publish an article Aulegnier Abbé Paul, one of the founders of the Good Shepherd, about the convocation of world religions to Assisi, Benedict XVI announced in October.
The article was published at the same Aulagnier abbé, in "Regards sur le monde", January 18, 2011
October 27, 2011 Why we should not "commemorate this historic gesture 'of Assisi 1986
On 1 January 2011, at the Angelus, Pope Benedict XVI has announced its intention to renew interfaith ceremony at Assisi in October 27, 1986 :
"in the coming month of October, I will go in the pilgrim city of Saint Francis and invited to join this journey fellow Christians of different denominations, the leaders of the religious traditions of the world and, ideally, all people of goodwill, in order to make the memory of that historic gesture by my predecessor and wanted to renew the solemn commitment of believers of all religions to live their religious faith as a service to the cause of peace. "
He had already announced in his message for peace for the year 2011, entitled: Freedom of religion, path to peace.
He wrote: "In 2011 marks the 25th anniversary of World Day of Prayer for Peace, convened in Assisi in 1986 by Venerable Pope John Paul II. On that occasion, the leaders of the great religions of the world have witnessed how the religion is a factor of unity and peace, not of division and conflict. The memory of that experience is a reason for hope for a future in which all believers feel and make it truly work for justice and peace. "
is known, however, that Pope Benedict XVI, then still a cardinal, he would not attend this World Day of Prayer for Peace, because of the danger of syncretism in such a day. So how, when seated on the throne of Peter, on two occasions he wanted to make clarifications on this day, perhaps in view of the anniversary.
In a message addressed to the Bishop of Assisi, 2 September 2006, he wrote: "In order not to misinterpret the meaning of what, in 1986, John Paul II wanted to accomplish, and that, with his own espressione, si suole qualificare come “spirito di Assisi”, è importante non dimenticare l’attenzione che allora fu posta perché l’incontro interreligioso di preghiera non si prestasse ad interpretazioni sincretistiche, fondate su una concezione relativistica. […] Perciò, anche quando ci si ritrova insieme a pregare per la pace, occorre che la preghiera si svolga secondo quei cammini distinti che sono propri delle varie religioni. Fu questa la scelta del 1986, e tale scelta non può non restare valida anche oggi. La convergenza dei diversi non deve dare l'impressione di un cedimento a quel relativismo che nega il senso stesso della verità e la possibilità di attingerla».
But simple fact, he did not pray with the Jews and the rabbis of the synagogue in Rome during his last visit?
words are one thing, what other acts.
And a visit to Assisi, 17 June 2007, the Pope again said in his homily: "The decision to celebrate the meeting at Assisi was prompted by the testimony of Francis as a man of peace, to which many look with sympathy from other cultural and religious positions. At the same time, the light of the Poor on that initiative was a guarantee of Christian authenticity, since his life and his message so obviously based on the choice of Christ, rejecting a priori any temptation to religious indifference, which has nothing to do with genuine interreligious dialogue. [...] It could not be evangelical attitude or Franciscan, the failure to combine acceptance, dialogue and respect for all with the certainty of faith that every Christian, like the Saint of Assisi, is bound to grow, announcing Christ as the way, truth and the life of man, Savior of the world. "
Benedict XVI's intentions are certainly clear and honest ... but they can not prevent, de jure, the risk of syncretism, relativism and indifference. How very well said Romano Amerio, in his book "Stat Veritas:" This is pure speech: ... you can not promote this syncretism and then warned that we must take care to avoid syncretism "(Chiosa 51).
Nor is it because this meeting took place in Assisi, where the poor man has stamped his own brand of self-giving to Christ, that it, in itself, you can ensure a correct orthodoxy. Yes he may be unfaithful.
More, October 27, 1986, with John Paul II, perhaps he wanted to be careful "because the interreligious prayer meeting not lend itself to syncretistic interpretations "taking care" that the prayer is performed according to the different uses proper to the various religions. " Sincere desire, of course, but that was not and could not be achieved, so that we can talk, and rightly so, the day pancristiana of Assisi or of the 'illusion pancristiana of Assisi. "
In fact, in Assisi, October 27, 1986, Catholics have prayed, like the "representatives of other religions," on their own, as suggested by Benedict XVI, according to their rites and in full " expression of their faith, "but have come together in 'prayer for Christian unity" with "representatives of churches and Christian communities' in the Cathedral of San Rufino. What clearly reported by L'Osservatore Romano on 27/28 October 1986. There the pope, stripped of any sign of his primacy, he gave away, always in his capacity as host - what will Benedict XVI on 27 October - a celebration typically Protestant reading of passages from the Bible, interspersed with songs and concluded by the "Prayer", that "the whole Church." Witness this, which is found on page 3 of this issue of L'Osservatore Romano.
The greeting addressed the meeting, read by the 'guest' Giovanni Paolo II, ha parlato senza dubbio di «serie questioni che ancora ci dividono », ma ha anche detto che «il nostro presente grado di unità in Cristo è nondimeno un segno per il mondo che Gesù Cristo è veramente il principe della pace». Meglio ancora, ha concluso auspicando che la preghiera : « deve farci crescere nel rispetto degli uni verso gli altri come esseri umani, come Chiese e comunità ecclesiali» ( Discorso ai rappresentanti delle confessioni e delle comunità cristiane , Cattedrale di San Rufino, 27 ottobre1986; vedi anche L’Osservatore Romano del 27/28 ottobre 1986).
Nessun’altra distinzione, se other than those imposed by its role as host, inviting, "the Pope has been recognized by the ecumenical ceremony. What is so shocked that Archbishop Lefebvre who saw in this an insult to the Vicar of Christ. And even the final prayer of 'pancristiani, "the street of the Lower Basilica of San Francesco was started by a woman" pastor ", while the Pope was only the fourth" among many wise men. "
To make matters worse, the next day of the 'meeting of Assisi, Cardinal Etchegaray declared: "For me, prayer of the Christian Church in the Cathedral of San Rufino was the moment, the important time of all day ... The quality and intensity of this prayer was that everyone seemed to be lit as a new joint effusion of the Holy Spirit. " That's how he is "the funny" expressed in the newspaper of the future of November 2, 1986. It should be noted that he was the great organizer of the day in Assisi.
force Game one is forced to recognize that the Babel of Assisi, the cardinals and the Pope himself represented in fact, not the Catholic Church, but the "Christian Church" which includes non-Catholics.
And who were those that made this "Christian Church" which according to Cardinal Etchegaray had his Pentecost at Assisi? The "different churches and denominations, who have Christ as its foundation," says L'Osservatore Romano on 27/28 October 1986. In practice: the Orthodox Church, the "Churches" and the Reformed Catholic Church. Evidently this "Christian Church" was not the Catholic Church, but a super-church that exceeds and includes the Catholic Church itself, like the other so-called "churches."
What ecclesiology!
In fact, the prayer of the "Christian Church in Assisi was not that of the Catholic Church, whose faith is expressed fully in the Mass," sacrifice vero e autentico», come insegna il Concilio di Trento al contrario degli autori di queste «confessioni e comunità cristiane» riuniti con i cattolici a San Rufino. Il rito della Nuova Messa è stato celebrato il 27 ottobre di buon mattino, dal Papa, Giovanni Paolo II, a Perugia, prima di essere condotto ad Assisi, dove il cerimoniale lo ha ecumenicamente confuso con i suoi «fratelli separati» - e questo Benedetto XVI, malgrado la sua intenzione, non potrà fisicamente evitarlo – per pregare con loro «ecumenicamente» e «senza trionfalismo», spogliato della dignità di Vicario di Cristo, dimentico che la Chiesa cattolica è tutt’uno con Cristo che deve regnare eternamente su tutte le cose, tutti i beni, tutti gli esseri. Questo gli deriva di diritto divino. Ma questo non potrà essere confessato dal Papa. Eppure è la sua funzione!
Ma c’è di più, ad Assisi la Chiesa cattolica è stata messa, non al livello delle false religioni, che si dicano cristiane o no, ma al di sotto di esse. Si è ricordato al cardinale Etchegaray che è stato permesso a tutti di «esprimersi nella pienezza della propria fede» (DC del 7/21 settembre 1986), ma questo non è stato permesso ai cattolici; «che la preghiera di ciascuno è stata rispettata», ma quella dei cattolici non lo è stata. E quando, mettendo in moto il carosello finale sulla piazza bassa di San Francis, has triumphantly declared: "We met in full fidelity to our religious traditions, deeply aware of the identity of each of our commitments of faith" (OR, cit., P. 4), this was true for all except for Catholics, nor for their prayers, nor for their Pope, the One who is still the Vicar of Christ ...
Finally, although there were plans with great care that the representatives of false religions to get together, according to their desire, "to pray together, pray together, but without" (Vatican Radio), the official representatives of the one true religion prayed joining representatives delle false religioni sedicenti cristiane.
La pratica pancristiana di Assisi basta a dimostrare, tra l’altro, che vent’anni di falso ecumenismo sono bastati perché tra i cattolici, a cominciare dalla gerarchia, prendesse piede l’indifferentismo pancristiano. Oggi tutto appare legittimo.
Per tutte queste ragioni, la «giornata di Assisi» non può essere né rinnovata né commemorata; essa non è «commemorabile»; essa non è degna della Chiesa cattolica, essa è «spregevole».
0 comments:
Post a Comment