Comments are closed.
The website of this magazine and the editions take name from the Aegean island in which the Blessed Apostle John wrote the Book of the Apocalypse, isola also known as «the place of the last revelation»
«God revealed the secrets of others ALTIUS»
(in higher than the others, John has left the Church, the arcane mysteries of God)
The bezel used as the cover of our home page is a 16th century fresco by Correggio. preserved in the Church of San Giovanni Evangelista in Parma
creator of the website of this magazine:
MANUELA LUZZARDI
Thanks for this article!
As for those who oppose them papal infallibility, But I must confess that I understand it: it's difficult, For those who want to remain faithful to the Church of Rome, accept that the Pope can manage the Church badly (although it has already happened in the past). It is feared to be in error how much you are in contradiction. E’ difficult for a lay, which does not have your own theological preparation: It is a question of being in balance between the fidelity to the pope and seeing that sometimes the Gospel goes to another part (or so it seems)…
I hope the Carthusian choice does not prevail: personally, I need to read it!
A curiosity: I was born on 15 August, She on what day of August?
Thank you, father ariel, for what he writes! But, I tell her frankly that it does not surprise me that you continue to receive objections based on papal infallibility: it's difficult, For us lay people, Understanding what is happening and finding the right balance between understanding the errors of the reigning pontiff and not to lose faith in Catholicism which has among its foundations obedience to the pope… Often, Speaking with many good Catholics, I feel like saying that certain things should not tell them out of our areas, Why, substantially, The dirty clothes are washed in the family and we must not give topics to the detractors of the Church…. I do not agree, but I cannot deny that I am put in difficulty by such statements….
I hope he doesn't want to be a painstaking: personally, I need his clarity.
A curiosity: On what day of August ago the years? I the 15 (but I have a year less than her).
Father Ariel was born the 19 August 1963
dear father ARIEL
I would like to ask her Rahner's thought is heretic yes or no ?
The Jesuits are heretics yes or no?
Thank you
dear fabio,
First of all, I state that I do not answer her by expressing personal opinions, But I answer them based on historical facts, not easy to deny, regardless of the deep pain that can cause my Catholic and priestly soul to have to admit certain truths; but hide the truth, or alter it, It would be serious before God and before the living limbs of his Holy People, which is not composed of poor beotes, as sometimes it seems that some believe.
Therefore, before the painful truths there are two solutions: or keep silent and lock themselves in the silence of prayer and penance, or to say what is true and what is false in a strictly objective level, not subjective level, In order to first and last to exorcise our fears and inconveniences, effectively denying the obvious objective truth.
Karl Rahner's theology is very insidious and with not indifferent elements of heterodoxy. More dangerous than he said and written, the real danger – And then he turned out to be such – It was what he said and on his often ambiguous and ambivalent writing was then developed later.
When they launch certain seeds on the ground, then happens, unavoidably, that the fruits generated are bad, With the result that from the heterodox thought and at times very confused by Rahner, We come to the formulation of real heresies, to which his favorite pupil came first to all in order to order, the most well -kept and also the most talented of his students at the speculative level, Reverend Prof. Hans Küng, who started questioning with his essay published in early seventies the dogma of pontifical infallibility.
As I have often complained to several theologians unnecessarily, Take it with Rahner, with its students and with the fruits from all of them products, rase at times the irrational, Seen and considered that Rahner and his theology have passed unscathed through four pontificates:
1. The pontificate of John XXIII, canonized today;
2. the pontificate of Paul VI, canonized today;
3. The pontificate of John Paul II, canonized today;
and they also passed unscathed:
1. from the congregation for the doctrine of the faith chaired for over twenty years by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, that Karl Rahner knew him well and thoroughly and he really knew his insidious theology;
2. From the pontificate of Benedict XVI.
At this point I tell you: Anyone who writes books, Articles and holds conferences on the danger of Rahnerian theology, without taking into account the fact that four popes, including three saints, have omitted to:
1. supervise the doctrine of faith;
2. defend the truth from the error;
3. confirm the brothers in the truth of true faith;
they made serious and coarse errors in this sense.
And stating this, far from light heart, I pay me on historical factual data, clear and evident, only denying those who claim to drop the dark on Rahner but totally fly over who has historical responsibility, theological and pastoral to have allowed its development and its diffusion.
All to confirm the fact that the popes, saints included, they are defective and can make serious mistakes, except when they express themselves infallibly on issues of doctrine and faith, According to what are the rigid patterns sanctioned by the dogmatic constitution The eternal shepherd of the Vatican Council and from the subsequent document To protect the faith promulgated by John Paul II.
The popes, saints included, they are infallible limited to subjects of doctrine and faith, but they are not indefectible, rather: Their heavy office can lead them to make much more serious errors and damage than that could ever make any bishop or presturious.
As for the Jesuits: The Church owes a lot of gratitude to Sant’Ignazio di Loyola and the old company of Jesus, definitively died between the half and the late sixties.
What we have under the eyes today is something else.
However, say that “The Jesuits are heretics” it would be risky and naive. We can say that inside there is certainly an army of heretics, But we cannot say that everyone is heretics, Even if he cannot arise healthy fruits from a rotten tree, Starting from their current general preposit, repeatedly launched into unhappy and misleading statements at the doctrinal level.
Mafia St. Gallen? or group of San Gallo? it was not a secret society (like the mafia) And the card also participated there. Martini
It was not at all a "secret society" type mafia. It would be offensive to believe it. However, It was actually a group of Cardinal Rahneriani, that, they worked secretly, without the permission of S.Giovanni Paolo II, To raise Rahnerism to the rank of official doctrine of the Church, Instead of that of San Tommaso d'Aquino.
“CAN A Roman Pontiff LEGALLY AND ELECTED…”
Ma, I wonder, It can be considered “legitimately elected” who was (as publicly stated by Cardinal Daneels, and without subsequent denials) from the “St. Gallen Mafia”?
Dear Gaetano,
Church history is ancient 2000 years and does not end in the course of recent events taken place between the 2005 and the 2018.
When it normalized to that which was in the course of twenty centuries the history of the Church and the papacy, the so-called “Mafia St. Gallen” It should be included in the list of pious confraternities of charity and mutual aid.
If not, instead applying the doubts she expressed and therefore her criterion, We should proceed a posteriori to declare the elections of at least half of the summary popes retroactively invalid, several of which risen to the sacred throne through simony, deceit and political blackmail, not to mention many of those pontiffs who made a cardinal beloved nephew was succeeded in turn to his uncle on the Chair of Peter …
And so on to follow.
To make more, Cardinal Vicar of His Holiness for the diocese of Rome, It was commonly called in the current lexicon era er Cardenal grandchild? For the simple fact that for a quite short time, The Popes, they named their own grandson vicar general placing it in that very delicate role, cosiderando species at that time, Rome, It was the capital of the State and the Pontifical vicar general of His Holiness, on a political and legal level, powers had not indifferent.
So, For those who know the story, both recriminata “Mafia St. Gallen”, when compared to the history of the papacy, It is to be considered in the same way of the Pious Society of the Ladies of Charity of St. Vincent de’ Paoli.
father ariel,
Anyone who knows the history of the Church can not but agree, and repeat what you have expressed. But in the past it was pure political power games and favoritism, they would never dare to change or overturn the law of the Lord.
What instead the so-called San Gallo Mafia had every intention of doing, It is not limited to the intrigue of the court.
Anyone who knows the true story of the papacy and above all those who believe in Peter's charisma, does not accept what was asserted by Don Ariel. The group of San Gallo, also admitted, as it is almost certain, According to the names of those who participated in it, that it was a modernist group, He has not had and has no power to "change or distort the law of the Lord", Giacchè, as Christ promised, portae hell not praevalebunt.
Estimated Father Cavalcoli,
I don't think Don Ariel wanted to understand what she understood, nor have I ever thought before “election” Papali were disabled.
However we know well that in the past, in some cases, purely political issues played their part. This does not detract from the qualities that the Pontiffs subsequently elected have had.
The difference I wanted to point out, Just as she wrote in a subsequent comment, He lies in the real purpose of the intentions of the San Gallo group. That is the key difference.
Obviously we all know the end that who wants to make war to God does…
There is a not slight difference though: Nobody had yet established that those elections were disabled, and the participants with the elected pope all excommunicated latae sententiae (or sitting). John Paul II did it in the 1996: should not be taken into account, from then on? Or pretend nothing is because it is a funny custom custom, And so wojitila definitely joked?
Just saying…
It is clear that the new provisions given by S.Giovanni II in 1996 invalidate previous uses, even if they were legitimate. But precisely because the said provisions did not apply before that date, they could not have a retroactive value. Those elections that were made without taking into account the new provisions of S.Giovanni Paolo II would be invalid. But there is to think that they, in the conclave of the 2013, have been respected.
Don Ariel's statement that "we should proceed a posteriori to declare retroactively invalids the elections of at least half of the supreme popes" is historically unfounded, Mina the credibility and authority of the Papal Magisterium and creates legal empty inadmissible in the apostolic succession, that would break its continuity, All this against the trust of faith that the Catholic has in the doctrinal and moral authority of the uninterrupted series of the popes, guaranteed by the Holy Spirit and historically demonstrated, From S.Pietro to Pope Francis.
As for the modernist group of San Gallo, It is possible that it violated the canonical rules concerning the discussion about the one who could be the best candidate for the election of the new Pope. But one thing is the validity of the election of a pope and one account are the rules that regulate the procedure.
What is historically shown, as far as possible, and that must be believed with certainty Proxima Fidei, is that all the Popes listed in the papal annual from S.Pietro to Pope Francis have been legitimately elected and therefore are valid, As different as they have been over the centuries, the procedures e…
Dear Father Giovanni,
If it weren't fun it would be really tragic that you don't even take care of reading what I answered the reader, giving my words a totally distorted sense and detached from their meaning, until I attribute things that I have never written, Just read above my offending answer, that given to Gaetano, because the effort is really minimal.
The whole, moreover, written and sent by you the 25 December, in the Nativity of the Lord, day on which priests and religious should be overlooked in many other things, For example to explain to the faithful the mystery of the incarnation of the verb, as was done with three different homilies also on the columns of The Island of Patmos; of the texts that have built much more the people of God than they build it instead of the matters of wool wool.
In short, You chose just Christmas day to take ten lines, not to understand what had been written in them through the use of an evident paradox that everyone has perfectly understood, Fumento you, Finally, to make such a gift to a confrere who in four years of work on these columns has only been used to enhance your work and your writings to the maximum. To this, if you want, You can also add the fact that when in 2016 You have been involved in unpleasant issues and hard attacked, For example for the radio program on Radio Maria, when anger was unleashed for your statement on divine punishments made a few days after the earthquake in the Rieti, in front of a large series of so -called pieces by ninety of the Roman Curia and the Italian episcopate who attacked you and who publicly denied you, We did not put the tail between the legs in front of powerful codes, nor did we say "…the cavalcoli? But we don't know him!» … Far from it, We defended you on the sword trades, we didn't turn your back, nor did we criticize nor did we attack you hard, Pointing your feet as you did in this case so that your really unhappy comment was absolutely published at all costs. And I also remind you that I defend yourself at my total risk and danger. Or maybe you forget what I later paid, in the high price, for having taken the then substitute for the Secretariat of State, who denied you with theologically inappropriate topics, until resorting to the old rotten heresy, and to which for this reason I publicly called the’ "Theological donkey" and the "Pygmeo"? Or perhaps you think that the former substitute and current Cardinal Angelo Becciu as well as current prefect of the Congregation of the Causes of Saints, for that’ "Donkey" and for that "pygmeo" used in your sum defense, He made me pass it smoothly?
However, thank you for your manifest and public gratitude and above all for your Christmas present. Repeatedly, several of your Dominican confreres, Bringing me the example of how you stubbornly gave you to give her the herthic time to your Dominican brother Giuseppe Barzaghi despite the prohibitions and complaints in this sense of your superiors, They had explained to me what your attitudes are and that you suddenly take two words, the upsets and then build us on what does not exist; And once this is done, There is no way to make you feel reasons. Unfortunately, I had never believed him, and I have always protected you. Instead known today – And I know him to love expenses – instead they were the right, I have to admit it.
I repeat: attribute to me that they said that half of the elections to the sacred thrill would be disabled, then pretend to deny what I never said, creating issues on something that does not exist, After misunderstanding a paradox and hyperbole that everyone has perfectly understood, If it were not in and in itself comic, it would be tragic.
Unfortunately, These ours, These are times of great ecclesial tragedies, from which none of us is unfortunately exempt, including certain Christmas gifts by those who never would have expected you.
I misheard me or is it a response to the previous post of Father Cavalcoli?
No, it's not an answer.
E’ just a subject matter in a different way, like: seen from the right and seen from the left.
The dogmatic truths of faith are intangible, while the theological interpretations are different; no theological interpretation, starting from my, You can ever rise to absolute truth and dogma of faith.