- ecclesial news -

HOW TO REMEDY THE excommunication TO HERESY

.

The belong or not to belong to the Church, the stay or leave the Church are not such simple things. Of course, there may be forms of separation and total, such as loss of faith with apostasy. But usually there are different degrees of separation and therefore of excommunication. We must also see that idea one gets of the Church and of belonging to the Church or ecclesial communion. One can be convinced to fully belong to the Church, and instead is yours only partially, as for example the Protestants or modernists.

.

Author
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p.

.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

Alinari photo 1950 – the Dominican Friars, during the Fiorita Festival in Florence, lay a tribute to the place where he was hanged and burned Girolamo Savonarola

St. Paul the Apostle warns: "If any man preach a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be anathema!» [Gal 1,9].

.

In every community the president has the power and duty to protect with appropriate remedial measures or coercive community members that it causes harm or endanger the good order and peace. This principle of justice also applies to the Church, as stated in the Code of Canon Law: "The Church has an innate and proper right to coerce criminal penalties the faithful who have committed crimes" [can. 1311].

.

From the earliest days of the Church the apostles, taking up the tradition of the synagogue, expelling unruly, troublemakers and apostates, exercised judicial power against serious crimes, as evidenced by the story of Ananias and Sapphira [cf. At 5, 1-11]. So St. Paul expels from the incestuous community [cf. The Cor 5,8]. To condemn the erring, he uses a greek word: anàthema, corresponding to Hebrew dear, which means "cursed" and therefore "excommunicated". So he warns: "If any man love not the Lord, is anàthema!» [The Cor 16,22]. E: "If anyone preaches any other gospel, is anàthema» [Gal 1.8]. Jesus himself repeatedly launches curses. And indeed, since the first centuries the Councils declare anàthema, ie excommunicated those who support the errors condemned.

.

St. Thomas Aquinas explains l'Origin of the concept of anàthema and then of excommunication. L'says Aquinas: « anàthema It is a Greek word composed of he went, which means 'above' and thesis, which means 'position', so to call 'anatema'' What-you-place-in-high ', because when it was captured prey like something you did not want to use by men, it was suspended in the temple, so far it has become a habit that those things which are separated from common men, They were "anathema" calls, as we see in the Book of Genesis: "Whether this city accursed [1] and is devoted to the Lord all that is in it " [GS 6,17]» [2].

.

From here, in Ecumenical Councils, the much used formula let him be, that will appear for the last time in the First Vatican Council, while it is absent in the Second Vatican Council, This clearly does not mean that the Council did not condemn the errors, claiming which it incurs excommunication. Today's excommunication is what the Church once called anatema, that curse: a verdict of an error or an errant, pronounced authority with the imposition of a penalty and the expulsion or removal of the dissident or criminal from the community.

.

"Curse" in this biblical context means "to say the least-bad", but not in the sense of slander, but in the sense of declaring in court that someone has spoken ill or hurt and therefore it deserves to be punished, It deserves a bad penalty. In this regard the Bible says that God curses the wicked and Christ at the Last Judgment when away from the reprobate [cf. Mt 25,41]. The curse can strike the evil deed, but it can also affect the person who has done this deed. It is true that both the Gospel [cf. LC 6,28], As St. Paul advised not to curse [cf. RM 12,14]. But these prohibitions affect those who curse the innocent, as it is forbidden to kill the innocent, but not criminal. Otherwise, the Church would not anathematized for centuries and millennia heretics and schismatics. And if today we hear or read the Popes curse the heretics, we can not ignore that only recently the Church has abandoned this language, that the Commission used safely for a long time, but that today, the current climate of ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue, indeed there embarrass. Today it seems to us that the curse has aroused hatred. But it is not necessarily so. Understood in the legal sense, it is an act of justice. And if the word has been abandoned by the Magisterium of the Church, It remains the equivalent term of "excommunication". Now, communion, the unit, the pace, mutual love and harmony in the Church born from the common acceptance by all the faithful of the same truths of faith and the same discipline taught by the Magisterium of the Church under the guidance of the Supreme Pontiff. So we understand that the heretic deserves to be excommunicated. The Church is a community united, coordinated and concordant in mutual by the Holy Spirit, who argues the Pope in the task to found the fellowship with God and the truth of God's word all acceptation. However, with God's permission, within the Church on earth, He works the Devil, with his retinue of "children of the devil" [The Gv 3, 10]. This means that the Church arise and spread heresies, that the ecclesiastical authority is obliged to intervene to warn the faithful and stop the error diffusion. So it happened, for instance, with the phenomenon of modernism at the time of St. Pius X and some theologians, as for example Ernesto Buonaiuti, Alfred Loisy, George Tyrrell, Romolo Murri and other.

.

Fact, it happens occasionally that the devil persuades and push cunningly and wickedly some brothers imprudent, ambitious and unwary, which can also be shepherds, to distort the concept of the Church and to work to divide, desecrate and destroy, acting so insidious and covered, with vain and specious pretexts of reform or conservation, to avoid being discovered and seduced more easily.

.

These false Catholics, seduced by Satan, openly reveal their perverse and subversive plans, for example masonic or atheists, only to those tawny or unfortunate that, after they were told they thoroughly, perhaps with petty man or glittering promises, They know they have become allies or punch in the work undertaken satanic, while they are keeping the secret or know well before the true believers masquerade. In this sense, the Canon Law warns against 'associations which plot against the Church " [can. 1374].

.

After having spun their plots, heretics and schismatics suddenly emerge from the darkness and strike by surprise, as the Psalm says: "Whet their tongue like a sword, hurled bitter words like arrows to hit the innocent in secret; hit him by surprise and have no fear. They persist in doing evil; agree to laying snares " [Shall 64 3-6]. "The poor succumbs to the pride of the wicked, and falls into the pitfalls tramate" [Shall 9, 23]. This can be for power and pressure groups hidden within the Church and of the same class of bishops or cardinals, which apparently they seem respectful of papal authority. But the expert eye, as to what the good doctor, Take a few signs or symptoms for a glimpse of the rot that lies beneath the beautiful appearance, how those whited sepulchres of which the Lord speaks. It is the "enemy" [Mt 13, 25-36], of which the Gospel speaks, that hidden in the wheat field has sown the tares. To about, Jesus recommends to let it grow with wheat and weeds, lest, removing this, be taken even that. You must wait, He says, the Lord's Day, when He unveiling the secrets of hearts, He shall judge. Now, it is clear that here Jesus refers to God's judgment at the end of the world, final judgment and unappealable, determining the ultimate destiny of all of us. But that does not stop at all to Jesus to entrust a judicial power to the pastors of the Church, in the first place to Peter, when orders him to tend his sheep. It 'also clear that this power, limited and fallible, It refers only to the outer hole and does not purport to scrutinize the intimate of conscience, only God knows. However, this power, functional to the maintenance of good order of peace in the Church, is assigned by Christ the right and duty to fix all the conditions and the degrees of membership in the Church, why he is not prohibited, in appropriate circumstances and for valid reasons, excluded from ecclesial communion - that's excommunication - those jumping off it unworthy or to their false ideas or for their misconduct.

.

THE excommunication EXCLUDED FROM CHURCH COMMUNION

.

Excommunication is a decree authority, Pope or Bishop, with which the prelate, in order to correct - medicines penis O censure, title IV, Chapter I - or protect the community - expiatory penalties, Chapter II -, impose penalties in various ways that isolate him excommunicated from the community and limit the possibility of having relations with it or influence it, because such activity is considered to be dangerous or otherwise objectionable. Such penalties may be, mo 'example: or transfer to another residence, the exile, or discharge from an office or prohibition to leave the place of residence or prohibition of journalism or the administration or reception of the sacraments, until the reduction to the lay state for clerics or expulsion from the Institute for religious.

.

The schism and heresy in itself are mortal sins. They are punished according to canon law. It is possible that these criminals escape justice of the Church, but they do not escape the judgment of God. Every believer should be able to recognize a schismatic and heretical, without waiting for the judgment of the Church, because he has to defend against these evil temptations. For this Scripture gives several warnings.

.

In condemnation for heresy the Church is infallible and no exceptions. Instead excommunicate in the Church can make mistakes or may lift the excommunication. This is because the question of heresy there is a game the truth of faith, that does not change in this field, and the Supreme Pontiff has received express promise by Christ not to err. Instead excommunication can be linked to the conduct of the excommunicated, which can correct itself, for which it can be removed. It remains, however, that the effect of the excommunication, which can also be unjust, illegal or invalid, It does not touch at all the state of one of the excommunicated before God, state that may be of mortal sin - and in itself the schism and heresy are mortal sin -, but it could also be a state of grace, because it is excommunicated unfairly blamed. Because of this, ecclesiastical power, as he said proudly Girolamo Savonarola to his executioner going to the gallows, It may exclude from the earthly Church, but not from the heavenly.

.

It must be said that membership in the Church and consequently the ecclesial communion and the exclusion from it - namely the excommunication - is not a simple act of will, with which it can accept or refuse in toto a proposal or an injunction that is done, as it would be to stay in one room, or to get out of it.

.

The belong or not to belong to the Church, the stay or leave the Church are not such simple things. Of course, there may be forms of separation and total, such as loss of faith with apostasy. But usually there are different degrees of separation and therefore of excommunication. We must also see that idea one gets of the Church and of belonging to the Church or ecclesial communion. One can be convinced to fully belong to the Church, and instead is yours only partially, as for example the Protestants or modernists. Because of this, usually there are degrees of membership and degrees of exclusion or separation. Because of this, excommunications are not all of the same weight or level. The branch can be periclitante at various levels. It can be separated from certain values, but not by others. Conversely, ecclesial communion is the belonging summit that starts from a minimum degree to climb to the maximum. Here we are aided by the Gospel image of the vine and the branches. A branch can be partially detached from the vine, but still he receives its sap. Thus the separated brethren enjoy a certain communion with the Catholic Church, even though this communion is not full.

.

Every believer must know how to distinguish the wheat from the chaff, must be able to judge for themselves if another brother, was theologian, bishop or cardinal, It is or is not in communion with the Church, and consequently attend, if it is in communion; stay away, if it is not in communion. Here then are the directives of the New Testament: "Stay away from every brother who is in idleness" [Ii Ts 3,6]. "If anyone does not obey what we say by letter, take note of him and discontinue relations » [v. 14]. "Stay away heretic [airetikòn]» [Tt 3,10]. "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house nor greet, for he who greets him shares his evil deeds " [II Jn 10-11]. These are obviously cases in which dialogue is impossible or inconvenient or dangerous or useless for the following reasons: or because the heretic does not accept the correction or because he tries to seduce us or because they treat us with contempt.

.

In order to preserve and promote the theoretical and moral values on which rests the fabric of the church a, santa, catholic and apostolic, therefore, care must be the sum of all the faithful, but especially pastors and theologians under the supervision and direction of the Pope, take care that the sound doctrine of the Gospel is rightly interpreted by all, accepted, shared, widespread and defense against heresies, which they are precisely the rejection or the deformation of the truth of faith. The prelate, so, in the Church, and first of the Supreme Pontiff, supreme custodian of the unity of the Church and advocate of ecclesial communion, They have the right to expel from the Church, ie scomunicare, those faithful, which, or their attitude schismatic or heretical or scandalous for their ideas, falsify the doctrine, disobey the Supreme Pontiff or create divisions in the Church.

.

There are believers who in fact or for their ideas or their conduct, outside the Church and the Church, yet they want to remain there to change it with their errors. It happens in these cases that the naive or complicit prelate excommunicating them, but let them do or even support them, or, Invite them to preach to the faithful in churches. Conversely there are bishops, priests and faithful into full communion with the Church, which may expose evils and scandals, which, however, the fact of opposing pastors or theologians heretics or schismatics, They are treated by them as if they were excommunicated. There is therefore a difference between the official excommunication and be made out of the ecclesiastical apparatus.

.

Whatever Christian can be a heretic, schismatic and excommunicated, besides the Pope, who by divine assistance it is the supreme guardian of the truth of the Gospel and ecclesial communion. In fact, it is excommunicated involves breaking with a higher ecclesiastical or with the Pope. But the Pope evidently has no top soil to which he may rebel, except Jesus Christ. And also it should be noted that a Pope can be a bad pastor of the Church, but you can not teach heresy. Because of this, Code has among "crimes against religion and the unity of the Church" [part II, title I], «L'apostasia, heresy and schism " [can. 1364], and the publication and dissemination of "blasphemy, offense to good morals, of insults, excitement hatred or contempt against religion or the Church [can. 1369] and teachings or doctrines condemned by the Roman Pontiff or an ecumenical council " [can. 1371], which is equivalent to the refusal or misrepresentation or falsification of the teachings of the Pope and councils. This is why the offense of heresy deserves excommunication [cann. 1364, 1331].

.

The excommunication can be automatic O sententiae penalties. The first is triggered automatically upon the completion by the crime, for example strike the person of the Pope or embrace heresy to what is already provided for excommunication. automatic it means that the judgment has already ruled. sentence rather it means that we need a process, after which the court renders its judgment, for example to determine whether a person is or is not heretical.

.

EXAMPLES OF SIGNIFICANT excommunication

.

A recent example, It is one of the four bishops Lefebvre, which, At first excommunicated, They were then subsequently released by Benedict XVI. But those who support the Mass the old order - which also it is in itself lawful - but refuses, as did Lefebvre, the Mass new world order charges of pro-Lutheranism, it is excommunicated. The Mass new world order It is in fact the greatest moment of ecclesial communion. Rejecting the Mass means so separate from ecclesial communion, and for this we are struck by excommunication.

.

It was the famous mutual lifting of the excommunication of the Blessed Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras. There is, however, question what sense he had the excommunication of the Pope by the Patriarch Michael Cerularius in 1054. The Pope can excommunicate, but it can not be excommunicated, because it has no land no top from which it can be separated. The Pope is in fact the principle of ecclesiastical communion, while the faithful is what comes from this principle. Now the principiato may separate from the principle, but the principle can not separate himself from himself. So the Patriarch of Constantinople, excommunicating the Pope, He has done nothing but separate from the Church. Paul VI made a magnanimous gesture by revoking the excommunication to Athenagoras, but the Patriarch, beyond his friendship with Paul VI, He made a gesture objectively and legally null and void, as nothing had been his excommunication. It should also be noted that the Church can remove the excommunication of heretics who are heretics, as are our Orthodox brothers, because with them it was not yet resolved their dispute over And the son. It is clear then that this reintegration involves a very imperfect communion, given the permanence of doctrinal deficiencies.

.

Throughout history there have been excommunications who not only they have not had the desired effect of inducing or stimulating the excommunicated to repentance, but which have had the effect of provoking even more hatred against the Pope and the Church, as happened to Luther with excommunication by Pope Leo X and Pius V against Queen Elizabeth of England. If the excommunicated already he has a big following, he is proud of what he does and strong, that the excommunication it rears up and tightens more. They are the saints, for example, a St. Pio of Pietrelcina, who obey even unjust censure. But heretics, powerful and troublemakers who are excommunicated, easily do worse. Because of this, especially now that the modernists are very powerful, Popes renounce excommunicate.

.

In respect of the excommunication to those who profess the doctrine of communism Marxist atheist, imposed by Pius XII, it has never been abolished, although the Church since then she has done more nod. However, such excommunication keeps in fact its value, since it is obviously impossible that an atheist sharers in ecclesial communion.

.

How Much to membership freemasonry, a decree of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 1984 It warns that those who are affiliated with Freemasonry is in mortal sin and may not receive Communion. Also in this case the reason for the excommunication is evident: Freemasonry does not recognize the dogma of the Communion of Saints.

.

As for the excommunication associated with the mafia, it is motivated by the fact that it is conspiracy to theft and extortion to murder with the application and the private vengeance, It is evident that a member of this association may not qualify for the ecclesial communion. The same is true for the modernists, which, They have a concept of the Church incompatible with the right of the Catholic Church.

.

THE REASONS AND PURPOSES OF excommunication

.

It deserves to be excommunicated those who shed the heresies, turbo, injures, offends or disorganize the community, creates scandal and divisions among the faithful, disobey authority. Unfortunately, however, today macroscopically - except not to see it blocked by fear or human respect or because the chariot of the modernists or because a party or closed because in their own narrow interests or because suffering allocchismo doctrinal [3] - these characters are multiplying, They are honored and go up to high places, while those who are truly in communion with the Church are beaten, humiliated or marginalized. So scomunicabili are not excommunicated, and it happens that those who are in communion is excommunicated or at least is treated as if it were one excommunicated. A beautiful mess and Injustice, where someone who enjoys it is the devil, obscurantism master that leads to destruction.

.

On the question of excommunication species, to ask three basic questions: a first question is to distinguish the right from unjust excommunication or lawful or unlawful; a second is to distinguish the valid excommunication from that invalidates or nothing; and third is to distinguish him excommunicated stated or official from the actual or de facto.

.

Excommunication is right, when the prelate spoke out of a concern to safeguard the truth of the faith, ecclesial communion and call of the rebel obedience. About the unjust excommunication, instead, St. Thomas Aquinas says that the excommunication can be unjust or by the scomunicante or by the excommunicated. In the first case it has effect, that is, the subject is officially excommunicated by public decree, even though you do not deserve this measure and, if anything, he would have deserved a decree of praise. So the excommunication can be unjust, as motivated not by respect for higher authority, as would be the Magisterium of the Church, or the fear of God or love for the truth or for the Church, but ignorance, hatred or envy for the excommunicated; or it can be unfair because no foundation or legal or doctrinal reason, and indeed it based on false accusations and reasons or pretexts heretical [4]. The first is valid but illicit; the second is null and void.

.

The prelate should be very careful to understand and evaluate the reasons that guide the thinking and actions of the supposed dissident or heretic, especially if it has a large following, not to confuse a prophet with a rebel, as happened with Savonarola or vice versa as not to confuse a rebel with a reformer, as happened to some German bishops against Luther, which, instead of condemning the so-called "Reformer", They went over to Luther. The prelate is not hasty in judging, do not let yourself influenced by the passionate and partisan climate that usually creates around these events, be cautious assess allegations from the environment to the supposed guilty and prefers to listen and consult directly. If it is the case, establishing a process, to avoid the risk of condemning an innocent or acquit a guilty.

.

It can also happen that an unjust excommunication It is imposed by a heretic priest, which can not be officially excommunicated, so it is not substantially and actually in communion with the Church, while the subject officially excommunicated, as Orthodox, in fact it remains in communion with the Church.

.

It is clear that a prelate who excommunicate based on a false concept of the Church or of obedience or without him first to be subjected to the major superior or to the Roman Pontiff or the Word of God, excommunication invalidly, for which per se, this excommunication, It is null and should not have effect. However, de facto, the action of an authoritarian prelate, influences, bossy, supported by his peers or by the worldly powers to an honest person but helpless can still produce a damaging social effect, exercising violence on excommunicated and his disciples, defames him in the community and harms the community itself so deceived by the false excommunication.

.

St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that in these cases the excommunicated may have recourse to the major superiors. Of course, if it is the Pope who excommunicated unjustly, You must have patience, avoiding taking vengeful or resentful attitudes, that certainly would put him excommunicated, if he was right, the wrong. If then, as was the case with Luther, the rebel is rightly excommunicated, it is clear that any objection by the excommunicated, further aggravate his guilt.

.

The fact that an excommunication has no vices form - for example, it is issued by legitimate authority or explicit about - does not necessarily mean that it is right, appropriate, beneficial, lawful. It may be originated by arrogance or gross negligence in the scomunicante, as was the excommunication of Savonarola by Alexander VI. And if the excommunication is also infected by formal defects, for example, be the result of an abuse of authority or, as observed by St. Thomas Aquinas, be "not due or because the sentence is contrary to law" [5], besides being unjust in the content and grounds, it is absolutely nothing.

.

Such cases are common today the fact that modernism has spread among the bishops, so not only is it rare that a bishop excommunicating a heretic, it even happens that Orthodox believers are excommunicated by heretical bishops. It is clear that an excommunication motivated by a cause heretical, It is contrary to the rules of faith and law, It is nothing, for which the excommunicated in principle may not be taken into account. However, But, it is possible that in this case the prelate inflicts even more, why the excommunicated should resign. Under this St. Thomas Aquinas point of view it observes that an excommunication can be unjust and yet Sorting the punitive effect [6], to which the excommunicated, in the hypothesis, It has no means of escape or get rid, as he had the good fortune to be able to do St. John of the Cross, fleeing from the monastery prison.

.

Excommunication is twofold: first, to be an exemplary punishment and healthy; exemplary, to discourage others to imitate him excommunicated; to greet, ie such as to induce him to excommunicated resipiscence, to repentance and penance, that it may correct itself and to be reintegrated into the ecclesial communion. Because of this, must be neither excessive, nor too mild, but with the size of the damage caused to himself and to the Church from the schismatic or heretic, and the quality and quantity of its moral strength and reputation in the Church, as well as of the Ascendant, of fame and following that he has in it. Not too must isolate it from the community, so it does not worsen his hostility to it and does not have the temptation to leave it entirely, but it is maintained in a certain degree of esteem and consideration. It happens indeed that the dissident is subject to unfair and exaggerated hostility by certain overzealous believers or enemies, malignant or short intellect, that the prelate has to defend and protect the dissident also they.

.

Excommunication does not even have to leave the excommunicated too much freedom of action and movement, nor should leave too much part of the community, because that would enable him to continue to spread his heresies and to foment rebellion against the Church. The excommunications too lenient, and purely formal, that does not bother him that much excommunicated, lose their deterrent effect and educational, He is derided by him and his followers and are slow to no effect, if not to create a martyr in the eyes of the followers. This will probably be the excommunication of mobsters and such, Unfortunately, It was the excommunication of the Communists.

.

According to the excommunication order It is to shed light in the sense of helping to discern who belongs to the Church and who's out, It is thus to free the Church from a dangerous agent discouraging the faithful from wanting to follow. It may happen that the Church in these interventions is too severe, as it seems to have happened in the cases of Peter Waldo in the twelfth century, Albigensian in the thirteenth century, of Jan Hus in the fifteenth century and Luther. They did not lack any good ideas to propose a reform of the Church, though certainly their heresies were condemned. However, they counted among their ranks also people in good faith, whereby, if he had had more confidence in the dialogue, perhaps it would be avoided painful division that continues after centuries.

.

RECONSTRUCTION OF COMMUNION

.

Paradigmatic is the parable of the prodigal son [LC 15, 11-32]. The excommunicated is not so much one that is driven, but it is one that goes away. The decree of excommunication is very often nothing more than the taking of sorrowful act and the public sad news that his brother has left us, and we became the enemy. In the excommunication there is so much outrage, but rather the pain and the hope that the lost child is found. It's him that if he wanted to go. And if a brother is hunted, because it is already practically was not in communion and communion disturbed. So what is expected excommunication? The return of his brother, his repentance, his repentance. Why are so rare phenomena of conversion? Perhaps the Church has so far not done enough to recover these brothers, these lost sheep. It is used too severely and too little mercy. So at least he thought St. John XXIII in will and in proclaiming the Second Vatican Council. It wanted to retain the prodigal son with the force, without groped to convince him of what would face leaving the parental home. But, we must also recognize that in many cases frankly honesty and humility of which the prodigal son gives evidence in Luke's parable, noticing the bad business that made leaving the parental home, They have always been rare virtue. Almost always heretics seem to do well in eating the husks the swine, and they have, indorandole of specious tinsel, as if they were a sign of freedom and wisdom, and even invite others to follow and others follow.

.

What the Church can do in these cases? With the Second Vatican Council it decided to take a new path, that minimizes the use of severity, and then the excommunication and feared let him be. Some theologians have interpreted the choice to reconcile in the sense that the Council would assume that all men, at least subconsciously, They seek God and have grace; that the proclamation of the Gospel should not be proposed in categorical terms and threatening a aut-aut: as the only way of salvation, refusing which opens the hell chasm: or do you believe or you do not save; but simply as a proclamation of mercy, which already all people of good will are being, perhaps unconsciously, whatever the religion to which they belong. In this visual optimistic, because everyone is saved, everyone is free to follow their religion. The doctrinal differences would not matter. The determining factor would be that all of them are the subject of the divine will of salvation. All so, perhaps unconsciously, belong to the Church, which embraces all religions, no one excluded.

.

For the modernists we can not say, so, the Lutheran, Jew or Muslim: you are wrong. In fact, he can always tell us: wrong they are to you, but not in my religion. It can therefore understand how in this relativistic loses visual sense or the excommunication interest. It is clear that a church that does not believe in possession of absolute truth, how to conceive the modernists, It does not distinguish more clearly and definitely the dogma heresy, so the idea of ​​excommunication not for her has no meaning. It is therefore opposed to the Church of the past, said by them pre-conciliar, it now appears taxation and illiberal, disrespectful of pluralism, and freedom of conscience.

.

others say: the severity and threat of Hell is not served. But then it will not be that in the end God's mercy reaches all accounts, and all are saved? We respect diversity, we focus on dialogue and on what unites us: the common interests of peace and justice. All right. However, There are some truths that touch God or salvation, They do not like the separated brethren. So we do? Some, my idea is that it is good tacerle and only admit those truths in which we all agree. The other let them optional for individual confessions. But this is not the command of Christ. And in fact, the Council proposes the Gospel to all mankind.

.

The Council, But, unlike previous, aware with the irreversible human tendency to sin, proper to fallen nature, therefore mainly dedicated to the fight against the world and the condemnation of errors and vices, with its punishments sentenced to disobedient, It seems animated by the confidence that we can build on this earth the general harmony of mankind around Christ [cf. Pacem in Terris], the confidence to make the cooperation of the Church with the world, We can build a humanity right, united and peaceful, in which the Church and the world get along. The world is seen as essentially available for the Gospel, and the Church seems confident of being able to conquer the world, because the whole world waiting for Christ. So the Council seems to minimize the tendency of men to wickedness and sin - hence the need for coercion and discipline -, following on original sin and believe that education, the testimony and preaching of the Gospel are sufficient to create a humanity finally right down here, happy and harmonious.

.

but yet, the Apocalypse, provides that the clash of the Church with the world - the Woman and the Dragon - will last until the Parousia, so the end of the story will not be the symbiosis of the Church with the world and the general unification of humanity in harmony and peace, but rather the victory of Christ over the powers of evil and the final separation of the wheat from the chaff, with the salvation of the elect and the damnation of the reprobate.

.

Another thing to note: until Vatican II the Church has always held to clarify its identity and oppose the world. Hence the ease with which it contended with the world, He is condemning the errors of the world, and excommunicated those who yielded to the seductions of the world, especially in the modern world. It had great care for her children, There he was kept protected from the snares of the world and from the mistakes of other religions, including non-Catholic Christians, while it was severe towards the world, in whom he saw almost only dangers and corruption. If it contacted the world, The purpose was to convert to the Gospel, according to the command of Christ.

.

The Vatican II addressed the Church greater openness to the world and values ​​of other religions. This led to an enrichment and a costume improved, of theology and Catholic culture, but at the same time it decreased the care to preserve the Church from penetration into it of erroneous or dangerous doctrines. So it happened that, if on the one hand, the Church has taken a more conciliatory attitude toward the world, other conflicts have arisen and corruption inside because of the penetration of errors and bad customs of the world, penetration is not sufficiently prevented by the shepherds, which they have greatly diminished the use of excommunication.

.

What now has to be is a greater care in pastors, starting with the Pope, the good education of the faithful and of the pastors themselves, in pacifying the minds bitterly divided by a wretched and embittered opposition between Lefebvre and modernists, you drag from fifty, in defending the Church against the penetration of false ideas or heterodox and then in the moderate recovery of a wise and prudent use of the institute's excommunication, not at all giving up on what the Council has produced in the relationship of the Church with the modern world. It is clear that we need to continue the work of evangelization; but do not be under the illusion that in the distant future or close mankind will gather around the church. Nor it is there to hope for a worldwide peaceful coexistence between religions, as some believe, or hope.

.

On Christianity, at the behest of Christ, it world domination. Religions must be submitted to the Catholic Christian religion. Christianity does not fit, by its nature, to be a religion on a par with other, as if it were a political party in a world parliament. We do not confuse civil relations among religions with the United Nations. Are not these things planned apocalyptic eschatology. Christianity will continue to expand, but always fighting against the forces of Satan. Always, in the Church, They will mix the wheat and the tares, always it must be purified from sin and expel from its midst the unworthy, always it will be opposed by enemies and always will be persecuted. Always advance and will be renewed in history, and convert the hearts to Christ, always welcome new children, and generate new saints, until, in a known now only to God, the Church will appear and defeat the great apostasy, expected from Sao Paulo, but it will precede the triumphant return of Christ in glory.

.

Varazze 24 September 2018

.

.

______________________

NOTE

[1] "Utterly destroyed" (eb. cherem), Inviting. of the CEI.

[2] Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, c.9, 3, lect.I, n.739, Marietti editions,Turin-Roma 1953, p.134.

[3] spiritual defect attributable to opportunism, the flattery and cowardice, now spread among bishops, for which they, for crass ignorance or human respect or attachment to the bishop's throne, They do not even notice to be led by the nose by heretics. Not only they flee before the wolf came into the fold, but they do not even notice its presence by entrusting important ecclesiastical offices to people who should be excommunicated.

[4] QUESTION, Suppl., q. 21, a. 4.

[5] Ibid.

[6] QUESTION, Suppl., q. 21, a. 4.

.

.

.

«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:
They were IT 08 (J) 02008 32974 001436620930
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 ]

.

.

.

.

.