- we defend the Holy Father from false friends -

CANUTO THAT CLOWN EUGENIO SCALFARI CONTINUE TO OFFEND THE POPE, WHILE THE HOLY SEE CONTINUES TO REMAIN SILENT, INSTEAD DENY

.

It is our sacred duty to defend the Successor of Peter, who you are required to be a master of wisdom and prudence. We can also expose Scalfari games, but we can not fail to take note that the Holy Father is manifested sometimes unwise. If you admit this, an army of faithful astray, wounded and grieved, it would ask us this question which would not be easy to answer: He admitted that Scalfari claims and write nonsense attributed to the Holy Father, who is receiving it and that speaks to us, if not the Holy Father himself? And after Scalfari he has made certain shoot, How come, the relevant information organ of the Holy See, do not deny? And to answer a similar question, unfortunately it is not easy.

.

.

Author
Giovanni Cavalcoli, o.p.

.

.

PDF print format article

.

God catches the wise in their craftiness

The Cor 3,19

.

.

.

Giovanni Cavalcoli is not vegetarian, is only one patient …

The escalation of those who shoot biggest, it seems to have no end. The Devil, that throughout history shows considerable ingenuity in always repeated and always vain attempt to destroy the Church of Christ, starting with the Papacy, who it is the rock upon which Christ wanted it rests [cf. Mt 16, 13-20], He is suggesting to his human instruments regarding the pontificate Pope Francis, a new, subtle and effective tactic, to discredit and overthrow the Papacy. This subtle tactic is inspired by a method which so far, the Evil, He had never adopted; a refined technique as paradoxical, that is no longer that of traditional denigration, ie to attack the Pope in the name of modernity and progress. It is not what it used to accuse the Pope to oppose the reforms and freedom, person indicated as closed to the prophetic voices, or as a reactionary bastion of conservation and the worst backwardness, representative of the ruling classes and a God prohibitionist and legalistic, as well as terrifying provoker of guilt. All charges, these, which were different but similar riots, very turbulent historical periods, both to Blessed Pope Pius IX is the Holy Pontiff Pius X.

None of this, in our present which it is a real hive of skilled and blatant sycophants, fake fake admirers and associates that arise like mushrooms everywhere. These characters, falsely interpreting the teaching of the Pope, It would give us to understand that he is the modernist or, as they say, «Progressive», obviously intending to progress in their own way, certainly not in that sense imprinted on the deepest and Christological ecclesiology that brought the Blessed Paul VI to give us the Encyclical Development of Peoples [cf. text WHO].

Among all flatterers, the most famous, the most ingenious, the biggest faker and provocateur, It is certainly Eugenio Scalfari, which we review a couple of formidable outputs, Dating back to the 2 August and one at 9 October. The first of the two outlets - one in August -, ironically it is indicated by Francesco Agnoli on daily The truth as a formidable output, of historic significance: "The usual Scalfari uses Bergoglio failed to show a church". The things, But, They are not exactly like [cf. WHO].

The operation is more fiendishly subtle: Scalfari pretends to be an admirer of the Pope and thus affected not want at all to destroy the Church, but you enthusiastic spokesperson and interpreter - he, atheist - as the Pope of "revolutionary today», It means the Church. Indeed, he would have us believe that the Pope proposes a new model of Church, that in reality, if we do care, is false church-good, secularized, relativistic, meatloaf, turncoats and politicized, designed and prophesied by Freemasonry since the eighteenth century and modernist laggards, as a philanthropic society and a-dogmatic, that enter, as malleable member, the international federation of religions under the chairmanship of the international community. What it was once the dream of Leibniz and the secret society of the Rosicrucians in the seventeenth century, then that is the dream of all the Gnostics.

In this episode cited by Francesco Agnoli we can add a new recent reported by Seismograph the 9 Last October and taken by Republic. The words are as follows Scalfari:

.

"... Pope Francis abolished places after death the souls should go: Inferno, Purgatory, Paradiso […] All souls have the grace and therefore are born perfectly innocent, and these remain unless you take up the way of evil. If they are aware of it and do not repent even at death, they are condemned. Pope Francis - I repeat - abolished the places of eternal residence in’ Beyond the souls. The thesis he sustained is that the souls dominated by evil and do not repent cease to exist and those that have been redeemed from evil will be made from bliss contemplating God. This is the thesis of Francis' [text, WHO].

.

These things that Scalfari attributes to the Pope are false, They would make the Pope a heretic and they are just as well, pure inventions of that incredible brazen that Eugenio Scalfari. What the wicked at death cease to exist and do not go to hell is not an idea of ​​the Pope, but heresy Edward Schillbeeckx [1]. And to demonstrate this, If there was need, sufficient to mention these words said the Pontiff to the Mafia, filming a stern warning already addressed by the Holy Father Giovanni Paolo II [cf. video WHO] members of mafia groupings:

.

«Be converted, There is still time, not to end up in hell. That's what awaits you if you continue on this road. You have had a dad and a mom: think of them. Cry a little 'and be converted " [cf. WHO].

.

And also we take care of these other words Apostle John, who still continues: "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire" [cf. AP 20, 14]. It is those damned. The Pope wanted to dwell on this very sentence of the Apocalypse: "This is the second death, the lake of fire " [cf. supra]. In reality, has explained, "Eternal damnation is not a torture chamber, this is a description of this second death: is a death '. And "those who will not be received into the kingdom of God - he explained - is because they have not approached the Lord: They are those that have always gone their own way, moving away from the Lord and pass before the Lord and go away on their own ". Therefore, "eternal damnation is constantly straying from God, It is the greatest pain: a dissatisfied heart, a heart that has been done to find God, but for pride, for being too sure of himself, He has turned away from God " [cf. WHO].

Another thing in which Scalfari shows crass ignorance of Christian doctrine, It is when you ask:

.

"Who should be the existence of the Devil? It's a power contrary to God, or is God himself in a robe deliberately opposite to the natural? The Catholic-Christian religion obviously distinguishes between good and evil, but it does not address the origin of evil: it is God himself who created it when he recognized his human creatures the right to free will?» [cf. WHO]

.

We may limit to respond referring to these astonishing words to Catechism of the Catholic Church. However, we give a short answer. As taught by the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215, "The devil and the other demons were indeed created by God good, but they themselves have become wicked " [Denz. 800]. As for the origin of evil, The Bible teaches clearly that it must be attributed to the evil of Satan: «The death entered the world through the envy of the devil and experience make those who belong to him" [Sap 2,24].

God has given to His creatures, angels and men, freewill; but the misuse of this is not God's fault, but of the creature. Men are not born innocent, but with the stain of original sin, that is removed from Baptism. The new tactics of the enemies of the papacy was truly fine. Let's look in more detail the operation diabolical cunning of these flatterers, that is unbelievable, if he had not supported by the facts. That, that for now - while it lasts -, it works, is that the traditional enemies of the Church: Protestants, Freemasons, Liberals, Epicurean, atheists, positivists, relativists, idealists, pantheists, gnostics, Communists, a die-hard enemies time, open and declared the Church, Today they did, in a grandiose tacit pact, a kind of shameless turnaround. With incredible chutzpah, often under the bishops reticent eyes, They have infiltrated the Church in the modernist and robes and rahneriani, from the inside of the Church, posing as outposts of progressivism, It has gone from hot allegations to the Popes of the past to the effusive praise than today, praise evidently affected, the use of dolphins, twisting in their favor certain the Pope's speeches, that does not always shine for clarity and, honestly, we have to recognize as well that are sometimes equivocal. All this to support their lies, keeping silent on the major issues of faith and morality to which they manifestly contrary, then taking dishonestly, that upon which the Pope is silent, as a denial or a formal refusal on his part. So, a fraud of gigantic proportions epochal, making it appear the Pope, grin with pleasure, like one of them. In doing so - Think about it - the Church today has no more external enemies, because suddenly like the world. Enemies are now all interior and I'm: or masked, how modernists, or open, as Lefebvre.

The modernists, that until Benedict XVI attacked the papacy, Now make the praises. But were modernists; and they believe and do believe that the Pope is one of them. But - for the uninitiated - Modernism is a heresy and it is not possible that a Pope is conscious heretic.

But, as the saying goes, the devil makes the pots, but not the covers. Because of this, their game, can not let filter of cracks; and of these the most obvious is the shot of Scalfari - that we shall soon see -, shot that, among all those of flatterers, It is the biggest, the most brazen and the most tacky, but also the most brilliant, which as such, while undoubtedly denotes a sharp mind, He discovers evidence dirt and dishonesty of the game. It is a stab that hurts deeply. But we can heal. "We have to study it in depth", says Scalfari. And he's right. But with its criteria. One would curse him. But we must remain calm and look into the issue.

But what is this shot? It's the following. Dad, Scalfari said four years ago

.

«[…] It is revolutionary in many aspects of his albeit brief pontificate, but above all on a fundamental point: in fact it abolished sin. A Pope who has changed the Church, indeed the Church hierarchy, on an issue of this radicalism, He had never seen, at least the third century on the history of Christianity and did it operates simultaneously on the theology, on the doctrine, on liturgy, on the organization. Especially on the theology […] This is the revolution of Francis and this is examined in depth, especially after the publication of the Apostolic Exhortation The gospel of joy, where the abolition of sin is the most shocking part of all this very recent document ' [item, WHO].

.

This shot of Scalfari requires adequate psychological and moral analysis, because with undoubted, even if mischievous sharpness of view, touches or, we could say, to pinch, albeit with coarse brutality, but also with a certain openness, albeit down, just what seems to us the central issue of the Pope's preaching, not quite clear on this point, and evokes, which apprentice wizard, a ghost of the bad conscience of the contemporary gooders: the question of sin.

If it were not Scalfari which is dishonest quell'intellettualmente, God would give him the ability to be an intellectual adviser to the Pope. Maybe - if I'm not naive - you should read his message down or negative, as if to say: “Francesco, parlaci of peccato!”. Of course, that, He took as they are, Scalfari's words are objectively a terrible insult and slander to the magisterium of the Pope - although Scalfari believes him a praise -, and to the Catholic doctrine. It is perhaps a boutade? The thing is too serious to joke. A shot to get publicity? It's possible, but Scalfari does not pay too high a price for its reputation? An atheist has nothing to lose maybe? No, It also has a conscience, with which he has to answer to God. And so I want to take it seriously and respond briefly, even though the issue would require a book.

First, the penalty demand: but the Pope who makes? He notices all this? To tell the truth, Unfortunately, It does not give signs in this sense. Neither he nor whoever he intervenes to correct bad interpretations. Come May? He can not keep up with all? the snubs? It's afraid of the reactions? He is not informed? Difficult to answer. That approve, when it comes to heresy, is unthinkable. The least one can say is that the situation is abnormal, never occurred in these dimensions and frequency with previous Papi.

Scalfari, taking advantage of the Pope's silence and benevolence of those against him, raises the bar. But for how long this horrible joke? This affront to papal dignity? It is the thing that disturbs more. It is obviously interpreting the phenomenon in order to safeguard the dignity of the Pope's magisterial, and do not make room for Lefebvre who accuse him of being a heretic. What to say, so?

Let us see what are the responsibilities from one and the other side. The blame for this huge mistake and this terrible devil is, in my opinion, from both sides. It looks like a game of hide and seek or mirrors, If the situation were not tragic, and we were not going half souls. The Pope is pastorally unwise and imprudent, It lends itself to the game, It seems driven by a certain opportunism, and the modernists, who are scoundrels, take advantage shamelessly. The Pope is maneuvered and at the same time it leaves maneuver. He believed to be circumspect, but do it without even noticing. It should help the Pope to free themselves from modernist.

So the thesis of flatterers of the papacy palingenetic, heralded with enthusiasm and plenty of media from the rooftops to millions of gullible believers and gloating, is that, after centuries and millennia, we finally the turning point of a Pope "revolutionary" (Scalfari), the Pope of the God who does not punish, but who forgives all (Rahner), the poor Pope, of workers, the exploited and immigrants, promoter of freedom of peoples (Mature), leader of the international left (Castro, Gutiérrez, Maradiaga), Indeed, the Pope finally introduced freedom in the Church (Bianchi), Pope's mercy and tenderness (Ronchi, Cantalamessa), ecumenical reconciliation (Kasper, Küng), the dialogue between the "faiths" and the Church "spontaneous" and "relaxed" (Radcliffe), the Pope's primacy of conscience (Soda), of modernity (Cricket), tolerance and tenderness (Straw), the Pope of the universal brotherhood, even with the Masons (Ravasi) and Muslims, the Pope BUSINESS (Galantino) and the Council (the valley), Pope of "turning prophetic" (next meeting in Assisi) and turning points (Melloni).

It is interesting that no one ever praises the Pope in his primary and fundamental task, which it is to be teacher of the faith and of the heresies oppugnatore. Perhaps you would find some altar, that embarrass admirers. How does Scalfari to say a huge amount of the genre? It is possible that he starts from a mistaken concept of sin. But there does not seem appropriate to examine the Scalfari written what he meant by "sin". I think this is enough to remember what is really sin, according to Catholic moral and therefore according to the Pope's thinking, who is the Master.

But what is sin? So let us say that sin is a free human act, with which the person knowingly and willingly does what is evil, ie that which is forbidden by divine law, which is owned by Practical Reason [2]. The infringement of human law is the crime or crime. The implementation of the divine command sorts the human act to the attainment of the ultimate goal of human action, who is God, supreme good of man. The human action is related to a plurality of purposes, based on the human nature and hierarchized between them, on top of which there is God. The will, in some of its acts, You can go directly to God. But even if the human act pursues an interim order, to be a morally good act, however it is necessary that the agent orders at least implicitly to God the interim order. Sin is when the will or rejects God directly, or, instead orient themselves to God as the ultimate goal, albeit through the intermediary of an intermediate end, He chooses as the ultimate end of an intermediate [The conversion to a commutable] implicitly rejecting God [Turning away from God]. Sin leaves the conscience and the will into a state of agitation or restlessness, which is called "fault". It can be removed using the discount or served their sentences, in the case of the crime, while, whether it is sin, which causes the loss of divine grace, sin is forgiven, ie canceled, and the fault is removed from the divine forgiveness, Rido che la Grazia, on condition of repentance and penance the sinner. The blame diminishes or completely lacking in cases where the subject acts or through ignorance or weakness or because overwhelmed by passions. If consciousness errs in good faith, the subject performs, with such consciousness, objectively bad action, but remains innocent, at least before God.

The notion of sin is a fundamental notion, intuitive, spontaneous and ineradicable of legal consciousness, natural and Christian morality. It enters the deposit of divine revelation, guarded and interpreted by the Supreme Pontiff. Because of this, The only imagine that the Pope can "abolish" the notion of sin and sin itself, idea is blasphemous, absolutely, grossly offensive of the pontifical magisterium.

It should be noted that the human will, in this life, He can not oppose evil nor can avoid sin. Everything is going to see what we mean by "evil" and "sin". This is therefore also in buonista, with the difference, respect the right man, that he is a sinner and fight against sin, and it has a rule for the practice of justice and severity, for which he curbs his sins and opposes the sins of others with a just severity. The feel-good, instead, devoid of this rule of justice and deceived precisely error buonista, that does not recognize the existence of sin, if someone opposes citing the existence of sin and the need to be punished, you imbestialisce and attacks him or if he gets the chance of having to Justice, not disposing of a right criterion of judgment, It is unleashed into violence and bullying. So the false mercy becomes cruelty.

To believe that all moral problems They can simply solve with good will, in a continuous progress - the "magnificent and progressive", on which satirized Giacomo Leopardi -, without the help of grace and adequate ascetic discipline, It is the tragic illusion, typical of rationalist moral, as liberalism and Freemasonry. But on the other hand, trust in divine mercy does not exempt from the struggle against sin and the duty to obey the law, who punishes evildoers. Indeed, coercion and the use of force with justice and moderation, at the right moment, It is necessary to curb the wicked and have an educational function.

That feel-good concept of sin which leads to the denial of sin is in some way within the general trend buonista, for which all basically are good and well-wishers. In this view there is a pantheism and then a latent atheism: the subject believes to be good, because after all he is God. villains, if anything, They are the other, that does not give my idea that all are good. Therefore, there is "consequences" of original sin. To sin and suffer falls in human nature. Death is natural. If nature is hostile, God has nothing to do. It is nature that is like that. All they saved. Who does evil, it is either ignorance or weakness. Sin seems bad for the individual, but actually it falls in the general order of the universe. Some even say that, since everything is God, everything is fine. Sin is not a bad thing true, but it is an imperfection. Sin is only a hiccup in the path of evolution. Everyone apologized and whoever does evil must not be punished, or correct, or threatened, but it must be left free and tolerated. We can not judge others by external criteria to their conscience, because that would be an imposition. Indeed, what is bad for us can be good for others. It is therefore necessary to see things from their point of view. There are no rules or universal and immutable laws, but only particular and concrete situations standards. Everyone is free to act according to his conscience. God always forgives and does not punish. There is no evil of guilt, but only penalty. Feelings of guilt are no signs that he has sinned, but they are simple to cure diseases with psychoanalysis. There are no bad people, but all have grace and save. In hell there is no one. The crime is explained by psychological predispositions (Lombroso) or environmental influences (Rousseau) or class economic conditions (Marx) or sexual orientation (Freud).

Analyzing the problem of hidden truth in error, it is natural to offer a suggestion to the Holy Father. On the other hand we observe that the large aberrations of the human mind, as for example what Scalfari attributes to Pope, I am never so false as not to cover a bit of truth and are never so absurd, not to receive some explanation, especially if born out of a fine mind and evil genius - from clever foolishness, you could say paradoxically - like that of Scalfari. Let us ask then how he may be come up with the idea balzana? On what basis or facts? Starting from what? We believe that in some way it can be put in relation with a defect in the preaching of the Pope on the subject of sin. Without being a feel-good, the Pope is dangerously close to the ideas of do-gooders. In his anxiety to be next to all, to welcome all and to go to all, especially the "discarded", Poors, the oppressed, the suffering, it is projected to the "suburbs", he is, as once it was said, "Too indulgent". They, Instead of moderating the feel-good trend already present in Vatican II, for a moderate recovery of discipline, regularity, observance, austerity and severity, which for a long time the Church feels the need in education, in the formation of the clergy, as in the pastoral, in the government of souls, Church and society, dad, I said, as they say, It is "too good", permissive and accondiscendente, the risk then go out in harsh attitudes with those who do not deserve them, according to the mechanism that I described before.

The Holy Father is too severe to the Lefebvre, too lenient towards the modernists. It is good to recognize the commonalities with the Lutherans, but also should correct their mistakes. It's good to recognize monotheism in the Qur'an, but it should also encourage Muslims to convert to Christ. It's good to recognize communism instance of social justice; but it should also condemn the atheistic materialism; It does well to exhort to welcome immigrants, but it should also invite the vigilance against terrorists, parasites and saboteurs; It does well to cultivate inter-religious dialogue, but it should also remember that Catholic Christianity is the highest of religions, the only error; Call it Bonino "great Italian", but it is more clear in the condemnation of abortion; It does well to exhort homosexuals to love yourself, but strongly condemns sodomy; peace is not achieved only through dialogue, but also with the moderate use of force; irregular families are not only families "wounds", but there are also those who wound, corrupt and scandalous.

Not enough to proclaim the truths of the gospel that please the world, but we must also announce those that displease. The Pope says that should not be flatterers: well, At that time, if you take them out of the way replacing them with competent employees, loyal and sincere. This would truly be a revolutionary Pope, a never before seen Pope, a Pope of reforms. In this way the Pope will take away any pretext to the nonsense of Scalfari and its "similar".

It is our sacred duty to defend the Successor of Peter, who you are required to be a master of wisdom and prudence. We can also expose Scalfari games, but we can not fail to take note that the Holy Father is manifested sometimes unwise. If you admit this, an army of faithful astray, wounded and grieved, they would ask us this question which would not be easy to answer: He admitted that Scalfari claims and write nonsense attributed to the Holy Father, who is receiving it and speaks to us, if not the Holy Father himself? And after Scalfari he has made certain shoot, How come, the relevant information organ of the Holy See, do not deny?

.

Varazze, 13 October 2017

.

.

_____________________

[1] He supports this thesis Humanity. The story of God, Queriniana, Brescia 1992, p.183.

[2] St. Thomas, QUESTION, I-II, q.91, a.2.

.

.

«You will know the truth and the truth will set you free» [GV 8,32],
but bring, spread and defend the truth not only of
risks but also the costs. Help us supporting this Island
with your offers through the secure Paypal system:

or you can use the bank account:
They were IT 08 (J) 02008 32974 001436620930
in this case, send us an email warning, because the bank
It does not provide your email and we could not send you a
thanks [ isoladipatmos@gmail.com ]

.

.

.

.

.

.