Who is Marco Felipe Perfetti referring to when he states from the Silere Non Possum website «here in the Vatican … us in the Vatican", if he can't even set foot in the Vatican?

WHO IS MARCO FELIPE PERFETTI REFERRING TO STATING FROM THE SITE I CAN'T BE SILENT «HERE IN THE VATICAN… WE IN THE VATICAN…», IF YOU CANNOT EVEN SET FOOT IN THE VATICAN?

Why bother with this person who does not arouse any charm and interest in us, but only Christian and priestly compassion? Because it has happened very frequently that multiple people from Italy and abroad have asked us for information on this "great connoisseur" and "frequenter" of the Holy See and the Vatican.

- Church news -

(at the bottom of: All articles)

.

Author
Editors of The Island of Patmos

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos they have many interesting topics to deal with in the context of the doctrine of faith and talking about certain characters is not within their aspirations. However, we have duties that we cannot avoid. The site manager I Can't Be Silent continues to present himself as an excellent expert on the Roman Curia, of the Holy See and the Vatican City State. And this actually creates several problems.

Recently, when he attempted to beatify the unfortunate Archabbot of Montecassino who died a few weeks ago, alluding in his various posts that the Church should apologize to this "innocent" (!?), completely overlooking the fact that his deeds were and remain unspeakable, by these columns he was sensationally denied through gods dubia to which he obviously never responded (see article WHO).

He always fired in bursts on people and institutions of the Holy See, going against everyone's grain, from the Supreme Pontiff to the soldiers of the Vatican Gendarmerie. For months he has been relentlessly mocking and insulting Paolo Ruffini, Prefect of the Dicastery for Communications of the Holy See, and Andrea Tornielli, Director of Media of the Holy See, indicating them as «incapable, incompetent, ignorant…», to the point of accusing them of being "illiterate". Whether Andrea Tornielli ― like it or not ― is an internationally renowned professional in the field of journalism and after over thirty years of profession one of the best-known Vatican experts in the world, It's not something that seems to interest Mr. Marco Felipe Perfetti, to whom it would be useless to remind that the director of the Vatican Media, repeatedly accused of "illiteracy", he certainly didn't self-publish, like he did, a booklet at your own expense, because he is the author of dozens of books translated into multiple languages, including substantial biographies on the Supreme Pontiffs of the twentieth century which at a documentary level remain works of high historical interest.

However, if calm "dubia" are addressed to him who insolent and mocks everything and everyone, by the Supreme Pontiff to follow (see video collection WHO), in this case he wouldn't hesitate to send some cheerful priest to complain to the Bishop of one of us. Already, because for some time Mr. Perfetti has wanted to clear the gay Trojan horse into the Church, stating in his writings and videos that clerics dedicated to the practice of homosexuality are only people who have the right to live their sexuality as they see fit in their private lives. In this way, however, he shows that he is unaware - despite presenting himself as an expert in Canon Law - that for a priest the concept of "private life" is very different from how he understands it., both on the level of Catholic morality and on that of law. The exercise of unnatural sexuality - because homosexuality remains such according to Catholic doctrine - if practiced by a cleric falls in fact and in law into the very serious crime of carnal sacrilege, certainly not in the exercise of freedoms linked to the private life of clerics.

Why bother with this person which does not arouse any fascination or interest in us, but only Christian and priestly compassion? Because it happened very frequently that more people, from Italy and abroad, they asked us for information on this "great connoisseur" and "frequenter" of the Holy See and the Vatican.

As already said and explained previously (see article WHO), This character cannot set foot in the Vatican, both for what he writes and for the bursts of insolence he utters. And if he were to get close to one of the access gates to the territory of this state, they wouldn't even allow him to enter.

When he uses expressions like this in his videos «here in the Vatican… we in the Vatican…», he boasts of knowledge and connections that he absolutely does not have. The only people he knows are some anonymous low-level minutants who have remained tied to the stake and who vent their frustrations deriving from their failed ecclesiastical career through him., providing him with doses of poison to spread through the social media. If not, to the many naive people who follow his site and take what he says and writes as true, he should prove his connections by shooting one of his videos from inside the Vatican City State. If he can't do it from the San Damaso Courtyard, or while walking under the frescoes of the Third Loggia of the Secretariat of State, could shoot one from the Vatican Gardens, or at the corner of the Governorate Palace under the statue of San Michele Arcangelo, or in front of the beautiful Fontana del Veliero. Instead he continues to present himself as a great connoisseur of Vatican matters while continuing to shoot and distribute videos while he is near Via della Conciliazione, or outside Bernini's Colonnade, or mainly from other external or internal places, all rigorously located within the territory of the Italian Republic, except to say "here in the Vatican... we in the Vatican...".

If growing up involves effort that some can't stand this is their problem, as long as they don't make people believe they are what they are not, or to enter where he is not allowed to set foot at all, forcing others to respond that this great frequenter and connoisseur of the Holy See who begins by saying "here in the Vatican... we in the Vatican...", to the point of dating their videos with the words "Vatican City", he is simply someone who cannot even get close to the gates of access to the Vatican City State. And if the person concerned could demonstrate the opposite, that proves it, rigorously replying to the merits of what was contested against him in light of the truth of the facts.

the Island of Patmos, 8 December 2023

.

Our previous articles on the Band of the Silerian:

– 16 August 2025 — I CAN'T BE SILENT And that word taboo that he just can't pronounce: "HOMOSEXUALITY" (To open the article click WHO)

– 14 August 2025 — There is a homosexual? AT THAT TIME I CAN'T BE SILENT Also defends the indefensible (To open the article click WHO)

– 29 March 2025 — Always about I CAN'T BE SILENT: DAL “Vertical man"A" Fireculo "and" quadhow "of Leonardo Sciascia (To open the article click WHO)

– 21 March 2025 — I CAN'T BE SILENT And the story of that convinced seamstress that he can give Giorgio Armani high fashion lessons (To open the article click WHO)

– 12 February 2025 — The Opossum is to the knowledge of the Vatican as Henger is in chastity and like his deceased husband Riccardo Schicchi is at work Confessions OF SAINT AUGUSTINE (To open the article click WHO)

– 15 January 2025 — AT THE CLERICAL BORDERS WITH REALITY: THE WOMAN SUFFERS FROM FREUDIAN PENIS ENVY, The Opossum of the envy by Matteo Bruni Director of the Press Room of the Holy See (To open the article click WHO)

– 20 January 2025 — THE OPOSSUM IGNORE THAT A NUN CAN QUIETLY BECOME GOVERNOR OF THE VATICAN CITY STATE, As already was Giulio Sacchetti (To open the article click WHO)

– 22 November 2024 — THE EPISCOPAL APPOINTMENT OF RENATO TARANTELLI BACCARI. WHEN YOU ARE AFFECTED BY LIVER CANCER, THEY CHARGE ON THE ATTACK THOSE WHO CANNOT BE SILENT (To open the article click WHO)

– 31 May 2024 — A NOTE FROM FATHER ARIEL ON THE SITE I CAN'T BE SILENT: «AS ANNOYING AS A SEA URCHIN INSIDE YOUR UNDERPANTS» (To open the article click WHO)

– 8 December 2023 — WHO IS MARCO FELIPE PERFETTI REFERRING TO STATING FROM THE SITE I CAN'T BE SILENT «HERE IN THE VATICAN… WE IN THE VATICAN…», IF YOU CANNOT EVEN SET FOOT IN THE VATICAN? (To open the article click WHO)

– 14 October 2023 — THE ARCHABOT EMERITUS OF MONTECASSINO PIETRO VITTORELLI HAS DEAD: CHRISTIAN PIETY CAN ERASE THE SAD TRUTH? (To open the article click WHO)

.

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome – Vatican
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

The case of the Bishop of Tyler and Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, the healthy relativism on the figure of the Supreme Pontiff and the wise lesson of Cardinal Carlo Caffarra

THE CASE OF THE BISHOP OF TYLER AND CARDINAL RAYMOND LEO BURKE, THE HEALTHY RELATIVISM ON THE FIGURE OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF AND THE WISE LESSON OF CARDINAL CARLO CAFFARRA

Better to have a Supreme Pontiff who governs the Church badly, however, fulfilling the apostolic power of the keys conferred by Christ God on Peter and his Successors rather than a pious Pontiff who has the keys consigned by Christ God to Peter taken away from him, leaving others to open and close, bind and untie.

- Church news -

.

PDF print format article

 

 

Some argue that Francis is not a good Supreme Pontiff. Whether it is or not is entirely relative, because Francis is the legitimate successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter. If he has fulfilled his high office well he will receive the deserved reward from God, if he has performed badly he will have to tremble before the warning of the Holy Gospel:

"To whom much is given, much will be asked for; to whom men have committed much, It will ask the more " (LC 12, 48).

Some argue «I don't like Francesco». Sympathy is entirely relative, a Supreme Pontiff must not arouse emotional sympathy but Catholic and devout respect, because it is due to him, therefore it must be followed and obeyed, whether he's nice or not.

Some argue that Francis governs the Church badly. Whether you govern it well or badly is entirely relative, better a Supreme Pontiff who governs the Church even badly, it will cause much less serious damage than someone who lets it be governed by fierce power groups or who allows himself to be governed, because the damage caused by the latter will be much greater than that caused by a bad government. It is therefore better to have a Supreme Pontiff who governs the Church badly, however, fulfilling the apostolic power of the keys conferred by Christ God on Peter and his Successors (cf.. Mt 16, 19), instead of a pious Pontiff who has the keys handed over by Christ God to Peter taken away from him, leaving others to open and close, bind and untie.

Some argue «Francis expresses himself in an ambiguous way, spreading confusion in matters of doctrine and faith and for this reason it must be corrected". This statement marks the transition from the relative to the absurd: the Supreme Pontiff is the supreme custodian of the deposit of faith, however paradoxical it may appear, it can legitimately be criticized with due respect, however, it cannot be correct. The correction, even the fraternal one (cf.. Mt 18, 15-17) implies that it is exercised by a single person, or an entire college of people endowed with superior doctrinal and moral authority. Not even an ecumenical council, highest expressive body of the Church, could define anything, without the approval of the Supreme Head of the Church. Criticizing the Supreme Pontiff, in those spheres where criticism is legitimate and possible, implies the exercise of the freedom of the children of God, while correcting him would imply the exercise of an authority superior to his, of which no one in this world is the custodian.

Certain publicists and commentators they are tearing their clothes crying about persecution for the removal of H.E. Mons. Joseph Edward Strickland from the chair of the Texas Diocese of Tyler. A few days later, the tearing of clothes continued with Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, to whom the Supreme Pontiff decided to revoke the benefit of free accommodation owned by APSA (Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See) he was born in cardinal dish, today referred to as a cardinal's allowance. Also in this case it is necessary to understand with an example: if I say that inviting a questionable and problematic figure like Luca Casarini to the Synod of Bishops was imprudent, in this case I express a completely legitimate critical opinion, equally legitimately I could ask the Holy Father that perhaps it would be appropriate to ask for an account and reason from those trusted people who presented it to him, without explaining to him in a prudent way, precise and detailed that this character is an ideologue who, both in the debate and in the political sphere, has always created major divisions and strong contrasts. It's a completely different thing if, as the Bishop of Tyler did before the Synod and then during the current Synod, I had stated that that discussion assembly was seriously harmful to the doctrine of the faith, for the Church and the People of God, because this would not have been a completely legitimate critical opinion, but a judgment of unacceptable weight, also because it contains an implicit accusation: the Supreme Pontiff is not able to supervise the doctrine of the faith and therefore safeguard it.

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke he has been holding meetings and conferences around the world for years, effectively undermining, albeit in a pompous way, the magisterium of the Supreme Pontiff, inviting a nebulous and unspecified «resistance», without explaining who should be resisted, but leaving it clear to whom. Even in this case we are well beyond the legitimate right of criticism.

Incidentally I would like to mention than in 2020 I published a book provocatively titled Sadness of Love, dedicated to the memory of Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, of whom I was a disciple, often in line with him, other times respectfully critical of some of his positions on moral matters. And he, who was a great man and above all a man of God, loved to argue with me precisely on those points on which I might not agree., because this is theological speculation based on debate according to the styles and tradition of classical scholasticism. Unfortunately, some bishops and priests have only read the provocative title of that book, without ever having read even two pages, they accused me of having written a work of non-fiction against this post-synodal apostolic exhortation. Which is false and extremely ungenerous towards me, because in that book criticisms were made of the style of language, to the numerous and in my opinion useless sociologisms, on several ambiguous passages, unclear and subject to different interpretations. We are within the sphere of the legitimate exercise of critical thinking, which would cease to be such if I had instead made criticisms, even indirectly or subliminally, to that Synod and to the final exhortation published by the Supreme Pontiff under the title of love joy. An exhortation that leaves open hypotheses for discussion on topics yet to be defined, without the previous discipline established by the Holy Pontiff John Paul II in his post-synodal apostolic exhortation Familiar Consortium has been modified, for example regarding the admission to the Sacraments of divorced and remarried people living in a state of irregularity. Therefore, bishops and priests who affirm the lawfulness of this admission, because they say contained and given in love joy, they state falsely, they are in grave error and mislead the faithful. In love joy in fact, no permission in this sense is sanctioned.

Cardinal Carlo Caffarra gave a solemn lesson in 2017 to some of our people today who wander from conference to conference calling for "resistance". He imparted this solemn lesson with one of his memorable declarations, made after some attempted to present him as an antagonist of the Supreme Pontiff Francis:

«Excuse the joke: I would have been more pleased if it were said that the Archbishop of Bologna has a lover rather than it being said that he has a mind contrary to that of the Pope. Because if a bishop has a thought contrary to that of the Pope he must go, but just you have to go by the diocese. Because lead the faithful on a road that is not what Jesus Christ. He would therefore lose himself eternally and risk the eternal loss of the faithful. Being considered against the Pope is something that deeply saddened me, because it is slanderous. Because not only has the Pope never spoken about this, but when he spoke he asked for a debate. And the debate is real if all voices can speak. I was born a papist, I lived as a papist and I want to die as a papist!».

I believe the Holy Father, at this juncture, all in all it was also too good, with both the Bishop of Tyler and Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. Personally I wouldn't have been, because for the type I am, to a Bishop or Cardinal who has repeatedly questioned the protection of the doctrine of the faith by the Supreme Pontiff, perhaps I would have led them to say that Innocent III, Boniface VIII and Alexander VI all three put together were much more tender and much less severe than me.

the Island of Patmos, 6 December 2023

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

From the doctrinal disorientation of the Church to the sin of priests and the recycling of lay people. Prospect of an intransigent culture which while condemning sanctifies and condemns by sanctifying

FROM DOCTRINAL DISORIENTATION OF THE CHURCH TO THE SIN OF PRIESTS AND THE RECYCLING OF THE LAITY. PROSPECT OF AN UNTRANSIGENT CULTURE WHILE SENTENCING SANCTIFIES AND SANCTIFYING SENTENCES

The “tolerant” modern, instead, he does not sacrifice himself for his ideas as the idealist would, on the contrary, one does not scruple to sacrifice those who have ideas contrary to his, just as a dictator would do towards his opponents. How many martyrs of tolerance and rights exist today? But perhaps the most numerous martyrs are those who are held up as unwitting sowers of hatred precisely because they diverge, carriers of a hatred that cannot be seen because it is present only in the gaze of the tolerant on duty who has an interest in using hatred as an ideological tool to control the masses.

- The Theological Pages -

.

Author
Ivano Liguori, Ofm. Capp.

.

.

PDF print format article
.



.

I. A QUESTION OF PRINCIPLE

I guess I don't reveal secrets untrustworthy if I say that keeping Christian Christians, nowadays, it is not a simple undertaking at all. It is not so much a question of preserving only an apparent traditional identity - at least as far as the European continent is concerned - but of showing that God still has a certain right of citizenship in the life of men and that Christ is recognized as the founding and definitive event of revelation divina.

the collapse of the vault of the basilica of San Francesco in Assisi in 1997 [click on image to open the video]

According to a survey the Pew Research Center [cf. WHO] conducted in 2017 on a sample of 1.804 respondents, 80% of Italians declare themselves Christian, the worrying fact concerns the frequency, in fact the 23% participates in religious services at least once a week, the 20% once a month and on 34% has a much less assiduous practice. According to other data relating to an Ipsos research of 2017, always in Italy, his 60.000 respondents, Catholics are decreasing. It goes from 85.4% of 2007 al 74,4% the 2017. A more recent study from the 2018 dell 'European Values Study 84.4% of Italians generally say they believe in God without further useful specifications.

Data in hand we are undergoing a drastic decrease in the Christian faith but what a survey can never say concerns the theological motivation which represents the real reason for this decrease. The theological motivation that becomes a scandalous stone on which the pitiless statistics are broken lies in the fact that one is no longer in possession of the specificity of Christianity, so that we are often lost, at the mercy of a form of Alzheimer's that makes us unable to recognize the faith and to recognize ourselves as believers ready to give reason, as St. Peter expresses in his first epistle [cf.. 1PT 3,15-16].

I give an example to be clearer. No Jew, of yesterday as of today, one would never dream of disavowing the covenant between God and Abraham and above all the founding event that unified the chosen people during the liberation Easter in Egypt. No Jew, sane, would doubt that God is the Goel liberator and redeemer of the people and who in Moses made possible salvation against the dominion of the pharaoh of Egypt. Although this faith has been severely tested in the face of the terrible events of Auschwitz, the faith of our brothers in Abraham has remained substantially unchanged for centuries and becomes a reason for ethnic and religious identity to be celebrated with pride in every family.

For us Christians, instead, having a certain faith is not a matter of pride but of embarrassment, we are often the first to consider ourselves uncompromising and fanatic when we try to rise above mediocrity. Then, to be more digestible in the eyes of the beholder, rather we prefer to turn pink and show off a universal love that we can beautifully justify through Matthew's eschatological discourse 24,31-46 which - incidentally - according to correct exegesis, it should never be divorced from the subsequent passages — narrated by the Holy Evangelist Matthew, first the parable of the Ten Virgins [cf.. Mt 25,1-13] and then that of Talents [cf.. Mt 25,14-29] — with the risk of making the sacred text say what it really doesn't intend to say.

As evidence of this, I bring an example in support of my words. How many times have we heard of preaching about love from the pulpits? How many times has love been used as a slogan and master key to justify everything even the unjustifiable and the unreasonable? How many times in the name of love have been made completely wicked choices, expression of the most emotional sentimentality and the most seductive passion? The Christian term of charity refers to God, according to the teaching of the apostle John: "Dear, let's love each other, because love is from God: anyone who loves was born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love has not known God, because God is love " [cf.. 1GV 4,7-8]. Sad is the awareness in verifying that this "love" so strongly publicized today is deprived of the presence of God Trinity and used as an alibi through which sin is normalized until it runs out in an exclusively philanthropic and utilitarian attitude. This attitude of impoverishing charity in fact, it is not a modern vice from the person of God, strong of that wisdom saying Nothing new under the sun [nothing new under the sun] the history of Christianity has already known this degeneration of the concept of love since its first centuries.

In 361 D.C.. the emperor Julian the Apostate, he strenuously opposes Christianity by implementing a policy of paganization of the people and a return to Neoplatonic thought. Christianity will retain only the charitable activity and the attention to the neighbor that tries to graft within the pagan anti-Church he designed. History tells us that the attempt was unworkable, decadent paganism, as well as modern atheism assumed by elite religiosity, he could not compete with the authentic love of God which in Christ consists of the characteristic of heroism until the sacrifice of life and in the Holy Spirit of the characteristic of missionaryness which is the primary cause of every virtuous action. The love, to be authentically Christian, it doesn't just have to do good, but it must lead to total self-giving, even with those people and in those unloving situations, by virtue of the fact that if the justice of the disciple does not exceed that of the world, there is no more that is an indication of perfection and a guarantee of the presence of the Spirit of the Father, as the Holy Evangelist Matthew indicates [cf.. Mt 5,20]. Christian love is that theological virtue which recognizes itself in God and leads to him, announces salvation to the soul, it converts from sin and opens the doors of paradise.

After this necessary digression on the relationship between God and love, let us return to the search for the questions of meaning that challenge our faith. Who is Jesus? What did he come to do in the world? These are the basic questions yet, in most cases, questions remain unanswered for many young people attending the catechism and for many young Christians. The situation does not change much if we were to submit this question to adults, to the parents of these kids, or to their grandparents who, tragic to say, they are moving towards a return to religious illiteracy which leads to a real practical atheism.

By now to know who Jesus Christ is we resign ourselves to questioning the various trendy secularists who are on social and on television with a subdued air they dictate the new Christology on page with the aggravating circumstance that the Church, the official one, the one assigned to the control of right doctrine, which should confirm the brothers in faith, is silent. And even when he speaks, trying to put together a botched and pale denial, he does so with little conviction so as to make one suspect that certain heretical affirmations have gained a certain sympathy even within the sacred palaces.

We can say, at this point, that dogma has gone into crisis? Absolutely not. Who has gone into crisis is a certain It'sestablishment ecclesiastical made up of pastors and theologians who have lost - yes - the compass of faith and who increasingly resort to the category of "mystery" trying to hide behind a screen, since they can no longer give reason for the faith and hope that is in them, everything is contained in the first and second epistles of St. Peter and in the Gospel of St. John [cf.. 1PT 3,15; 2PT 1,16-19; 1 Gv1, 1-4]. In this way, he lost the two theological virtues of faith and hope, what remains, the love, takes on the connotations of modernity and the search for consent at any cost. Have you ever noticed that the modernization of the person of Christ, of the church, of the Magisterium, of morality, of the formation of the clergy and its identity has always been carried out by the champions of love and in the name of love? We have arrived at the paradoxical, in which the doctrinal corruption of the Church is under the banner of love! That Love that, it is necessary to reiterate, he became flesh and gave his life for the sinful man, in short, insult to injury. At the height of this doctrinal confusion there is also the sacrilegious act of wanting to confuse or associate God with sin. But if we intend to remain faithful to Christ and the Catholic Church, as did St. Thomas Becket with his martyrdom, we have to resist and the Christian resistance is not realized in the singing of "Bella Ciao", but of 'let Pasquale ' which reminds us that Christ is God, Lord and Sovereign, conqueror of sin.

Are, ultimately, to be Christian it means entering into the intimate life of Jesus Christ, and let him reign as the undisputed ruler of my existence - truth reiterated every year on the solemnity of Christ the King at the end of the liturgical year - perhaps it is good to recognize that something has gone wrong or we are faced with a great misunderstanding. Faith is above all an adherence of man to God and at the same time and in an inseparable way, it is the free assent to all the truth that God has revealed and which finds fullness in Jesus Christ, definitive and complete revelation of the saving mystery of God [cf.. Lord Jesus].

Therefore, we candidly recognize that it is us priests, as well as the so-called committed Christians - those who, for example, militate in ecclesial movements, they recognize themselves as activists within the country's social and political life, who help in the parish, who practice a certain charity — at best we are pursuing a secondary Christianity, border or periphery which in the eyes of the most mischievous is revealed as a facade Christianity.

With this term we identify a certain extremely varied and complex Christian culture that neglects the ultimate and supernatural end of the faith which consists of the salvation of the soul, ignores the spiritual struggle against sin and openness to divine grace together with the need to remain within a divine Catholic faith observed within a community of faith that recognizes itself within the Church of Rome.

Tale secondary Christianity largely dissipates the figure of the priest by reinventing him as manager, a diligent museum curator and regularly paid social worker with variable working hours. The same dissipation is found among the laity, in those who no longer identify themselves in the category of the faithful (then faithful to who and what? mAh!) and for this reason they choose to hybridize into Christianity models that transform all of them into mythological figures that are difficult to reconcile within a journey of faith and a life that in baptism was handed over to God.

There is no doubt that there is an urgent need to reiterate a question of principle: the essence of Christianity lies within that little word that Jesus pronounces several times in the Gospel of John [cf.. GV 8,24; 8,28; 8,58; 13,19; 18,5] to designate himself: is that’I am — in greco ἐγὼ εἰμι, I took it, which is a guarantee of divine identity [cf.. Is 3,14-15] and of salvation for every creature.

It is the totalizing choice of that divine self that puts in crisis and that, as can be seen from the reading of Jacob Neusner in his book "A rabbi speaks with Jesus", constitutes the great difference between Eternal Israel and New Israel made up of the people of the baptized redeemed by the Passion of Christ and his Resurrection.

Mine I identity he must be able to recognize the mystery of God, quell’I am who has the first place [cf.. LC 14,25-33] and that throws me to the ground [cf.. At 22,8] and it terrifies whenever I presume to own it and manage it as I please [cf.. GV 18,6], the whole, it is found enclosed in the Gospels of San Luca and San Giovanni.

Who is Jesus? Jesus is God, as various passages of the holy scriptures indicate to us, in particular the Holy Evangelist Luke, to follow with the Gospel of St. John and the Pauline correspondence [cf.. LC 22,70; GV 1,1.14; GV 5,18; GV 8, 58; Fil 2,6; With the 2, 9; With the 1,15; EB 1,3], is the Lord [cf.. RM 10,9; GV 20, 28; LC 23,39-43; Fil 2,11], he is the authentic revealer of the Father [cf.. GV 10, 30; GV 5,22-23; GV 14,8-11], and for these reasons no one can ignore these revealed truths without consuming a betrayal, make a denial, without feeling scandalized or starting a holy war; all always with reference to the Gospel of St. John. This Man-God came to save the world from sins [cf.. Mt 1,21], so that man has a beautiful life and not one good life [cf.. GV 10,10] and in living seriously be definitively deprived of the cancer of sin [cf.. EB 2,14-15] and made righteous in His blood [cf.. RM 5,9; 8,33]. There are no alternatives, the divine jealousy of the Old Testament [cf.. Dt 5,6-10] is combined with the totalizing choice of Christ and his person is the only possible communion choice that produces fruits of new life [cf.. Mt 12,30; LC 5,38].

Jesus Christ is so bulky that it is not possible to silence him, for two thousand years his name has resonated on earth and his faithfulness has proved to be as stable as heaven [cf.. Shall 89,3]. Everything still speaks of him: from the calendar to the holidays, from civil traditions to ethics, from art to music; the story, geography, the way of computing time and even the vast cosmos and nature testify that He is God and that he is Lord. Even before those who intend to perniciously deny it, refuse it, Until it disappears completely, involuntary merit must be admitted - just as it was for demons [cf.. MC 5,6; LC 4,34; At 19,15] - of an acknowledgment kerygmatic, in which his majesty and power are not in the least questioned.

And while Christ proclaims and affirms himself, his majesty is reiterated, his key role that he plays in human history, although the latter most often hides from his presence as Adam did [cf.. GN 3,9-10] or desire like Nietzsche to carry out a parricide that breaks the anguished dependence on the divine partner, promising greater freedoms.

.(II). FAITH CRISIS, DOCTRINAL CRISIS, MORAL CRISIS

.The question of principle that I wanted to address in the first paragraph of this article helps us to better understand the condition of chronic crisis that for fifty years now has affected how solid the Church is. It is a crisis on several fronts that affects the aspects of believing in the current historical contingency. From doctrine to pastoral care, from morality to spirituality, from daily witness to the way of interpreting martyrdom, everything rests on a shaky faith, where Christ is no longer God and his role is no longer that of Savior. Attention well, to affirm the existence of an unsteady faith is not the same as saying that there is no longer any faith in general or that those who believe do it in a malicious or interested way. Statistics show us that still about 80% of people declare themselves Christian, but the fact of declaring oneself is not yet sufficient reason that leads to believing. The blessed apostles Peter, Andrew and John have seen themselves reproached several times by Our Lord for their faith in him not yet sufficiently mature and open to grace. And all the others, although identified as the disciples of the Nazarene, they did not hesitate to abandon him at the moment of the Passion, disavowing with works what they openly proclaimed. In other words we can say that the registration of the name in the parish baptismal register does not make us believers and credible Christians. These considerations lead us to understand how a faith of this nature and a belief of this kind add nothing and do not detract from the existence of man. With the words of the Gospel of John we can say that faith essentially leads to a dwell there where Jesus is present [cf.. GV 1,38; 15,4-ss]. In dwelling in Him there is more that leads to a Christification of life than, although work of grace, however, it needs human assistance and the exercise of free will.

How not to recognize Karl Rahner and in the invention of the "anonymous Christians" the masterly cunning of an apparent modern religiosity which, in the face of an open proposal of faith, it has led many to believe that it is much better to keep as far as possible from all that is Christian (and maybe even Catholic) preferring to spend time more fruitfully instead of resorting to a God who no longer knows himself by name and who has preserved himself only as a formal presence. These people are more than "anonymous Christians" - anonymous to those considering that God always calls everyone by name [cf.. Is 43,1; 45,4] — they should be called “dogmatic atheists”, since not feeling the need to believe in the God of Jesus Christ, they already live within an atheist faith that feeds and feeds on its own dogmatists. Pay attention to it, nobody is more dogmatic and uncompromising than a convinced atheist, who strenuously affirms what for him shouldn't exist, and fight what he no longer believes in. Just as no one is more attached to the Christian traditions of the one who has abandoned religious practice for years and lives on distant memories and nostalgia. dogmatism, rigidity, nostalgia and sclerotic styles of faith are the waste foods of which the secondary Christianity voraciously feeds, but since they are indigestible, they are regurgitated as soon as any evangelical novelty approaches.

We must reiterate that the Christian faith short it is a pious illusion, if it does not consist of a well-established theology of salvation. Christ is not only the God to believe in but he is the Savior and Redeemer of man, the one for whom salvation enters the world and man frees himself from the slavery of sin [cf.. Mt 1,21; MC 2,7]. Faith without salvation is mutilated and in order to survive it is directed and identified towards other disciplines of human knowledge, like philosophy, psychology, the sociology, anthropology, Medicine, towards a new humanism with an atheistic imprint that manifests its own hybris presuming to save the individual's physicality - fight against poverty, to hunger, to diseases, to wars - and to preserve creation - parallelism, environmentalism, pseudo communist Franciscanism - reconstituting a primordial virginity now lost, all at the expense of an immortal divine soul that was created by God and who will return to God after death. Indeed if we want to say it all, this fake hybris who fought original sin in the past and still fights it today, it takes away from man the sense of sin by introducing external control places in which to search for the good scapegoat to justify any adversity and opposition. Unfortunately, man is created for God and without him his heart cannot find peace [cf. Augustine, The Confessions, 1,1.5], with no sense of sin and no need for redemption, what is left is the guilt that crushes and depresses the poor modern humanity. Many deresponsabilizzati, they are incapable of carrying out a true and sincere examination of conscience - even in view of a sacramental confession - which leads to the recognition of guilt and the search for redemption from the only one who is able to provide it.

Some prefer to download to the Devil the fault of all personal reversals, naively dismissing the question on the shoulders of the spirit of evil - which is here assumed as a place of external control - without remembering that the tempter [cf.. GN 3, ss] to consume the fall of man he needed his consent. In short, attenuating on attenuating, easy and unlikely for a humanity beyond the limit of disarray.

To divert attention from this sad truth which leads to a pessimism that defining Leopardi would sound like an understatement, oppositions are invented, mass distractions fighting each other. And as in the time of the ancient Romans, people competed in the Colosseum to keep the hungry people good, so today you compete between opposing factions to digress your minds: traditionalists versus progressives, the papists against the sedevacantists, the Lefebvrians against the modernists, the Guelphs against Ghibellines, right-wing Christians against left-wing Christians, secular priests against regular priests, in short, the list could still lengthen and continue indefinitely with the inclusion of ecclesial movements that compete to win the palm of the best if the question was not in itself sufficiently tragic.

In front of this panorama the hierarchical Church, that of shepherds with the smell of sheep, the priestly poor, lobbies speculating on migrants, integration and welcome what it does? The exercise of leadership more validated today by the clergy, it no longer rests on the authoritativeness of reasonable faith, which brings motivations based on the need to believe and why it is necessary to believe. The leadership of many of us priests - it is enough to listen to some homily or catechesis to realize this - is filled with democratic do-goodism and a style that I would define as "parliamentary" in which things are decided by election through the authority of the majority and if something endangers the dominant thought, a motion or interpellation is immediately ready to reverse the situation in one's favor.

Parliamentary political style is also that of our bishops who are ready to dissociate themselves from their priests, seen as inquisitive hitters, when they try to educate the faithful to the principles of doctrine and morals, even simply by citing the catechism. Next to the acts of dissociation pushed there are easy excuses towards all those categories of people who do not coincide with the thought of the Gospel. The technique of turning the enemy into a friend through a love bombing [bombing of love] that takes on the assumption of easy and non-existent faults is the new paradigm for being inclusive in charity. It matters little if the apostle reminds us that charity must flee fictions [cf.. RM 12,9] and practice the Truth even when it is uncomfortable and inappropriate for most.

We priests 3.0 in the new updated version, absorbed by the managerial role of museum curators with a fixed salary, without fatherhood from our shepherds and without a solid faith that distinguishes us as prophets before the world, we are easy prey to the fomite of sensuality. The senses clouded by a life more in tune with the world than with Christ the Savior of the world, they expose us to critical issues that are identified through the exercise of disordered sexuality, of a possessiveness that expresses the worst of itself in money management, and in the inability to carry out meaningful relationships with people not to mention the despotic maintenance of power that comes very close to the preservation of the privileges of the worst caste.

Speaking of sexuality, a distinction must be made. I talked about sexuality just to diversify it from genitality, in fact the two terms in Christian morality are ascribed to two different aspects. Although the adjectives sexual e genital they are used today as synonyms, they are not. We identify the person in his male or female being with the sexual term, in his male or female behavior, in her way of expressing masculinity or femininity and in the different and original style of communicating love. With the term genital, instead, we mean what refers more properly to the genital systems, to their anatomy and physiology, to the unitive and procreative task which Catholic doctrine resolutely continues to consider united.

Genital reality, so hailed by modernity, it is included in the sexual one which is wider, complete and typically human. We are too concerned to catch the priests at fault for an abuse regarding genitality that we do not realize that there is a great disconnect in the practice of that sexuality which is an integral and essential part of the figure of the presbyter. So much so that the term "father", with which we commonly call the priests of the regular clergy, it is an indication of the exercise of healthy male sexuality as a demonstration of a spiritual fatherhood which is aimed at the accompaniment and sanctification of the people of God. This is why priests are required first of all for a proven and proven masculinity that allows them to better express the exercise of their sexuality in being loving and authoritative fathers.

The way of loving that he knows in sexuality and masculinity your own language, it can express itself in two different and antithetical ways: through an asphyxiating possessiveness that wants to consume the other and operate it or through a dialoguing freedom that does not fear the other and proposes to love him as he is, enough to mature and grow as we see it happen in the encounter between Jesus and the Samaritan woman [cf.. GV 4,1-26]. In relating to the female sex, Jesus is different from the majority of the men of his time who use, they abuse and objectify the woman to get something from her in return. In Christ, that free and liberating love of the Father which testifies to true love for every created reality is concretized. The priest, come old christ, it cannot mortify this liberating and free love which is constitutional to one's sexuality and nature. Compromises that alternate between compensatory sublimations must be avoided, pathological disorders and deviations. The freedom of the priest in love, which is an explanation of a celibate life, caste, poor and obedient in the image of the Redeemer, it is a theological and prophetic condition that cannot be understood except in function of the Kingdom and of that full eschatological life in which all relationships will be assumed and transfigured in God [cf.. Mt 19,12; MC 12,25].

Even in the use of money and in the exercise of power it is possible to trace an expression of human sexuality that can prove to be balanced, mature and informed by grace or despotic, narcissistic and subjected to the selfish desires of the world. The way of managing and safeguarding the goods entrusted to us - from the care of creation to the way of working within creation - communicates or not the all-encompassing encounter with God who loves and serves starting from everything that exists. was entrusted for the common good. Flaunt success and power, through an inhuman and instrumental use of wealth, it is a constant that we find quite widespread in human history, sometimes it is an immediate gratification, other times of a real idolatrous cult towards things and towards one's self. Among the disciples of Jesus Christ, But, the logic of the human kingdom does not apply, but the imperative is undisputed: "It's not like that among you" [cf.. MC 10,43]. We must not be so naive as to think that wealth and power objectively constitute evils in themselves - as happened in some pauperistic movements or in certain ideologies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries -, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the use made of it. The Gospel never accuses the rich man as such, if not in reference to a non-sharing and a solipsistic use that forgets the groans of the poor [cf.. LC 16,19-31], and the hardships of the widow [cf.. MC 12,41-44]. Like this, while human wealth becomes functional to honest sustenance and maintenance, the wealth of the Kingdom opens the doors of paradise and ensures the possession of God [cf.. LC 12,16-21].

All power and authority derives from God and is his gift [cf.. Sir 33,23; Gives 1,10; GV 19,10-11; RM 13,1-2; AP 2,28]. This concept was quite well known in ancient times, so much so as to support the thesis - which some authors have supported [cf.. S. Paul, S. Augustine, Of the State of God, Jacques-Benigne Bossuet] — according to which it was possible to build a real legal principle that legitimized rulers to govern over men by taking the place of God. In both civil and religious government, obedience to the one who held power was interpreted as direct obedience to God. This thesis thus formulated consists of two inaccuracies. The first consists in not considering the fact that any earthly power and authority is not immune from that wound of original sin which corrupts all power and authority in despotism and dictatorship. The second inaccuracy consists in neglecting the Trinitarian aspect of the question considering only the person of the Father as the exclusive holder of authority and power excluding the participation of the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Only by becoming obedient to the Father, just as Christ was, it is possible to find the safe way to avoid corruption of power and deviations of authority [cf. Mt 4,1-11]. The priest, participating in the authority of Christ deriving from sacred ordination, it is also admitted to the government and to the exercise of a power that expresses an authority. As well as, after baptism, Christ is led into the desert by the Holy Spirit to become a messiah of salvation according to the Spirit of the Father and not according to the spirit of the world, thus the priest in the exercise of power and authority is called to imitate the Master who in serving the other made himself a servant, culminating his diaconate with the sacrifice of his life in favor of men [cf.. MC 10,42-45] and placing all power in the hands of the Father in the garden of olives [cf.. Mt 26,39; 26,42; MC 14,36; LC 22,42] giving fulfillment to that kenosis which started with the incarnation. Priestly authority traces the diakonia of the Son, feeds on the will of the Father and possesses the anointing of the Holy Spirit for the sanctification of the brothers and for the confirmation of the faith received with baptism.

III. A LIQUID COMPANY, WEAK AND IMPERFECT

The western society in which we live, where the Christian is called to make his earthly pilgrimage and where he manifests his courageous witness of faith, increasingly resembles a terrible Moloch who demands the fulfillment of continuous sacrifices and who self-attributes the right to be worshiped as a deity. It does not matter if these sacrifices are paid for through the price of inconclusive human lives and souls now fragmented and lost, lost in the non-sense of existence. A strange society, our, who is pleased to be narcissistically contemplated to resemble a terrible stepmother who demands far more from her children than she actually manages to give.

An anaffective stepmother, because of sterile womb, which is adorned with words as it would with jewels that sparkle with high-sounding meanings as in the case of love, of tolerance, of benevolence, understanding and rights. This bankruptcy view of the world had already been foretold by Christ to his disciples in the Gospel: "If the world hates you, know that it hated me before. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; because you are not of the world, but I chose you from the world, that's why the world hates you " [cf.. GV 15,18-19]. Christ and his disciples are not of the world, while experiencing the temporal dimension of the world but not its essence. The effective sign consists in the fact that the Word of God became flesh [cf.. GV 1,14], the divine Word became human, contrary to what happens today in which many of human words are divinized and absolutized. However, this apparently invincible and deified corporate Moloch already has an established term, just for the simple fact that the "prince and god of this world" [cf.. GV 12,31; 2Color 4,4] has been definitively defeated.

At this point in the discussion it is useful to introduce the theme of idolatry, this will help us understand some important company issues that we experience on a daily basis. Talk about idolatry, in the social fabric, it is by no means secondary, indeed we can say that this attitude recurs cyclically and systematically just when the sense of the "Sacred" diminishes which includes much broader and more diversified horizons than the simple reference to the divine. In this regard, it would be interesting to study the decline of peoples precisely in relation to the crisis and the disappearance of the "Sacred" from human life. For the moment it is sufficient to mention it pending a more punctual and competent future study.

Let's clear up a fact immediately: idolatry, in reality, it is one of the many masks with which atheism conceals itself before society and the world. Talking about idolatry and atheism seems a contradiction but it is not. In the Bible, for instance, the sin of idolatry is well known but not that of atheism, How come? The answer is simple: the ancient man as well as the biblical one is absolutely not an atheist. It is necessary to start from the self-evident finding that no man is naturally born an atheist, the spark of its divine origin prods man from his birth, until his death and pushes him to search for the meaning of his own existence and for a truth that transcends him.

Visible atheism, the one practiced these days, it is the degeneration of idolatry that gives up the vestments of the sacred. Atheism is the deceptive fruit that was formed within some historical periods and that through the French Revolution, the Age of Enlightenment, Positivist thought has increasingly materialized through the philosophies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries together with well-defined Gnostic movements that have declared war on Christianity and specifically on Catholic Christianity.

Atheism, paradoxically, it feeds on that dissociated way of lifeO which is clearly visible in our day and which increasingly takes on pathological features, deluding himself that he is leading everyone towards unlimited progress. Modern Western man finds himself reeling in this corporate model - often and willingly deluding himself that he has achieved excellent achievements of civilization and humanization - a face of a human community that is increasingly defined as the face of a The imperfect society and that has already started to present a very high account.

This imperfect society who defines himself and makes himself known precisely from his dogmatists so intransigent and from his markedly fideistic awareness that they often turn out to be rash. The customs clearance of gnoseological and ethical relativism with which to read and interpret the reality that surrounds us, the widespread optimism of a certain type of science that claims to respond to the most intimate moans of meaning in the heart of man, revolutions in the field of technology and communication, together with the presumption to constitute a new world order that can unify every creed, lead inexorably to failure since in fact it traces in a modern key that ancient sin that the builders of the Tower of Babel committed [cf.. GN 11,1-9]. Atheism is thus the distillate of an idolatrous will deprived of the sense of the sacred that claims to make a name regardless of its Creator [cf.. GN 11,4].

This social overview, so painfully concrete but nevertheless real, it can be explained through a phrase by the Dominican theologian Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange [1877-1964] that says: «The Church is uncompromising on principles, because he believes, it is tolerant in practice, because he loves. The enemies of the Church are tolerant of principles, because they don't believe, but uncompromising in practice, because they don't love. The Church absolves sinners, the enemies of the Church absolve sins " [cf. Dieu, its existence and its nature, Paris 1923, p. 725]. What meaning should we give to these words of the good Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange in relation to a liquid and destabilized society like ours?? Which common thread unites the features of weakness, imperfection, dell 'atheist idolatry enough to produce an apparently liberal but secretly intransigent and at times ruthless and contradictory reality?

The reasoning of the Dominican theologian helps to understand how this society, before being an enemy of God and the Church, is first and foremost an enemy of itself. In fact, it is more inclined to undertake more easily the search for a tolerance that uniforms and flattens its fellow men than a search for truth that leads to different alterities, until reaching the transcendental otherness that represents the authentic core of faith and of the relationship with God. Today, if you have noticed how to conduct some debates and discussions, the safest way to put your opponent on the ropes and then silence him, it essentially consists in accusing him of intolerance. The charge of non-tolerance is that indictment that does not admit objective truth, that does not take personal experience into account, of the history and tradition of peoples. The charge of intolerance is declined through censorship, the ban on realities that cannot be said, known or simply testified. Today, it is possible to be considered intolerant in many ways and be provoked on different areas such as faith and religion, race and ethnicity, sexuality and genitality, customs and traditions, politics and the civilized world and much more.

In the game of contrasts, ploy which I have already analyzed in this article, professing faith makes me, for example, an intolerant and violent person. Affirming the natural moral law on marriage gives me visibility as a medieval fundamentalist fanatic, cultivating and enhancing the traditional and cultural roots of a people makes me a dangerous enemy of globalization and inculturation. Those who we call today with the appellation of intolerants are actually divergent, heroes who do not align with the single thought and therefore need to be seen as enemies to neutralize. If you notice the best exponents of liberal thought, tolerant and guarantor they sin countless times of illiberal attitudes, violent and uncompromising worthy of the best dictatorial despotic regime.

The “tolerant” modern, instead, he does not sacrifice himself for his ideas as the idealist would, on the contrary, one does not scruple to sacrifice those who have ideas contrary to his, just as a dictator would do towards his opponents. How many martyrs of tolerance and rights exist today? But perhaps the most numerous martyrs are those who are held up as unwitting sowers of hatred precisely because they diverge, carriers of a hatred that cannot be seen because it is present only in the gaze of the tolerant on duty who has an interest in using hatred as an ideological tool to control the masses. Modern tolerance therefore not only claims rights but also the dispersion of hatred. For less than a decade, tolerance contracted a happy marriage with the Greek term phobia. Through this term the best workhorses of the tolerant are generated The imperfect society such as homophobia, Islamophobia, xenophobia and others. I mention these three examples just because they are the ones most practiced by the social media, television, radio and newspapers … We realize that all this scaffolding does not make the slightest sense and that it is not possible to pursue a discourse of tolerance that is exclusively linked to a right deprived of duties and a fear that is an antidote to hatred? Invoking tolerance by leveraging rights and excluding duties constitutes a worldview based on self-centeredness, in which everything becomes lawful it is sufficient that it indulges true or presumed personal rights.

On the other hand, call into question the tolerance ahead to hate relying on the feeling of fear of the other is foolish, as this would mean that it is enough to generate an alarm to ward off evil. In this imposing zibaldone it is difficult to find the edge of the skein so as to bring everything back to a certain and safe origin. The prospect of an uncompromising social culture that while condemning sanctifies and sanctifying condemnation appears more like a paradox that reminds the Roman god Janus who, having a "double face", it is the perfect image of compromise, of transformism, of the union of opposites.

Today the mask of Janus triumphs over the faces of the world who travel the streets of our cities and towns, of our squares and shopping centers, of the buildings of power and churches. An ageless Janus who dresses in male and female clothes or, if necessary, neutral, wearing the veil, the cassock, the habit, the skirt threaded in purple or red but that is always him, the ancient snake that never tires of waging war with the impious pretense of proving that God was wrong in trusting man.

.

Sanluri, 27 November 2023

.

.

The latest book by Ivano Liguori, to access the book shop click on the cover

.

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

 

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

 

.





In the lordship of Christ King of the Universe to be little kings

Homiletic of the Fathers of The Island of Patmos

IN THE LORDSHIP OF CHRIST KING OF THE UNIVERSE TO BE LITTLE KINGS

Oscar Wilde wrote: "Selfishness does not consist in living as we please but in demanding that others live as we please"

 

Author:
Gabriele Giordano M. Scardocci, o.p.

.

PDF print format article

 

 

Dear readers of the Island of Patmos,

The Liturgical Year ends, It's our last one of the Catholic year. The liturgical year ends with a great celebration, that of Jesus Christ who is King of the Universe.

Today the monarchy it is no longer a form of government typically adopted throughout the world, where instead the republic is preferred. This is why the figure of the "king" escapes us, if not perhaps for the recent coronation of King Charles of England. Jesus is King of the entire universe and of our lives. But not like the King of England, of Sweden or Belgium. His monarchy is not exercised in a political government. It is a monarchy of love that expresses its throne of glory, its exposure of maximum visibility in the cross; today this throne of glory is realized for us, in the compassion of Jesus. We read it at the beginning of passage from today's Gospel:

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory […] he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the peoples will be gathered before him. He will separate one from another, how the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.".

Here the image of the king is combined with that of the shepherd. Effectively, the shepherd, it also has a governing role within the world of the farm. It was a world and a culture close to the imagination in which Jesus speaks. Here then are those on the right who are blessed by the Father. Those on the left don't. Effectively, the blessed of the Father, they are those who welcomed the poor and needy in the various situations of need that Jesus expresses. While those who will be in eternal fire, they were not attentive and compassionate towards these material and spiritual poverty. Thus Jesus shows us and asks us to imitate him as King in concrete Love, in active charity, that He wanted to do towards all the people he met: Nicodemus, the blind man of Jericho, the demoniac of Gerasa and other encounters. The Lord has always accomplished all these great works with an act of compassion and tenderness, with a truly human and truly divine heart. A small Christological heart for a great love.

From this comes the foundation of the works of mercy for us material and corporeal. The Lord, so, He asks us to follow Him, our King, in Catholic life precisely because we operate with a concrete and attentive love for others, trying to look at them with tenderness. Trying to look at our neighbor as if it were Jesus himself who, as a little one, asks us for this service. We become little kings in Jesus little king of the Universe.

On the contrary instead we find those who will go into eternal fire. Because they have completely escaped the logic of love and compassion. So, the goats on the left are the people closed in on selfishness, in the dimension of unique attention to one's own needs and requirements. The risk we run when we forget the practice of works of mercy is that we no longer recognize not only others, but of not recognizing the need for God in life. So the wicked in the eternal fire are those who do not recognize the centrality of the Lordship of God in life, of the King of kings, without which we can do nothing. The tension towards selfishness is therefore a substitution, a crowning of oneself as king, demanding that the Universe and God bow down to us.

Oscar Wilde wrote: "Selfishness does not consist in living as we please but in demanding that others live as we please".

We ask the Lord to be welcomed to his throne and his monarchy of love, and be witnesses from now on that authentic Love exists, and we live in communion with the Father, of the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Amen!

Santa Maria Novella in Florence, 25 November 2023

.

.

Subscribe to our Channel Jordan the Theological club directed by Father Gabriele by clicking on the image

 

THE LATEST EPISODES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE ARCHIVE: WHO

.

Visit the pages of our book shop WHO and support our editions by purchasing and distributing our books.

.

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

Our Lord Jesus Christ King of the Universe: a royalty built on charity

Homiletics of the Fathers of The Island of Patmos

OUR LORD JESUS ​​CHRIST KING OF THE UNIVERSE: A ROYALITY BUILT ON CHARITY

This page of the Gospel proclaimed today in our churches is so splendid, that every comment seems to spoil it a little. Better to leave it as it is, simply, to indicate to people that human life is never conceivable without the other. Tragedy then the conflict will not be, otherness, the difference but rather the two extremes that deny this relationship: confusion and separation

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

PDF print format article

.HTTPS://youtu.be/4fP7neCJapw

.

 

In a short but famous apologue by title Martin's Christmas the Russian writer Leo Tolstoy1 told of man, a cobbler named Martin, who had mysteriously met the Lord in the needy people who had passed by his shop during the day and expressly cited the page of Gospel for this Sunday.

Saint Martin gives part of his cloak to the poor (painting, overall element) by Bartolomeo Vivarini (SEC. XV)

The literature it was not the only art that this wonderful page of Matteo inspired, just think of Buonarroti's frescoes in the Sistine Chapel. Let's read it:

"During that time, Jesus told his disciples: “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the peoples will be gathered before him. He will separate one from another, how the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will place the sheep on his right hand and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right hand: “Come on, blessed of my Father, receive as an inheritance the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world, because I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me drink:, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and dressed me, sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to visit me". Then the righteous will answer him: "Man, when we saw you hungry and fed you, you are thirsty and we gave you something to drink? When have we ever seen you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and clothe you? When have we ever seen you sick or in prison and come to visit you?”. And the king will answer them: “Truly I tell you: everything you have done to just one of these least brothers of mine, you did it to me ". Then he will also say to those on the left: “Via, away from me, cursed, the eternal fire, prepared for the devil and his angels, because I was hungry and you didn't give me anything to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you visited me ". Then it will: "Man, when we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and we did not serve you?”. Then he will answer them: “Truly I tell you: everything that you have not done to even one of the least of these, you didn't do it to me. And they will go: to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life".

With today's song it ends not only, regarding the liturgy, the current liturgical year, which gives way to Advent, but also the teaching of Jesus in the Gospel according to Matthew. In fact, immediately after our pericope the evangelist begins the story of the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus, with these words: «Once all this talk is over, Jesus said to his disciples" (Mt 26,1). Jesus will teach in another way from now on, especially with gestures and obedience to the Father in the supreme test of the cross. For this reason today's pericope is of particular importance, the last speech given by Jesus in Matthew, without counting, the invitation of the Risen One to make disciples and baptize in 28,18-19, and the few but important words said during the passion, starting from the last supper.

Solo by the way it must also be said that despite a consolidated interpretative practice that begins with the Fathers of the Church and which leads to defining the scene as the "universal" judgment, starting from the 18th century, the many good clues in the text are underlined, not just lexical, to believe that instead of a judgment for the whole humanity, the text implies, on the contrary, a judgment only for pagans, but it is not possible in this context to make this interpretation explicit as it would require too much space.

The judgment scene is exclusively Matthean, and it is masterfully built, with the use of various expedients such as repetition, useful for memorization. There are many comparisons that we can make with the apocalyptic language and symbolism current at the time of Jesus which appear from time to time in the canonical literature - Daniel and Apocalypse - but also in the apocryphal literature. The original data, revolutionary, instead, the novelty that Jesus' speech brings is that the same judge, the king, consider himself the object of such actions: «I was hungry and I you fed", or, «not me you fed". This creates an effect of surprise both in those who showed him mercy and in those who denied it. While in the Old Testament the day of the Lord is decreed by God himself and therefore He is the only one who judges, in the logic of the New Testament it is Jesus, the Messiah, who can intervene in this judgment. Consequently God will carry out judgment, but this in nuce it already happens in the way we have related to his Son in this world, to Jesus present in the poor who were hungry and thirsty and who were or were not assisted by us. That's why at the end of time, it will be Christ, the Lamb, to take up the book of our life, what not even we are capable of reading and fully understanding, and to open its seals (cf.. AP 5).

What is then striking is the grandiose vision which embraces the whole of humanity is accompanied by the gaze placed on each one and, in particular, on those people who are normally the most invisible: poor, sick people, prisoners, hungry, thirsty, foreigners, naked. It is no coincidence that our text calls them "minimal" (vv. 40.45). Charity towards the needy, the gesture of sharing that is so simple, Human, daily, for everyone, believers and non-believers, it becomes that on which the final judgment is exercised. The example of Martin of Tours, according to the hagiographic narration of Sulpicius Severus2, it is emblematic. After having divided his cloak with the sword to cover the nakedness of a poor beggar at the gates of Amiens, in a harsh winter, Martin had a vision in a dream of Christ saying to him: «Martino, you have covered me with your cloak". Christ is identified with the poor, as in our evangelical page.

This page of the Gospel is so splendid proclaimed today in our churches, that every comment seems to spoil it a little. Better to leave it as it is, simply, to indicate to people that human life is never conceivable without the other. Tragedy then the conflict will not be, otherness, the difference but rather the two extremes that deny this relationship: confusion and separation3. The others, especially if in need, they will not be hell for me but a blessing: «You are blessed because…». Two famous ones pieces theatrical, one by Sartre4 with the famous expression inside: "Hell is other people"; the other by Pirandello, Dressing the naked5, which in the title makes direct reference to our evangelical passage, they dramatically tell us that by not excluding the Other from one's world the problem would be easily solvable and hell would cease to exist. Those authors understood, on the contrary, note the impossibility of an existence that excludes the Other. In other words, hell, it's the others, because you cannot escape from otherness, one realizes that the Other holds the secret of one's being and, while, that without the Other this being would not be possible.

So does the Lord Jesus, even in his last speech, surprised us once again by giving a new meaning to the 'works of mercy', already known in contemporary Judaism, where they were, But, understood as a sort of imitation of God, in the sense of doing for others what God himself has done for man. However, they did not foresee that the eternal judge was hidden behind very humble existences, disadvantaged and defeated. In the other, in his brother, there is Jesus who had said to his disciples: «Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me... Whoever gives even a single glass of cold water to drink to one of these little ones because he is a disciple, verily I tell you: he will not lose his reward ". While now he extends this vision to all of humanity – panta ta ethne, all nations del v.22: «Everything you have done to just one of these youngest brothers of mine, you did it to me". Because as an ancient hymn used in the liturgy of Holy Thursday says: «Where charity and love, God is there».

Happy Sunday everyone!

From the Hermitage, 25 November 2023

 

NOTE

[1] Tolstoy's reworking first appeared anonymously in the magazine “Russkij rabocij” (The Russian worker), no. 1 the 1884, with the title “Djadja Martyn” (Uncle Martyn). In 1886 the story, with the title “Where there is love there is God”, it was included in a volume published in Moscow by Posrednik together with eight others, all with the signature of Leo Tolstoy

[2] Severo Sulpicio,Life of Martin, EDB, 2003

[3] Michel de Certeaux, Never without the other. Journey into the difference, 1983

[4] J.P. Sartre, Closed door, Bompiani, Milan 2013

[5] Pirandello L., Naked masks. Vol. 5: Henry IV – Mrs. Morli, one and two – Dressing the naked, Mondadori, 2010

 

 

Sant'Angelo Cave in Ripe (Civitella del Tronto)

 

.

Visit the pages of our book shop WHO and support our editions by purchasing and distributing our books.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.

We should reflect more on the sin of wasting time

Homiletics of the Fathers of The Island of Patmos

WE SHOULD REFLECT MORE ON THE SIN OF WASTING TIME

However you want to understand them, since every parabolic tale is open to a plurality of interpretations, talents will remain a free gift that cannot be kept for oneself, nor does it hide, but it must be multiplied. They reveal that God, more than a master, he shows himself to be a Father towards us children and over time offers many of these graces to each of us and to our communities.

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

PDF print format article

.HTTPS://youtu.be/4fP7neCJapw

.

A gift can be offered with a thousand reasons, even non-noble ones at times. But it has an unmistakable characteristic on its side: it reveals the identity of the one who offers and the one who receives it. The Gospel of this Sunday presents a very special Donor, who does not bestow a single gift, but rather all his good. Let's read:

"During that time, Jesus told his disciples this parable: «It will happen as to a man who, going on a trip, he called his servants and gave them his goods. To one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, According to the capacity of each; then he left. Immediately the one who had received five talents went to use them, and earned five more. So did the one who had received two, he earned two more. The one who had received only one talent, he went and made a hole in the ground and hid his master's money there. After a long time the master of those servants returned and wanted to settle accounts with them. The one who had received five talents showed up and brought five more, saying: "Man, you gave me five talents; there, I earned five more”. "Good, good and faithful servant - his master told him -, you were faithful in little, I will give you power over much; take part in your master's joy". Then he who had received two talents came forward and said: "Man, you gave me two talents; there, I earned two more”. "Good, good and faithful servant - his master told him -, you were faithful in little, I will give you power over much; take part in your master's joy". Finally the one who had received only one talent also showed up and said: "Man, I know you are a hard man, who reap where you have not sown and gather where you have not scattered. I got scared and went to hide your talent in the ground: here is what is yours". The master answered him: «Evil and lazy servant, you knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered; you should have entrusted my money to the bankers and so, returning, I would have withdrawn mine with interest. So take away his talent, and give it to him who has the ten talents. Because anyone has, it will be given and will be in abundance; but to those who don't have, even what he has will be taken away. And throw the useless servant outside into the darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth". (Mt 25,14-30).

This Sunday's evangelical song adds a specification to the meaning of vigilance which had already been presented in the parable of the ten virgins (Mt 25,1-13). There, being vigilant meant being foresighted, to be ready, preparations, equip yourself with what you need, taking into account a long wait. Now, in the parable of the talents, vigilance is specified as attention and responsibility in everyday life and expressed as loyalty in small things ("you were faithful in a little": Mt 25,21.23).

First of all, let's remember what function the parabola has. This form of communication often involves the use of hyperbolic language, a paradoxical setting, with deliberate exaggerations that can even scandalize due to the violence involved. It affects us, who, the punishment of the wicked servant. But the ending is also surprising, as often happens in fictional parabolic tales, presents a real twist: talent is taken away from those who only have one and given to those who already have many. The question arises in the reader: what a master is he who allows himself to humiliate his servant in this way, who ultimately acted prudently?

It was said that vigilance it does not only concern the eschatological expectation but fully affects the relationship with everyday life, with its everyday realities. Matthew's parable, which has a somewhat different and more complex parallel with Luca 19,11-27, it is certainly inserted in an eschatological context - the v.30 places it on the horizon of the final judgement: «Throw the useless servant into the darkness, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" - but this only reiterates that this final judgment is being prepared here and now, in the present day of history, something that will be shown in all its evidence in the parable of the Last Judgment (Mt 25,31-46) next Sunday. There the eschatological authority of the little ones and the poor will clearly appear. The final judgment will be based on the actions of charity and justice carried out in their favor or omitted. The everyday thus reveals itself as the eschatological place par excellence, because it is the time we are given. Thus the parable after the distribution of talents[1] in a personalized way, commensurate with the capabilities of the recipients, unfolds between the "immediately" (v.15) of those who make them profitable and the after "a long time" (v.19) of the master's return. Besides, it doesn't seem important, at least in this story, the quantity of gifts received, since the two hard-working servants, although they received talents to varying degrees, however, they will receive the same reward. Rather, what is important is the time whose duration brings out the truth of people, of their behaviors, of their estate and their responsibility. The passage of time is revealing; in fact the first two servants were able to immediately grasp that it was the first great gift they could take advantage of and did not waste it by throwing it away.

We should reflect more on the sin of wasting time. If the third servant had thought about this he would have taken advantage of it, because in the end the reward would be the same as the first two servants who had received more. But as was said above, the gift is, as well as the time spent, revealing the characters in this parable. So does the donor, even if Jesus initially hides it behind an anonymous man (v.14), it is clearly God who will in fact later be called 'Lord' (Kyrie, Lord God v.20.22.24). Only He is capable of giving all of his things as a gift [2], in a preventative and unexpected way, especially towards recipients who, however enterprising, are still servants. Some church fathers wanted to see behind the gift of talents that of the Word of God, in memory of the parable of the good seed that bears fruit according to the soil it finds. Irenaeus of Lyons, d. 202 d.C., he saw there the gift of life, granted by God to men. However you want to understand them, since every parabolic tale is open to a plurality of interpretations, talents will remain a free gift that cannot be kept for oneself, nor does it hide, but it must be multiplied. They reveal that God, more than a master, he shows himself to be a Father towards us children and over time offers many of these graces to each of us and to our communities. The ability to recognize them and make them bear fruit is the quality of fearless servants who also know how to take risks.

The point of the parable but it is not of an economic nature, that is, in the ability to derive profits from the investment of capital, because the reward, in this sense, it should have been commensurate with the merit and size of the accumulated assets. Instead, it focuses on acting instantly and not remaining inert in the time given. Taking into account that the master-Lord will return and ask for reason («he sets out the reason» translates the Vulgate) of how the servants will have acted. They will discover that in his eyes what mattered was goodness and faithfulness in action and what seemed like a lot was actually very little compared to the reward: "Good, good and faithful servant - his master told him -, you were faithful in little, I will give you power over much; take part in your master's joy".

The parable thus becomes an invitation to the disciples and for communities not to remain immobile and enchanted in the face of the difficulties of the current times, ready to act at any moment, aware of the gifts received and that this which is given to us is the propitious time. The challenges it poses and the changed cultural conditions should not frighten us or make us remain happy only with what is already done or intoxicated by activism as an end in itself. The parable asks Christians for awareness, responsibility, audacity and above all creativity, all realities condensed in words: be good and faithful.

Finally we asked ourselves first because the master, protagonist of the parable, he treated the third servant so badly. What is striking in this story is precisely the idea that the servant had of him. While the first two servants didn't need to think about this, almost as if it were automatic for them that if the owner gives you a gift it should immediately be made profitable, the other servant instead develops his own idea, we could say his theology, which blocks its action, because the idea of ​​fear dominates it. Trapped in this image he has of his master, that of a hard and pretentious man, despite having the great gift of a talent at his disposal, he is unable to trust him. And this will be his real drama.

His inaction he will be judged in a parallel way to the good and faithful, but as evil and lazy. If he had at least opened a savings account he would have received the interest income, but he preferred to bury his gift and for this reason, when there is no more time to act, at the time of judgment, it will be delivered to weeping and gnashing of teeth, a biblical expression that indicates the failure of one's life[3].

Faith that works is important in the vocabulary of the first Gospel. Jesus speaks of the faith of those who believe in him to be healed, that of the centurion (8,10), of the paralytic (9,2), of the hemorrhaging woman (9,22), of the two blind men (9,29), della Cananea (15,28), and encourages his team, never criticized for having "little faith", to have more (cf.. 6,30).

Our parable it could therefore mean something about believing or not believing in God in the intermediate time that separates from judgment. The third servant, evil, he no longer has faith, he lost it over time: he forgot that what had been entrusted to him had to be invested so that it would bear fruit for the master, but also in his favor: it has therefore become useless (v.30). That the parable deals with the gift of faith, it can also be indirectly deduced from another text of the New Testament, where St. Paul says that this gift is mysteriously personalized, just like in the parable that Jesus tells:

«For the grace that was given to me, I say to each of you: do not value yourself more than is appropriate, but evaluate yourselves wisely and justly, each according to the measure of faith that God has given him" (RM 12,3).

To conclude we could ask ourselves: What vision do we have of God? The vindictive one, demanding and harsh that instills fear or the liberating one, positive that makes us act with trust and without fear, how Jesus lived it and taught us?

From the Hermitage, 19 November 2023

 

NOTE

1 The talent, which also meant «that which is weighed, it was a unit of weight of approximately 30-40 kg. corresponding to six thousand denarii. Because a denarius, according to what Matthew himself explains in 20,2 (Matteo is very precise in his use of coins, and in his gospel several types are listed), it is the amount of pay for one day of work, here we mean a large sum given to the servants for management

2 In the parable of the murderous tenants He does not hesitate to also send his Son (Mt 21,37)

3 "Still, the kingdom of heaven is like a net cast into the sea, which collects all kinds of fish. When it's full, the fishermen haul it ashore, they sit down, they collect the good fish in the baskets and throw away the bad ones. So it will be at the end of the world. The angels will come and separate the evil from the good and throw them into the fiery furnace, There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth " (Mt 13,47-50).

 

 

 

Sant'Angelo Cave in Ripe (Civitella del Tronto)

 

.

Visit the pages of our book shop WHO and support our editions by purchasing and distributing our books.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater: the institution of the godparent in the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation

WE DO NOT THROW THE BABY AWAY WITH THE DIRTY WATER: THE INSTITUTE OF THE GODFATHER IN THE SACRAMENTS OF BAPTISM AND CONFIRMATION

Given the current situation, I believe that in pastoral practice, it would be worth making further efforts to restore dignity and value to the figure of the godfather, taking into account its pedagogical function but, even before, of the typically ecclesial connotation of his presence.

– Theology and canon law –

AuthorTeodoro Beccia

Author
Teodoro Beccia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PDF print format article

 

 

The institution of godparents dates back to the early Church, when the duty to baptize children was imposed, though, presumably, at the beginning the children were introduced directly by their parents. Tertullian refers to the sponsores the guarantee, but the terms used in ancient times are different and very evocative: receivers, pregnant women, fideas, protestants who attend the baptism of children (cf.. Of Baptism, 18, 11, in PL I, 1221). The need for godparents was perhaps correlated with baptism conceived as a new birth, which therefore required new fathers.

In continuity with this line of reflection, later Saint Thomas would recall that the spiritual regeneration brought about by baptism resembles the carnal one and, as in this the child needs a nurse and a pedagogue, so in the spiritual one there is a need for someone to instruct him in faith and Christian life (Summa Th. III, q. 67, a. 7). The institute, or godfather ministry, certainly appears to be related to the catechumenate of adults. Taking into account the situation in which Christians found themselves during the persecution by the Roman Empire, to prevent any intruders from entering the communities, it was required that the candidate for baptism be presented by some known believer, who guaranteed the seriousness of his intentions and accompanied him during the catechumenate and the conferral of the Sacrament, as well as subsequently ensuring their fidelity to the commitment made.

Coming to the present day, priests caring for souls often now find themselves in difficulty when they have to deal with the question of choosing godparents. The cases are very varied. There are parents who, in order not to harm any relative, would like to do without godparents on the occasion of their children's Baptism or Confirmation.. Sometimes we are instead faced with the proposal of godparents who are in an "irregular" situation and who therefore cannot be admitted. Moreover, with the intense migratory phenomenon that characterizes our era, it also happens that a request is made to accept as godfather or godmother faithful belonging to Churches or ecclesial communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church, with the exception of the Orthodox Churches (cf.. can. 685 § 3 of the Eastern Code, Cceo and other).

All this leads to asking some questions: Godparents are really necessary and it makes sense to continue to request their presence, given that their office has often become a "liturgical lie" as some have called it? What is their function? What are the requirements to be admitted to this position?

Godparents are necessary? We try to give an answer to this question through the legislation of the Code of Canon Law, which is about the godfather (or godmother) of baptism according to cann. 872-874 and the godfather (or godmother) of confirmation at cann. 892-893. Let it be the can. 872 that the dog. 892, in reference to the obligation to give the person being baptized or confirmed a godparent, they use the same expression: as much as possible (as far as possible): the rule is not exhaustive or preceptive, as it was not in the previous Code of 1917, but it must not be considered merely optional either.

Regarding Baptism, the reasons for the presence are appropriately indicated in a short but dense passage of the General Introduction of the Rite of Baptism of Infants (cf.. 8) and the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults (cf.. 8):

«The godfather expands the family of the person being baptized in a spiritual sense and represents the Church in her role as mother».

Its function, so, it is not only liturgical ― nor can it be reduced to a merely choreographic presence ― but also pedagogical, as the canon recalls. 872 § 1, that, in addition to the task of assisting the adult being baptized and introducing the infant being baptized, calls for cooperation so that the godchild leads a Christian life in conformity with the Sacrament and faithfully fulfills the obligations inherent to it.

An effective description of the godfather's task, in the case of the baptism of an adult, but which suggests criteria of judgment applicable by analogy also to the godparents of newborns, is indicated at no. 43 of the To be noted to the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults:

"The Godfather, chosen by the catechumen for his example, for his talents and his friendship, delegated by the local Christian community and approved by the priest, accompanies the candidate on election day, in the celebration of the sacraments and in mystagogy. It is his task to show the catechumen the practice of the Gospel in individual and social life with friendly familiarity, help him in his doubts and anxieties, bear witness to him and take care of the development of his baptismal life. Chosen even before the "election", when he bears witness to the catechumen before the community; his office retains all its importance even when the neophyte, received the Sacraments, still needs help and support to remain faithful to the promises of Baptism".

Even for Confirmation, what requires the presence of the godfather is not the celebration as such, but the Christian formation of the candidate for confirmation, as the canon recalls. 892, which refers to the dual function of ensuring that the confirmed person behaves as a true witness of Christ and faithfully fulfills the obligations inherent to the same Sacrament (can. 892). Therefore not a mere ornamental appearance next to the candidate for confirmation at the time of the celebration, but a ministry that is founded in the Sacrament and which also asks the godfather for continuity of spiritual presence, as a counselor and guide called to educational responsibility towards a brother, who must express in faith and works the maturity received as a gift and to be acquired existentially.

The indication of the Code it is therefore oriented not by minimal choices, but for a pastoral care to be renewed. Outside of extraordinary cases, the Confirmation godfather must be there (the science, about it, a response from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the discipline of the Sacraments (cf.. Information 11 [1975], pp. 61-62).

The requirements. The can. 874 is responsible for presenting the necessary requirements to be admitted to the office of godfather/godmother at both baptism and confirmation (cf.. can. 893 § 1). Let's limit ourselves here to focusing on just a few points, starting from previous legislation:

1) for both Sacraments, the godfather must have received all three Sacraments of initiation (signifying the intimate union between them), not just the one for whom he acts as godfather;

2) the dog. 893§ 2 remember the opportunity (expedient) that the godfather of confirmation is the same as that of baptism (to underline the profound connection between the two Sacraments), whereas previously this was prohibited;

3) a godfather of the same sex as the person being baptized/confirmed is no longer required;

4) the prohibition on clerics and religious men and women from acting as godfathers and godmothers no longer exists, without express permission from the ordinary or at least the local superior. However, religious institutes could establish their own rules.

5) Regarding age (16 year old), with a particular law the bishop can establish a different one, but also the parish priest or the minister, for just cause, can introduce the exception, taking into account a rather broad criterion but which should never obscure the ecclesiological reason motivating the presence of the godfather.

6) The godfather must be a faithful Catholic. The reason for this apparent "ecumenical restriction" is to be found not only in the danger of indifferentism, from which the Council itself warned (cf.. To nations 15 e Eastern Churches 26), but even more so in the ecclesial value of gift of godfather: from the nature of the matter you cannot represent an ecclesial community with which you are not in full communion, nor even express faith in it. In this perspective, the code provision is consistent with the awareness that the Church has of its own identity, and therefore it is also profoundly ecumenical. That being the case, members of ecclesial communities separate from the Catholic Church are excluded from the role of godparents, who can act as witnesses together with a Catholic godfather.

As for the "Orthodox", united with us by very close bonds (UR 15) the dog. 685 § 3 of the Eastern Code (Cceo) admits that one of their followers can fulfill the role of godfather, but always together with a Catholic godfather. In the baptism of a Catholic, by virtue of the close communion existing between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, it is therefore allowed, for a valid reason, admit an Eastern faithful with the role of godfather together with a Catholic godfather (or a godmother), provided that the suitability of the godfather is recognized. However, Christian education will primarily be the responsibility of the Catholic godfather, as it represents the Christian community and is the guarantor of the faith and desire for ecclesial communion of the baptized person and/or his parents (cf.. Vademecum for the Pastoral Care of Catholic Parishes towards non-Catholic Orientals, the, n. 16).

Other requirements too indicated by can. 874 § 1, 3° they are very qualifying to define the profile of the godfather. Dutifully respected, have a profound impact on both the designation of the person, and on the way of understanding the task.

It is up to the particular legislation determine what it means to “lead a life in conformity with faith”: Different environments and situations lead to different determinations. The case history is as broad as ever: we range from the whole range of possibilities relating to those who find themselves in an irregular marital situation, to those who profess atheism and agnosticism; from those dedicated to magical arts to those who are notorious members of a sect, of an association that plots against the Catholic Church (cf.. can. 1374: so for example Freemasonry), or appears to belong to some criminal group (like the Mafia, at N'drangheta, the Camorra or other mafia-type criminal groups).

In the end, against the practice of replacing godparents with parents, without foundation and justification, remember (can 874, § 1,5) that neither father nor mother can act as godparents, for it would be absurd to think of parents as helping themselves as godparents to their children. About the number, the dog. 873 states that only one godfather is enough, while in the case there are two, they must be of different sex. The can. 892, which deals with the godfather of confirmation, instead it prescribes only one godfather or godmother.

The role of the witness: it cannot be forgotten that among the tasks of the godfather there is also that of proving that the Baptism or Confirmation has taken place. Can. refers to this function. 875: it introduces the figure of witness of baptism that, unlike that of the godfather, it is not subject to any conditions and plays a role similar to that of marriage witnesses (cf.. can. 1108 §2) albeit without being, as in this case, ad validity. In order to obtain valid marital consent, ad validity the simultaneous presence of two witnesses is required, the assistant as a qualified witness and the valid consent of the bride and groom. In the case of Baptism or Confirmation, the witness only has the task of certifying the conferral, therefore it is not necessary for the validity of the Sacrament (cf.. cann. 875-877). Consequently, the figure of the witness is not subject to any conditions. The only requirement is that the person chosen as a witness has the use of reason and is capable of testifying.

The possibility is thus offered to deal with some particular situations in which the chosen person could not otherwise hold the role of godparent: thus for example in the case of a believer belonging to a Protestant ecclesial community (cf.. can. 874 §2), or is cohabiting, divorced, remarried or in another irregular marital situation, or declares himself an agnostic or atheist, or has formally and publicly abandoned the Catholic faith through the so-called "banging". This is a solution that can potentially generate ambiguity, misunderstandings and misleading interpretations, it must be adopted with prudence and caution, while, on the other hand, it will be necessary to explain with absolute clarity that the baptism witness is in no way "a kind of godfather", but a completely different figure.

The CEI document We meet Jesus, the 29 June 2014, he claims:

«The regional Episcopal Conferences are asked to discern on the matter and evaluate the pastoral opportunity of supporting - only as witnesses of the sacramental rite - those people indicated by the family who, despite not having prescribed requirements, they always express a positive parental closeness, affective and educational".

A for this purpose they can be found online various pronouncements on the matter. We cite for example the provisions of the Sardinian Episcopal Conference and the Diocese of Aosta. Therefore, as much as possible, it is necessary to give training to GodparentsWitnesses to accompany the Baptized in the choice of Christian life, without prejudice to the freedom of the Witness who cannot be forced to share or embrace this life choice.

The usefulness of the figure of the Witness it is merely legal or responds to the need for certification of the conferment of Baptism or Confirmation. From a pastoral point of view, the document also presents it as a possible solution to meet those situations of incompatibility of the requirements for the role of godparent.

The age of the witness at Baptism or Confirmation it is not specified as in the case of Marriage, where the age of majority is required, or in the case of godparents where the age of the child is required 16 year old. Logically, for the age of the Witness, the evaluation of the Parish Priest or the Diocesan Bishop could be applied as a criterion., as in the case of the Godfathers can. 847 §1 n.2. During the celebration, differently from the Godfather and the Godmother, the Witness must not be given any active participation since their role is solely that of guarantors for the certification of the conferment of the Sacrament. Each diocesan bishop will be able to give further provisions regarding the celebratory context

As regards the registration of the baptismal certificate in the parish register it must be underlined that, in the case of the witness of a Baptism foreseen by can. 874 §2, the name and surname of the witness and the personal details must be noted as required by canon. 877 [5].

The certificate problem. The Code of Canon Law, in the canons dedicated to the godfather of baptism and confirmation, he never mentions the need to produce, from the godfather, or the parish priest, of any type of certificate / certificate / self-certification. We are faced with a case in which the practice has now taken on a meaning Besides the, often linked to the fact that the priest caring for souls does not have full knowledge to establish the admissibility of a person to the office of godfather, because he doesn't know him, comes from another parish, often far away, etc. etc…

“Canonizing” the civil order, we can observe how already in various dioceses and parishes, the "certificate of suitability" has been replaced with a "self-certification of suitability". But let's see what self-certification is: civil law has introduced the possibility of providing the Public Administration and private individuals with a declaration made and signed by a citizen which completely and definitively replaces some administrative certifications. This is why it is also called "substitute declaration". AND, so, a way to avoid bureaucracy and unnecessary waste of time, especially when you choose to self-certify online. According to the law, public offices are obliged to accept self-certification for the required practices. If not, would incur a violation of official duties. The situation is different when it comes to private individuals: whether or not to accept this declaration remains a matter of discretion for them. Therefore, the self-certification has the same legal and administrative value as the certificate or document it replaces. As long as the truth is told: if the data contained in the self-certification turns out to be false, the interested party loses all benefits.

Self-certification, being a declaration made personally by the interested party, it could reveal itself, if implemented in the local legislation of the diocese, a substantial simplification of work for priests caring for souls: the interested party will be able to declare himself the existence of the requirements for access to the office of godfather and commit himself in this sense to the Church directly in front of the parish priest who will have to administer the Sacrament, without requesting a certificate from the parish priest of residence which often the parish priest himself could not issue for the reasons set out above, that is, the impossibility for the priest to be able to certify a situation of which he may not be aware for a whole series of reasons that we know well.

Given the current situation, I believe that in pastoral practice, it would be worth making further efforts to restore dignity and value to the figure of the godfather, taking into account its pedagogical function but, even before, of the typically ecclesial connotation of his presence. We cannot hide the fact that the deviations of the past weigh on the figure of the godfather, but this cannot justify the emotional reaction of those who now consider it useless, nor of those who easily access the convenient solution of not requiring the presence of godparents, because he can't find any suitable ones. If there aren't any, they must be trained, through appropriate paths that enhance this office, which has the characteristics and dignity of a true lay ministry (cf.. The lay 23).

Among the various proposals, there are those who suggest engaging the godparents to keep watch, albeit discreetly, on the education of godchildren, warning the parish priest about deficiencies and deviations, in order to provide, within the scope of possibilities and limits, for a return to goodness. Somebody else, then, believes that they could be given the task of taking care of the godson in the event of an early orphan. Perhaps a reminder of that spiritual kinship that, de facto, comes to be established between godfather and godson, and to which the Code of 1917, recognizing its high sacramental and pastoral value, it connected a marital impediment, today no longer in force in the Latin code but fully understood and implemented as a law on marriage by the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.

 

Velletri of Rome, 11 November 2023

.

.

Visit the pages of our book shop WHO and support our editions by purchasing and distributing our books.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

Why did we Fathers of the magazine The Island of Patmos not talk about the Synod?? Because we are priests and theologians, not gossips who excite the irrational moods of the populace

WHY HAVE WE FATHERS OF THE MAGAZINE THE ISLAND OF PATMOS NOT TALKED ABOUT THE SYNOD? BECAUSE WE ARE PRIESTS AND THEOLOGIANS, NOT GOSSIPARIES THAT EXCITE THE IRRATIONAL MOODS OF THE PEOPLE

Even before it began, this latest Synod was preceded by proclamations from unspecified internet experts who sowed terror not so dissimilar to that of the Hamas terrorists, to give a completely absurd-paradoxical hyperbolic example. If in fact Hamas terrorists kill innocent civilians, this other type of terrorist kills, in the increasingly lost faithful, the little that remains in them of faith and ecclesial feeling, of being members of the living body that is the Church.

— News in brief —

.

PDF print format article

 

 

In one of my latest articles to which I refer you (see WHO) I spoke about the decline of the principle of authority in relation to social media, where even the least imbecile can launch into dealing in a grotesque and surreal way with topics that are the subject of complex historical debates on a scientific level, historical, social, politico, theological…

We the Fathers of this magazine we have convinced ourselves that when faced with certain desolations the ancient saying of Publius Terentius Afro is valid (190-159 a.C), universally known as Terence: «They are silent, praise them enough» (They are silent and in doing so they praise). With this maxim, the famous Roman playwright of probable Berber origin meant that sometimes silence prevents words from being expressed, also clearly, end up being distorted or even deliberately misunderstood by those who are inclined to misunderstand or look for any excuse for a dispute. From this maxim by Terenzi was born the famous popular saying "a beautiful silence was never written".

A personal note: for reasons that need not be explained, during this last Synod I had the opportunity to come and go from Martha House Sancthae several times, to meet and speak with various bishops from various parts of the world, clarifying the obvious that I certainly don't need to clarify, because the whole thing, for me as for many other scholars and theologians, it falls within the scope of obvious things about which there would be absolutely nothing to discuss. But, as I wrote in my previous article (see WHO) sometimes it is necessary to explain especially the things that seem obvious to us, in this crazy decadent world in which a boundless army of people thinks of giving maximum and unappealable sentences with a Tweet o a post su Facebook, after having fed themselves on the blogs of people who speak and discuss complex issues that they really don't know about practice and rigor.

Even before starting this latest Synod was preceded by proclamations from unspecified internet experts who sowed terror not so dissimilar to that of Hamas terrorists, to give a completely absurd-paradoxical hyperbolic example. If in fact Hamas terrorists kill innocent civilians, this other type of terrorist kills, in the increasingly lost faithful, the little that remains in them of faith and ecclesial feeling, of being members of the living body that is the Church (cf.. With the 1, 18).

For weeks we have read and heard proclamations in which certain web terrorists gave the best of themselves to disorient simple and increasingly lost Catholics by foreseeing the imminent customs clearance of priestly celibacy and married priests, women priests, or at least women deacons, the blessing at the altar of homosexual couples and so on to follow. And all these elements that to define as fantastic is just an understatement, they were announced as certain, indeed presented as taken for granted.

At the end of the Synod the Supreme Pontiff Francis spoke publicly, clarifying that priestly celibacy would not be affected in any way, reiterating what we have known for centuries: priestly celibacy, which has its roots since the first apostolic era and which has great value on a spiritual level, ecclesial and pastoral, it is not a dogma of faith but an ecclesiastical discipline. There is proof that even in the Catholic Church there have always been Eastern Rite priests who are married and have families. Having said this, the Holy Father reiterated that he does not intend in any way to modify ecclesiastical discipline on the celibacy of priests belonging to the Latin rite community, specifying that nothing similar "will happen under my pontificate".

Regarding the issue of women priests, the Supreme Pontiff Francis had already expressed himself several times in the past, therefore he did nothing but reiterate the pronouncement given in definitive form by his Holy Predecessor John Paul II which clarified for the present and future future: «The Church does not have the power to grant sacred priestly ordination to women» (cf.. WHO).

If in the preparatory stages of the Synod there was talk of the LGBT world, from the draft of the final document this acronym has completely disappeared, to the certain displeasure of that cheerful character Father James Martin supported not long ago with an article in the well-known pseudo-Catholic weekly slush Christian, originally born as Christian family, which he announced: «Pope Francis has restored dignity to LGBTQ people and this is a blessing for everyone» (cf.. QUI). So no blessing to the happy rainbow couples under the steps of the altars for the obvious reason that the Church, with the excuse of blessing the people who always need to be blessed, is not so naive and unprepared to end up blessing what for Catholic doctrine and morality remains the sin against nature (Catechism, n. 2357), which as such cannot be blessed, not even with the excuse of only blessing people. This is a topic on which the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith had already expressed its opinion (cf.. WHO). Several times over the last few years I have written and explained that the Church has the duty to welcome the sinner, especially the worst sinners, because if she did not do so she would betray the mission that Christ God has entrusted to her (cf.. Mt 9,13), always being careful, however, never to welcome sin, which cannot be welcomed, much less blessed.

This is why we remained silent, because we are priests, theologians and above all men of faith aware that even today the Church is experiencing very delicate moments, or if we want even confused and sad, In any case, she will never be able to betray the mission that Christ God has entrusted to her to meet the whims of the world, because God chose us from the world but we are not of the world (cf.. GV 15, 18-19).

Let's move on and conclude with two elements. The first: the essence of ecumenical councils and synods of the Church; The second one: the unusual attitude, perhaps even questionable and ambiguous of the Supreme Pontiff Francis.

The Catholic Hamas terrorists who have carried out campaigns for months and weeks aimed at exciting people, now at terrorizing them, they demonstrated first of all that they have no idea what councils and synods are in the two-thousand-year history of the Church. First let's see the difference between the two: by ecumenical council we mean, as the word itself says, an extraordinary event that involves all the bishops of the universal Church. The term “ecumenical” in fact it derives from Greek world (oikoumene) and it means universal. Otherwise instead, the Synod, which can be local or even global, it involves a slice of the episcopate, or invited and selected participants, which can also represent Catholic universality, but which do not constitute an ecumenical council, that is, that most important and solemn act of the Church which requires and implies the participation of the entire Catholic episcopate.

In both cases, whether it is an ecumenical council or a synod, participants are simply not entitled, but precisely the duty to discuss everything and its exact opposite. In discussions they can, indeed, even the most unlikely or even absurd hypotheses must be raised. Perhaps the great Fathers and Masters of classical scholasticism did not do this, often starting in their disputes even from surreal and paradoxical elements, in order to stimulate the speculative sense and arrive at wise judgments? What does this take to make clear to the aggressive blogger or to those who have a sentence on Twitter they have solved problems that have not yet had a definitive answer for centuries. Therefore, than certain fringes of the episcopate, that is, the inevitable Germans and Northern Europeans, have raised certain questions, It shouldn't have surprised anyone, including hardcore bloggers and tweeters, if only they had known the rudiments of Church history.

The Supreme Pontiff Francis for its part remains an enigma, as I defined it in an old article of mine from 2013 commenting on his first ones 100 days of pontificate (see WHO) where I compared him to the Pied Piper of Amelin, which deserves enormous credit: having made all the mice come out for what they really are, after they had hidden themselves in the most false and calculated condescension for thirty years under the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. At least today, thanks to this Augusto Pifferaio, we get to know the mice one by one for what they are and what they really think. This will make it especially difficult for them, or rather, really impossible to be able to recycle it at the next change of helmsman of Peter's boat, given that a 87 years and with health problems of no small importance, the Supreme Pontiff Francis will certainly not last forever. If so tomorrow, as if nothing had happened, a playful cardinal even went so far as to lower himself into a manhole to reconnect electricity to the inhabitants of an illegally occupied building (see WHO), if he showed up with three meters of cappa magna and a galero on his head - something that certain chameleons would be capable of doing because by their nature they lack the very sense of modesty - we would all ask him: "But you, Were you perhaps not the one who, under the pontificate of Francis, went in trousers and rolled up shirt sleeves to bring coffee in the evening to the tramps who had transformed Bernini's colonnade into a public urinal?, after showing off gold cufflinks and artfully pleated purple robes under the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI?”.

For the umpteenth time the Supreme Pontiff Francis brought them together, speak and vent in a Synod, causing them all to come out into the open again. Once the discussions were over he announced "then we'll see", concluding with a "see you next year", assuming of course that the Holiness of Our Lord is always alive.

Of the two one: or we are faced with a man who alone is crazier and more deranged than Joanna of Castile, Henry IV and Ludwig II of Bavaria all three combined, or we are faced with a man who in a very difficult and complex historical moment did what was best and most appropriate to have been done, using his state grace wisely and prudently, although at the moment his actions cannot be understood. In fact we cannot affirm either one thing or the other, because we lack the elements to be able to do it. Maybe it will take many years, but one day history will clarify the great "enigma" for us Francesco, how I defined it in 2013 after the first ones 100 days of his pontificate, revealing him as the right man who rode out an extraordinarily delicate season in the best way.

the Island of Patmos, 29 October 2023

.

.

Father Ariel's new book has been released and is being distributed, you can buy it by clicking directly on the cover image or by entering our bookshop WHO

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

The love that comes from charity is the foundation of Christianity

Homiletic of the Fathers of The Island of Patmos

THE LOVE THAT BORN FROM CHARITY IS THE FOUNDATION OF CHRISTIANITY

Jesus teaches us that there is no love for God that is very great, devoted and authentic, and that it does not become love towards our neighbor. A love of charity which therefore means acting according to concrete and real works, to help others also grow in holiness. Therefore as the Provencals said, in love you either grow or diminish.

 

Author:
Gabriele Giordano M. Scardocci, o.p.

.

PDF print format article

 

 

Dear readers of The island of Patmos,

«It's obvious: l'Love waxes or wanes and never stays the same'. We find this beautiful phrase in an ancient one Provençal Love Code. This maxim contains one of the fundamental laws of love which is continuous growth in the donation of oneself to others and to God. Love is a common experience that we have all experienced at least once in our lives. The foundation, therefore, of our human love, what love of charity and tenderness is always the love of God which being eternal, He asks us to love with an eternal love too.

This cornerstone is enclosed In the Gospel of this XXX Sunday of Ordinary Time, where the fundamental law of Christianity is stated. A true Copernican revolution within Judaism and the Greek world- romano. An absolute novelty where the center of everything is the relationship of love between God and man.

Once again we find the Pharisees all united to hold a council against Jesus Christ. Last week went badly for him, when they had sent the Herodians to try to turn him against the Romans. This time they send a doctor of the law, an expert who asks him a trap question. Which 613 Jewish precepts (take it easy) you think is more important, according to the Jewish hierarchy? This is also a trick question, according to the fallacy of false dichotomy. From i 613 There was in fact a hierarchy and importance to the precepts. Regardless of whether or not we remember this hierarchical scale - which for Jesus was simple - the trap consisted in listening to Jesus' response, whatever the answer would have been, reply that the precept cited was instead the least important one. In tal modo, they wanted to discredit and show Jesus' lack of connection with Jewish tradition and with God. Jesus once again frees himself from this argumentative trap. And he exploits the situation to offer the center and core of the teaching of Christianity. Jesus responds:

«”You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your mind”. This is the great and first commandment. The second one is similar to that one: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets ".

The news it consists first of all in the formulation of these two precepts. The first is taken from Deuteronomy 6,5 and it is linked together with the law of Holiness that we find in Leviticus 19,18. Here then is the inseparable link between love for God and neighbor already present and prefigured in the Old Testament and is then made explicit and announced by Jesus. This answer breaks any counter-answer. And it is an answer that is still valid for us today.

Jesus teaches us that there is no such thing as love towards God who is very great, devoted and authentic, and that it does not become love towards our neighbor. A love of charity which therefore means acting according to concrete and real works, to help others also grow in holiness. Therefore as the Provencals said, in love you either grow or diminish. We grow in love towards God because the works of mercy continually fuel our choice of faith which is a relationship with the eternal You of God, perennially in love with his creation and therefore with humanity. At the same time, to love with charity is to choose to engage responsibly in the Church, so that all other believers can encounter Christ through us. If you stop loving, also our life and our joy, little by little they fade. Thus our person also becomes more and more closed in on himself. Jesus asks us to put our authentic and tender love into circulation.

We ask the Lord the strength and courage of generous and merciful action, to all grow united on the path of holiness that leads to eternal life.

Amen.

Santa Maria Novella in Florence, 29 October 2023

.

.

Subscribe to our Channel Jordan the Theological club directed by Father Gabriele by clicking on the image

 

THE LATEST EPISODES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE ARCHIVE: WHO

.

Visit the pages of our book shop WHO and support our editions by purchasing and distributing our books.

.

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

"You will love your neighbor as yourself". On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets "

Homiletics of the Fathers of The Island of Patmos

«YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF» ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS DEPEND ON THESE TWO COMMANDMENTS

Jesus immediately went further with the surprising novelty which has no parallels in ancient Jewish literature: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”. They, going back to the will of the Legislator, discerns that love of God and neighbor are inseparable from each other: one does not exist without the other.

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

PDF print format article

.HTTPS://youtu.be/4fP7neCJapw

.

In the lectionary, the discussion with the Sadducees regarding the resurrection was omitted, we arrive, with the gospel of this XXX Sunday in Ordinary Time, to a new diatribe that opens with Jesus questioned by his adversaries, ma, Once again, to test it.

"During that time, i farisei, having heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together and one of them, a doctor of the law, he questioned him to test him: «Maestro, in the Law, what is the great commandment?». She answered him: «You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind". This is the great and first commandment. The second one is similar to that one: "You will love your neighbor as yourself". On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets ". (Mt 22,34-40)

These are the last days of Jesus in the holy city of Jerusalem, before the arrest and passion, and he knows that the circle around him is increasingly narrowing. The Pharisees enter the scene again on our Gospel page, and among them a doctor of the law, a theologian we would say, an expert in the Holy Scriptures, who once again addresses him by calling him: Rabbi (Maestro, teacher). In fact, something like this had never been seen before, that a carpenter had taken it into his head to teach and give advice on the Torah, on how to honor God, on what is permissible and what is prohibited. This was not well received as Ben Sira attested at the beginning of the third century BC: «He who is free from toil will become wise»1; and in the Gospels there is never mention of an exegetical school of Jesus. The surprising interpretations of the Torah, which allow him to counter the dialectical pitfalls of his adversaries, they will not be replicated by his disciples. If Jesus is called rabbi (maestro) it is because of his authority and ability to delve into Scripture creatively. However, he is not the kind of teacher who trains students, to transmit their exegetical methods to them. While in rabbinic Judaism, which will assert itself after the destruction of the second Temple in 70, the student is destined to replace e, if possible, to surpass the master in wisdom, Jesus' disciples will remain such forever, without the possibility of emulating him in the intellectual field.

It was precisely the rabbis who had identified it in the Law, tor, more than ten words (Is 20,2-17), ben 613 precepts, so the question posed to Jesus seems relevant and was about simplification: «Maestro, in the Law, what is the great commandment?». It was a debated topic as evidenced by this rabbinical response: «Rabbi Simlaj these:

«On Mount Sinai they were announced to Moses 613 commandments: 365 negative, corresponding to the number of days of the solar year, e 248 positive, corresponding to the number of organs in the human body… Then came David, who reduced these commandments to 11, as it is written [in Ps 15]… Then came Isaiah who reduced them to 6, as it is written [in Is 33,15-16]… Then came Micah who reduced them to 3, as it is written: «What does the Lord ask of you, if not to practice justice, love pity, walk humbly with your God? » (Me 6,8) … Then Isaiah came again and reduced them to 2, as it is written: «Thus says the Lord: Observe law and practice justice" (Is 56,1) … Finally Habakkuk came and reduced the commandments to just one, as it is written: «The just will live by his faith» (Ab 2,4)» (Babylonian Talmud, Makkot, 24a).

Jesus replied highlighting, Once again, his ability to refer to what is fundamental and then propose a surprising novelty, tying a second commandment to the main one, declaring them similar and making both a rope on which the entire structure of the remaining commands is balanced, indeed the entire complex of the Word of God. If they detach from it they fall to the ground. This is the meaning of the verb Creamy ― I hang ― del verso v.40, that is, being hung, suspended, penzolare; which was made with depend: «On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets».

Where Jesus found the foundation to justify the greatness of the first commandment? In prayer, in this case that of Shemà (Listen) which opened and closed the day of the religious Jew and in particular that of shabbat, Saturday:

«Listen, Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is only one. You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your life and with all your mind" (Dt 6,4-5). And he said: «This is the great and first commandment».

Then Jesus immediately went further with the surprising novelty that it has no parallels in ancient Jewish literature: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19,18). They, going back to the will of the Legislator, discerns that love of God and neighbor are inseparable from each other: one does not exist without the other. The command to love your neighbor is, in the Gospel of Matthew, the most cited Old Testament text: it is also found in Mt 5,43 e 19,19. It means that Jesus insisted on this precept, but also that for Matthew it was particularly necessary to remind believers in Christ, when they will no longer be understood and welcomed by their own people; Unfortunately, even from their own Jewish brothers.

Not surprisingly in our text the second commandment is defined as equal - ὁμοία - to the first, with the same importance and the same weight, while the evangelist Luke even unites them in one great commandment: «You shall love the Lord your God… and your neighbor» (LC 10,27). Jesus thus makes a bold and decisive innovation, and he does it with the authority of someone who knows that you cannot love God without loving people.

Love being a human feeling it cannot be said to represent a proper of the christian, instead, faith in Jesus is, the Christ, Son of the Father who revealed himself. And at the heart of this process is the manifestation of God as love. As everyone knows, the authors of the New Testament who explored the depth of this mystery are Paul and John. Precisely the latter, in one of his letters he stated that "God is love" (1GV 4,8.16) and who "loved us first" (1GV 4,19). Saint Paul will give us the gift of the hymn to charity (1Color 13). All these words addressed in the first instance to the disciples of Jesus of all times, they are now the distinctive sign of those who believe in him, so much so that Giovanni himself affirmed it: «If one says: I love God and hate his brother, he's a liar. For whoever does not love his brother whom he sees, he cannot love God whom he does not see. And this is the commandment we have from him: who loves God, you love your brother too" (1GV 4,20-21). And this is because the reference will always be to Jesus who placed himself as a point of comparison: «From this everyone will know that you are my disciples: if you have love for each other " (GV 13,35); that is, that love that puts "the new commandment" into practice, that is, last and definitive, left to us by him: “Love one another as I have loved you” (GV 13,34; 15,12).

To return to the example of the suspended rope the Christian will always find himself walking on this subtle path, avoiding leaning too much on one side and losing the balance of the other. Love towards God and towards others remains in constant balance and both do not constitute the emblem of a season. Even now, in the Church, greater emphasis is placed on solidarity and welcoming the poor and miserable, the Christian will always be a “man for all seasons”2. And according to the teaching of Jesus there will always be someone who, walking down the unsupervised slope from Jerusalem to Jericho, could run the risk of finding themselves half dead: compassionate love will be the answer (LC 10,25-37).

Saint Augustine also seems to think so:

«Enunciating the two precepts of love, the Lord does not recommend that you love your neighbor first and then love God, but he puts God first and then his neighbor. But since you still don't see God, you will deserve to see it by loving your neighbor. Therefore love your neighbor, and look within yourself at the source from which love of neighbor flows: you'll see us, as much as possible, It gave. So start by loving your neighbor. Break your bread with those who are hungry, and bring the homeless into your home; if you see a naked person, news, and do not despise those who are of your flesh. By doing so, what will happen? Then your light will burst forth like a dawn (Is 58,7-8). Your light is your God. He is the morning light for you, because it comes to you after the night of this world. He neither rises nor sets, always shines… By loving your neighbor and taking an interest in him, you will walk. What path will you take, except that which leads to the Lord God, to the one we must love with all our heart, with all my soul, with all your mind? We have not yet arrived at the Lord, but we always have our neighbor with us. Therefore bring the one with whom you walk, to reach the One with whom you wish to remain forever"3.

from the Hermitage, 29 October 2023

.

NOTE

1 [Farmers, blacksmiths, potters, and all the manual laborers who toil day and night for wages] «Without them a city cannot be built, no one could stay or move around there. But they are not sought for the council of the people in the assembly they do not have a special place, they do not sit in the judge's seat and do not know the provisions of the law. They make neither education nor law shine,
they do not appear among the authors of proverbs, but they consolidate the construction of the world,and the job they do is their prayer" (Sir 38,24. 33-34)

2 Sylvester R. S., The “Man for All Seasons” Again: Robert Whittington’s Verses to Sir Thomas More, Huntington Library Quarterly, Vol. 26, no 2,1963, pp. 147-154.

3 Augustine of Hippo, Commentary on the Gospel of Saint John, Homily 17, 7-9 (see WHO)

 

 

 

Sant'Angelo Cave in Ripe (Civitella del Tronto)

 

.

Visit the pages of our book shop WHO and support our editions by purchasing and distributing our books.

.

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our
Bank account in the name of:
Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome
Iban code:
IT74R0503403259000000301118
For international bank transfers:
Codice SWIFT:
BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff, the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message:
isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.