only, I cordially greet you and, as always, I wish you good work to you and your talented collaborators.

    1. Both the previous comment, let this clarifying comment be, what do they have to do with the contents of Father Ivano's article?
      Our webmaster has already been commissioned to work on a replacement that is unfortunately needed: delete the comment space and replace everything with: “Letters to the editor”. Who wants to comment or ask an Author for explanations on one of his articles, will be able to send an email.
      And so, we eliminate the root problem.

  3. Caro Father, until recently, a small staircase was enough to access its pedestal and recklessly dare to dialogue with her, today I see that the Viggiù fire brigade auto-scale is not enough.
    Cordially

    1. Explain the reasons and the reasons, otherwise it's just a shot of poison as an end in itself.

      … in any case they are and we are grateful to you, in fact, we are becoming more and more convinced than to make space available for comments, there is a risk of giving only way and opportunity to many people in the mood to raise inappropriate and unrelated issues with the articles, to unleash the best of oneself, and to the merciless judges like her to draw a polite sketch of shit on years and years of apostolic work done by me and my brothers.

    1. Father Ivano is too much of a holy man of God to give certain answers, I'll provide then, that I am an unworthy man of God and a notorious bitch of a priest.

      I remind you that in Italy, in 1978, the abortion law was approved under a Christian Democrat government and promulgated by an army of baciapile politicians led by Amintore Fanfani and Giulio Andreotti.
      The government and the politicians of the D.C.. who signed that law were not at all favored "by the reigning pontiff", who at the time lived in Argentina and was a priest from 9 year old (date of the sacred ordination 13 December 1969), but it passed – I repeat under a Christian Democrat government – formed for the most part by politicians who were pupils and spiritual children of the Holy Pontiff Paul VI.

      In July 1975 a Christian Democrat politician, for which some have even tried to open the beatification process, he declared:

      «[…] the newfound popular nature of the party (N.d.R. the Christian Democracy) it induces to close some rigorous evaluations in the secrecy of consciences, some positions of principle that were proper to our experience in a different phase of social life, but which hinder ease of contact with the masses and political cooperation. There are things that, note, modern public conscience attributes it to the private sphere and refuses to be regulated by legislation and subject to state intervention. Therefore, ductility and tolerance will prevail ".

      Words spoken by Aldo Moro, who was the favorite pupil of Paul VI, the most successful jewel.

      It appears that Holy Communion has been denied to these politicians who, I repeat, they materially passed the law by tying it to their Catholic names, believers, committed and militant?

      Then, what goes’ saying of the current President of the United States of America, who, starting from the case of Afghanistan, does not seem to have guessed one?
      And she knows who did it, before him, the previous Catholic President? It was the very Catholic John Fitzgerald Kennedy, so Catholic as to jump from one whore to another, member of a family whose members, in politics, they have combined all sorts of them, it gives … good Catholics.

      How do you see, I too can conclude by saying like her "and I could go on …»

      1. Reverend Father Ariel,
        I would like to ask you but a politician or a simple Catholic who supports a sin such as abortion or euthanasia or divorce, or the civil unions that then go to mass and commune does not commit a sacrilege? Si o n ?
        Thank you.

        p.s this is never mentioned by many priests

        1. Certain, who performs sacrilege, the Blessed Apostle Paul says so:

          "Therefore everyone who unworthily, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord, he will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord " (The Cor 11, 27).

          But you have wrongly brought up the reigning Pontiff, and in this regard I replied. So now don't change the subject and don't pretend you haven't.

          1. Excuse me, I understand its difficulty, but if we cannot bring up the reigning Pontiff who let us know through the ineffable Mons Paglia what the position of the Church and Catholic politicians should be precisely on the regulation of euthanasia, so why should we bring up the Bishop of Bergamo? It would no longer be consistent to leave him alone?

          2. And what the Supreme Pontiff would have declared through H.E. Mons. Vincenzo Paglia?
            You take out the official document and send it to us.
            But don't send us the confabulations of some bloggers, send us the official declarations contained in the Acts of the Apostolic See, of the Press Office of the Holy See, of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications e, in the specific case, of the Pontifical Academy for Life of which Vincenzo Paglia is president.

          3. Forgive me p. Ariel, I don't like putting people in a corner, but if you ask me for official documents as proof of what Monsignor Paglia is saying daily in the newspapers, it places itself in an awkward position.
            The declaration of the adult Catholic and mayor Gori about his adhesion to the radical referendum is in all respects superimposable to the positions expressed – certainly not in a personal capacity – by Mons Paglia, except perhaps for the method chosen by Gori to sign the referendum for the decriminalization of assisted suicide, when instead the President of the Pontifical Academy for Life would like more the way of “dialogue” to arrive at a law shared by all. Here, however, the question is not whether it is better to call soup wet pan, avoiding raising new walls and easily overcoming old fences., but to understand if Catholic doctrine admits cooperation in evil e, If not, whether this is classifiable as “ideological fury”, an expression now reserved by the hierarchical Church only to disqualify the faith of the little ones (https://www.quotidiano.net/cronaca/il-vaticano-non-alziamo-muri-serve-una-legge-condivisa-1.6731247).

          4. Well, his source on this issue that to define very delicate is pure euphemism and that is engaging the world of politics, of science and faith, is an article taken from National newspaper.
            I have nothing else to add and comment on.

          5. As some seem to teach, a divorced and remarried person whose marriage cannot be annulled, he can have adulterous relations with his partner “for the welfare of the children” and be blameless?

          6. Indicate the precise sentence in which Father Ivano deals with the topic on which you ask this question.
            I have already told him in the past, but to no avail, so I tell him again: because he insists on going into the greengrocer's to ask for a kilo of minced meat?
            Which pro?
            When you comment and ask questions, it is done on the basis of what the author wrote and discussed in his article.
            It's called common sense.

          7. I have not commented on the excellent and acceptable comment of Father Ivano, I simply commented on your statement: “Certain, who performs sacrilege, the Blessed Apostle Paul says so: "Therefore everyone who unworthily, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord, he will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord " (The Cor 11, 27).”
            When commenting in response to a comment, it is done on the basis of what the author of that comment wrote, not based on what the Author of the article that generated the comment wrote and treated.
            It is called logical common sense.

  4. As a believer and Catholic I firmly believe that suffering is a great grace that God often offers sinners for our redemption and salvation. I prefer to die suffering and go to suffer worse pains in Purgatory and one day near or far to enter Heaven ,rather than letting me practice euthanasia, seriously offending God with the illusion of putting an end to my suffering and instead ending up in hell forever. That Mayor now reflects the atheist thought is full of contradictions and hypocrisy of the majority of people, I am surrounded by it unfortunately. This world is shrouded in darkness not only because of the apostasy of "lay Christians" but also because of that of various consecrated persons or at least because of their cowardly silence. Thank God , you can still find priests like you, I also hope bishops and cardinals who have the courage to make the true faith in Christ and his true Gospel resound. You are a great comfort to me. Despite the serious crisis of faith, Jesus made a promise that we all know.
    Thank you and may the Lord bless you always.

Comments are closed.