Sunday, October 21, 2007

Good Foundation To Cover Freckles

Against Halloween: macabre celebration of gourds




few more days and the streets of our cities, the night of All Saints is be filled with devils, witches and skulls. In short there is to be quiet! Again here are some useful text for a proper discernment of what is actually Halloween. We have many reasons to reflect on this strange feast
1) The social liabilities that exists in the name of entertainment vendor. And the liability Christian also opposite to such events
2), the debasement of the solemnity of All Saints and the commemoration of the faithful departed. Halloween party turns solemn liturgical celebration of light and shadow to evoke magic. Like Santa Claus and the Assumption thus initiates a party reduced to pure ideological externality.
3) evocative symbol of spiritual poverty and danger.
4) Growth in a dramatic way of witchcraft, paganism and Satanism, especially among the younger classes.
5) Party addressed the imaginary child with sponsors ranging from Coca-Cola to McDonalds to Disney.
Faced with this answer in our parishes and dioceses with an invitation that made Father Gabriele Amorth:
1) celebrate the Mass to offer to the Lord in the Eucharist, a repair to this "horrible" party, and to approach all to take the Eucharist;
2) To recite the Rosary, preferably in the Family, in the parish, through listening to Radio Maria (for times go to the Rosary www.radiomaria.it). If you really are unable, recitatelo alone;
3) At the end of the Mass to recite the Chaplet of Divine Mercy, asking for forgiveness from the Lord.
defend our tradition of these perverse forms.
Federico Intini
Ass Studies Knighthood St. Joseph Lioness
Halloween party anti-Christian
by Don William Fichtner
HALLOWEEN: FESTIVAL ignorance and superstition
"NO" to the ridiculous ... PUMPKIN FESTIVAL EMPTY!

It is more just and more respectful of the Christian faith at least move the date of this Halloween, do not let that coincide with two major Christian holidays of All Saints and Souls? AN INTRODUCTION

not enough to say lightly: "It's just a way to have fun ... it's like another carnival", without properly evaluate its cultural roots, its implications esoteric, its climate and its resulting ambiguous opening more or less declared, the magical thinking.
1) Is it possible that you do not seem absurd to masks on the same level as those of Pulcinella, Arlecchino, Colombina, Dr. Balanzone, etc.. that behind a literature, a history of art and theater history significant and positive, with masks that are intended only to highlight a negative climate, a climate macabre fact of horror, of witchcraft, the occult, engaging and disseminating a dangerous and destructive culture magic?
2) Is it possible that all those symbols Horror (bats, witches, ghosts, vampires, the dead come back, etc..) Have aroused in you at least a fair concern?
3) Is it possible that the only way to have fun is to resurrect horror THE FAIR? Necessarily have to have fun (sic) only with devils, ghosts, witches, bats, and more that is eerie to propionate?
Halloween, for explicit admission of his supporters is a pagan festival to which were added elements from the esoteric culture, magic, witchcraft, all hypocritically masked (duplicity and studied) in the form of feasting, fun, the pleasure-eat and the frenzy of this group, so when someone, not "asleep", points the finger at the puzzling "aspects of horror and magic of this rite that was forced upon us, the fanatics of the party (who?) with a smile sarcastic and mischievous justify it by saying: "But it's just a bit 'of fun!" We We wonder and ask: what is the need to resurrect a pagan festival? What it seeks a return to paganism, which is not unique in our society? Why should tie a healthy entertainment to a deleterious horror at a party esoteric, magic, witchcraft, complete with costumes as devils, witches, ghosts, bats? When a company drops (or you fall) Christianity, the space occupied by the salt superstition!
A) We think that as it exists in normal culture, an "introduction to philosophy", an "introduction to sociology, etc.., These mass rituals, (not only Halloween, but also others in other ways and other areas ) are an attempt to introduce of the public sympathetic to the esoteric-magical thinking. So are leading the way for further handling. B) It is necessary to contextualize this pseudo-holiday. Halloween is not an attempt to "colonize" magic block. This pseudo-holiday is just one of several ways in which you try to introduce this esoteric mentality, alien and hostile to Christianity in our culture and our customs. To implement this strategy are several means, such as literature, movies and even publications that are sold now, even on sale. At the same time, society, teem "gurus" and "sensitive." C) Of course, all these variety of ways, including Halloween, are only a "net cast," with which we introduce opportunities, which may lend itself to subsequent involvement in magical thinking. We think that those who intend to spread this magic-esoteric mentality among the public, step by step and trial and error. We start with the joke, with the novel-fumettone that makes you dream, with the film entertaining and engaging. If you come across an authentic Christianity, SUPERVISION AND VIGOROUS, stop and refer to the next opportunity and means. But when we see a watering down CHRISTIANITY, secularized MODERNIST, CULTURAL AND FRAGILE COMPROMISE, then spread openly and very large, their forms "alternative" to Christianity and soon move on to more serious next step. Halloween, on the other, it has also become a huge business economy, with a huge round of money that enriches speculators and journeyman. For all these reasons together and recorded all the arguments in this leaflet, we say "NO!" in this celebration of ignorance and superstition.

CAUTION AGAINST DECEPTION
There is an attempt underway to introduce and spread in various ways, a counter-culture alternative based on the esoteric and magical thinking. It is therefore designed in various ways to create an atmosphere of sympathy around the magic to make her look good, useful, fun ... even to push to lower the guard and prevent natural and right that the public has in their regard. This so-called "Halloween" is just one way (certainly not the only) to achieve these goals. The mentality and practice magic or para-magic is the way superstitious, modernist and secular to replace the true religion. There are ongoing attempts to introduce taste, mind and spirit magic in various ways, trying not to arouse suspicion, and by tactical cunning tricks, if it were possible to deceive even those who have kept a healthy ... common sense. This tactic of "double game" is declared explicitly by their magazine out for the occasion: "The costumes are the most typical depicting dangerous magical creatures, or regarded as such by Muggles (Ed = Muggles are sensible people who stay away from magic = Ed) as vampires, wolves breast, ghosts, etc.. 1) If we frequent settlements completely magical, there are no limitations on the costumes. 2) If you plan to do a spin, maybe to a costume party Muggle, we observe some simple rules such as: A) The use of spells to create the costumes must be very low. B) Not too realistic fur or fangs, Muggles might get suspicious. Attrezziamoci then patiently and try to minimize the use of magic "(Journal of the Wizards and Witches, Year I, No. 10, 2004 - SPECIAL EDITION - HALLOWEEN - Spells and most mysterious secrets of the Night, p. 3).

before acting, known symbols and occult
On 31 October, is an important day not only in Celtic culture, but also in Satanism. And one of the four witches' sabbath. The first three seasons marked the time for "healing" the awakening of the earth after the winter, the time of sowing, time of harvest. The fourth Sabbath marks the arrival of winter and the "defeat" of the sun, cold, hunger and death. The Catholic feast of All Saints has nothing to do with that Halloween. It was established by Pope Gregory IV in the year 840. Originally it was celebrated in May and November 1. It was in 1048 that
Odilo de Cluny decided to move the Catholic celebration in early November in order to dethrone the worship of Samhain. Once, then, the pagan festivals were replaced in the same day by Christian holidays, today is the attempt contrary to coincide with the Christian holidays of All Saints and All Souls, we try to spread the culture and customs, a pagan festival alien and hostile to the climate and context of prayer and true faith of the two Christian holidays. It was not more just and more respectful at least move the date of this Halloween, do not let that coincide with these two major Christian holidays?

1. IL SIGNIFICANCE
Halloween is the contracted form of the English "All Hallows Eve" which literally means Halloween. Halloween, although not as it should be said, is a magical celebration. The world of the occult so defines it: "It's the most magical day of the year is New Year around the esoteric world, is the feast. The most important year for the followers of Satan."
last page we publish the ritual magic for Halloween, printed on letterhead, from a center of magic in Foggia.

2. WHY CELEBRATE THE NIGHT October 31?
The origins of Halloween date back to the ancients, therefore, Celtic Druids, and then about 2000 years ago. The Celts lived in a vast territory that is now occupied by France, England, Wales and Scotland, Ireland, and celebrated the New Year's Eve, October 31, in honor of Samhain, the prince of death. Since their main livelihood was agriculture, on the night of Oct. 31 (the night of late summer), the Celts celebrated Samhain, a dark gods mortals thanked for summer harvest. This was the "Trinox Samhain" or the Celtic New Year. So it's clear the pagan origin of the festival. Samhain was the lord of the underworld, with the arrival of winter, erased the power of the sun god, his eternal rival. Samhain was traditionally identified as the god of the dead, or simply with the moon, which appears often in the iconography of Halloween. Samain is also the Gaelic name of the month that corresponded pretty much in November. So on the day of Samhain marked the beginning of the winter half year, and was called to this day among the years.
Being "in the middle of the year" was considered a magic moment: the barriers between the world of the living and the spirits were tapered so as to enable them to return to earth to communicate with the living. The Celts believed that on this day the evil spirits of the dead returned to cause confusion and chaos among the living. The party had to appease Samhain and the spirits of the dead. At the beginning, on this day, all the dead are honored, including the first Christian saints, but with the passage of time, incredibly, these spirits took a diabolical and evil connotations. And so, during the celebrations for Halloween, appeared representations of ghosts, skeletons, symbols of death, the devil and other evil creatures as witches. Bats, cats blacks, the full moon, witches, ghosts, etc.. these symbols have little to do with the initial and Celtic Samhain Eve. Someone added them illegally. The ceremony was Celtic, however, already have a particular that was a trailblazer all'inglobamento of esoteric symbols: participants had to dress up in animal skins and heads, in order to acquire the force of the animal represented and scaring (sic) so that the evil spirits who were present.

3. THE LEGEND
The old Irish legend says that Jack, a blacksmith evil, wicked and stingy, a night of All Saints, after yet another drink is seized by a fatal attack of liver cirrhosis. The devil in claim his soul is tricked by Jack (sic) and is forced to satisfy some of his wishes, including leaving it to life by reaching an agreement which gave up the soul of the reprobate. Jack, unaware of the effect of the disease, died a year later. Rejected in Paradise, Jack has no place even in hell because of the pact with the devil. A poor way of the ritual carving of a large putting greens in the blazing fire, a place of eternal damnation. This lantern, Jack, ghost, come back into the world of the living. The Irish, the famine hit, immigrated to America around 1850. Landed in the New World, they found a huge pumpkin that, unlike the indigenous small turnips, were large enough to be carved. So the pumpkin replaced the turnip and became the Jack O Lantern, used the night of All Saints' Day because it was thought to ward off the restless spirits of the dead who were trying, like Jack, to go home. Children Today they dress up and make visits to families led by lantern-pumpkin and get sweets in return for their "kindness". "Trick - or - treat" is the custom of "trick or treat" [...], the original meaning is: "Curse or sacrifice." This festival, established itself and spread in the U.S. was imported from the United States in Europe and then in Italy.

4. HISTORICAL FACTS
few centuries before Christ, a secret he kept under his empire the Celtic world. Each year, October 31st, Halloween day, she celebrated in honor of their pagan gods, a festival of death. The elders of the sect went from house to house demanding deals for their "god" happened and that to require human sacrifice. In case of refusal, uttered the curse of death on the house, hence was born the "trick or treat".

5. WHY YOU PUT IN MASK?
Halloween is a holiday - the monsters, spirits, evil beings, and all those characters that traditionally, in the popular imagination, embodying the concept of evil, as opposed to the good heroes. So the more appropriate forms are those that meet this evil tendency: pirates, witches, vampires, devils, with all the modern variants extrapolated from cinema, cartoons, comic books (how many children this year, even disguised themselves as enemies of Spiderman ?). Celtic in Ireland it was believed that on this day the spirits came back in search of a body to possess. To defend (sic) us from this threat is masked in frightening ways, and paraded through the streets hoping to banish the ghosts wandering outside the city.


6. WHY APPLE IS THE STAR FRUIT?
For Halloween festivities during which they are distributed are different types of sweets such as caramel apple, sweet traditional Halloween night. In addition, we organize games such as apple, which is to try to bite an apple placed in a basin of water, holding her hands behind her back. But where it comes from the habit of using apples on Halloween? Popular tradition says that to worship Samhain, the terrible god of the night, practiced divination rituals that concerned weather, weddings and fortune for the coming year, and that all had starring the apple. In particular, there were two ceremonies: 1) the second dive of the apples) and the stripping of the apple. The first was a divination from a marriage: the first person to bite an apple would be married the following year. Instead, peel the apple was a divination on the duration of life was the longest piece of peeled apple without breaking it, the longer would be the life of the peel. Of course, not the candy apple - by itself - makes in ... Witches! How can we not have the bats, spiders and cats that blacks - by itself - make the magic. In these mass rituals, open the "windows", we introduce the opportunities that cast a favorable network that can pave the way to possible intrusions, by members of magical thinking.


7. WHY ANIMALS ARE THE ICONS BAT, OWL, BLACK CAT AND SPIDER?
All four of these animals have been associated, from the Middle Ages, the witches, which were believed to be demonic servants, called families. When the witches began to be linked to Halloween, even pets they became icons.
Bat. Very popular symbol of Halloween. The bat is connected with witchcraft and death in many different cultures: this association comes from the custom of flying at night and dwell in caves and ruins. The blood of a bat was also used (especially in black magic) for the preparation of magic potions and ointments.
Spider. Superstition has it that the spider is the bearer of bad vibrations, capable of doing harm to humans and animals even with the neighborhood.
Owl. Even today there are those who think hear an owl in the dark indicating death or bad omens. During the Middle Ages it was believed that on Halloween night demons in the form of owls traveled together to the witches and their cats aboard a broomstick to go to the witches' sabbath. Even it was feared they were witches in disguise, so that seeing or hearing an owl was a source of fear. Even in ancient Rome, the owl was a bird of ill omen: its presence indicates bad luck (that the owl was called by the Romans strinx, ie witch).
Cat. Finally, the black cat, how many of you are still three steps back when a black cat crosses the road? For some, even today, cats are creatures of blacks left the bearers of bad luck. And it is once again the medieval that the black cat became a symbol of the devil. Cats blacks are associated with the witch superstition: it was believed that witches could transfer their minds into a cat, and for this reason they always had one.

8. SOME CONSIDERATIONS
1) A party that is just ridiculous to think that there are spirits of the dead trying to get home! After his death, with Particular Judgement, the soul of every man goes to heaven or hell or in purgatory, and then is forever, only in God's hands It's just ridiculous to think that the soul may decide to be a walk, going to find a home to live for the future, to picnics or to spend an evening with friends! 2) The Legend of Jack is just shocking and absurd: A) when one dies, the rating takes place before God and before the devil B) the devil has the power to bring a person back to life after it dead: that power belongs only to God, C) if it makes a pact with the devil, Hell welcomes with open arms, the contractor, the little story, however, says that because of the absurdly pact with the devil even Jack has no place even to 'Hell, D) little story also develops and accredits beliefs and magical practices: Ask the devil the fulfillment of their desires, make a pact with the devil, and so on. E) It is really ridiculous to think these supposed to keep away the spirits of the dead, to frighten and chase away the ghosts, only with the lanterns. It is superstitious to think of removing spiritual realities, supernatural, only with a pumpkin, that is only natural means! F) It should be stressed strongly negative attitude toward death and to the dead that this "festaccia" causes, as if the dead were just something to be resisted hostile. To the dead we go to the cemetery to pray, we do offer Masses, however, must be designed and combined with affection and familiarity, not fear and mistrust. The worship and affection for the dead is a sign of civilization springs from. "It was Christianity to revolutionize the relationship with the dead: the pagans buried their dead away from the city because they were afraid and they felt somewhat contaminants, however, the Christians soon began to venerate the bodies of the saints, churches built over the and villages. They were the Jacobins officially down for "Toilet" (but actually neo-pagans), to restore the suburban cemeteries, Napoleon was anxious to export, infuriating, as we know from school, his admirer Foscolo (Rino Camilleri). We want exorcise death, making a caricature. But this is not a way to exorcise death, but to desecrate it, trivialize it, ridicule it, to make surface, as a consumer. This Halloween certainly throws a shadow on the unholy holiday of all Saints, also trains leaving on the day of the dead.

9. WARNING: It is ESSENTIAL MAGIC HALLOWEEN
Young or old, we must always be well realized not clinging to us from the esoteric world through rituals of mass, such as those in the festivities dedicated to Halloween, there are proposed. Halloween, when and where it is celebrated today in the sense given, among other ways, and similar stimuli (such as those in literature, cinema, etc..) Are all open minded about magic, the esoteric culture, in some cases - and where can be reached - even on the world of the paranormal.
The aim is to familiarize the public and having them become familiar with these esoteric and magical mentality, alien and hostile to Christian culture. Part of the film - for example - has contributed greatly to the harmful influence of Halloween, sponsorship and promoting style, content and costumes. Anyway, we must always ensure that through the gestures and symbols placed during this holiday does not fall or do not give access to harmful meanings to it - today - that underlie and vehicles. There is no doubt that the world of satanists, Halloween is a big party magic and that in some areas their most depraved nowadays it is known that on this night some of them even come to practice human sacrifices. Because of its roots and essence of his hidden Halloween can open a door hidden influence in people's lives. The emphasis of Halloween is about fear, death, the spirits, witchcraft, violence, demons.
retailers and consumers, we have the courage to say "NO" to promote articles which, under the guise of the masked, disseminate and create, esoteric mentality. Many items sold in the consumer products are amulets, or reproductions thereof, used in witchcraft.
not forget that the disastrous consequences of inhalation magic are not immediate but become apparent after many years in depression, crisis and violence. This calls for an adamant stance about everything that is served up by Halloween, from the world and magical thinking in general. Consider that the words we proclaim, the gestures we make, the mentality that we follow and symbols that say, are not really neutral or no meaning, but build and attract a world-minded, mean and introduce the spiritual realities they represent. Parents, we are careful to let our kids get used, or even worse, be educated in the occult. Teachers, informiamoci the truth behind this rite of mass. We may pass on to young people - and without their knowledge to us - coins and deleterious mentality openings magic-esoteric.

WITNESS IN THE FIRST PERSON
Foggia in a high school teacher of religion has spoken at length about this festival, its implications, its meaning, its pagan origins, its implications magical, esoteric, witch, etc.. During dialogue with the boys, two girls have asked to speak to testify that anything shown in this document is true and correct. The previous year it took part in one of these Halloween party, thinking it was just a little 'fun with bits of macabre, but at the end of the party some guys have asked them to take part in a seance.

"not participate in the unfruitful works of darkness, but report it Open" (Eph 5:11)
John Paul II: "Today, various kinds of esoteric rampant even among some believers who lack a critical sense" (Fides et Ratio, n . 37).
Many groups, movements, Catholic associations, the night October 31 will gather in prayer or Christian festivals organized with the participation of alternative groups, singers and songwriters in contemporary Christian music of various genres of music and particularly, on that occasion, a contemporary Praise and Worship.
The pumpkin festival has proved in reality, the party of those with little ... pumpkin. It is a celebration of those who have little knowledge of. its roots and its implications. It is the festival of gourds, but not those who carry in your hand! The pumpkin is made up of truly empty - in fact - from the pagan mentality, superficial and superstitious - alien and hostile to our Christianity - that the current spirit of this festival attracts and seeks to introduce.
Halloween anti-Christian celebration of Don Lorenzo
Biselx n.1 (49) of Catholic Tradition (new series - the year XIII - 2002), Halloween
undoubtedly entered the landscape of our "civilization" today. But I must confess that ten years ago I had never heard this strange word. I discovered during my first year of seminary in Flavigny-sur-Ozerain saw with surprise one night in a pumpkin with a candle, placed in front of the houses. Someone told me then that this was a new holiday: Halloween. I think it was more or less like for you all. On the other hand we can see that even the great encyclopedias like the Catholic Encyclopedia (1948-1954), the Great Encyclopedic Dictionary (1935), the Great Dictionary of the Italian language (1972) or the Great Universal Encyclopedia Atlantica (1982) have none at all this name. Encyclopedia Britannica devotes only one article. Internet obviously provides us with many details today about the history of this "party" legendary.


Origins
November 1 was the most solemn day of the year for the Celts who used to do their most important celebrations during the night from October 31 to November 1, called the night of Samhaim, who was the "Lord death, the Prince of Darkness. " The Druids believed that, the vigil of this feast, the dead return to earth in the previous year looking for new bodies to possess. While farmers extinguished the fire to ward off these spirits, the Druids would gather on a hill in the midst of the oak trees to make the big ceremony that night, including dances and songs, they offered sacrifices to scare the "evil spirits". The morning after the fire again, the Druids made the rounds of the houses carrying the embers of the fire from the families so that all could turn the family hearth. On this occasion asked to tender their god and utter curses in case of refusal. Hence the "trick or treat (an offer or curse), and the famous turnip (pumpkins today) in which the sacred fire burning. And the modern custom
to dress up for Halloween in the day?
is the three-day feast that happened the night of sacrifices during these days, the Celts used to dress the skins of animals killed, "to exorcise the spirits and frightening. Dressed in these grotesque masks, returned to the village light their way with carved lanterns made from onions were placed where the embers of the sacred fire. "
In modern times this ritual is interwoven with the Celtic legend of Jack O'Lantern. Jack was a man of evil and unrepentant alcoholic. When one night the devil came to look for his soul, he negotiated and achieved another year of life. After this year he managed to get the devil to never be sent to hell. So when he died, unable or enter into heaven because of his or impenitence in hell because of its trade with the devil, was condemned to wander the earth, lighting his way with a lantern made from a turnip (Americanized then pumpkin) contains a grill donated by the devil of hell.

Death and demons, of course, Halloween brings us back full paganism, a paganism disappeared and never took advantage of the religious upheaval of the Reformation to return to the "surface": October 31, the eve of All Saints Day (All Hallows' E'en in Old English), some used to celebrate the evil spirits, praising as opposed to the goodness and beauty of God, to eternal life ...
The Protestant Reformation, bringing with it the loss of Catholic faith and eliminating many parties (including the feast of All Saints), had diverted the pity, and then created conditions favorable for such sacrilegious ceremonies. Worse still, the night of October 31, the Celtic New Year, remained as the New Year the sorcerers, because it is the beginning of what is "cold, dark and dead ..." (Cold, dark and dead ...) and one of their main Sabbath (Black Sabbath) 7. Alas, can also be a special occasion for sacrifices, even human, and black masses. Halloween
followed the Anglo-Saxon settlers (most of all in Ireland) in their conquest of the Americas and developed in the New World where, in the last century, has made the happiness of some major retailers, which was missing from the summer holidays and Santa Claus, an opportunity to exploit the consumerist spirit of children. Of course, the Old Europe could not remain long without adopting the new "cult", so we see more and more of us spread Halloween with its procession of decorated items in a macabre (with pictures of teschi8, skeletons, witches, ...). I have before me a card "demon Journal 2000; the child is invited to sign the following declaration:" I'm one of the demons of Halloween 2000 and I am committed to do and say many things monstrous. " Then comes the answer: "Now that you are demon official, learn the language and reveals the horrors of the demon on your side!" Here is the demonopedagogia! Children are then invited to shoot in the city, "with monstrous and terrifying masks and costumes, knocking on doors asking for candy or coins. If people refuse, they can play some bad joke, "how to empty the bin in the garden." 10
So, cleverly, the children are invited to dress as a witch, ghost, undead or demon in a new carnival, much worse than the old one (because for a child to dress a bear or a princess could be a game innocent). Here it is aimed directly at the ugly, evil in order to participate, unwittingly, the celebration of a kind of neo-pagan liturgical celebration and even satanic. Children are thus rendered more vulnerable to the allure of dark satanic rock that may meet once teenagers. Noisy Mag magazine specializing in "extreme rock", consecrated in 2000 a dossier "Halloween Special" in which they were convicted of the attempts made in the USA by "powerful lobbies affiliated with the ultraconservative right" to ban the celebration of Halloween. Noisy May also stated that, in addition to the processions of children dressed up knocking on doors, Halloween continues to "have particular importance at the Satanists." So the article in this issue "hard rock" continued with a description of Luciferian rites of their "holiday" called by them "Samhain". According to the British
Encyclopodia, the Church attempted to eradicate Halloween in the Middle Ages: this was the purpose of the move, by Pope Gregory IV, nell'834, the feast of All Saints' Day from May 13 to November 1. The introduction in the tenth century the feast of All Souls also had to help the disappearance of the "feast of the witches." We have seen that unfortunately was not fully achieved this goal and now requires particular vigilance because, for many Christians in name, Halloween intense competition is likely to make the beautiful and consoling Christian holidays of 1st and 2nd November. Enough of Halloween

Cecilia Gatto Trocchi taken from October 26, 2002
future of the last few years there has been widespread in Italy's fashion to celebrate Halloween, semi-carnival party, improperly linked to witches. The elementary teachers are racing to bring ghosts, wizards, vampires and monsters. But Samain Samuin or Gaelic is the name of a month which corresponds more or less in November, the feast is mentioned but not described for the first time in an Irish text prosaically called "The cow brains" of 1100. Other than pre-history! All Saints is a Christian holiday, brought in the United States by Irish and Scots. They remembered the martyrs on Halloween night, in a celebration that precedes the celebration of the November 2, when each family remembered their dead. Christianity revolutionized the relationship with the dead: while the pagans buried their dead outside the city, as they were afraid they heard and contaminants, the early Christians have venerated the bodies of saints, altars built on them and then the churches and villages. The memory of the deceased was placed by the Fathers of the Church in the autumn, when even nature seems weighed down by a mortal sleep and the days get shorter until the winter solstice.
Popular traditions linking the autumn rites. It is certain that within the Celtic and Gaelic are celebrated and the dead is a day consecrated to their recall, although there are no historical writings. The rituals related to the nature, the cosmos and the community the living and the dead. The children wore masks representing in the great cosmic drama and social continuity of life. That's because the spectral masks: one day for children personify the "poor, pale, dead," as an Irish ballad: In the name of the deceased asked that the candy in central and southern expressly called "dead bones" or " beans dead. " Pumpkins lit, used since Roman remote, symbolizing both fertility (because of the numerous seeds, which allude to the revival) is the light that will guide the dead in their return to the kingdom of Hades.
In Sicily is the tradition that the dead are to bring presents to children. During the "fair of the dead ", including rituals and celebrations, they sell sweets that children are at the foot of the bed on November 3. Why, then, today we celebrate Halloween in nightclubs fracassone, you conjure demons and witches, vampires and ghosts?
This is a actual process of "secularization" that the environment is forcing American consumerism and materialistic for many years. It should be noted that the neo-American Protestantism denies the cult of saints, the fights and demonize him. In the nineteenth century, forgotten the relationship with Saints forgotten the role of the masks related to the commemoration of the dead, remains a mess neo-witchcraft, ambiguous evocation of evil forces, a fashion horror, in the wake of the worst romance. All this for at least 10 years came on top of the revival of pagan magic, witchcraft New Age, occultism and Satanism. It then happened that has become a pagan Christian holiday and not vice versa. No accident that the founders of English and American neo-witchcraft have "hijacked" to Christianity, the feast of All Saints to make a recurrence of Sabbah. It is beautiful and good invention, as in any text are historically correct magic magic rituals carried out on 1 November.
According to the traditions of many primitive peoples, the dead are at peace and never mentioned to no avail. But some eager young teacher-leaders and condominium vying to conjure witches and ghosts. Now Sisal also invented a lottery-related Halloween. Not to mention the clubs that make profit on devils, witches, ghosts. No accident that the Satanists celebrate their rituals on Halloween. The party thus conceived is configured as a spell lay unconscious, a kind of ritual of necromancy mercantile kitsch. It is a folklore from fast food, served with sweet and spicy sauces and accompanied by a plastic monster.
is fair to ask: What will become of the digestive and mental health of our children? Would not it be better to eat the desserts homemade almond and recite "the Tomb" by Ugo Foscolo, permanent monument to the glories of Italian? Father Gabriele Amorth

The Exorcist THE HOLY SEE: Halloween and 'Hosanna to the A DEVIL
''I think the companies 'Italian is losing his mind, the meaning of life, and the use of reason is more and more' ill. Celebrate Halloween and 'making a hosanna to the devil. Which, if you love, even if only for one night, he plans to claim rights on the person. So do not be surprised if the world seems to be a topsy-turvy and there is evidence from psychologists and psychiatrists are full of restless children, vandals, restless, and boys obsessed and depressed, suicidal.'' The sentence and 'the exorcist of the Holy See, former' President of the International Association of Exorcists, Father Gabriele Amorth from Modena.
The macabre masks, the appeals would not be another seemingly innocuous, the exorcist, a tribute to the prince of this world, the devil. I'm very sorry''that Italy, like the rest of Europe are moving away from Jesus 'the Lord, and even set yourself up to pay homage to Satan,''says the' Exorcist''whereby Halloween and 'a kind of seance in the form of the game. The cunning of the devil is right here. If you notice everything is presented as a playful, innocent. The sin is not 'more' pity in the world today. But all is disguised in the form of need, freedom 'or personal pleasure. The man - he concludes - and 'became the god of himself, exactly what' that the devil wants.'' And remember that while in many cities' Italian, were organized the 'Festival of Light', a true counter to the celebrations of darkness, the Lord with songs and games for innocent children.
of Don Tullio Round
Dear friends, about the Halloween party I think is important riportarequanto follows, taken from the Encyclopedia Britannica, 1960. Sintetizzoal up the text, but I point out info Ilnome more decisive, as it means that the eve of the Feast of All santi.Studiosi found in the folklore of Halloween traces of Druidism and beauty Roman festival of Pomona and this because of the use of nuts and apples and difigure of witches, cats and skeletons blacks. The link to druidismoè evident from that precisely the annoceltico ended October 31 was the eve of Samahain: For druids Samahain insiemela was late summer and the party of death the spirits of the departed siriteneva who visit their loved ones who sought caloreavvicinandosi winter. Sam. were practiced divination and gliauguri (magical practice) about the coming year. It was the occasionein where witches and other characters such lapopolazione terrorized. Fires were lit to guide spiriti.Questi fires remained in Scotland until 1800.Probabilmente the two Catholic feasts of All Saints and all the dead were attached to the 1st and 2nd November lapersistenza precisely to eradicate these pagan festivals. Note that initially all the festadi Saints was celebrated on May 13. The commemoration was introduced deifedeli departed significantly from here intutta Cluny and the church probably also to increase the cancellation dellefeste remained pagan. The satanic cult that survived allaintroduzione of faith was just a giornoparticolare on Halloween where you just celebrated a very important Sabbhats.
the late Middle Ages the Feast of All Saints was spread tuttaEuropa but with the Protestant Reformation and the non-important solemnity their riconoscimentodi including exactly all the saints, returned leantiche, pagan customs that remain tuttora.Dunque .... Judge for yourself which party is ....... A return of Satan consett other spirits more wicked than himself.
Please

Lord you know that these parties do not want, but we believe other toMember not clear all this, they need powerful signs: mandala Lord, according to Your holy will, so that people understand that Halloween chiaramenteche looks like it is a satanic holiday. Send what you want, but does everyone understand accettiamotutto, loud and clear, that Halloween is a festasatanica which is practiced magic and makes in Europe and America will leave this party. We ask for your sorrowful Passion. Let your will throughout Amen
3 Pater, Ave and Gloria will end with

St. Michael the Archangel defend us in battle, be thou our difesacontro the malice and snares of the devil that God exercises his dominiosu him, we humbly pray you do, and do thou Prince of miliziecelesti with the power of God cast into hell Satan and altrispiriti evil that roam the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen
HALLOWEEN: THE gourds of Arrigo Muscio
SYMBOLS AND HIDDEN - October 31, is an important day not only in Celtic culture, but also in Satanism. And 'one of the four witches' sabbath. The first three seasons marked the time for "beneficial": the awakening of the earth after the winter, the time of sowing, time of harvest. The fourth Sabbath marks the arrival of winter and the "defeat" of the sun, cold, hunger, death. The Catholic feast of All Saints is not tied to Halloween, was instaurala by Pope Gregory IV in the year 840, was originally celebrated in May and November 1. It was in 1048 that Odilo de Cluny decided to move the Catholic celebration in early November in order to dethrone the worship of Samhain. In English the day before is called "All Hallowed Eve", which later became Halloween.
"Halloween is a matter of culture, is a form of economic colonization of our country (and everyone else), is a commercial gimmick, and want to have fun, is the night where anything goes, is a way to entertain children, so ... HAPPY HALLOWEEN! With these words, or who knows what else with this hope there is going to decorate shops, parties, teaching English to children in mododivertente, or improvise some disguised in school, or office. "Meanwhile," My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge "(Hosea 4:6), as is the case for magic and tuttoquanto the wheel around and including the next new age (pranotherapy, Bach flowers, pyramids, profumoterapia, music therapy, reiky courses, etc.): Most personeanche of the Catholic, do not know that violates the fundamental rules of the AB relationship with God: The 1st Commandment: "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me." BEFORE YOU ACT, YOU KNOW, 1. THE MEANING - Halloween is the contracted form of the English "All Hallows'Eve day" that letteralmentesignifica Halloween .2. The applicant - Halloween, although not as it should be said, and a magical celebration (in fact, the magic and exercise power in a covert, against someone). The world of the occult so defines it: "It 's the most magical day of the year, and New Year around the esoteric world, is the most important holiday of the year for the followers of Satan."
contrast, the Bible says: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who change darkness into light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter "(Isaiah 5:20) .3. LEGEND - The ancient Irish legend says that Jack, a blacksmith wicked, perverse and stingy, a night of All Saints, after yet another drink, he was seized by a fatal attack of liver cirrhosis. The devil in claim his soul is tricked by Jack and is forced to satisfy some of his wishes, including leaving it in life, coming to an agreement to waive the soul of the reprobate. Jack, unaware of the effect of the disease, died a year later. Rejected in Paradise, Jack has no place even in hell because of the pact with the devil. A way of ritual the poor man carving a large putting greens in the flaming fire to the place of eternal damnation. This lantern, Jack, ghost, come back into the world of vivi.4. TRADITION - The Irish hit by famine, immigrated to America around 1850. Landed in the New World, they found a huge amount of sugar that, unlike native dellepiccole turnips were large enough to be carved. So the pumpkin replaced the turnip and became the Jack O'Lantern. Use the night of All Saints' Day because it was believed to ward off the restless spirits of the dead who were trying, like Jack, to go home. Children dress up as today's restless spirits, who can not find "peace" in the Paradise and visits to families are led by lantern pumpkin and get sweets exchange for their "kindness". "Trick-or-treat" is the custom of "trick or treat." Trick or treat literally means "trick or fun," "trick or pleasure," but that the original meaning of "curse or sacrifice" .5. HISTORICAL FACTS - The Legend of Jack dark hidden historical facts and, in a magical way, aims to evoke. Some centuries before Christ, a secret he kept under his empire the Celtic world. Each year, October 31st, Halloween day, this celebration in honor of their pagan gods, a festival of death. The elders of the sect went from house to house demanding deals for their god, and it happened that demanding human sacrifices. In case of refusal, uttered the curse of death on the house, hence was born the "trick or treat" 6. Considerations on the ... READ: This is mounted on the double lie that man can be more cunning of the devil and that the gates of Inferis close to someone. Also develops in satanic practices: Ask the devil the fulfillment of desires, unpatto do with the devil, Satan's mandate to make themselves known to mankind, esoterica.TRADIZI0NE ritual: the phenomenon of Halloween, the tradition, customs and trade, is a set rituals and the practice of witchcraft is for those who do so knowingly or no.STORIA: the story behind the phenomenon reveals that there have been Halloween satanic rituals and sacrifices. In our day sappiamoche the satanic practice of human sacrifice during this notte.7. Warning: Halloween is 'substantial MAGIA.S' requires un'irremovibile stance on all that is served up to Halloween and magic genere.Consideriamo that the words we proclaim, the gestures we make, the looks that we are not neutral, but signify the spiritual reality that they represent.
Parents, we are careful to let our children become accustomed, or even worse, be educated in the occult.
Teachers, informiamoci the truth hidden behind the macabre creativity, we might offend, to our knowledge and without their knowledge, the students that there are davanti.Certe nursery rhymes that children must learn are the evocations spirit of death.
Young and old, we realized not to cling to the esoteric world through mass rituals, feasts such as those dedicated to Halloween, there are proposed. Some dance groups have initiation rituals satanic.
retailers and consumers, we have the courage to say NO to promote articles which, under the guise of the masked, disseminate and create esoteric mentality. Many items sold in the consumer products are amulets, or reproductions thereof, used in witchcraft.
Christians, let us not be misled by apparent traditions and fashions, but we hold high the victory that overcomes the world, our faith (cf. 1 John 5:4). Do not forget that the disastrous consequences inhalation magic are not immediate but become apparent after many years in depression, crisis and violenze.8. SYMBOLS - Bats, cats blacks, the full moon, witches, ghosts ... these symbols have little to do with Samhain vigiliadi. However, these symbols used in the occult world who have found a place "natural" to "Halloween." The full moon is the perfect time to practice certain rituals occult. Cats blacks are associated with witches because of superstition, it was believed that witches could transfer their minds into a cat, and for this reason they always had one. Are attributed to the bats ability occulteperchè have characteristics of a bird (which are symbols hidden in the world soul) and the devil (because they live in darkness). In the Middle Ages it was believed that the devil is often transformed into a bat. Thus becomes clear why the bat has become part of Halloween. The origins of Halloween are closely related to magic, witchcraft and Satanism. The followers of Satanism and magic recognize the December 31 one of the most important days of the year: on the eve of a new year for witchcraft. Because of its roots and essence of the occult influence Halloween opens a door hidden in people's lives. The emphasis of Halloween is about fear, death, the spirits, witchcraft, violence, the demons. And children are very impressionable at this field. Many symbols are very clear in various products including food, in this period: swastikas, devils, etc..
The Word of God, the teachings of all the Catholic Tradition, by Christian primecomunità to date are very clear, 150 are the passages of Sacred Scripture from the leaf (never abolished by Jesus Christ) to the New Testament, prohibit the use of more or less oblivious to magical practices, esoteric, occult, spiritualist, and so on. For example, Deuteronomy, in chapter 18, verses 9-14 says: "When you enter the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, do not learn to commit the abominations of the nations that abitano.Non be found among you anyone who sacrifices, passing them off the fire, his son or his daughter, or who face spells, or who consults the spirits and soothsayers, nor who interrogate the dead, that whoever does these things is detestable to the Lord ... Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God, because the nations which you go in to occupy the country, listen to the soothsayers and magicians, but as for you, so do not you allowed the Lord your God. "In essence, the night of Halloween , those who participate in various "celebrations" in one way or another more or less unconsciously are actual rituals that make contact with spirits, which are nothing more than the fallen angels: the demons. The spiritual structure that surrounds man, comecreatura fact is very simple: there is God the only Son Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit (the Triune God), the Angels (in different hierarchies) and the fallen angels, that the demons with their boss: Lucifer, who became Satan. Then there are the souls of the Offences-Saints, Purgatory, and those damned to hell. The man and an embodied spirit, composed of three distinct components: soul, body and spirito.9. HOPE - Despite the harsh reality of phenomena such as Halloween, we must say of the great hope cheviene by Faith Christian Church, its also divided into many new and emerging reality, the Holy Spirit is also raising the birth, training and growth of Christian communities within the Catholic Church. Community who work with parishes, bringing new vitality evangelica.Sempre younger, although this news did not say, but you www.papaboys.it, are discovering and accepting Jesus, Messiah, Savior and Lord and want to dedicate their lives to Him. More and more families, after experience of the Holy Spirit want to live where to find food allafame experience of communion that today, the world complaint.
Faith is necessary to experience God's love but not enough, it takes the community, the Church and variety in his joints and anti-charging calls. "No fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, rather than report it openly." I want to do the will Papaboys of God and therefore make this work of information, proper, and we believe it useful, even for the Church's own structures, often unaware of the above. Also several Italian bishops in dioceses are spreading informazioniriportate.Molti groups, movements, Catholic associations, the night of October 31 will gather in prayer or Christian festivals organized with the participation of alternative groups, singers and songwriters of contemporary Christian music of various genres and particularly, on that occasion, a contemporary Praise and Worship.

Halloween as the EU constitution ( Mario Mauro Vice President of European Parliament )
Il Giornale, Liguria edition, 06 November 2005 p.2Nella his homily for the Solemnity of All Saints, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone has wisely pointed out the exaggerated role that is given to the so-called Halloween. It is indeed regrettable that public institutions such as the Municipality of Genoa and the East Central District, have favored such an event, ephemeral and purely commercial. This gives us an important starting point for reflection on the tasks of the institutions and the importance of our roots. We look to the European Constitution. The problem is the cement of our continent on which to build European integration. The problem is setting up a daughter of a generation of politicians are afraid of everything and its opposite, because the logic of the folded consent and the exercise of power as an end in itself, devoid of high ideals. A clear sign that the biggest problem is the inability to restore the dignity of the peoples of Europe. For too long, everything was sacrificed to Europe bureaucracies much more widespread and pervasive that the only bureaucracy in Brussels. Hopelessly bureaucratic enemies of their people, much to tolerate the moral and cultural desertification. For institutions at all levels of government will be seeking an urgent duty to answer the question "What do you believe in Europe?". Europe is a continent not fully grasped in terms of geography, but a cultural and historical concept. The man must be aware on the ultimate meaning of things. This is a battle for freedom, the battle of our time to make our company a free society than the models fundamentalists and relativists towards which we are dangerously avvicinando.06/11/2005

Saturday, October 20, 2007

Baby Lockgrace Sewing Machines

Conference in Rome Friday, Oct. 26: A form and face of the Italian Risorgimento


The resurgence is a milestone in the history of our country. But behind the facade of the celebrations and commemorations lies another story: a story of ambiguity, uncomfortable and a little-known history dominated by occult powers and ideologies.
spoke Gulisano Paolo (historian and essayist)
Friday, October 26
in the parish of St. Martin Pope
Via Veii, 37 (S. Giovanni) Rome
Info: 349/0707557

Monday, October 15, 2007

Darker Shades Of Blonde

DOMINATED CULTURE. THE MODERN 'is the current' THE LIGHT CHRISTIAN EVENT


cycle of meetings: " DOMINATED CULTURE ". Second year 0.2007-2008 " Modernity and its timeliness in light of the Christian event .
For the second consecutive year, " Culture Dominated "Offers a percorsoattraverso the issues and the ongoing challenges and fascinating inun'otticarealmente alternative to the dominant culture." Place and time of meetings: - All meetings will be held at 21:00, at the church of St. Martin I Pope, Via Veio n.37 - (S. Giovanni area), Rome.


- Participation includes a contribution-free beads expenditure organization For more information contact ilnumero: 3490707557


Calendar of events: Friday, 26 October2007

: MASK AND THE FACE OF THE ITALIAN NATIONAL REVIVAL ( Paolo Gulisano, historical Wise ) -


Friday, November 30, 2007: ideologies of the twentieth century and their roots anti-Christian ( Adolfo Morganti, historical Wise ) -


Friday, January 25, 2008: THE OTHER SIDE OF MODERNITY: L 'HIDDEN BY THE NEW AGE MASONRY ( Giancarlo Marletta, essayist, historical ) -


Friday, February 29, 2008: DARWINISM: FROM FAILURE TO SUCCESS SCIENTIFIC IDEOLOGICAL ( Giovanni Monastra, Biologist ) -


Friday, March 28, 2008: each pulse 'RIGHT? The IDEOLOGIALIBERTINA BY THE MARQUIS DE SADE GAY PRIDE ( Adolfo Morganti, psychologist ) -


Friday, April 18: FUNDAMENTAL: PARODY OF MODERN RELIGION ( Louis Cupertino, journalist and essayist ) -


Friday 9Maggio: INFORMATION OR MANIPULATION? The mass media and mass consciousness ( Mauro Mazza, Director of TG2 )


by: - \u200b\u200bAss Cult. "European Identity area Lazio ( http://www.identitaeuropea . org / ) -

Publishing House "The Circle" ( http://www.ilcerchio.it/ ) -

Library Literary Cafe "Aachen" (www.aquisgrana.org)

Sunday, October 7, 2007

Does Dr. Bernstein Work

Catholic faith, secularism and secularism (Adversus G. Zagrebelsky)



Di Cosmo Intini
(Part Three)




The worst blasphemy of secularism is perhaps precisely this: to deny the Church to act in truth "name" and then "of faith" Christ Jesus! Here's how it is still critical: "If his people (the Church) are attributed to the full possession of so confusing it with the spirit world that they are, how can the Church not also apply to the inexorable law of all the institutions 'secular' to fouling is the corruption of their members and, ultimately, I'm overwhelmed? At the beginning of the third millennium, Pope John Paul II has deemed it necessary to ask God's forgiveness for an impressive string of misdeeds of the Catholic Church, all caused by admixture of faith and worldly power. It 'was an admission of guilt to the past but nothing prevents other admissions to assume that tomorrow will be repeated with regard to our present, when it also passed. "[I]
introduce reflections on the primary way by which to understand the "Day of Forgiveness", expressly desired by John Paul II celebrated March 12, 2000, we would be inappropriate and excessive digressions: therefore disclaim there! But we can not remain silent about the distortion and bias with which the subject is here introduced by Zagrebelsky. This request for forgiveness is in fact re-read instrumentally by secularism and taken as an excuse to justify their anti-clericalism, as clear evidence of both the "fallibility" of the Catholic Church as the "wickedness" of its hierarchy, generally prone to collusion of convenience with powerful politicians! "The Church of Christ reduced at the table of a game, "[II] will say elsewhere in the tone of an outraged right-thinking!
But things are not so, because forgiveness is not invoked by the Church as an institute for itself, but for all their children, nor to endorse a kind of "historical revisionism", but for the purification of memory, and even to judge individuals responsible, but to reiterate its general faith in God's mercy
Having thus tried in various ways to deny the Church the actual and lawful possession of His attributes of "unity, holiness, catholicity and apostolic, "just then throws Zagrebelsky finally the mask to reveal the real purpose of aggressive secularism against the Catholic hierarchy: the de-legitimization, through it, the Church in its entirety. He says immediately after: "... we can say that ... the reduction of Christianity is a sin in the Church (sic) against the spirit." [III]
We are still the usual opportunistic contradictions! Christianity can not be reduced to the Church, yet when it suits them, The one recognizes a certain credit related to that: "... (Christianity) over the centuries has caused moments of terrible oppression, now condemned by the Church itself! [IV ] So, with "liberal magnanimity" The sweetener is allowed at least: "What is it? So ... the Church recognize the full right to participate, together with others, the definition of our collective identity, but in moral equality with any other party without the Christian name would justify a claim of incontestable. "[V] Despite
" prudery "shown on several occasions by Zagrebelsky - for example in stating to worry about providing" a solid ground to establish the harmony between believers and nonbelievers that we seek, "[VI] or even later recognized where" open the scope of a broader partnership ... (whose) job are called, at the same time and with the same responsibility to the democratic coexistence, and lay believers "[VII] - if the claim is that it must speak with the secularism that longs to bring the Catholic Church to compromise in the name of a dialogue "which is actually only put partisanship on the basis of their relativism. Since there can never be any dialogue between two parties but only sterile monologue, unless you decide to donate at least advance the same meaning to the terminology to be used and to recognize the same value to the concepts that are put in place, well, a closer examination it is established as a secular democracy by nature a priori attitude "Anti-dialogue," because it allows everyone from the outset the "Babel" legitimacy of each based on their language! Get words to the Church to surrender their spiritual incontestable in the name of such a "distorted" dialogue is not only symbolic in its offensiveness and its arrogance, but it is also indicative of a conscious deception: what it is intended that, with the ' deception, to silence her forever submerged by the "noisy" chaos of relativism!
E 'in this context only, and not otherwise, that can and should be read in fact sharing Zagrebelsky shows that enthusiastic about the ideas of D. Bonhoeffer, Protestant theologian, when these "... the draft outlines of a theology 'without God' or, more precisely, a theology that leaves the God of religion, personified by the historic churches ...: a theology that makes it possible even if, indeed, precisely because the God of religion does not exist (anymore). In the 'age of majority of the world', a world that 'sufficient unto itself' and 'work without God', and no less well than before thanks to the extraordinary development of scientific, ethical and artistic they are even able to exorcise the ' extreme fear of death by treatment of the psyche (sic) - Bonhoeffer says - There is no place for the deus ex machina of religion because it has failed ... this God who proclaim the truth from the cross, the throne of the world, opens the time of faith in suffering God 'who allows himself to kick off the world '(sic) and we know that free and problematically purified by faith, and selfless' demythologizing.' "[VIII]
Given the fact that the" throne of Christ in the world "is the" throne of Peter, "Well "kick God out of this world" precisely equivalent to "undo the Catholic Church"! Words of such a "monstrosity" may not be short uttered only by those who intend to replace Jesus Christ with that famous "prince" who is master of "this world"!

smuggle everything behind a screen to presume what might be the "dialogue" between believers and nonbelievers means distorting the real and most correct meaning that is implied in that term! The question invites us to a words needed clarification in the light of the fact that it "dialogue", whose implementation is, however, still hoped for from his own Church, as is too often a misunderstanding of the topics on which to base its demagogic secularism claims. In this case
demagogy is to ride the incorrect assumption that the "dialogue", in accordance with the principle of egalitarianism and libertarianism "- passed off as" equality and freedom "- represents the democratistic" discussion process in which two opposites are developing a unit to be replaced by a higher time synthesis! However it should be objected that this definition lies in reality the term "dialectic" than that of "dialogue", which means but its etymology with a very different meaning and significance!
there is to say first that the claim of "non-believers secularists", mounted in the wake of statements by the council, having to use right to a dialogue with the Catholic Church on a par with any "dialogue" - an attitude that it is on the other hand more and more specifically accepted by the Church itself, precisely after Vatican II, as vital sign availability of duty to the Catholic faithful of other religions in the light of recognition in the latter the actual presence of "elements of truth and goodness" - in an unlawful postulates by overlapping each other quite different contexts (cultural systems and religions ) betrays, once again, the perpetration dell'inconfessata hoax, which has already mentioned above, made from a conception of democracy idolatrous. But apart from this, although it is true that "the right to freedom of conscience and especially religious freedom, proclaimed by the Declaration Dignitatis Humanae, is based on the ontological dignity of the human person and in no way on a non-existent equality among religions and between human cultural systems, "[ix] But neither the non-Catholic religious doctrines nor cultural ones, however erroneous, then the council have the same value. On the contrary, "the affirmation of freedom of conscience and religious freedom does not contradict the condemnation of indifference to and religious relativism by Catholic doctrine, is indeed fully consistent with it. "[X]
So what is the sense with which to understand the desire on the part of the Catholic Church to establish a" dialogue "with those to which nothing can give your teaching that could lead to the slightest renunciation is the centrality of Jesus Christ than himself, as his only true church? Perhaps never before in this case is illuminating to consider the etymology of the term according to it are issues that are more immediately!
Well, it derives from the greek dia-logos, "dialogue" literally means "through, through, because of the word. " Therefore, since in this case the word that is uttered by the Spirit of Truth through the Church of Christ, then it coincides precisely with what usually is expressed with the Greek word "Logos": namely, the Word, the word absolute, the Christ itself. This word is then given by the Catholic Church to be "dialectically" inserted in a debate, but much more precisely to be "announced" and that is what is really the "dialogue par excellence! After all the greek dialegomai verb, the noun from which it originates Dialogos, means precisely "Conversely, speak, reason, explain; while for its part the same noun Dialogos translates, in one of its most ancient meanings, even "hearing"! From this it follows that if ultimately the most proper concept of "dialogue" does not make any sense at all "imposition", however it does not even make any sense of "debatable"!
The Catechism states that the conviction of the Church can and must operate the dialogue with other religions and with non-believers, has its basis in the belief that human reason "can and should know God." [XI ] And also it is said: "The missionary activity (which can certainly also be added the pure and simple testimony, note) implies a respectful dialogue with those who do not yet accept the Gospel ... If it (the believers) proclaim the Good News to those who ignore it, is to consolidate, complement and elevate the true and good God has distributed among men and peoples, and to purify them from error and evil. "[xii]
When secularism (and through it the democratism) stands the principle of dialogue to his chief virtue, however, accusing the Church Catholic is a fault, does in fact a triple anti-Christian hoax: appropriates a value in an absolute sense belongs only to the Church of the Logos; subverts this value must be given a meaning quota that is not the real one, and the "return it to sender", so to speak, by availing themselves as an instrument of revenge and revolt. Behold, what do you think Zagrebelsky: "Democracy is the possibility of research must mobilize against those who reject dialogue, tolerance, denies, search only the power, believed to be always right. Criticism of democracy and goodness - as open-minded attitude of the common discourse, which seeks not to persuade but to win and is willing to be convinced - certainly is the cardinal virtue. But only the Son of God could be as gentle as a lamb. In politics, the gentleness, not to be as mocking stupidity, must be Under a mutual. If not, at some point before the end, we must break the silence and to cease to be. "[XIII]
derives from that observed in short all the 'unreliability" of the secularist-democratic constitution, with good availability, to have received a dialogue with the Catholic Church, and what precisely the nature Vistani apart, by his own admission, retention of each to make their case except in the light of resentment and rebellion! Beyond the apparent calmness of those words that praise the gentleness, the ambiguity in which it falls when you declare Zagrebelsky democratically "willing to be convinced," shows indeed a clear hypocrisy. First, because it is neither operable nor appropriate to a too easy equation of attitude that is "available to the change of opinion" - that is devoid of any real effort of abdication, operated by those who, like him, just think relativistically in the equal validity of different "opportunities" - with the ontological impossibility for the Church to "be convinced" to change their beliefs on issues that are contrary to the truth. And also because it establishes clearly that the difference is to be placed between the so-called "mild" from the vaunted secularism - However, he wrongly assumed the role of a "cardinal virtue", that it is actually more precisely one of the twelve fruits of the Holy Spirit (see Galatians 5:22-23 vulgar.) - And "gentleness" Christian that it is relativized (once again) from being able and wanting to exist only in reciprocity, this is absolute for its existence ever fin'anche in martyrdom! The fan
need and duty of the so-called "mild democratic" to finally stand up to "break the silence and to cease to be, with his proud conviction of never having to comply to avoid the danger of being nell'umiliante mistaken for "weakness" (which is really the true sense of the word "stupidity"), betrays a rather ill-concealed the existence of a vocation to want to impose on each other with the "strength". It does not matter the cross-specification that anything is true in a more specifically "political"! In fact, the irreverent and casual mention of the mildness of the "son of god" (written symbolically all lower case), in the irony that puts you on the edge of blasphemy confirms that Zagrebelsky, the much desired deference to the rules secularist must be implemented and also taken by those who persist in wanting to recognize Christ as their model: starting from the hierarchy then! And that this is an explicit reference to the Church, is also confirmed by his further statement, "The Church wants to be 'dialoguing'. Unfortunately, however, adopted a friendly attitude exterior, the interior does not seem changed. The parties continue to be considered not as different but as the lower the moral and rational. "[Xiv] For
Zagrebelsky therefore the Church" rejects dialogue, denies tolerance, the only real power, believes being right: "... the other party non-Catholic, the Church, is one who, in morality and rationality, is worth little or nothing, is that the circumstances lead to a bear (sic), but for which you'd rather avoid ... The dialogue is not a question of conviction but expediency dictated by force majeure or tactical reasons. "[xv] As a result, apart from the contradictory question whether or not the actual tolerance of the Church, those who are oppressed by it with arrogance, there is nothing legitimate that "rebellion"!
We observe in this regard and what one might read in the light of a full-blown case of nomen omen, that such a character prone to "revolt" against the hierarchy Catholic repeatedly revealed itself to be Zagrebelsky, nightspots curiously harmonious reflected in the fact that the decomposition of his name comes out the word "rebel-sky", which in English translates to "rebel to heaven! While "-zag", for its part, is significant relevance with the German "zach" which means "pointy thing" as well as with the English "Zaga", "rear, tail." Moreover, the "zig-zag" means "snake" and Russian "zagovor" translates "conspiracy" but also "exorcism"! We call this
perhaps some process, and then some also issue a verdict? Absolutely not, because it is not our intention to judge, but only express contingencies even singular objective. Moreover, because the positivist and materialist secularism could never condescend to consider such operations semantic nothing more than play games without any scientific sense, and then practice!
However, in a surprising way Zagrebelsky just let go a reflection of this kind: "It happens sometimes ... however, that the Catholic side, even upper class, is invoked today to allegations of collusion demonic, not just a manner of speaking (the reduction figures in the faith of symbols is doomed) waves, the writer This article may be an adept, at best irresponsible, of Satan. "[XVI]
The speech here is inserted in the larger context of the" moral issue "which should not ask for Zagrebelsky" ... in terms of a trivial list of merits and demerits. No one should venture to assert the primacy of this kind. There can be a competition like this, where all risk of leaving battered. "[Xviii] In other words, according Zagrebelsky the Catholic hierarchy (the Catholic" upper class "), already the victim of his eccepibilità a moral, not with arrogance to recognize the moral superiority of Christianity precisely - Let alone in its - on secularism, however, silenced him, in extreme cases, even explicit collusion with evil! And to substantiate its argument concludes, "postulates an external moral, provided by an authority, even as the divine father, means, in the great conversation about freedom that occupies a famous chapter (II, 5, 5) of the Karamazov, right and wrong to give the Inquisitor to Christ. "[XVIII]
not go into details an analysis of the highly praised here," famous chapter of Dostoevsky's novel, nor a contradiction with the numerous entries that secularist, riding content note "Legend of the Grand Inquisitor, which is alluded to here, they also endeavor to establish and then confirm (for them) whether there is a rift between Christ and His Church hierarchy (in this case personifies the Inquisitor), Church therefore charged with having just it, an identity "antichrist." For an instant refutation of these slanderous statements, that claims against any temptation to recognize and enact any truth content of the text in question all we need only observe that it is not, nor can it claim that it is more than what is his due be: a narrative and non-sacred, a representation made by human invention and certainly not a writing attributed to a divine revelation! A
Zagrebelsky But like almost convinced of the "sacred" authority of the text, much to mention it as a model in more than one occasion [XIX] and even the publication of devoting an entire essay, thus forging a "truth" ad hoc and demanding also that it will be accepted by Catholics themselves as the most suitable for them!
The confusion between truth and verisimilitude, the latter being the only quality that can be granted for a novel, although it is subject of philosophical and religious, goes hand in hand with confusion perpetrated repeatedly between "morality" individual and "moral law" to him outside! If the first is indicative of the freedom enjoyed by the human person as such, ie owner to act according to a review of consciousness may suggest that, by virtue of greater or lesser reason, acts of "good or bad", while the second is the "work of divine wisdom ... a father's teaching, a pedagogy of God, "[XX], which is ratified, that" issued by competent authority for the common good ... It presupposes the rational order established among creatures ... It 's declared and established by reason as a participation in the providence of the living God, Creator and Redeemer of all. The sort of reason (the Logos, note), here is what is called the law. "[Xxi] This repeats the word autonomy, freedom, but not the independence of morality to moral law, and the specification value of a response to all questions and doubts raised in a purely artistic and philosophical point of doctrine and theology, including the novel by Dostoyevsky, in which the investigator represents, but is certainly not the Church, and the prisoner is, but certainly is not Jesus!

Even the morality of human beings who make up the hierarchy can not circumvent the requirements of "addiction" the "moral law" is obvious! But the claim of legitimacy accuse them of speaking "on behalf" of the moral law and thus effectively ratify the principles, though moral imperfection of human nature, well, this means will, in a subtle, reject the divinity of Jesus Christ giving him only his humanity! But the mystery is this: Christ is God, he is a man! And according to both people, human and divine, will always be next to the church: "I am with you always, until the end of the world" (Mt 28:20)! It 's just the "great tempter" who can seduce a lie, it is only the "big mystifying" that can instill doubt, it is only the "great rebel" that can incite to revolt!
Certainly, at the end of all this discussion against the temptation, deception, rebellion secularist, we do not want to hide the crisis of morality and authority in recent times suffered from the hierarchy. But if your morals are in crisis, namely the ability to adhere to the moral law, and His authority, ie the ability to gain the popular view, however, can not be called into question his authority in dispensing really the moral law.
On the other hand this is not even have to worry that the faithful lay, in part because "... that servant who knew his master's will, and does not have according to the will of him, will be severely whipped, and he who does not know, but work to deserve the beating, shall receive a less. Much will be required of one who has received a lot, and the more you require from one to whom much has been entrusted "(Lk 12, 47-48). This represents a clear warning to the "shepherds" whose leadership has been "entrusted with the flock of Christ! Warning which, if not absolve the flock, at least release him from a lot of responsibility!
On the other hand, in a somewhat "mirror" well that deserves mention is made here that passage of Gaudium et Spes, which recognizes that "... the power of God often shows the strength in the weakness of the witnesses of the Gospel" (IV, 76)! Which is this time an "encouragement" at all the believers not to despair, while not exonerating them from their responsibilities.
As the only true believers and therefore "secular," because their desire not to be confused with the atheists "secularists," we can not and must not fall into the same trap to operate their "de-legitimizing" anti-Christian game: namely that there would be a problem would be attributable to the exclusive responsibility of the hierarchy. Apply rather than the repeated calls that are persistently (if not begging) come from a certain part of the hierarchy itself, because it remedies the lack of effective presence of a strong proposal and determined that it is in fact "purely and legitimately lay "and, therefore, aimed to" protect "the Church in the world and the world. This is indeed the primary function of the laity, the "ministry" that is relevant to them! Val
well to remember what precisely should write Attilio Mordini:
"Saying no intention of moving this process to the clergy. The problem concerns only the laity, and the causes are to be found in the affirmation of Guelphism. By the clergy, indeed, there have been many laudable attempts to change the situation for the better, but everything is useless unless you climb to the very root causes ... Responding to the needs of their time meant, in the era of Christianity and equestrian really militant , fight for ever and ever, and with the same tenacity, heresies typical of the moment, and then establish a civil system suitable for the defense of institutions and souls from the disease which in turn rushed to the Church. But in modern times, to live their time means, in practice, comply with the heresies of the century looking a modus vivendi with them, provided that it is prejudice to comply with the precepts of the Church. For a long time, organizations of the Catholic laity were no longer ongoing at the advent of the enemies of Christianity and civilization in a word, Catholics were no longer able to fight. "[Xxii]
We conclude, therefore, , summing up the thought: today lacks the Cavalry that could stand as a defensive bulwark against the wiles Antichrist who aim to dismantle the castrum of the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ aedificium; those pitfalls of which secularism is precisely democratistic the ram to break through and which Zagrebelsky has proven to be one of the most dangerous bearers!

September 29, 2007 (the feast of St. Michael the Archangel, patron of chivalry)

Cosmo Intini
Assoc. Studies of Chivalry "St. Joseph of the Lioness"





[I] Idem, pg.87.
[II] Idem, pg.159.
[III] Idem, pg.87.
[IV] Idem, pg.48.
[V] Idem, pg.87.
[VI] Idem, pg.17.
[VII] Idem, pg.23.
[VIII] Idem, pg.18.
[ix] Doctrinal Note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of 24/11/2002.
[X] Ibid.
[XI] See Catechism of the CC, 39.
[XII] Idem, 856.
[XIII] G. Zagrebelsky, The Crucify and democracy, Einaudi, Torino 1995.
[xiv] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.146.
[XV] Idem, pg.148.
[XVI] Idem, pg.146.
[xviii] Ibid.
[XVIII] Idem, pg.147.
[xix] See idem, pgg.23, 118, 146, 147.
[XX] Catechism of the CC, 1950.
[XXI] Idem, 1951.
[XXII] A. Mordini, The temple of Christianity. For a rhetoric of history, The Circle, Rimini 2006, p.139.

Saturday, October 6, 2007

Rockstar Grill For 2010 Chevy

Catholic faith, secularism and secularism (Adversus G. Zagrebelsky)


Di Cosmo Intini
(Second Part)


As outlined, therefore, the "no confidence" secular existential perspective, just as "free of custody and security" (in a word as "faithless"), is revealed clearly, and "desperate", as well as subject to the ' genius "even the" fate "and" need. " And in fact, admits Zagrebelsky: "None of us, ordinary mortals, can never aspire ... to shake off our world to put on another. None of us will ever think of giving a meaning, a direction to his and others' lives and turn them into something totally different. " [i]
Completely alien to the Christian concept of recognizing in "cooperation" between free will and human action "evidence" of God's grace the way for the realization of the "vocation" of man to his "transcendence", that vision morbidly adherent to the secularist assumptions shows all his "anti-humanist" in the reaction which gives rise. In fact, the obvious mortification of the fundamental and tutt'affatto "natural" human yearning to "break quality" of his own limitations, when it involves one part in a resolution of no confidence "operated from the outside" (from what is of "ontological quality" different and higher) on the other can not simultaneously avoid creating a "autodivinizzazione," an "idolatrous myth" of its values \u200b\u200b"quantitative" precisely because it demands a compensation of mortification all'innaturalità said. Because, of course, the secularist-man aspires to the "best": "... the meaning of life ... is to work together ... so that the condition of the labyrinth that is the human condition, to be gradually made more bearable, more humane, less unjust, " [ii] well, with an ontological subversion the "ipervalori" are lifted up to be confused with "metavalori. The term "salvation," but only that which "will be by ourselves! There is talk of "virtue", but only those that "man proposes itself as such"! The "democratic values" become "metavalori! [iii] And so forth!
The great confusion perpetrated by Zagrebelsky focuses on the claim to reduce the Christian faith in "human morality" on the "immortal life of the hereafter" where, in parallel, the secular-democratic principles are the "foundations of moral life the wing of here. " [iv] Thus, faith is to be "unnatural" and "in context" so much so that he adds: "... does not consider the possibility that here, in freedom, there can be a real moral worth ... at least as much faith in promises of rewards and punishments. " [v] Here we are, therefore, the reductive humanization also the third theological virtue, so that the "faith" remains indeed conceivable, but only as an ontological and moral option! And in this regard, recalling the 'prophetic warning of Solov'ev, "here's what has got to enforce HE Cardinal Giacomo Biffi: "... Christianity is reduced to mere humanitarian action in the various fields of assistance, solidarity, philanthropy, culture and the Gospel message identified in the commitment to dialogue among peoples and religions in search of welfare and progress, I urge you to respect nature, the Church of the Living God, the pillar and foundation of truth, mistaken for a charitable organization, aesthetics, socialize: this is the mortal danger that is looming today for the family of redeemed by the blood of Christ "! [vi]
Furthermore, an immediate consequence of this is that it becomes possible also operate in reverse, so that even the "moral wing of here," it can somehow imagine that "faith", as well as "love and hope": that is, as something that is transformed, getting rid of its primary field of dimension "profane"! Look Zagrebelsky fact that democracy "is always willing to correct ... ... (subject) its substantive and procedural conditions ... ..." consecrated "(sic) in intangible rules of the Constitution." [vii] E 'in the light of this reversal, which he defines as reductively "faith" as "concrete evidence", while it enhances the "democracy as" abstract value ", unless then holding it, with yet another opportunistic stunt rhetoric, itself a" faith "! [viii] Anyway, here is short, the groundwork for replacing the idolatry, the worship of Christ, the "sacred" worship of a totalitarian political system (ie "not limited or restricted by anything"): the "realm "Democrats just secularist!

E 'has been rightly said that "now ... everything has been incorporated under the cloak of democracy is like an atmosphere that embraces all and all it contains and outside of which there is only nothing ... In this way the nature, things, reality take a back seat in front of the new deity on the altar, if necessary, must be sacrificed ... The word democracy is used as a talisman entitled ... Modern democracy is presented as a real religion, though an atheist, because ... 'democracy is essentially religious, since every religion is based on dogma and ritual': 1) the doctrine is that the power derives from the people, and 2) the ritual is in the designation of those who wield power through the election. It 'a dogma that one must believe that his refusal will anathema, and even the persecution of' heretics politicians', to use the expression of J. Maritain. In this way we will establish a new era of justice and welfare, which is normal and inevitable consequence of democratic development: it is the heresy of the Grand Sillon Plus, condemned by St. Pius X, by making Christianity the needs of modern democracy in fact left him, proclaiming the independence of a man with the natural order ordained by God, religion is the heresy of democracy, that it is no longer to convert people to Catholicism, but to convert to Catholicism ideas modern. In this sense, one must speak of democracy as a religion. " [ix] In more than one occasion
Zagrebelsky advancing the 'insinuation "that the Catholic Church hide the (for him) reprehensible and shameful aversion to democracy. Indeed, without mince words, he often provides even their almost incompatibility: "religion, especially if organized hierarchically structured churches and faith are a democratic union difficult, not without its dramatic moments." [x] But what a nice discovery! How can he claim that the Church agrees to be overwhelmed by the degeneration of idolatry which we defined to be the "religion of democracy", which aims to appropriate anti-Christian His chief of the nature of "confession of worship" and then replace it with an attitude of true "aping"!?
The problem, in our view, is not whether the Church is "incompatible" with the democratic formula, but rather whether the democratic secularist religion today is compatible with the Church. This fact does not deny the diversity in itself, but can not share if it is designed in such a key, in fact, ethical relativism! If Zagrebelsky, with yet another ambiguity, on the one hand endorses the unacceptability of relativism by stating: "... This does not mean that democracy ... take ethical relativism as its substrate, [xi] or even that "democracy does not presuppose that moral relativism that the Magisterium of the Church rightly condemns" [xii] the other hand, immediately reveals instead its real position by proclaiming that democracy "... is based not only on a specific public ethos: the opening to the possible right to assert himself as payable to all forces and political ideas that respect the equal rights of others, but also requires different private conceptions of the common good "; [xiii] or even that" democracy is precisely the regime opportunity to explore, through discussion and debate and the logic of the lesser evil or greater good in the given conditions. " [xiv] And in addition to the admission that "democracy" is a true "religion" relativistic, not only writes the "Decalogue (sic) to learn democracy," [xv] but states plus "I, a little 'to provocation, I would say that we, as believers (sic) in democracy, we must assert relativism as the great advantage of democracy itself." [xvi]
His concern, in respect of an alleged "incompatibility" Church with democracy, thus born from an unlawful overlapping meanings in different realities, and conceal more than all the subtle claim that the Church always, in the name of their sincere approval of an absolute "equality ethics" of individuals, that ratifies surrogate which is represented by a fully relativistic "egalitarianism" between the individual! In other words, it should be the difference in philosophy between the so-called "equality as a fact" and the "equal value": the former equality is to be inferred based on the simple "fact" that "everyone is brothers, because all are children of God, "while in the latter equality derives from the requirement of a secular chief" value "to that" all should be equal "legally and politically (formal equality) as well as socially and economically (substantive equality)!
How can I understand now, this difference of interpretation of 'equality' means in short, a different way of understanding the concept of personal identity, ie, the "person" in the first case if the man is in fact also been perceived as a spiritual substance, in the second case, he is regarded only as a pure and simple collection of moods. From this discrepancy also follows, therefore, a different conception of ethics, as the Catholic inform their behavior in the light of awareness that the biological and sociological identity converges and is justified in a more theological identity - which is the thesis of the Thomistic '"substantial unity of the human person" -, while the secular, for its part, refuses to pass the first stage and considers the ethics free from any dogmatic precept. Now, Zagrebelsky states in a completely misleading, that "... in the report that the theologian of the Papal Household, Wojciech Giertych, recently held (12 February 2007, note) at the International Congress on natural law ..., it is recognized that human nature is not a biological concept or sociological, but, with Thomas Aquinas, theological. " [xvii] The tactic secularist insists that its subtle nature "disruptive" (dia-Ballico), distort the accuracy of the facts and overturn the consequences so that they are inherently more convenient! If it were as Zagrebelsky says, then admits the Christian view as "operator" a "bifurcation" of "human nature", his "Severability" component in "physical and mental, on the one part and component "spiritual", the other, and also would like to see also the "denial" of the first against an exclusive "exaltation" of the second. Well, if so, the result would be very similar to the Monophysite heresy! Evidently
by secularist, this is not only wants to defend its position by invoking a legitimate "right to freedom of opinion", but it tends to inoculate unlawfully distorted perspectives that they can immediately convert into as many "battering rams! When St. Thomas says that 'primum principium quo intelligimus, sive intellectus sive dicatur intellective soul, east form corporis', [xviii] this means that "... the self that we find in the body such as affective states (in some affective states) is the same that I, thinking, consciousness has to know, to contemplate the beauty of doing The man takes metaphysics ... as one. " [xix] He adds: 'ipse idem homo est percepit here if et et intelligere feel' [xx] . In the words of Archbishop Carlo Caffarra, "... therefore, the thesis aims to describe the substantial unity in the first place the fundamental human experience: the experience of the unity of the self in the plurality of specific its operations "! [xxi] For St. Thomas, then, human nature is not a concept "only" the biological and sociological, but "also" theological!
Zagrebelsky instead tries to show that the "natural reality" in the broadest sense - in particular meaning that is inclusive even of "human nature" - is, as it is conceived by the Catholic vision, a concept "unnatural" and therefore ironic perplexity asks: "What is the human being should understand considering his relationship with God the fundamental precepts of natural law would be seen only by means of metaphysical intuition the purpose of existence, an intuition of faith ... Fides et gratia, therefore, as a condition for the Christian discourse on nature: what's more 'unnatural' nature of this vision, from the point of view of those - legitimately, it is assumed again - is not a believer? Here's how nature can become a form of oppression. " [xxii]
The 'error' is here again in the secularist claim that the Church for what it takes for granted but it is not at all: a clear "severability" logic between the visible and invisible, a "irreducibility" ontological between the body and spirit, a "fracture" between the social and political ethics and religious context! Again it takes the typical work of his "dia-ballo"!

It 'clear that at this point, however, the discussion requires clarification of what is the meaning of principal by which to understand the term' nature ', located as it is the basis of the fundamental concepts of "natural world" and "human nature "and" natural law "! Here again
Zagrebelsky proceeds in a mystifying, because before arbitrarily assigned to the church membership to a mentality that is very simplistic in accordance with an "old injury "that arises as a base, the choice of ethical rules, the combination of" nature-artifice "as incorrectly set:" ... the original frame of mind, which affects the relationship between us and the world, is the contrast between what is natural and is outside us, and what is artificial and proceeds from within us. " [xxiii] After passing the de-legitimization of such "outdated way of thinking" that purported to tie himself to the Church, to delegitimize the Church: "... it is the current time, a time when even ' nature 'of human beings may be the product of his 'Trick' - the power of genetics - and the time when the inside and outside us, that we have become the subject and object are confused, frustrated in that distinction ... [xxiv] No wonder at all that just when has become untenable, the binomial nature-artifice has been rediscovered, to find in it the rule of human actions, a provision that gives the course the first on the artificial, synonymous with deceit, abuse, adultery ... So be it by the Church Catholic to oppose the changes in terms of unions, euthanasia, scientific experimentation, genetics, etc.., and to return to the old, in terms of family, contraception, abortion, etc... " [xxv]
The falsification of the terms of the speech made so secularism, unable to conceal the matrix from which it originates: the confusion! The same Zagrebelsky if you let slip when he says triumphantly that nowadays the subject and the object-person-person, inside and outside man, "merge"! No more short stays in place, neither logically nor ontologically or ethically!
If the distinction is believed to be wrong that there be an interruption between inside and outside of man - as well as between the visible and invisible, between the body and spirit, between the socio-political and religious -, but even this can not be understood in the sense that it is to implement the two elements of such a random and disorderly hendiadys "confusion." Rather, they will be implemented between an 'organic unity "or better to say, a mutual" subjectivity "(which is different than the" relativized ") which is made possible only ever in the light of an identical objective and absolute common denominator: God the Creator! According to the Catholic concept of "human nature", "... created in the image of God is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical expression this reality with a symbolic language when he says: 'God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being' (Genesis 2:7). The whole man is therefore willed by God ... [xxvi] The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul as the 'form' of the body, which means that because of the soul spiritual body, composed of matter, is a living human body, spirit and matter, man, two natures are not joint, but their union forms a single nature. " [xxvii] In Under this "unity" between soul and body, "... man sums up in himself, for his bodily, the elements of the material world, so that they, through him, and reach their high praise for their voice freedom in the Creator. So it is not lawful for a man to despise the bodily life, and he even has to look good and honorable one's body, precisely because it was created by God and destined for resurrection on the last day. " [xxviii]
Conceived in this way, then, the question can not be trivially reduced to a dichotomy of nature-artifice! Given that "the term designates soul ... also all that in man there is more intimate and more valuable, especially that for which he is the image of God, " [xxix] Well the Catholic Church does not" demonize "all that" proceeds from the inside 'man', as it is presented as the result of the arbitrary free soul and remains, for this, "an integral part of human nature itself." Moreover, Bishop Caffarra always had a way of expressing this, saying: "The body is the transparency of the human person, the only creature in which the invisible visible." [xxx]
not Accordingly, there is in human nature, no solution of continuity between its constituent inner-and outer-spiritual body, and in the absence of such a solution even its component body and the natural world outside of him - because of that his already mentioned here are to the divine will, as supreme synthesis of the natural world itself -, well, it is quite ironic and laughable to accuse the Church of "unnatural" because it carries the opposition against ethical relativism, and as such opposition is based on simple awareness that everything that the human person was made "against nature," must also "against human nature same! But the bias of
Zagrebelsky, commenced discovered in his attempt to defend the ethical relativism, does not stop here! To deny it the character of absoluteness of the "natural" and therefore its ethical superiority compared to the 'artificial', goes on to specify what their position on the legal concept of the "right". And so the formula: "In the field of justice, the opposition is reflected in the tension between natural law and positive law, ie legislation. Justice in the polis is of two kinds - Aristotle said -, the natural and the legal, natural justice is everywhere the same way and not because it is recognized or not. Legal justice, however, is that relating to what, originally, it is irrelevant and can vary in space and time. " [xxxi] Zagrebelsky practice here in quotes, "almost" in full, the pitch of the fifth book of the Nicomachean Ethics (V, 1134b 18-24) where it is enshrined in the traditional distinction between natural and positive law (or legal). Exposed like this, it would almost seem that according to Aristotle, this distinction not only puts the two rights on an equal footing, but even in spite of all the conclusions reached unanimously Aristotelian criticism, implicitly recognizes the legal right which justify a certain preference. In fact, it took Zagrebelsky "omit" the continuation of Aristotelian thought - which, after "... what, originally, it does not matter" as he continued: "... but that is irrelevant once it is established" - the suggestion to a reading that they seem almost as if Aristotle, without making any distinctions, to endorse the relativism of a right that "there always remains indifferent and moreover varies according to times and places! In truth, Aristotle not only never loses an opportunity to reaffirm the superiority of "natural" than the "legal" as well as the 'universal' compared to the "special", but additionally, always below the fifth book introduces the important concept of "fairness" - which obviously does not Zagrebelsky no mention - by which means: "the rectification of the positive law where there is insufficient for its universal character ", that" the correction made by the natural law of positive law in cases where it would be unfair to apply it "(see Nicomachean Ethics, V, 1137b 26-27). The importance of the concept of "fairness" in fact derives from the fact that it has authority to regulate what is considered right by law with what is considered right by nature. "Equity reaffirms the universal justice where it is inadequate for detail. The assumption, therefore, is inadequate compared to the universal ... But the composition of the universal (natural law) and particular (legal right, positive) made by equity is only apparent because, in reality, the particularizes' universal. This is not simply autonomize the particular respect for the universal or the particular hypothetical exemption from the universal rule, since, on the contrary, the homogeneity of universal justice and equity particular ... For Aristotle, the fairness a special form of justice and not a provision of a different kind (cfr.V, 1138th 2-3) ... The homogeneity of universal justice and equity particular thus refers to an additional justice in particular not only fairness, but the same universal justice is a special case. The justice further particularizes that the same universal justice is called by Aristotle 'justice in the first sense' and 'justice in the absolute sense'. " [xxxii]
So, to sum up: according to Aristotle, the positive law may be subject to error if not sufficiently adapted to the natural law and the fair, for its part, "Is right, and is better than a certain kind of right, not just in absolute terms, but the mistake that causes the formulation as absolute" (EN, V, 1137b 24-25). It was with this recognition of the existence of what he calls "the first right, or right in an absolute sense, Aristotle does in fact refer to something that has actually occurred prior to any expression in the form of law" and thus not only give a definitive no room for the slightest temptation-relativistic interpretation of positive type, but it clearly shows that it considered to be a point of view so-called "theological" as well as areas of physics and metaphysics, ethics giustappunto that too! [xxxiii]
To return to the relationship between natural and positive law, it is therefore fair to say that justice "... does not end in positive law. It is known that the issue was Aristotle ... (his) way of posing the problem has the merit to show that natural justice is not a legal body abstract, ahistorical and separated from the political right, but a component or a layer of this. The natural right is fundamental and originating layer of justice, the ultimate foundation of political legitimacy, but it is insufficient by itself to order social life. Therefore it must be materialized, determined and developed in the common good of all people from the political right for the Convention of the Law, ie, from the political right that we call here positive law. " [xxxiv]
Zagrebelsky Yet, despite everything, continues to plead that "... the natural law is not the way of consensus that embraces the whole of humanity in the name of justice universally recognized. In contrast is the land of the most radical conflicts. First, what is the 'nature' to which we appeal? If we turn to the past, we see a lot of confusion. For some, such as Christians, is God's work, but for others, the Gnostics, is the work of the devil ... Regardless of God and the devil, then, for some mother nature is beneficial and for others, evil stepmother. " [xxxv] And thus concludes: "... there is a kind of all recognizable. You can talk about nature, and thus the natural law, only from within a system of thought, a worldview, but systems and visions belong to cultures, not to nature. " [xxxvi]
The glaring flaw in this approach which it falls, the result of clear "ethical relativism" - attitude, then, that only seems to disavowed Zagrebelsky is elsewhere - is to be able to assume (And hence the need) to recognize an "ontological superiority" to "nature" and thus the "natural right", only on the basis of a mutual and total agreement! If so - that is if you could make such an assessment based on a simple criterion of opinion, belief system, vision of the world - to make such "superiority" not enough time, in accordance with the democratic spirit, even only a "majority"? And in fact we could say then that was precisely what was claimed to have occurred in the past, when Gnosticism manicheistico, the thought that, based on a conception of "dualistic" thought the natural world precisely "the devil", is not never constituted within the European-Christian culture more than a "minority" view, sectarian and heretical. [xxxvii] While, on the other hand, the accession "almost general" natural law in the classical sense of its value, then what would have been entitled would substantially as ethically superior! On the other hand, much less stand up approach based on an assessment that would take into account data such as the emotional and sentimental, just as such, constitute themselves as purely subjective and inevitably 'partial'! The same "vision" rationalistic forces, their lovers, which avoids indulging in positions that naively evaluate the "nature" on the basis of parameters such as "benign or malignant"!
Ultimately, if someone falls in the mistaken claim to give an opinion on any kind based approach to relativistic "cultural", well that's just Zagrebelsky! The assumptions of the Catholic Church are quite different in that they focus on "natural reason" understood as a dowry "absolute" and not merely accidental, the human being. Through reason, "of course" conferred ab initio from God, man takes in fact, their dignity, their freedom, their own will and power, and is what he is made "similar" to God himself, to which the same reason it is ordered! "The natural law is written and engraved in the soul of each and every man, for it is human reason which requires him to do good and forbidding him to sin ... This limitation of human reason, however, can not have the force of law unless it is the voice and interpreter of a higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be subject ". [xxxviii] And also: "The legislation human is in the nature of law to the extent that it accords with right reason, and thus it is clear that it draws its strength from the eternal law. To the extent that moves away from reason, it must be declared unfair, because it makes the concept of law: it is rather a form of violence. " [xxxix] In other words, the divine and natural law is so called "... not in relation to the nature of irrational beings but because reason which decrees it properly belongs to human nature." [xl]
Zagrebelsky Whatever they say is really no doubt that the "natural right", in addition to not being at all cause of confusion, and instead remained largely unchanged throughout history, indeed, it represents a decisive factor in the development of civil peoples and cultures: we have seen with Aristotle in the Hellenic world, but we can recognize in ancient Rome with the basic concept of ius gentium, as it was put to good governance and protection of justice. [xli] And as it was for Aristotle (he spoke before his theological ethics), even more so for the Roman world, the natural law, jus, metaphysical established intimate relations with the divine! It can be seen from the fact that "... jus (from 'ie * Yous), even before a deadline of the lexicon legal, means 'the rule of regularity, normality, rituals required by the rules' and requires that to which we must follow. Roman law is based on the absolute rule: jus proceeds from Fas which is inextricably linked as the cause and effect which has its justification. " [xlii] The Fas (BHA * from e-), for its part indicated "the living word in itself": where Fatum, that "the word appears, the will of God that becomes the standard and the law for men and the gods, "and Fastus that" what is right according to divine law and realizes it in the world! Cicero, moreover, taught that "... there is a true law: right reason, and it conforms to nature, is in all men, and is immutable and eternal, and his call to duty precepts, its prohibitions turn away from ... It ' replace it with a crime against a law it is forbidden to practice not a single provision, then no one has the chance to abolish it completely. " [xliii]
As is symbolically shown by the fact that often appears in the oldest sources of the significant sentence: Roman jure Vivit Ecclesia (the Church lives by Roman law), the Church then sinks its roots in this complex legal humus, that would be understatement want to define only an occasional "system of thought." The recognition shown by all major civilizations about the need to "conform to the natural law" (not "give consent", as Zagrebelsky), it clearly expresses the innate human awareness of the basis of this intrinsic law, required to establish the proper limits within which maintain the social order: the proof is the immutability with this awareness has gone through and even accompanied the diverse political systems and different religious beliefs that have marked the different historical moments of individual civilizations same! The
secularism, which he rails against the Church, accusing it of wanting to undermine the ethical-relativist to replace it with natural, therefore, makes a double hoax! When Zagrebelsky says: "... we reason as if our society had no identity, having lost or destroyed, and therefore we discuss how to give a new or how to restore the old. The rediscovery of the 'Christian roots' is the culmination of these arguments. Because apparently it is to fill an absence, the promoters of identity ... not act to fill gaps but to start substitutions ... they are fighting a battle for cultural hegemony that is not only, but above all against. Benefactors but are not conquerors; [xliv] Well this is not just the umpteenth time that "the ox said cuckold donkey," as it is the secularist view that considers the legitimate "replace" what for many centuries served as a, although in different social and political realities, the "right and natural" common ethical norm, but here plus you deny the spiritual sense, "of divine revelation," which is the very premise of "natural law" to "replace" subverted with something merely "human." If the Catholic teaching says that "the natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in harmony with the work of the Spirit," [xlv] by his hand, Zagrebelsky believes that "the basic unit of society and government is the human being as such, neither more nor less. The spiritual origin (sic) of this revolution is humanism, the fulfillment, the six-eighteenth-century rationalism, which resulted in the French Revolution. The product of this emancipation is the constitutional secular state ". [xlvi] This
real "act of rebellion", perpetrated by man against the secular order established from God is revealed in an even more striking when Zagrebelsky distinguished: "Originally, there is the invitation of St. Paul to the Christians of Rome to obey authority, because in accordance with God: nothing potestas nisi a Deo (' no power except from God ', note) ... [xlvii] if you still want to use, the present day, the Pauline motto you should turn (sic) nothing potestas nisi a hominibus (' no power except by men ', note). The men get together and do not obey authority in the name of God but of their common rights. " [xlviii] This contains the assumption very ambiguous and dangerous, because in this way, the concept of "justice" is to be separated from that of "freedom", so that the right loses its absolute character! It 's what makes the same Zagrebelsky: "... the doctrine (sic) of rights is not a lay Catholic, as reflected in a crucial point: first, the limit of rights is the equal right of others; for second, the natural order right. The difference is fundamental. The first doctrine is aimed at freedom, and the second to justice. " [xlix]
One of the most abused "workhorse" secularists - to substantiate argument that the Church carry out an unlawful interference and mystifying about the "civil power" as an expression of "authority", even conceiving it as necessarily "coming from God" - is the famous quotation from the Gospel passage about the problem of " tribute to Caesar "and the relationship of this with God (Mt 22.21, Mk 12.17, Lk 20:25). The introduction to the book we are discussing, written by director E. Mauro, we read that "... can not become Caesar, two thousand years later, units of Christ, after the Gospel had separated them as separate authorities, each with its load of debt for man-citizen, dividing the realms and worlds. " [l] For its part, subtly and in complete bad faith, Zagrebelsky then tries to grab even his own (alleged) conformity with the true spirit of Christ, saying that Jesus is betrayed when, despite the explicit wording of your " render to Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God, His Church instead claims (so he says) to establish Catholicism as a "civil religion": "... for the immediate material benefits that may ensue, and men of the church than by the state. This political idea of \u200b\u200bthe Christian religion, though deeply rooted history would seem to be a curse ... (sic) from the point of view of the message of Jesus of Nazareth, reduced to an instrument of government or ideology. In any case it is an aberration from the point of view of the supreme principle of secularism that is written in the Constitution. " [li]
But that is not the case! Zagrebelsky obviously, which is still enjoyed in other contexts to evoke a dialogue between Jesus and Pilate, but does not like to take into account all the words spoken by Christ at that juncture, when clearly points out how every "authority", and thus also civil, "is from above" (Jn 19:11). It must be said, however, that peddle Caesar, the sacred Roman Empire, the pontifex maximus rex et sacerdos, for any modern (and secular) President of the republic or the parliament, charged that only "obligations for the man-citizen" and not primarily "to the tutelary deity of Rome," is not only a distortion of history, but also to a falsification of the theology inherent in the Roman civil power that Pilate certainly could never even begin to conceive. That makes absolutely out of place to treat the figure of Caesar paradigmatic precursor of "secularity" of the state! But beyond that, the wording of Jesus to "render unto Caesar ... etc.." is mainly meant that "we must return to the owner what already belongs to him legitimately." Now, as in the episode of "tribute to Caesar" is clearly stated that it is legitimate because this would "return" the money that he coined, but is not explicitly said what it is legitimate to "give back" to God! Jesus actually say later, when before Pilate during his trial, just leave a clear sense that, among other things, the authority of Caesar must be "returned" to God!

When the Magisterium of the Catholic Church states that "The political community and authority public have their foundation in human nature and therefore belong to the order established by God," [lii] and then also specifies that "if the authority belongs to the order established by God, establishment of political regimes and the appointment of rulers are left to the free decision of the citizens. The diversity of political regimes is morally acceptable, provided they serve the legitimate good of the communities that adopt them. Regimes whose nature is contrary to natural law ... can not achieve the common good of nations to which they have been imposed, " [liii] Well Church does not show that much dreaded "irreconcilable" with the pluralistic-democratic system, but rather only the exaggerated form of "totalitarian democracy" which is represented by secularism.
starting point is the dialogue between Jesus and Pilate, writes HE Cardinal Julian Herranz, "Meditating on the same dramatic trial of Jesus, John Paul II wrote: 'So, therefore, the condemnation of God by man is not based on truth, but the arrogance, the devious conspiracy. It is precisely this truth of human history, the truth of our century? In our day the sentence was repeated in many courts under the oppression of totalitarian regimes. And it is also repeated in the democratic parliaments, when, for example, by a law duly enacted, condemning to death the man not yet born? '. We must, therefore, to state clearly and forcefully - to defend the inalienable right to life, but also to prevent the honest minds against the sophistry of false democrats - that this reduction purely subjective and agnostic of freedom and law is not only contrary to the doctrine Christian social but also to the traditional concept of democracy and healthy. It was, in fact, noted by philosophers like Maritain, Del Noce or powerful as lawyers and Cotta, Hervada, Finnis or Waldstein, but only some names, which the classical authors prior to spreading dogmatic agnostic liberal ideology have always interpreted democracy as a social order of freedom with natural boundaries. Not with the outer limits, whether imposed from without authoritarian (totalitarian tendency) or imposed by a simple and comprehensive treaty agreement (liberal-radical tendency), but with boundaries having an inherent basis: the natural law, natural law or ius gentium . Unfortunately, the liberal-radical ideology, founded sull'agnosticismo religious and moral relativism, in removing the foundation of democracy, its principles and objective values, made it dangerously uncertain limits of rationality and legitimacy the standard. This has deeply undermined the democratic legal system faced with the temptation of a denaturalization freedom: a freedom that is, truly free without the constraints of objective truth about nature and human dignity and human life. " [liv]
being the case, then you must ask: why so much rage against the alleged secularist "antidemocraticità" of the Church? What might be the "question" that prevents recognition of the Catholic Church rather than the historical institution which, for your very specific nature, more than any other is the guarantor for the man of "freedom and Law "?! To try to give us an answer, however, must proceed in an orderly fashion!
is primarily what is being said by Zagrebelsky: "Different was the spirit that animates many pages of dialogue, open to hope, the Second Vatican Council, in which the 'modern world' is taken as a positive partner was different ... the conception of the relationship between faith and reason, between faith and work of Christians in the world ... But (today) is still the case? ". [lv] And elsewhere he adds: "But who would dare deny that over the centuries the Church has opposed rather than democracy and supported every kind of autocracy, which has engaged over the imposition and to respect the consciences? Who could forget the violence of which was released in the name of faith that kept? Who can ignore the memory so short that the only 'freedom' has been approved to join the true religion and that all claims of freedom otherwise addressed was the subject of harsh sentences? ". [lvi]
Now, in the light of this, there arises a suspicion that now more than a "ruling" to be solved here it is in fact an "injury" that you want to bring to the Church! Nor can it be otherwise if, in an apparently opportunistic, on the one hand we want praise the Vatican II on the basis of his "alleged" acceptance of the liberal-secularist-modernist instances, while the other side it holds up equally with contempt "alleged" autocratic longstanding provision of the Church. Moreover, this contradiction is also stained dall'incongruenza that the Church itself, in two thousand years of its history, was opposed to democracy "ever", as if this form of government has not established until much later in just two centuries ago! But contradictions and inconsistencies do not play in favor of claims that aspire to establish itself as evidence, let alone provide a guarantee of sincerity! You can understand better in the hereafter, where Zagrebelsky says: "The civil wars of religion are in front of us, to teach what produces the intertwining of politics and religion after there has been a unity of faith. Cracked the unity of Christians from heretical movements from the twelfth century, then route the Lutheran Reformation and the Anglican schism, the interweaving fed only division and oppression. Christian Europe became divided battleground, with cruel feuds between Christians of different denominations, inquisitions, witch hunts, burning of heretics and pogroms of Jews. States Army took to the field in the name of the different religious professions. Religion, once the route his unit, insurance was no longer any 'premise legislation'. Or rather, had become endemic factor of subversion, hatred, poverty, hostility. It came with no winners and losers but a constitutional settlement: the emancipation of the State, its distinction from religion and the regulation of this as an element of individual and social conscience, and not directly as a politician. " [lvii]
What! While the Catholic Church to establish a nature accustomed to tyranny, arrogance, the soverchieria, even here you grant, in full contradiction with respect to many other occasions, that Europe was actually Christian in origin and catholic in its common identity?! "The reduction in European history in Christian history is a false history," [lviii] argues elsewhere Zagrebelsky! It also gives you that its original common Catholic identity has been questioned due to loss of 'unity of faith "?! But then, the crux of the matter is not so much by the 'intertwining of ethics and morality of politics and religion "or a completely fictitious" antidemocraticità "of the Church, but rather, just what is and is always saying the Magisterium Catholic, loss, and therefore the lack of "unity of faith" the one Church of Jesus Christ! Says the Catechism: "The unity which Christ has bestowed on his Church from the beginning ... we believe that there is no possibility of getting lost in the Catholic Church and we hope it will grow each day until the end of time ... The Church should always pray and work to preserve, strengthen and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her ... The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit "! [lix]
However, while avoiding any concession to the historical value of Catholicism, the unit is considered imperative that Zagrebelsky from an "impossible condition", at least to restore; [lx] and also an 'insuperable difficulty "exists against non-believers, as" ... to what constitutes the being and acting in accordance with what the 'existence of God requires, the layman does not know and people of faith have fought for a thousand years each believing the other to know better. Authority should be recognized and understood that both the Catholic magisterium. But how can you ask a non-believer to contradict himself so deeply to the point of relying on what they say about a God who does not know? The Board so that the Church addresses the non-believer (ie to sort out their lives 'is veluti daretur Deus', 'as if God exists', note) has only one contradictory meaning: follow me, "act of faith." [lxi]
But in this way the contradiction is not in fact suffered by the Church, but by the "snake biting its tail! As shown by Zagrebelsky fact, the issues at stake are reversed in their logical sequence, since it is obvious that the "non-believer" does not know God if they knew, then I think! And then the Church does not claim at all, but merely suggest (as indeed he himself acknowledges, albeit ironically) that does not pretend to "be followed by faith," but recommended "to have faith to be able to follow it! If we wanted to explain a point of view of syntax, that "an act of faith" is not in fact an addition to "limiting", but "fashion". And despite its subtlety, this is not an irrelevant nuance!
If in fact the process of "division of the Christian faith," the action of the give-dall'anticristicità dance work first through the heretical movements, then and now with the breakaway Protestant-Masonic liberal secularism, in the centuries has caused the progressive alienation State by Church, social and political ethics from religion and, in the terminal phase, led to the inevitable loss of "knowledge of God" by many Christians - ie just the loss of their faith - will never be as Well can "know God" without that faith which was rejected and lost? Magisterium says: "Faith seeking understanding: it is intrinsic to faith that a believer desires to know better the One in whom he has put his faith, and understand better what He has revealed, a more penetrating knowledge will in turn call a faith great. The grace of faith opens 'the eyes of the mind' (Eph 1:18) ... So, according to the words of St. Augustine: 'Do you understand, the better to believe'. " [lxii]
It is therefore safe to conclude that secularism, the Church wants to impose "anti-democratic" His truth, if by democracy we must understand "what makes a free choice in the light of a right, just because faith involves , next to the intervention of divine grace, intelligence and cooperation of the human will. To arrive at faith, or the knowledge of God - which is a right that God has bestowed on man - it is necessary in short, the "free consent" of the individual intellectual!
But such a consensus that leads to knowledge, can not pass through the exclusive loyalty to the Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ! Remember about the Catechism: "Faith is the faith of the faithful of the Church received from the Apostles, the treasure of life that is enriched by being shared." [lxiii] Everything that was taught by Christ to the Apostles was relayed by them to the Church, which continues to speak and act "in his name" so that "he is known! An example is the prayer of the Pater Noster, "When Jesus openly entrusts to his disciples the mystery of prayer to the Father, reveals to them what will be their prayer, and our ... ... The novelty is to 'ask in his name' (cf. Jn 14:13). Faith in the Son introduces the disciples into the knowledge of the Father, because Jesus is 'the Way, the Truth and the Life' (Jn 14:6). " [lxiv] What a hypocritical sham, therefore, in the words of Zagrebelsky, when this same prayer diminishes bubble, with sentimentality, as "... the text where he could hide more easily (sic) a theological discourse on truth, (but) is on the contrary (only) a touching expression of filial spirit! [lxv] Continued ...


[i] Idem, pg.136.
[ii] Ibid , sg.
[iii] See Idem, pg.108.
[iv] See Idem, pg.147.
[v] Ibid .
[vi] G. Biffi, Beware of the Antichrist! The prophetic warning of V. Solove 'ev, Piemme, Casale Monferrato 1991.
[vii] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.20.
[viii] See Idem, pg.47.
[ix] Estanislao Cantero Nunez, Evolution of the concept of democracy, in Papers of Christianity, the year I No 3, 1985.
[x] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.47.
[xi] Idem, pg.21.
[xii] Idem, pg.46.
[xiii] Idem, pg.21.
[xiv] Idem, pg.125 sg.
[xv] See supra note 56.
[xvi] not possumus: Church divided society?, Cit.
[xvii] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.170.
[xviii] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q.76, aI
[xix] S. Vanni-Rovigo in A. Ales Bello and F. Brezzo (ed.), The Wire (sofare) of Ariadne. Routes of feminist thought in the Twentieth Century, ed. Mimesis, Milan 2001, pg.55.
[xx] St. Thomas Aquinas, ibid footnote 115.
[xxi] Archbishop Carlo Caffarra, "Corpore et unus soul": the ethical relevance of the substantial unity of man into the third millennium, the International Thomistic Congress, Rome 24 / 9 / 2003.
[xxii] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.170.
[xxiii] Idem, pg.165.
[xxiv] Ibid .
[xxv] Idem, pg.166.
[xxvi] Catechism of the CC, 362.
[xxvii] Idem, 365.
[xxviii] Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution. Gaudium et Spes, 14.
[xxix] Catechism of the CC, 363.
[xxx] "Corpore et unus soul", op.cit.
[xxxi] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.166.
[xxxii] Giampaolo Azzoni, the idea of \u200b\u200bjustice between universal and particular, Report to the XXII National Congress of the Italian Society of Legal Philosophy and Politics, Macerata 2 to 5 October 2002.
[xxxiii] See in this John Dudley, God and contemplation in Aristotle. The metaphysical foundation of the Nicomachean Ethics, Vita e Pensiero, Milano 1999.
[xxxiv] Angel Rodriguez Nuno, positive law, natural law and justice today, "Nuntium" VII/19 (2003), pp. 45-50.
[xxxv] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.167.
[xxxvi] Idem, pg.168.
[xxxvii] The contradictory logic and ontological vision of a "dualistic" in the world of Gnostic-Manichean, was already refuted by St. Augustine with his doctrine concerning the explanation of the existence of "evil"! We recall how this doctrine teaches that evil can not be considered either as "being" (because in this case, it would be good) nor as "non-being" (because it just would not be), but rather as "deprivation, absence of being. " Thus, as a principle that has consistency in himself, the devil can not even assume that "creator" of anything, but only as a symptom of "breakdown"!
[xxxviii] Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter. Libertas praestantissimus; Leonis XIII Acta 8, 219. See Catechism of the CC, 1954.
[xxxix] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q.93, a.3, ad 2. See Catechism of the CC, 1902.
[xl] Catechism of the CC, 1955.
[xli] See, for example, Gaius, Institutiones I, 1.
[xlii] M. Polia, Imperium, Ed The Circle Rimini 2001, pg.20.
[xliii] Cicero, De re publica 3, 22, 33.
[xliv] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.105 sg.
[xlv] Catechism of the CC, 1960.
[xlvi] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.55.
[xlvii] See 13.1 to 2 Rm.
[xlviii] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.54 sg.
[xlix] Idem, pg.85.
[l] Idem, pg.5.
[li] Idem, pg.99.
[lii] Catechism of the CC, 1920.
[liii] Idem, 1901.
[liv] Humanity is at the crossroads, op.cit.
[lv] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.149.
[lvi] Idem, pg.83.
[lvii] Idem, pg.56.
[lviii] Idem, pg.87.
[lix] Catechism of the CC, 820.
[lx] See The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.57.
[lxi] Idem, pg.58.
[lxii] Catechism of the CC, 158.
[lxiii] Idem, 949.
[lxiv] Idem, 2614.
[lxv] The State and the Church, op.cit., Pg.120.