Hypatia cat Roman responds to Roberto de Mattei



Hypatia cat Roman [see biography drafting, which] provides an analytical response to the message of Roberto de Mattei published and disseminated by Levied Christian [full text which]






Author Hypatia of Alexandria Roman cat
Hypatia cat Roman

click which to listen to the song dedicated to Hypatia by Alberto Sordi



Chiarissimo Professor Dr.. Roberto de Mattei.

The Priest Unnamed which "Christian charity" she is silent the name, we all know that is Stefano Levi Ariel Gualdo. Now, I being philosopher, I will try to answer with a certain logical consistency.

I have not been accused of writing in the newspaper The Gazette, anything, Reverend Unnamed has put a question that she has not escaped: has asked if there is a bad atheism, to Eugenio Scalfari, intellectual left; and a good one, to Giuliano Ferrara, intellectual right, the newspaper which have been repeatedly published your articles so-called "anti-bergogliani”, not only critical to the interview of the Holy Father.

The fact that she claims that "the interview of Pope Francesco be criticized for its content», is a statement that the door out of his job as a historian accustomed from time to use the instrument of history to arrive at conclusions theological and doctrinal disputes, which are entirely legitimate, but in turn questionable, especially if she assumed, as a devout Catholic, to be able to "censor" the Holy Father for what he does and says.

The items to which you refer, starting with some harsh articles on the person of the Holy Father signed by Alessandro Gnocchi - to which the Reverend Innominato recently gave the heretic [see which] - And by the late Mario Palmaro of blessed memory [see which], could not be published in Future because as you know this is the official newspaper of the Italian bishops. Or maybe just Levied Christian and Correspondence Romana may benefit from the right not to publish articles that rise up only indirectly relevant reservations on your friends Lefebvrians? Therefore, if you want to be logical and consistent, do not say that neither Future nor other Catholic papers would never published those your articles, when the first censoring is you, and to levels at which even the old Pravda would perhaps come.

The 'allegations' Cristina Siccardi are not "ungenerous", also because they are not accusations but critical. And here one might ask what is his criterion “scientific criticism”, since she is an academic longtime. Nobody has in fact attacked the delightful Lady but only his books and his ideas weird, under which she can be shown in full and deserved title as 'writer', because this is, But not with the adjective "catholic" as she calls it, because such is not. And who has challenged the ideas catholically incorrect Mrs. Siccardi, whether you like it or not, is in fact a respectable pastor in charge of souls and a theologian whose name she is silent for what he calls angrily "Christian charity". Now, if by chance she wanted to despise someone, do it well, Also this is his right, but does not invoke the "Christian charity", if the Catholic hard&Pure wants to play, because charity is not just a popular way to say, is very serious, because … Deus Caritas Est.

Reverend Unnamed is then a priest facing the people of God is vested with the grave responsibility that she and Mrs. Siccardi you have neither the grace of sacramental state nor for the sacred ministry, ie a moral obligation to tell the faithful what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, seriously pastoral, Reverend Unnamed invited the faithful Catholics who often live with understandable anxiety these moments of confusion get in and Extras ecclesial, not to seek answers and guidelines path in the lines of this delightful Lady, who clumsily abused the figure of Blessed Paul VI to legitimize the Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, impudently likened to St. Athanasius of Alexandria and presenting Paul VI as a figure through which to reach Lefebvre [see which]. Therefore, Mrs. Siccardi, against these his public statements on the historical weird, theological and ecclesiological, either he is ignorant - in the etymological sense of the term to ignore - or he is a mystifier of the history of the Church, because the Blessed Paul VI, about which she claims to own hands accurate research studies conducted [see which], in his letter to the 29 June 1975 Marcel Lefebvre made this clear and unequivocal statement:

You leave invoke the case in your favor of Athanasius. It is true that the great bishop stood virtually alone in defending the true faith, in the contradictions that came to him from all sides. More, precisely, it was the defense of the faith of the recent Council of Nicaea. The council was the standard that inspired his loyalty, as indeed in St. Ambrose. How could anyone today compare to St. Athanasius, by daring to fight a council as the second Vatican Council, that is not less authority, which is even greater in some aspects even than that of Nicaea?

"It is true that St. Athanasius remained practically the only one to defend the true faith, despite the opposition that came from all over. But it was precisely the faith of the recent Council of Nicaea. Today, how could anyone compare himself to St. Athanasius, daring to fight a Council as the Vatican, that is not less authoritative, which is in some respects even more important than that of Nicaea?». [full text of the letter of Blessed Paul VI, which]

Can a serious scholar circumvent this writing so clear of Blessed Paul VI, until completely ignore that just before it, a few years later, took note of the bitterly closed obstinacy of this bishop, St. John Paul II decided to impose excommunication, after he set up a schismatic act, this in fact is the consecration of four bishops without the mandate of the Apostolic? [see which].

Estimate now she erroneous and heretical scope of its arguments and writes the Siccardi, thus sowing serious errors among that People of God towards whom the Reverend Innominato has precise responsibilities and mandates - conferred on him by a Bishop in communion with the Bishop of Rome - to announce and safeguard the Revealed Truth and the Magisterium of the Church, she declares in fact:

"Monsignor Lefebvre was a knight without fear and without reproach with a force that was definitely not human, he acted like he could act during a Sant'Atanasio Arianism, acted as a St. Catherine of Siena, which alone has faced the Popes […] this is when Monsignor Lefebvre becomes the champion of the most important things, of the most essential, that is, a champion of faith, in the sense that defending Mass defends the faith itself […] Monsignor Lefebvre acted so much love for Jesus Christ and then for the Church and for the Pope […] Ecône was a place where you really can defend itself by bombing liberal, Modernist, relativists and where it was possible to keep the Tradition " [see which, from minutes 12,10 to follow].

The fact that Cardinal Raymond Burke Leonard has written a foreword to a book of this author, is neither a guarantee nor a license legitimacy of its contents, also because, if you like c'insegnate is legitimate to criticize at every turn the work of the popes who have succeeded by 1958 to date and therefore the authority and documents of an entire ecumenical council - something in which you have long specialized through books, conferences and journalistic activities - more so wonder: you can if necessary criticize the choices more or less appropriate for a single cardinal, deposed by the Roman Pontiff by the Presidency of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, just to be nominated 66 years chaplain of the Knights of the Order of Malta?

As for Mrs. Maria Guarini, whose kindness and commitment no one has ever raised any question, the fact that the Brunero Gherardini has called "a woman of faith and science", is not a guarantee, Although the Lady a woman of undoubted faith and a scholar who seeks to learn science. Indeed, when the Lady appeared long ago to Reverend Innomitato the draft of his book on liturgical themes, he was startled to find in it in a whole series of errors of historical and theological, combined with a precarious knowledge of dogmatic sacramental, finally crowned by a generous foreword by Brunero Gherardini. This is the reason why the Reverend Unnamed not agreed to publish the book in the series theological directed by him: to avoid an eminent elder brother of the caliber of Brunero Gherardini yet another poor showing to be delivered to the history, so evident were certain errors of Guarini as inappropriate before them the preface of Gherardini.

We are pleased, Professor clear, that you manage to keep up foundations, news agencies, magazines, sites, publications of books for a fee, organization of conferences, gears for the life and so on, all with subscriptions and sacrifice of so many faithful friends who collaborate with you. Therefore, if instead declare offended by certain "slanderous attacks" that these are not, Christian charity had to teach to us how to collect considerable sums of money to prop up our activities for the good of the Church founded by Christ on Peter, we would be grateful to be now and forever, ensuring a special memory for her and the Lepanto Foundation during a Mass celebrated for you - with the penalty the old order - on the feast of the Chair of St. Peter.


Post scripts

Dr. Paul Deotto, Director of Levied Christian, referring also to Reverend Unnamed, took the opportunity to make an allusion to the results of the Law Basaglia that left many loose those with problems after the closure of mental hospitals [see full article which]. Dr. Deotto, with his prudish weather democristianese based on saying and not saying - lexicon and style now dead at the dawn of the seventies -, seems very sensitive to certain political and social problems, so we would like to invite him to evaluate another drama, on which could write some pearl of wisdom: Italy is a country increasingly old and with a number of older problematic always higher, Unfortunately, many of which remain cut off from the departments of geriatrics for lack of places available, which is partly a human drama, partly an emergency that demands further investigation.


About Hypatia

Gatta Romana Filosofo Alessandrino ( Click on the name to read all its articles )

28 thoughts on "Hypatia cat Roman responds to Roberto de Mattei

  1. Don Ariel,
    I came across this speech by De Mattei del 2005 which I think explains well his thinking about atheists “good” and atheists “bad”. The gist is as follows:

    “A sincere and effective collaboration in which anti-progressive Catholics have the courage to profess themselves anti-liberal, and the anti-progressive liberals have the courage to collaborate with the anti-liberal Catholics who extend their hand to them. It has already happened in history with the Gentiloni Pact, […] The anti-progressive liberals who are not afraid to look at the enemy and call him by name, who have the courage to say very clearly and loudly what many Europeans and Italians think, breaking the hood of politically correct conformity. They are not afraid of arousing the ire of the political and cultural world from which they come. These laymen show us the way to the fortress, we must provide them with the Christian and theological virtue of hope, the confidence that with the supernatural help of grace and with a great theology of history behind it, the Christian roots of Europe and the West will invincibly bring their extraordinary fruits of civilization into our time”

  2. It doesn't seem so strange to me that in a situation of great confusion (because this is the basic figure) there are those who think they can solve something by denying everything the Church has said and done in the last fifty years. And’ a specular and complementary position to that according to which the solution at hand lies in the women priests, in introducing Catholic gay divorce and marriage, in giving all power to the soviets …hum, pastoral councils and diocesan synods. It is also not uncommon for people to move within these two poles without going through the center. In times of difficulty, human beings are unfortunately led to seek the stroke of a magic wand that magically puts everything back in place.. And’ an illusion, some, but it's not up to you, priests and bishops, to eliminate this confusion which exposes the laity to the temptation to seek their recipe for themselves?

  3. Dear father, she writes: “The Reverend Innominato is therefore a priest who in front of the People of God is invested with that grave responsibility that you and Mrs. Siccardi have neither by grace of sacramental state nor by sacred ministry., ie a moral obligation to tell the faithful what is right and what is wrong”.
    God bless you just for this sentence!! With it he reaffirms the role of priests and theologians and the role of the laity and scholars of various subjects.
    It is not the first time that, in his articles, she reaffirms the figure of the priest, that, if necessary, he is also an authority figure, and it is for “sacrament of grace” and, as you say for “mandate” received by the Church.
    Holy words!!
    This people, like some groups of Neocatechumenals (we are all priests!) that I have known in the past, they don't seem to have a clear picture of the priest.
    Well he wrote, a certain “Orion – 30 January 2015, 10:50”, in a previous article, the one where she was covered in insults (The West opposes only the tolerant irrationalism of atheists to the intolerant irrationalism of Muslims) : “in the time of St. Pius X Siccardi would not have been allowed to open her mouth even to sing in the parish choir, let alone to open his mouth to pontificate on ecclesiastical matters? You want to make really hard-core traditionalists? Fine, then you start to say to the Siccardi to stop dealing with things of the Church, dacchè come dice Apostle, "the woman be silent in church" “.
    I'm not saying that, give it, must be silent, as it would be understood today, perhaps not even St. Paul meant this but something else, than a secular gentleman, but, the name of a priest is silent with contempt, “for Christian charity”, is a qualifier of prof. De Mattei and all his gloomy group of sad saddened.
    Thanks again father!

    1. La mia ovviamente era una provocazione 🙂
      One of the big problems of the Church today lies precisely in the fact that there is a great confusion between clergy and laity: we have clerics who have become laicized, and lay people who have become clerics.

  4. Most Reverend Father, I am in agreement with your writings, maybe not always in the form, but in essence yes.
    I also have to thank you for putting (indirectly) questioning my way of thinking. I have often found myself with a head full of traditionalist ideas, that I now have
    understood to be different from tradition, in which the Pope was the object of my attacks (to the sentences then extrapolated), without ever remembering the words of Christ “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church”.
    Now then I can say that I have understood what the traditionalist world is: a closed world, made up of people who make it and laugh and where dissent is not allowed, above all it is not allowed on questionable and contingent things. Dissent from their ideas, means. While it is allowed, indeed, dissent from the Church is a must.
    The latest examples are the attacks on the person of Adinolfi, relentlessly leveraging his status as a divorced and remarried (as if they were without skeletons in the closet) and now to Francesco Agnoli, guilty of not thinking like them anymore (http://www.riscossacristiana.it/balilla-crociati…/).
    So I feel like thanking you from the heart.
    Ave Maria!

    1. Dear Gianluca.

      I have often been told that it is a world, the so-called one “traditionalist”, where there are also great people, moved by sincere good faith. But the fact escapes – something that I believe I can instead affirm with the experience of the confessor, of the spiritual director and the pastor in care of souls – that many of these great people, precisely because they are animated by these correct feelings, they depart from it for the very true reasons you have indicated.
      Make a statement like this mine, at best it leads to being accused of ungenerous generalizations. And in the face of these replicas, here I sincerely would like to understand, making an example in this sense: in 2011, in my book (And Satan came Trino), I explained that many diocesan seminaries and religious novitiates were by now so polluted, that if excellent elements entered it, soon they found themselves in a position to get out of it, all, often, in the total powerlessness of the ecclesiastical and religious authorities who seemed almost to defend the weeds rather than the good wheat; and for all this they explain the reasons. This was the result: over the years there has been a real army of bishops who, in the face of those analyzes, have given me not one but a thousand reasons, to which I have repeatedly replied: “Well, then intervene!”.
      However, if the same analytical criterion is applied to the world of the so-called “Traditionalists”, then thunder and lightning break loose … “here, your generalizzi, you don't take into consideration the many good and good people”.
      I take into consideration that healthy branches and fruit cannot be born from a rotten tree, and I have reason to believe that Lefebvrism is born in and of itself rotten, that is, by an intolerable and unacceptable act of rebellion against the authority of Peter and an entire ecumenical council. Having said that, explain to me, with these undeniable premises, what healthy fruits should be born, perhaps the safeguarding of the most holy rite of the holy Mass of St. Pius V?
      Well, but at what price, the safeguard of a liturgical patrimony that was going was paid – I'm the first to say it – protected, safeguarded and not lost?

  5. I join the many appeals pleaded in Ghergon's speech that I can only share and add, Father expensive Ariel: help us! really think about people like us and believe them, we are many. On faceboock they ask us for texts on apologetics and catechesis, they ask us how they should go on and they are not people who attend the ancient Mass, but they are people who no longer go to ordinary Mass because they are tired of modernist masses… and they don't know where to turn, they don't know what to do, souls forgotten by all!
    As for the beautiful and wise Hypatia what to tell her? 🙂 Potremo unire le mie tre: Diva, Yume and Vita together with Valery, la gatta della nostra amica Ester e fondare una nuova congregazione di teologhesse sagge 🙂 e sopraffine
    Voltiamo page caro Father Ariel, Jesus awaits proclaimers of the Word and He alone knows how much we need it so much to say that the harvest is plentiful but the true workers are few. You will also be one of these few, but he has the gift to face all this, spend it well.
    God bless you, and the Madonna protect her.
    Ave Maria

    1. How to Caterina,

      but you went crazy? Putting three cats together, so much more than Catholic cats like yours, of Ester and mine? And’ less dangerous to put together three pit bulls, dogs belonging to breeds “socially dangerous”.

  6. That Riscossa Cristiana adopts censorship is a fact also for the comments on their articles. Once I took the liberty of expressing my dissent to an article of great anger and bitterness against the Holy Father, trying to argue my position. Now my comments have not only not been published, but they have not even received a private response. A panic smut.. this is their tradition: I'm right, all the others are wrong!!!

  7. Don Ariel, There are in my opinion a little’ pro's and cons. Certain positions “traditional” they actually exude as well as an absurd hatred, a rampant pride. And’ I've been writing online for some time, and it should be clear to anyone who has studied a minimum of doctrine and professes himself “traditional”, that in an unequal society like the Church, composed of superiors and subjects, the obedience of subjects before higher requirements, that do not affect the divine or natural rights, is an absolute obligation even if they were unjust orders…in what seems to us injustice indeed, the Lord, works for his plans and our reckless rebellion might be just that’ unwanted hindrance to your designs, and even if we are its actors in the world, our pride could be the breaking element capable of ruining everything. The excuses normally used to evade obedience, they are generally absurd and are always well founded, ultimately, on their personal opinions placed before the Magisterium of the Church with extreme nonchalance, thing a Catholic should not do never ever, in the face of the Paladins of doctrinal purity…I had to impose myself to support the error of the SSPX which had no reasons in the specific case to refuse the canonical regularization agreement, given that affirm submission to the Pope(!)…. I caught myself’ I my good dose of insults and climbing “theological” do it yourself, in front of an almost comic evidence…but if a person loves the doctrine of our Lord he knows that or he professes it in full, or it is not professed at all. And myself, would like to try to be a true integral Catholic and not in flashes by flying over the Dogmas at leisure to make room for personal thoughts…this is not following the Tradition…but it is simple relativism / modernism disguised as Tradition…
    And’ true though, that even in the face of unjustified obstinacy and the many problems you have reported, it is however at least thanks to the SSPX if today we still have the Mass in the Tridentine Rite and this I believe is undeniable…
    On the other hand, we have a Soviet of modernists who would seem to finally claim victory at full speed…who still marched with purity and simplicity in Scripture and Tradition without fanaticism, with great love and serenity, totalmente with church, it was hit hard by indefinable forces. I am speaking clearly of the Franciscans of the Immaculate Conception, a holy order, police station, unprecedented in history, without reasons!…But to understand them just read the blogs of some dissidents of the order. I read an article about them two days ago and I was shocked by the hatred and personal anger that exuded from each line, a real matter of delusional pride: shocking .. believe me I'm not joking…
    So we faithful Roman Catholic Apostolic Catholics, that we want to profess our Faith fully, following the teaching of all time, as the Saints and Doctors of the Church have taught us, in the healthy Tradition, we are not in good shape…on both sides we have excesses and unacceptable relativisms, centripetal forces aimed at the demolition of the equilibrium point, which is what you are looking for…the devil clearly works well on all sides… God help us…Thanks Don Ariel a warm greeting.

    1. Dear Ghergon.

      I thank you for your amiable and balanced analysis to which I have nothing to add, if not take the cue of serious reflection.

  8. Rev. Father Ariel, will be able to understand, the good Alessandro Gnocchi, left now on a tangent, she, with her words, and his accusation of heresy, she opened her arms to him to tell him I want you in the church and with the church? Because it doesn't matter if I understood it, it would count instead if he understood it.

    1. Dear Fausto.

      I have no memory of my father at all, starting from childhood to adulthood – that is up to the age of 26 year old, when I lost it – who reproached me with a spirit of bitterness, or worse animated by bad feelings. I recognize and acknowledge something else, thinking about it today, a deep spirit of total goodness in his reproaches. The exact same goodness through which I gave Alessandro Gnocchi a heretic, reiterating that his expressions are deeply and seriously heretical, unfairly and dangerously contemptuous the person of the Holy Father, than with all its limitations and flaws – which he has and which no one denies – remains Pietro, the stone on which Christ built his Church; therefore this author is taking on the very serious responsibility, before the Almighty, of the sowing of poisons among the People of God, especially among the faithful lost and bewildered in search of comfort.
      The priest is neither a sociologist, nor a religious worker, nor an employee of the “multinational company” Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, but precisely a father, called to the responsible business, and sometimes even burdensome and decisive, of this paternity of his.
      Gnocchi and the people who follow his line are totally self-referential, they don't listen to anyone, they do not recognize the sacramental paternity of priests – with the exception of those who err, think like them – they do not recognize the authority of theologians who in the Church and in perfect communion with the Church have received from the same mandate to transmit the truths of faith and its Magisterium.
      At the moment I doubt that you understand what I have said and what you are pointing out, at least according to what she continues to write http://www.riscossacristiana.it/gnocchi100215/ a fortiori I do not lose hope and I hope that sooner or later he will understand and recognize that the authoritativeness and pastoral authority of paternity does not depend at all on all those external accidents that are often a sign of a glorious past that for some must not pass, just as the Dominican theologian Giovanni Cavalcoli explains in a truly masterful way in his latest article https://isoladipatmos.com/per-un-sano-tradizionalismo/

  9. Father Ariel Caro, this time I must say that the text puzzles me. I say this with regret and with the concern of being mistaken for a Lefebvrian and of catching myself “stylet” from his pen. Why transform this wonderful site into an arena where to conduct sterile controversies? I understand the first article, but this second was necessary? The other fathers agree? You leave us the beautiful image of a humble and uplifting priest and not the false image of a nasty polemicist. And forget about the people you mentioned who, even if they are wrong, seek only the good of the Church. With an ongoing synod where the interim report contained dangerous openings to homosexual couples and to communion for the remarried, he really thinks that the threats to the Church (the danger of apostasy of which Our Lady speaks), come from 4 cats she cited as alleged Lefebvrians? Think it's more’ right the conscience of a De Mattei or a Forte who styled’ la cited a report intermediates? Thanks for the attention

    1. Dear Joseph.

      Your comment is welcome and I would never dream of stylizing it.
      I don't want to widen the controversy, which I consider closed, also because my duty, together with the two older fathers, is that of edifying the People of God with theological texts, doctrine, catechesis, pastoral … certainly not with controversy that, if they exceed the limit, they become sterile and ends in themselves, as I sincerely think and as the theologian and elderly confrere Antonio Livi rightly pointed out to me, I have always held the opinion and above all the advice in the highest regard, since I also and especially listen to others, certainly not and not just myself.
      The good of the Church must be understood, because I don't think the parent of a drug addict, seeing her son writhing from withdrawal attacks, going to the drug dealer to buy him heroin does his good. In other words: the good of the Church is sought in the Church, with the Church for the Church and within the Church, not placing himself in open antagonism to the Church, to his authority and his magisterium.
      Regarding the synod on the family, on which in a while’ I will write an article, I believe it is appropriate not to process intentions. Let me explain: discussion texts came out, proposals and so on, it is true … but all this is irrelevant, with all due respect to whom, applying political rather than ecclesiological criteria, fear “carried out”, “blow”, “betrayals of doctrine”, transforming everything into a kind of scoop for Roman Correspondence, Levied Christian, Church&Post council, etc. …
      And I say irrelevant because what matters are the conclusions and therefore the pastoral directives; and for now we have had neither the one nor the other. What we have official, for now, they are 19 minutes of impeccable concluding speech by the Holy Father in front of which no one can reasonably disagree, because that's right, doctrinally correct and pastorally balanced. What this masterfully explained with all the balance and theological science that is proper to him by the Dominican theologian Giovanni Cavalcoli, who dedicated an article to the concluding opening of the Holy Father on these telematic columns, in which you will also find attached the video of the Supreme Pontiff speaking to the Synod Fathers: https://isoladipatmos.com/il-sinodo-dei-vescovi-ed-il-problema-rahner-il-grande-apprendista-stregone/
      So tell me, these robbers and scarecrows, like de Mattei, of schisms, what they base their opinions and hypotheses on?

      see movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZj0MV-f2Ug

      These “political” of the Church scared, what they are discussing, perhaps of trials of intentions or of parallel science fiction universes in which everything can, of course, end badly?
      I can not, in addition to, to establish “if the conscience of a de Mattei or a Forte is more upright”, because only God can read and judge the depth of conscience. I can only tell you this: I promised devout and filial obedience in the hands of the bishop who consecrated me to the sacred priestly order, not in the hands of Roberto de Mattei or other similar lay people.
      the Archbishop of Chieti-Vasto, Bruno Forte, in many respects it is the perfect antithesis of my theological feeling, but he is a bishop, a legitimate successor of the Apostles to whom I owe my most devoted respect. De Mattei is not a bishop and he is not a legitimate successor of the Apostles. Therefore, while not sharing his theology, I will always pay veneration to Bruno Forte as he is clothed with the fullness of the apostolic priesthood, at least until it fell into public and overt heresy. I will never be, instead, on the side of de Mattei, that starting from the Holy Father to follow with the Synod Fathers, remains a layman who presumes to make fleas on Peter and all his Apostles, except for one or two who show ambiguously that they think perhaps like him.
      All this I tell you with a purely Catholic spirit and without any polemical spirit, because I am fed up with these increasingly clericalized laity and these increasingly secularized clerics.

      With sincere esteem.

  10. I must say that your cat writes as well as you do, indeed perhaps (but I use the maybe) surpasses you in noble clarity
    and “sweet pungent stil”. I and, the cats move up “hot roofs”

    a hug

  11. Caro Father, I've always wondered one thing: how does Don Ariel keep himself so young? He has 20 years older than me, but he looks like my age! Finally reading the benefits of laughter at the bottom of his latest article I discovered his secret!

    1. Dear Mark,

      Thanks for the smile you gave me, all the more reason I must “defend myself” ensuring that I have not done the “deal with the devil”. As indeed Msgr. Antonio Love, that despite some ailments, to 78 year old, looks like a young man; I hope to reach her age in her physical condition, but above all mental.

  12. Sorry Hypatia, first of all congratulations on your article, you can see that you are the cat of a theologian. tell me, your master, Padre Ariel, travel on the loose or with bodyguards?
    However, she is a beautiful cat.

  13. father Ariel she has a pen … “evil”, in a purely figurative sense, for charity! Now, answer they can also answer you, but I wonder about what or denying it about what?
    What struck me was this allusion without naming it, as if she were an unknown emeritus, but when ever !?. Perhaps he has forgotten, the ironic director of Riscossa Cristiana, who invokes the Basaglia law for her, than on that site, his articles, they were the most read and clicked with hundreds of “I like it”, and that today those hundreds of likes are practically absent on those who write theirs “leading signatures” starting with Gnocchi and Siccardi?
    I believe, dearest father, that you are not a controllable subject, and that the only control that you accept is subject to, it is that of the church and its authority. I don't know her personally, but from his articles and books I believe, very modestly, to have understood this.

    1. On Riscossa Cristiana I only read the articles by Father Ariel and first those by Father Cavalcoli, which have disappeared … first one, then another … because?
      However, I noticed that the release of these two pens coincided with a markedly Lefevrian turn.
      Long live the Island of Patmos, here you are in your house, dear fathers, and nobody can make you fleas.

      Greetings from a very fond reader of Turin

    2. Madam / Miss Manuela, I have 72 year old, i lost my wife since 5, and I'm 5 years that I repeat myself: None, like women, he can read and understand us men.

  14. As a Catholic, this defense of Lefevre and participation in conferences in that area perplex me. Cito ” read the Motu proprio of John Paul II, Ecclesia Dei.
    “4. The root of this schismatic act can be found in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. …”
    In addition to, the excommunication was revoked that decree for living bishops, not for Lefebvre and his schism, for which the latae sententiae one is always valid for formal adherence to the schism: "Nobody should ignore that formal adherence to the schism constitutes a grave offense to God and involves the excommunication established by the law of the Church(8)”.

    1. BOOK SIXTH, Vincenzo, just the term “schism” non è corretto 😉 Benedetto XVI lo ha spiegato benissimo anche nella famosa Lettera ai Vescovi del 2009. The SSPX was never defined, by the Popes, schismatic. The schism was related to the 4 Bishops and not to the Fraternity which nevertheless ordained priests when the bishops were schismatics, but removed the schism in 2009 orders are valid but have NO jurisdiction, consequently they are not “sorted” the Church. Their position is canonically “disordered” but no longer schismatic. The SSPX has NEVER been declared schismatic as a fraternity. The schismatic act of which JPII spoke in the ED was related to the ordinations of 4 Bishops. Benedict XVI with his gesture had tried to open a passage, but he did not succeed and not for his own will! Some traditionalist fringes of our home have had a lot of responsibility and they are careful not to join the SSPX because they would not take them. Lefebvre consummated the schism by NOT giving life to the Fraternity, but for the sole appointment of 4 Bishops.

      1. I quote Cherubino . “The latae sententiae excommunication that struck Msgr. Lefebvre has not lapsed and is not to be confused with the ad personam decree that struck Lefebvre and the bishops.
        Let's do some clarity:
        – the latae sententiae excommunication affected Lefebvre and the bishops consecrated by him and all those who formally adhere to the positions of Lefebvre;
        – the decree of excommunication sanctioned what was already in the latae sententiae excommunication;
        – Lefebvre died excommunicated and the revocation does not concern him;
        – the revocation decreed by Benedict XVI concerns the previous decree and not the latae sententiae excommunication;
        – therefore those who formally adhere to the errors and schismatic choices of Lefebvre, not recognizing the authority of all popes, first of all the living and "ruling" one, not condemning the illegitimate ordination of bishops and the illicit exercise of the priestly ministry, he does not accept the integral Magisterium which includes the Second Vatican Council is still excommunicated. Now see if on the "paper" these gentlemen who contest or rather accuse the pope (several popes) of errors, heresies, etc.. etc.. and they openly profess to adhere to Lefevbre's ideas whether Catholic or not

    2. Dear Vincent.

      his comment is entirely relevant, however, what the Roman says about it is true “Saint Catherine of Venice”: the excommunication is linked to the consecration of the four bishops without the mandate of the Apostolic See and in disobedience to the Apostolic See, in that case, Marcel Lefebvre, he can be indicated in technical language not even as a heretic but as a heresiarch.

Comments are closed.