Showing posts with label Roberto de Mattei. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Roberto de Mattei. Show all posts

Thursday, May 19, 2016

Pope Francis and His Revolutionary Language



Pope Francis' "Revolutionary Language"
(Rome) The historian and well-known Catholic intellectual Roberto de Mattei published a column yesterday in the Rome newspaper Il Tempo (18th May), about the "revolutionary language" of Pope Francis.

The revolutionary language of Pope Francis

by Roberto de Mattei

In the Church's history there have been many "reformist" popes, but Pope Bergoglio seems to belong to a different category, which has been alien under the Roman popes to date, that of the "revolutionary".

The reformers of the past aimed to restore the doctrine and the discipline to its purity and original integrity, which is why they can be referred to from this point as "traditionalists". Such popes were Pius IX. and Pius X.

The revolutionaries, however, are those who want to make a break between past and present, by locating the achievable ideal in a utopian future.

The breach of Pope Francis with the past takes place more in language than on the doctrinal level. However, the language has a greater power to change than the idea that it represents in the media age. It is no accident that Cardinal Schönborn was called to launch the Papal Letter Amoris laetitia at the press conference in Rome as "a linguistic event".

The decision for a particular "house style", which is expressed through words, gestures and omissions, requires a certain mindset and implicitly offers new doctrine. The claim, however, carries out a linguistic revolution, from which one denies that it is also a doctrinal revolution, which inevitably leads to confusion. However, the confusion, the disorientation and a certain schizophrenia seem to be the distinctive cipher of the current pontificate.

Recent examples of the confusion surround the concept of poverty. The poverty of the Gospel is confused with that of the socialist-communist ideologies.

The former is a state of perfection, which arises from the conscious decision of the individual. The second is a social state which is imposed as a mandate from above.

In addition, if the men of the Church and Catholics should live generally on a personal level in the spirit of poverty, in the sense that they should not depend on earthly goods, that does not mean that the Church should be as poor as an institution founded by Christ, but have all the necessary material resources to carry outn its mission.

To rob the Church of this means depriving it of the means, to amputate and weaken its action in the world. From the point of this poverty mongering, Pope Bergoglio puts the Church in danger by taking away its vitality, to change it in order to immerse it in the process of secularization that has been dissolving what the Church once was in the Christian West.

* Roberto de Mattei , historian, father of five children, Professor of Modern History and History of Christianity at the European University of Rome, President of Lepanto Foundation, author of numerous books, most recently appeared: Vicario di Cristo. Il primato di Pietro tra normalità ed eccezione (Vicar of Christ, the Primacy of Peter Between Normality and Exception.), Verona 2013; in German translatio: The Second Vatican Council - A Previously Unwritten History, Ruppichteroth 2011. The intertitles are from the editors.

Translation: Giuseppe Nardi Image: Corrispondenza Romana Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com Link to Katholishes... AMDG

Saturday, May 7, 2016

"An Interpretation of Amoris Laetitia From Tradition is Not Possible"-- Interview With Abbé Claude Barthe by Roberto de Mattei

Abbé Claude Barthe: Chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia is incompatible
with the Church's tradition  
(Rome) The French priest Abbe Claude Barthe was one of the first people already on 8 April, the date of its publication, to take a position on the Apostolic Letter, Amoris Laetitia. The theologian has written many books, among others, La messe, une forêt de symboles (The Mass, a Forest of Symbols), Les romanciers et le catholicisme (The novelists and catholicity) and Penser l'oecuménisme autrement (Ecumenism Thinks Differently ). The historian and Catholic thinker, Roberto de Mattei conducted an interview for Corrispondenza Romana with Abbé Barthe to deepen the analysis.

Prof. de Mattei: it is very interesting for us to give Abbé Barthe the floor because you in your response to Amoris Laetitia  were not, as others had initially tried in the first moment, to read the Apostolic Letter on the basis of a traditional framework, and we share your reading.
Abbe Claude Barthe: I can not see how one could interpret  Chapter VIII of the letter within the meaning of the traditional doctrine, honestly. It would mean doing violence to the text  and not respecting the intent of the editors who want to introduce a new element: "Therefore, it is no longer possible to say ..." (AL, 301).
Prof. de Mattei: And yet, what is said in the Apostolic Exhortation that is not so new.

Abbe Claude Barthe: You're right, it is not new on the part of theological protest movements. Since the Council, under Paul VI. and John Paul II., there was a great undertaking primarily of protest theologians to attack Humanae Vitae with the help of books, "explanations" of theologians and congresses.  At the same time the demand of Communion for "remarried" divorced (and also homosexuals as couples and  cohabitants), I would say, played a symbolic role. One must know that it has long been the practice of many priests in France, Germany, Switzerland and many other places to allow "remarried" divorcees to communion, and to give them absolution when they want it.
The most common support for this demand came through a pastoral letter of 1 July 1993 of the Upper Rhine Bishops Saier, Lehmann and Kasper, entitled: "For pastoral care of people from broken marriages, divorced and remarried divorcees." It was about "respect for a decision of conscience."  It contained exactly, among other things, the arrangements of the current Apostolic Exhortation: in theory there would be no general admission to Communion, but the exercise of an examination with the priest to see whether the new partners "are authorized by their own conscience, to approach the table of the Logos." In France, some bishops (Cambrai, Nancy) have published files of diocesan synods that go in the same direction. Cardinal Martini, Archbishop of Milan, had also called for changes in the Discipline of the Sacraments in one general assemblyheld on 7 October 1999 at the General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on Europe speech that was a real program for a pontificate.
And in fact you go to France, Belgium, Canada and the US even further: Some priest, even a relatively large number, celebrate for second marriages a small ceremony without the bishops prevent them. Some bishops encourage this practice even as it has done "divorcés remariés Chrétien" (Remarried divorced Christians Desclée de Brouwer, 1990) Msgr. Armand le Bourgeois, the former bishop of Autun in his book. The "jurisdictions of religious" like those of diocese also "regulate" this ceremony even, discreetly, to be done without bells, without the blessing of the rings.
Prof. de Mattei: Share the assessment that Cardinal Kasper played a leading role?
Abbe Claude Barthe: At the beginning already. Pope Francis called Kasper shortly after his election a "great theologian", as he prepared the ground with his speech to the Consistory of 20 February 2014 which caused a great sensation. From there the matter was continued with great skill in three stages: two synodal assemblies in October 2014 and in October 2015 where the reports contained Kasper's "message".
Between the two Synods of the text was on September 8, 2015 Mitis iudex Dominus Iesus whose architect was Msgr. Pinto, dean of the Roman Rota, to make  easier the nullity of marriage, mainly because it takes place before it gets in front of the bishop when the couple request nullity together, and it alone can decide, because the double judgement has been abolished.Some canonists have spoken  in this case already of a cancellation by mutual consensus.
The synod has  a kind of leadership core, which is a Cupola [the  Abbé Barthe's use of the Italian word refers to the leaders of a mafia organization], around the very influential Cardinal Baldisseri, the Secretary General of the Synod, together with Msgr. Bruno Forte, Archbishop of Chieti-Vasto and special secretary of the Synod, which is the number two, to Msgr. Fabio Fabene, new member of the Congregation of Bishops and undersecretary of the Synod, then still Cardinal Ravasi, President of the Pontifical Council for Culture, who was responsible for the message of the Synod Assembly, and all together carefully supported by Msgr. Victor Manuel Fernandez, rector of the Catholic University of Argentina, and by the Jesuit Antonio Spadaro, editor of the Roman Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica . Added to this are other influential persons, all of whom are close to the Pope like the Bishop of Albano and C9 Cardinal Council Secretary Marcello Semeraro and Msgr. Vincenzo Paglia, President of the Pontifical Family Council. To them is also appended Cardinal Schönborn, the Archbishop of Vienna, the main one responsible for the Catholic Catechism, in the role of guarantorwho assumed   at the Synod that the text of the final report was already orthodox which Cardinal Müller refused to do. This whole team contributed a considerable amount of work in order to achieve the desired goal ...
Prof. de Mattei: To create a text of more than 250 pages submitted by the second Synodal Assembly ...
Abbe Claude Barthe: Even earlier ... The text of the post-synodal letter was broadly elaborated in September 2015 that is, before the start of the second Synod on marriage and the family.
Prof. de Mattei: You spoke of a desired target. What exactly?
Abbe Claude Barthe: It is very possible that it was at the beginning the intention of Pope Francis to grant only a "pastoral" and "merciful" pass. Since theology is a rigorous science, principles had to be announced, to justify a decision of conscience, to be permit people who live in public adultery to the sacraments. From the beginning, many passages of the Apostolic Exhortation prepare the doctrinal statement of the eighth chapter. There is the talk of "situations of weakness or imperfection" (AL, 296), and most of the divorcees who are seen "in a second union, settled over time, with new children, with proven loyalty, generous dedication, Christian commitment, with the awareness of the irregularity  their situation "involved," and great difficulty, these turn back without wanting the feeling on their conscience that they fall into new sin (AL, 298). In this "imperfect" situation (AL, 307), which relates to the "perfect ideal marriage," the Apostolic Exhortation rules for a "special exception" (AL, 301).
This happens naturally with the help of a priest "in the internal forum" (for both partners of the new union?) That the interested parties would be permitted to form a correct judgment of conscience (Al, 300). This judgment (The priest ?, the partner? with the explanation of the priest) do it because of "conditionalities or mitigating factors [...] possible that one in the middle of an objective situation of sin - who is not subjectively culpable or at least not completely "can go to the sacraments (AL, 305). It does not say whether this ruling also applies to the other priests who are interested to administer the sacraments. Anyway, it must be said that the text is not focused on access to the sacraments, which is treated in a footnote, which creates a pretty bashful impression (footnote 351).
A theological principle, however, is stressed which is summarized in paragraph 301 that is applicable to quote again: "It is therefore no longer possible to say that all who live in any so-called 'irregular' situations, are in a state mortal sin and have lost sanctifying grace. The restrictions have not only to do with a possible lack of knowledge of the standard. A person can, even though he knows the standard exactly, have great difficulty in understanding the values ​​at stake in the moral norm,[339] or he may be in a specific situation, which does not allow him to act differently and make other decisions without incurring a new sin."
A principle that can be analyzed as follows: 1) the basis of specific conditionalities, would be that people who are in "active" public adultery and know the moral rule prohibiting them, invite a guilt if they were to leave this situation (especially compared to the birth of children); 2) The people who live in  "active" public adultery, therefore, would not commit mortal sin if they remain in this state.
In fact, the negative consequences that result from the completion of the adulterous condition are (the children born of illegitimate union would suffer from the separation of parents) are not new sins, but the indirect effect of a virtuous action, namely the ending of a sinful state.
Natural justice must be respected, this applies especially to the continuation of the education of children from the second union, but outside a sinful state. So here we have a frontal contrast with the previous lesson that John Paul II. stressed in paragraph 84 of Familiaris Consortio. This clarified: If serious motives prevent it, that the "remarried" end in common life  under one roof,  then they have to live like brother and sister. This is in contrast to the new doctrinal proposal: Under certain conditions, adultery is not a sin.
Prof. de Mattei: You are saying  that one must not recognize the faith instinct?
Abbe Claude Barthe: All can not be reconciled with the natural and Christian morality. Those with knowledge of the moral norm have committed themselves sub gravi (the divine commandment that prohibits fornication and adultery) whose sin can not be excused, and therefore it can not be said that they in themselves are in a state of grace prior. St. Thomas Aquinas says in a Quaestio of the Summa Theologica, which all moralists well know, in Quaestio 19 of IA and IIÆ: It is the quality of an object that our quest arises that makes a voluntary act good and not the circumstances the action (Art. 2), and even if it is true that human reason can err and can take a bad action for good (Art. 5), are not some errors excusable, it is especially not those who disregard that one is not allowed to approach the wife of another, which is in direct opposition to the law of God (Art. 6).

Elsewhere, where it is also well-known to the moralists, in Quodlibet IX, Quaestio 7, Article 2, St. Thomas explains that circumstances can not change the value of an action, but its nature is one of the killing or punishing an offender to satisfy justice or legitimate defense. It is in this case not unjust violence, but a virtuous action. In contrast, he emphasizes that with some actions,  badness is inseparably linked, as in fornication, adultery, and other similar actions. You can never be good.
A child who reads the catechism understands this, Pius XII said in a speech on 18 April 1952 with which he condemned situation ethics that does not rely on the universal moral law, such as the Ten Commandments, but "in real and concrete conditionalities and circumstances in which one must act, and according to which the deciding individual conscience must judge and decide."
Pius XII. recalled that a good intention can never justify objectionable means, and that there are situations in which man, and especially the Christian, must sacrifice everything, even his life, to save his soul. The same thing happened in the encyclical Veritatis Splendor of John Paul II., when she says that the circumstances or the intentions of a dishonest act in itself can never turn into a subjectively honest effect of their object. He said, quoting St. Augustine (Contra mendacium): fornication, curses, etc. remain, even if they were committed for good reasons, always sins.
Prof. de Mattei: What's to be done?
Abbe Claude Barthe: The words of Christ can not be changed: "Even a woman commits adultery when she divorces her husband and marries another" (Mk 10:12). Professor Robert Spaemann, a German philosopher and friend of Benedict XVI.commented that any reasonable person can see that here we have a break. I do not think that one can be content to assert an interpretation of the eighth chapter of the Apostolic Exhortation, according to which nothing has changed. One must also take the Pope's words seriously, which confirmed the presentation of the letter by Cardinal Schönborn on the return flight from Lesbos.
The theological principle is clear and the commitment to truth requires us to say that it is not acceptable. This also applies to the related proposals, such as those who claim that illicit cohabitation or the communion of the divorced and remarried the ideal of marriage are embodied "at least partially and in analog." (AL, 292). It is therefore to be hoped, in the strong sense of theological hope, that many pastors, bishops and cardinals will speak in a clear way for salvation. At the same time, by the infallible Magisterium of the Pope or the Pope and  the bishops in communion with him, to solicit, request and demand an authentic interpretation - in terms of the interpretation of the revealed Depositums, including Depositums of natural law, and all that which is associated with it - that which differs and thus confirms in the name of faith what is true and rejects what is not.
It seems to me that today, 50 years after the Second Vatican Council,  we are entering into a new Post-Conciliar phase. We have seen a few passages on ecumenism, on religious freedom, breached the dam of doctrinal and theological Roman ecclesiological doctrine which was believed to be safe and well knit. Then another dam was built to withstand against the surge of modernity, the natural and Christian morality, whose starting points were Humanae Vitae of Paul VI. and all subsequent documents of John Paul II. on this subject. Everything that was described as  the "Restoration" as Joseph Ratzinger described it in "State of the faith,"  was largely built on the basis of the defense of marriage and the family. Everything happens now, as though the dam will break  at any moment.
Prof. de Mattei: Someone might accuse you exaggerated pessimism ...
Abbé Barthe: On the contrary. I think we are witnessing a crucial moment of Post-Conciliar history. It's hard to say what the consequences will be of that which we are experiencing, but it will be considerable. And despite everything, I'm sure that it will be positive in the end. First of all, I am safe by faith because the Church has the words of eternal life. I am also confident a very real way, because the need for a return to the Magisterium, the teaching that is actually one, will emerge more clearly in the future.
Translation: Giuseppe Nardi 
Image: Corrispondenza Romana
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Pharisees and Saducees of Our Time

The Sandhedrin of the time of Jesus was the Council of
Sadducees and Pharisees
by Roberto de Mattei *
Criticism of the "Pharisees" is often found in the words of Pope Francis. In numerous speeches 2013-2015 he has spoken on the "disease of the Pharisees" (September 7, 2013), "accusing Jesus of not honoring the Sabbath day" (April 1, 2014), from the "temptation of self-sufficiency and  clericalism, that codifying of faith in rules and instructions, like the scribes, the Pharisees and the lawyers of the time of Jesus" (September 19, 2014). During Angelus of 30 August 2015, he said: "As  then for  the Pharisees there is also for us the danger that we order, or worse: to consider ourselves better than the other based solely on the fact that we keep the rules, the customs,  even if we do not love our neighbor, are hard of heart, proud and arrogant. "On November 8, 2015, he compared   the attitude of the scribes and the Pharisees and their "exclusion", to Jesus, who was based in "inclusion." The reference to the Pharisees is equally evident in the speech in which the Pope concluded last October 24  for the XIV. Ordinary Synod on the Family. Who else are the "closed heart, who often hide behind even the teachings of the Church or behind  good intentions to sit  in the chair of Moses and - sometimes condescendingly and with superficiality - to address  the difficult cases and the injured Families,"  if not "the Pharisees, who made ​​religion to an infinite chain of commandments (June 26, 2014)?" Pharisees seem to be anyone who defend with stubborn pride, the existence of absolute and incontrovertible commandments, laws, rules of the Church.

Who Were the Pharisees Really?

Who were the Pharisees really? When Jesus began his teaching years, the Jewish world was divided into different currents, about which we are told from the Gospels, among historians, like Flavius Josephus (3 -100 AD.) in his works "Antiquities of the Jews" and "History of the Jewish War ". The main sects were those of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. The Pharisees were concerned with the details of the religious rules, but had lost the spirit of truth. They were arrogant men who forged the prophecies about the Messiah and interpreted the divine law  according to their opinions. The Sadducees taught even more serious mistakes. They doubted the immortality of the soul and rejected the majority of the Holy Scriptures. Both were fighting for power in the Sanhedrin, who, when Jesus was condemned, was led by the Sadducees.
The Sadducees are even mentioned by Mark and Matthew three times, while the Pharisees occur repeatedly in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew.  Chapter 23 of St. Matthew in particular, is an open accusation against them: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Your tithe mint, anise and cumin, and left the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy and faithfulness. One must do the one thing without neglecting the others."

The St. Thomas Aquinas, Augustine and Bonaventure about the Pharisees

St. Thomas Aquinas explains in his commentary on this passage of Matthew that the Pharisees were not condemned by the Lord because they paid a tithe, "but only because they valued the lower more than  the spiritual commandments. But [deliver the tithe] in practice he seems to praise it, saying: 'These things shall be done' (Haec oportuit facere) according to the law, as Chrisostomos adds (Summa Theologica, II-IIae, q 87,. a. 2 ad 3).
St. Augustine said, referring to the Pharisees, of which St. Luke writes (18:10 to 14), that he has not been convicted of his works, but because he has boasted of his alleged sanctity (Epistola 121,1,3).  St. Augustine explains the same in his letter to Casulanus that the Pharisee was not condemned because he fasted (Luke 18,11ff), but "because he was inflamed in pride over the publicans" (Epistola 36,4,7). Because it is "fruitless for a man to fast twice during the week as the Pharisees, on the other hand, yet it is an exercise of religion in a  believer who is humble or  one who is a faithfully humble man  when Scripture does not say that the Pharisees had been condemned, but rather that the tax collector was justified." (Epistola 36,4,7).
The most concise definition of the Pharisees is found from St. Bonaventure: "Pharisaeus significat illos qui propter opera exteriora se reputant bonos; et ideo non habent lacrymas compunctionis" (De S. Mary Magdalene Sermo I, in: Opera omnia, Ad Claras Aquas, Florence 2001 Vol IX, col 556b..). "A Pharisees is described as one who thinks of themselves good because of their outer works  and therefore has no tears of penitence."

Pharisees were Proud Conservatives, the Sadducees Unbelieving Liberals

Jesus condemned the Pharisees because he knew their hearts: they were sinners, but considered themselves holy. The Lord wanted to teach his disciples that the external fulfillment of good works is not enough. That which is a good act is not only so in its own property, but the intention. Nevertheless, if it is true that good works are not enough, if good intentions are lacking, as it is also true that the good intentions are not enough, if good works are missing.   Gamaliel, Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea (Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1), and even St. Paul (Acts 23.6) who belonged to the party of the Pharisees, were better than that of the Sadducees, precisely because they, despite their hypocrisy, acclaimed the laws, while the Sadducees, from whose ranks the high priests Annas and Caiaphas came (Jewish Antiquities 18.35.95), also disregarded this.
The Pharisees were proud conservatives, the Sadducees unbelieving liberals. But both unified rejection of the divine mission of Jesus (Mt 3.7 to 10).
Who are the Pharisees and the Sadducees of our time? We can give an answer to this with quiet certainty. There are those who have tried before, during and after the Synod and will try to change the practice of the Church and through the practice of their teaching, on the family and marriage.

Pharisees and Sadducees rejected the divine teachings of Jesus

Jesus proclaimed the indissolubility of marriage as God had thought from the beginning, and she founded this on the restoration of the natural law, from which the Jews had removed, and strengthened them by the raising of marriage to a Sacrament. Pharisees and Sadducees rejected this doctrine by denying the divine Word of Jesus and introducing their own opinion. They appealed disingenuously to the law of Moses, as the innovators of our time invoked an alleged tradition of the early centuries, by falsifying the history and doctrine of the Church.
For this reason, a brave bishop and defender of the true faith, Monsignor Athanasius Schneider, speaks of a "neo-Mosaic practice". "The new disciples of Moses and the new Pharisees in the two most recent Synodal Assemblies (2014 and 2015) have veiled their practical denial of the indissolubility of marriage and their occasionally lifting the Sixth Commandment under the guise of charity, by expressions like  'way of distinction,' 'accompaniment', 'orientation by the bishop ', 'dialogue with the priest', 'internal forum', 'a more complete integration into the life of the Church' which are used to eliminate the accountability [in the law] of cohabitation in cases of irregular connections as much as possible (see. Relatio finalis, no. 84-86). "

The Pharisees and Sadducees of Today

The Sadducees are the innovators who openly claim to overcome the doctrine and practice of the Church. The Pharisees are those who, although they confess the indissolubility of marriage with  their mouths, still hypocritical deny it  by their deeds, by proposing a "from-a-case-by-case" - transgression of the moral law.
The real disciples of Jesus Christ belong to neither the Party of neo-Pharisees nor the party of neo-Sadducees, both modernist, but follow the school of St. John the Baptist, who preached in the spiritual desert of his time. The Baptist was, when he denounced the Pharisees and Sadducees as a "generation of vipers" (Mt 3,7) and admonished Herod Antipas for his adultery, not hard-hearted, but moved by love for God and for souls. Hypocrites and Hardhearted were the advisers of Herod Antipas, who wanted to bring his sinful and unrepentant loose life in harmony with the teaching of Scripture.  Herod had John the Baptist executed to bring the voice of truth to silence, but the voice of the forerunner is  still audible 20 centuries later. Whoever defends sound doctrine publicly, does not follow the exaample of the Pharisees and Sadducees, but the example of St. John the Baptist and Our Lord.
Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Picture: Youtube (Screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Thursday, September 10, 2015

Roberto de Mattei: Christian Matrimony Has Been Dealt a Grievous Blow

by Roberto de Mattei *
The two motu proprio of Pope Francis Mitis iudex Dominus Iesus for the Latin Church and Mitis et misericors Jesus for the Oriental Churches, which were announced on September 8, 2015 have dealt Christian marriage a serious wound.
The indissolubility of marriage is divine and immutable law of Jesus Christ. The Church can not "cancel" a marriage in the sense of dissolution. You can, with a declaration of invalidity, consider its non-existence, if those conditions are not met which ensure their validity. This means that it is not the interest of the spouse which has priority in a canonical process for the Church to obtain a declaration of invalidity, but the truth about the validity of the marriage bond.
Pius XII. reminds us in this regard, that "the only destination is the truth of the marriage process and the law is its verdict in the annulment process, which secures the non-existence of the marriage bond" (allocution to the Roman Rota, October 2, 1944). The believer can cheat the Church to obtain a nullity, for example, through the use of false evidence, but the Church can not hoodwink God and has the duty to ascertain the truth in a clear and precise manner.

In the canonical process, the interests of marriage as a divine institution comes first

In the canonical process, first place goes to the highest interest of the divine institution - and marriage is one such - to be defended. The recognition and protection of this reality come in the legal field expressed in the narrow formulation favor matrimonii, in other words, acceptance of the validity of the marriage until proof to the contrary. John Paul II. declared that the magisterium represents the indissolubility of each consummated marriage as an ordinary law, precisely because the validity is assumed regardless of the success of married life and the possibility in some cases that there could be a marriage annulment (Speech the Roman Rota, January 21, 2000).
As the Enlightenment tried to deal a fatal blow to  Christian marriage,  Pope Benedict XIV. with the decree Dei miseratione from 3 November 1741, ordered that in each diocese a Defensor vinculi had to be used,  for obtaining the declaration of nullity, the principle double coincident judgment to by two different judicial bodies. The principle of double matching judgment was affirmed by the Code of Canon Law in 1917 as well as adopted by  John Paul II. on 25 January 1983 in the new Code of Canon Law.

Turned on its head by reform of Francis  - precedent USA 1971-1983

In the motu proprio of Pope Francis, things have been turned on their heads. The interest of the spouses take precedence over the marriage. This is said in the document itself. The basic criteria of reform can be summarized in a few points:
the abolition of the double, matching judgment, which is replaced by a single judgment in favor of the annulment;
granting a monocratic authority to the bishop, who is qualified as a single judge;  introduction of a fast and factually uncontrollable process;  with including extensive elimination of the Sacra Rota.
How else, for example, is the abolition of double judgment be interpreted? What are the reasons so serious that this principle will be abolished after 270 years? Cardinal Burke recalled that there is in this respect a catastrophic experience. In the United States were from July 1971 to November 1983, the so-called Provisional Norms, the de facto eliminated the duty of the double, matching judgment. The result was that the Bishops' Conference did not reject a single one of hundreds of thousands applications it dispensed, and that the process started to become popularly  known as  the "Catholic divorce" (s. Remain in the truth of Christ. Marriage and Communion in the Catholic Church, Echter, Würzburg 2014).

New powers for Diocesan Bishops, one aspect of explosive scope

Even more serious is the granting of authority to the diocesan bishop, to be able to initiate a rapid process of a single judge at his discretion and to arrive at a judgment. The bishop may exercise his judicial power either personally or delegate it to a committee, which does not necessarily consist of lawyers. A commission in his own image, which of course follows his pastoral instructions, as is already happening in Italy with the "diocesan centers of listening," which lacks any legal basis to date. The combination of Canon 1683 and Article 14 of the Procedural Rules is under this aspect possessed of explosive implications. Sociological considerations will inevitably weigh on the decision: the divorced and remarried are to obtain for the sake of "mercy," preferential treatment. "The Church of Mercy has been set in motion," said Giuliano Ferrara in Il Foglio of 9 September 2015. It does not move by administrative channels, but on the "Courts", which has little to offer in the way of justice.
In some diocese, the bishops will try to ensure the seriousness of the process. But one can easily imagine that in many other dioceses, for example, in Central Europe, the annulment will be a  pure formality. In 1993 Oskar Saier, Archbishop of Freiburg, Karl Lehmann, Bishop of Mainz, and Walter Kasper, Bishop of Rottenburg-Stuttgart, had produced a document in favor of those who were convinced, according to their conscience, for the annulment of their marriage, but not of the elements to prove this in court (Pastoral Letter of the Bishops for the Upper Rhine for the Pastoral Care of People from Broken Marriages, Divorced and Remarried Divorcees [In German]).

"Subjective conviction of conscience" is enough to keep marriage null and void?

The CDF responded by letter Annus Internationalis Familiae of 14 September 1994, with which they made it ​​clear that this path has not been possible because marriage is a public reality: "to ignore this important aspect would make marriage as a de facto reality of the Church, which would deny the sacrament "(no. 8). Nevertheless, recently, the Pastoral Office of the Archdiocese of Freiburg, took the proposal up again (Guidelines for the Pastoral Care to the address people in separation, divorce and after civil remarriage in the Archdiocese of Freiburg), according to which the divorced and remarried  because of a "conscience nullity" ("subjective conviction of conscience" ) of the previous marriage could receive the sacraments and   take on tasks in the parish councils.
The favor matrimonii is to be replaced by a favor nullitatis, which is the primary legal element whilst indissolubility is reduced to a "not practicable Ideal." The theoretical affirmation of the indissolubility of marriage is accompanied in practice by the claim to a right to declare any failed marriage band void. It is enough, in its conscience, to keep one's own marriage invalid, to obtain recognition of their annulment by the Church. It is the same principle, which according to some theologians, to hold a  marriage for "dead", in which the "love is dead" according to a statement of both or even one spouse.

"Bad money drives out good money"

Benedict XVI. warned on 29 January 2010 the Court of Sacra Romana Rota about  the cancellation of marriages by way of  a compliant attitude, "accommodating wishes and expectations of the parties or the influences of the social environment." However, in most diocese in Central Europe  the annulment has been reduced to a pure formality, as in the US when Provisional Norms was the case. Due to the known law, according to which "bad money drives out good money," will be condemned to chaos,  where the "quick divorce" will outweigh its opposite, the indissoluble marriage.
Since more than a year there is talk of a latent schism in the Church, but now  Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the prefect of the CDF, has implored in his speech in Regensburg against the danger of a schism, and urged vigilance and not to forget the lesson of the Protestant schism, which set Europe on fire   five centuries ago.
In advance of the Synod on the Family taking place in October, the reform of Pope Francis is not a torch, but it has sparked it and is paving the way for other catastrophic innovations. Silence is no longer possible.
* Roberto de Mattei, historian, father of five children, Professor of Modern History and History of Christianity at the European University of Rome, Chairman of the Lepanto Foundation, editor of the monthly magazine Radici Cristiane and the online news agency Corrispondenza Romana, author of numerous books, most recently appeared: Vicario di Cristo. Il primato di Pietro tra normalità ed eccezione (Vicar of Christ, the Primacy of Peter Between Normality and Exception.), Verona, 2013; translated into German last: The Second Vatican Council - a hitherto unwritten history, Ruppichteroth 2011. [Avalable on Amazon in English] The intertitles are from the editor.
Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Corrispondenza Romana
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG




Thursday, September 3, 2015

Inexplicable Censorship -- Vatican Publisher Presents Transcript of Proceedings on Emperor Constantine the Great


In Hoc Signo Vinces - censorship in the Vatican against Constantine the Great
(Rome) "The impudence of those who are obviously moved, to the detriment of the truth by an ideological schema, is always worrying," said Corrrispondenza Romana.  During proceedings at the Vatican publishing house,  the conference transcript about the Emperor Constantine the Great and the Constantinian Shift has recently appeared. It's a transcript with curious surprises, revealing an alarming censorship.
From the 18th-21st April 2012 on  the occasion of the 1700th anniversary of the Battle of the Milvian Bridge, an international meeting of historians took place on the figure of Emperor Constantine the Great. The meeting had been initiated by the reigning President until 2009 of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller. Renowned speakers discussed  key issues that ranged from the conversion of the emperor, to the relationship between Christians and the Roman Empire, and Constantine's vision before the decisive  victory of October 28th, 312.

Speech by Professor de Mattei disappears

Recently, the Vatican publishing house will publish the title "Constantine the Great.  On the Roots of Europe,"  as the conference's volume and which will be presented  in the Augustinianum in Rome. Among the "most important experts in the field", as the acting President of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences writes, there was also the  historian Roberto de Mattei, who illustrated in a highly regarded paper, the "archetypal significance of the Battle of the Milvian Bridge." The presentation by Professor de Mattei is, however, gone. It is not found in the conference proceedings in which the papers were published. De Mattei was also not invited to the presentation of the volume, which can be assessed as an additional personal rebuff by the publisher.
"How is such an inexplicable censorship possible?" asked Corrispondenza Romana. To many it may have caused some upset  that Professor de Mattei regarded the Vision of Constantine, with its luminous signs in form of a cross on the sun with the words "In Hoc Signo Vinces," as genuine.   In a time in which even Catholic theological faculties of priest-professors deny the authenticity of the miracles of Jesus, "because they are  scientifically impossible,"  someone may have felt provoked.

Vision and Victory of Constantine of "Archetypal Meaning"


Constantine the Great
The upset stomach of many must have grown, as de Mattei pointed out that in the vision of the emperor and its consequences  became a model for the following centuries, can be seen, and therefore taken up by Saint Pius X which he testified in the Apostolic Exhortation Universi christifidelibus, with which he announced the Constantinian Jubilee in commemoration of the historic event announced on 8 March 1913:
"At that time the Church Militant finally obtained the first of those triumphs which was relieved from previous epochs of all kinds of persecutions and stood ready on that day in the company of the human race for ever greater deeds."
What is significant to the battle of Saxa Rubra as  "military and political triumph," says Professor de Mattei in his speech, is "not separate from the wonderful intuition of Constantine." He continues: "Christ himself called on Constantine and his legions to fight on His behalf. Thus, He established the principle that it is lawful to fight on behalf of God, when the cause is just and the war is declared a holy war. The battle of 28 October proved not only the legality of Christians to serve in the army, but was declared instinctu divinitatis the first holy war of the Christian era."

"In Hoc Signo Vinces" means not only "internal victory over sin, but also public, armed victory"

So the motto "In Hoc Signo Vinces," the "Signum Crucis, binds the symbol of the cross to a victory that is not only the inner victory over the disordered passions and sin, but also a public, armed, military victory."
Although these statements by Professor de Mattei were covered in detail by the sources, they seem not to have fit the picture of someone in the Vatican, whether the Pontifical Committee for Historical Research, the Vatican publishing house or even someone in a high position. To invite a speaker as a designated expert to a meeting and then to dismiss his paper without any justification, without even mentioning the name of the speaker, is not only a personal affront, and not just a violation of all intellectual and academic practice, but pure censorship. It's a manipulation behind which hides a falsification of history.
Corrispondenza Romana provides the additional question: "Who is afraid of Constantine the Great?"

Second Lecture also Disappears


Proceedings
It was not only de Mattei's lecture which has disappeared. But  the presentation by Professor Gianluigi Falchi from the Lateran University also can not be found in the conference proceedings. Professor Falchi talked about freedom of religion and the baptism of Constantine. In this case, there was no "plausible" explanation either,  as the historian had died in the meantime and thus his text could no longer see the printing. However,  a complete eradication is still not justified. Propriety entirely demands the publication of  papers in such cases with a note.
The case of Professor de Mattei, however, offers no "plausible" explanation.  Therefore, there remains only the assumption that the contents of the lecture were not in fitting with the picture of that hasty distancing from the "Constantinian shift" matches in which to practice numerous church representatives.
When emerged from the Battle of the Milvian Bridge, as the chairman of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, the French Premonstratensian Bernard Ardura, writes in his foreword to the conference proceedings, really a "new world" and a Europe "in which the values ​​of human dignity, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and freedom of worship flourished ", it is difficult to understand that all this is depressed at the same time in connection with this meeting through censorship with feet that just wanted to emphasize these principles.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Corrispondenza Romana

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Radio Maria Chief Don Livio Fangaza and a "Pleasant Surprise"

Don Livio Fangaza, spiritual advisor and
program director of Radio Maria Italy
and Director of World Family of Radio
Maria
(Rome) Don Livio Fanzaga, program director of Radio Maria Italy was recently noticed for purges against critics of Pope Francis, but "there are also pleasant surprises," says the traditional website Messa in Latino.
In the World Family of Radio Maria, Don Livio occupies a central position. He is spiritual director and program director of Radio Maria Italy, the oldest among the many Radio Maria stations, of which there are four in the German-speaking world. And he is at the same time director of the World Family.

Purge against critics of Pope Francis

The purges began in October 2013. Those purged were employees who had been critical of gestures, decisions and statements by Pope Francis, including long-term employees who had helped to shape the profile of the broadcaster. Here no one had voiced his criticism on Radio Maria but in other media. However, Don Livio wasn't concerned with such details.  "You don't criticize the Pope," reads the verdict of the program director.

Purge  1

The first employees who were been shown the door were the congenial author duo Mario Palmaro and Alessandro Gnocchi. Both had worked ten years at the broadcaster and each was responsible for his own show. On October 10, 2013, the legal philosopher Palmaro and journalist  Gnocchi published in the daily newspaper Il Foglio, a lively but justified criticism of Pope Francis, under the title "Christ is not an option among many, and certainly not for his representative on earth".
Scarcely had Don Livio heard about it, than he gives  his two employees a "polite phone call". He did not discuss the content of the call.  "Father Livio is of the opinion that you can not be a presenter at Radio Maria and  criticize the Pope," said the dismissed employees.  Even when the Pope personally made a phone call to the the already seriously ill Palmaro  and expressed understanding for the criticism, nothing changed.

Purge 2

On February 13, 2014, Radio Maria separated itself from  the famous historian Roberto de Mattei. On the eve that de Mattei had published  the essay "The End of Civilization - Who loves the Church, Defends Her. De Mattei had been designated since 2010 his own show at Radio Maria. The correspondence between the dismissal Don Livio Fanzaga and Professor de Mattei was of the latter published.

Purge 3

On November 24, 2014 Gianpaolo Barra, the chief editor of the Catholic monthly magazine was Il Timone  was removed from the broadcaster. He had expressed no criticism of Pope Francis. His "guilt" consisted in refusing to disinvite one  the Pope's critics f  Antonio Socci from Timone Festival, an event that is unrelated to Radio Maria. Antonio Socci had recently published his book "Non è Francesco" (This is Not Francis). The rector of the Academy of Television Journalism in Perugia doubts the legality of the election of Pope Francis. Because Barra had hesitated in the eyes of Don Livio to purge, he himself was even purged.

"... Or you jump out of the window"

On March 13, 2014 on the first anniversary of the election of Pope Francis and less than 24 hours after the funeral much beloved and much too early departed Mario Palmaro, Don Livio commented  on his purges on Radio Maria Italy. His exact words were: "Lately, I had to make a nice clean sweep among those responsible for the programs of Radio Maria ... Some I had to bring down from the Chair and put on a simple stool ... Because it must be clear: either one eats this soup [Pope Francis ] or you jump out the window ... "

A "Pleasant Surprise"

But there are also "pleasant surprises" as Messa in Latino remarked. Such a "pleasant surprise" is the latest book Don Livio Fanzaga published,  "La vita devota" (The religious life, ed. Sugarco, Milan 2015). On page 13  Don Livio writes:
"In practical terms the liturgical reform had unexpected consequences by way of unpleasant deviations and abuses of a general permission to hand Communion, through lack of care in the storage of the consecrated Hosts, up to serious theological errors expressed by those who cast doubt on the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament."
In the World Family of Radio Maria  there are currently 75 stations  connected together on all five continents, including four TV channels in German: Radio Horeb Radio Maria Austria, Radio Maria Südtirol and Radio Maria German-speaking Switzerland. The individual channels are independent in organization and program design.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Messa in Latino
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Monday, April 20, 2015

Why We Pilgrimage to Turin: Jesus is a Lamb to Us and a Lion to His Foes

by Roberto de Mattei *
(Turin) coming from 19 April to 24 June 2015, the grave cloth of Christ, which is the Holy Shroud of Turin, will be on  public display. Only five years after the most recent exhibition,  pilgrims will be able to venerate the holy linen cloth in the cathedral of Turin again. The occasion is the 200th anniversary of the birth of St. John Bosco. The next opportunity to see the grave cloth is not likely to arise again until 2025.
The Holy Shroud is the  cloth in which the body of Our Lord Jesus Christ was wrapped in the grave. The Synoptic Gospels recall this (Mark 13:46; Matthew 27.59; Luke 23.53).  Likewise, the Gospel of John, which speaks of a "soudarion". It is not a simple "icon", one of the countless "likenesses" of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which are scattered all over the world, but an authentic relic, the most precious of Christianity, before over the centuries the Popes, Saints and millions of ordinary faithful have prayed.

Invention of Photography Lifted a Veil of Secrecy

The invention of photography lifted a veil that lay on the mystery of the grave cloth and kept it hidden for nearly 2000 years of its contents and revealed it for everyone. The overall shape of the Savior is stamped in life-size on the linen cloth and shows the viewer something like the negative of a photograph. It has a lot of details that no painter would have ever imagined, let alone be able to paint  without knowing the photographic process in every detail.
The man on the grave cloth of Christ shows the whole drama of the Passion. The accuracy of the Gospel is a factual historical  report as regards the scourging, the crown of thorns, the crucifixion, the wounded side of Our Lord, is proved by the grave cloth in quite an extraordinary way. The grave cloth in the embossed presentation confirms the prophecy of Isaiah: "no unwounded spot, / only bumps, bruises, and fresh wounds, they are not bound, not sound  / not relieved from head to foot with oil" (Isaiah 1.6) ,

Give a Meaning to Suffering

Why this suffering? Our faith teaches us that Jesus came into the world to redeem us from the sin of Adam, to have come through all the physical and moral evil of the universe in the world. "Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because all sinned", the Apostle Paul writes (Rom 5:12). Since then, the man is born in pain and lives and dies in pain. But the whole suffering humanity was ransomed by Jesus Christ. The grave Shroud of Turin reminds us that human life is suffering because of the fall, but that all suffering was worn by him who was without sin. In Him we can find the answer for our suffering.
Nothing elevates man more than the assumed freely and courageously endured suffering. One of the biggest fallacies of life is to think one can be happy by dodging suffering. In reality, the man who does not suffer is unhappy because he remains without the joy that grows out of the fact, to offer one's own suffering makes sense. That non-sentient creatures suffer without being able to offer their suffering makes sense. The man, however, can detect, due to his intelligence, that the pain is a result of sin, the original sin and actual sins, and that he can give a sense to this pain to undo the sin in union with Christ and to atone.

Grave Cloth is the True Image of the God-Man - In suffering, We Gaze at Him

The grave cloth, the true image of the Man-God, teaches us how to suffer. In the moments of sorrow and physical and moral pain we look at the man of grave cloth. His appearance is disfigured, but what touches the most to the core, is the contrast between the visible consequences of torture and torment he has suffered and the peaceful majesty,brought to expression in his face. Jesus gives us the model for the attitude of patience, of seriousness and composure, with which we are to bear adversity and sacrifice that inevitably characterize our lives. With patience but always to be accompanied by immense confidence of those who conquered death by his death.

Grave Cloth Impressive Proof of His Resurrection

The Holy Shroud not only proves the truth of Christ's suffering, but also provides us with an impressive proof of his resurrection. The scientists that have studied the sacred linen cloth, confirm that only a mysterious power, a sudden flash of radiation and would have the negative impression of the cloth can memorize. In other words, only the resurrection of Jesus Christ,  scourged and crucified under Pontius Pilate unto death may explain the mysterious origin of the grave cloth. He had predicted that He would rise again on the third day, and that the resurrection from the dead, the highest proof of his divinity, was the great miracle that all the miracles and prophecies summarizes all in itself.
Jesus is victorious, raised in triumph, not only allegorically or spiritually, as  a certain progressivist theology would have it, but with visible body, blood, soul and divinity. The grave cloth shows his negative image  "photographed" with His glorious body at the moment of resurrection and thus provides us with another argument to hold that we can find eternal salvation only in the Catholic Church.

As in Adam all die, even so in Christ all live

In his letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul reminds us of this fundamental truth, first proclaimed by the apostles: the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If Christ had not died and rose again, salvation would never have taken place. The resurrection is the foundation of our faith. By a man, Adam, death came into the world. By another man, man and God, came life. As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be revived.
All of humanity is, as St. Augustine says, "summarized in the story of two men, one of whom has lost us  by doing not His will and not obeying Him who had created him. The other has saved us by not doing his will, but that of Him who had sent him. In the story of these two men is the whole Christian faith. "The Holy Week summarizes this drama together and at the Easter Vigil, is familiar to us in the liturgy of the Church with its message of hope and victory.

With the Resurrection Begins  the Kingdom of the Sacrificed Lamb

Easter, says Dom Guéranger, is the proclamation of the kingdom of the sacrificed Lamb, it is the acclamation of the elect in heaven "the Lion of the Tribe of Judah has triumphed, the shoot from the root of David!" (Rev 5.5). Jesus is awakened and resurrected "as a lamb for us, as a lion for his enemies" by uniting the attributes of strength and gentleness. The force with which we fight the enemies of our faith, and love, we are to exercise toward our brothers.
The suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ was the pillar of the apostolic preaching and must be the foundation of our faith. The grave cloth is the visible and moving Compendium. That's why we go to Turin to venerate this sacred relic reverently.
Roberto de Mattei , historian, father of five children, Professor of Modern History and History of Christianity at the European University of Rome, Chairman of Lepanto Foundation, editor of the monthly magazine Radici Cristiane and online news agency Corrispondenza Romana, author of numerous books, most recently appeared: Vicario di Cristo. Il primato tra di Pietro normalità ed eccezione (Vicar of Christ, the Primacy of Peter Between Normality and Exception.), Verona, 2013;  The Second Vatican Council - a hitherto unwritten history, Ruppichteroth 2011th
Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
image: Corrispondenza Romana
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
H/t: Mazarra
AMDG