quarta-feira, 22 de fevereiro de 2017

Líder dos Jesuítas: "Não Leve a Sério o que Cristo Disse. Sua Consciência está Acima de Cristo"


É realmente o fundo do poço. O líder dos jesuítas, o venezuelano Arturo Sosa Abascal, acaba de dizer que como ninguém tinha gravador para gravar as palavras de Cristo e como, segundo Abascal, Cristo se dirigia apenas para algumas pessoas especificamente,  e como quem escreveu a Bíblia foram seres humanos, o que Cristo falou não deve ser levado muito a sério, importante é o "discernimento da consciência". E Abascal diz que segue fielmente o Papa Francisco, que é também um jesuíta.

O que o padre disse é pior do que o relativismo, é pior do que considerar Cristo como apenas um bom mestre, porque um "bom mestre" deve ser escutado. O padre acaba de jogar Cristo no lixo.

Os cristãos dizem há bem mais de mil anos que Cristo é Deus. Abascal acha que nem mestre Ele é.

E para Abascal o pecado só existe se você age contra sua consciência. Sua consciência é que manda. Hitler, Stalin, Tamerlane, Pol Pot e outros assassinos devem estar no céu, com essa.

Ele disse que não gosta muito da palavra Doutrina, pois é muito rígida, a Igreja deve mudar.

Realmente, eu não sei mais o que dizer.

Vejam o relato do jornalista Sandro Magister, na versão em espanhol:

Matrimonio y divorcio. El general de los jesuitas: "También hay que reinterpretar a Jesús"

Sandro Magister

...

Una idea de respuesta se puede encontrar en la entrevista que el nuevo superior general de la Compañía de Jesús, el venezolano Arturo Sosa Abascal, muy cercano a Jorge Mario Bergoglio, ha concedido al vaticanista suizo Giuseppe Rusconi para el blog Rossoporpora y el "Giornale del Popolo" de Lugano.
He aquí algunos de los pasajes más pertinentes al caso. Huelgan los comentarios.
*
Respuesta -
P. – El cardenal Gerhard L. Müller, prefecto de la congregación para la doctrina de la fe, ha dicho a propósito del matrimonio que las palabras de Jesús son muy claras y que "ningún poder en el cielo y en la tierra, ni un ángel ni el Papa, ni un concilio ni una ley de los obispos, tiene la facultad de modificarlas".
Respuesta - – Antes que nada sería necesario comenzar una buena reflexión sobre lo que verdaderamente dijo Jesús. En esa época nadie tenía una grabadora para registrar sus palabras. Lo que se sabe es que las palabras de Jesús hay que ponerlas en contexto, están expresadas con un lenguaje, en un ambiente concreto, están dirigidas a alguien determinado.
P. – Pero entonces, si hay que examinar todas las palabras de Jesús y reconducirlas a su contexto histórico significa que no tienen un valor absoluto.
Respuesta - – En el último siglo han surgido en la Iglesia muchos estudios que intentan entender exactamente qué quería decir Jesús... Esto no es relativismo, pero certifica que la palabra es relativa, el Evangelio está escrito por seres humanos, está aceptado por la Iglesia que, a su vez, está formada por seres humanos… ¡Por lo tanto, es verdad que nadie puede cambiar la palabra de Jesús, pero es necesario saber cuál ha sido [esa palabra]!
P. – Entonces, ¿también es discutible la afirmación en Mateo 19, 3-6: "Pues lo que Dios ha unido, que no lo separe el hombre"?
Respuesta -. – Me identifico con lo que dice el Papa Francisco. No se pone en duda, se pone en discernimiento
P. – Pero el discernimiento es valoración, es elección entre distintas opciones. Ya no hay la obligación de seguir una única interpretación…
Respuesta - – No, la obligación existe siempre, pero de seguir los resultados del discernimiento.
P. – Pero la decisión final se funda sobre un juicio en relación a distintas hipótesis. Por lo tanto, toma en consideración también la hipótesis de que la frase "pues lo que Dios ha unido…" no sea exactamente como aparece. En resumen, pone en duda la palabra de Jesús.
Respuesta - – No la palabra de Jesús, sino la palabra de Jesús tal como nosotros la hemos interpretado. El discernimiento no elige entre distintas hipótesis, pero se pone a la escucha del Espíritu Santo que, como Jesús prometió, nos ayuda a entender los signos de la presencia de Dios en la historia humana.
P. - Pero, ¿cómo se discierne?
Respuesta - – El Papa Francisco discierne siguiendo a San Ignacio, como toda la Compañía de Jesús: hay que buscar y encontrar la voluntad de Dios, decía San Ignacio. No es una búsqueda en broma. El discernimiento lleva a una decisión: no se debe sólo valorar, sino que hay que decidir.
P. – ¿Y quién debe decidir?
Respuesta - – La Iglesia ha confirmado siempre la prioridad de la conciencia personal.
P. – Por lo tanto, si la conciencia, después del discernimiento, me dice que puedo hacer la comunión aunque la norma no lo prevea…
Respuesta - – La Iglesia se ha desarrollado a lo largo de los siglos, no es un pedazo de hormigón. Nació, ha aprendido, ha cambiado. Por esto se hacen los concilios ecuménicos, para intentar centrar los desarrollos de la doctrina. Doctrina es una palabra que no me gusta mucho, lleva consigo la imagen de la dureza de la piedra. En cambio la realidad humana es mucho más difuminada, no es nunca blanca o negra, está en un desarrollo continuo.
P. – Me parece entender que para usted la praxis del discernimiento tiene prioridad sobre la doctrina.
Respuesta - – Sí, pero la doctrina forma parte del discernimiento. Un verdadero discernimento no puede prescindir de la doctrina.
P. – Pero puede llegar a conclusiones distintas a la doctrina.
Respuesta - – Esto sí, porque la doctrina no sustituye al discernimiento, como tampoco al Espíritu Santo.


Terrorista Inglês que Foi Preso de Guantanamo e Recebeu 1 Milhão de Libras do Governo Inglês.


O Estado Islâmico saudou essa semana um terrorista que praticou atentado terrorista na cidade de Mosul. Esse terrorista se chamava Jamal al-Harith, era inglês da cidade Manchester e tinha o nome de guerra de Abu Zakariya al-Britani.

Ele tinha sido preso pelas forças dos Estados Unidos na Afeganistão e levado para a prisão de Guantanamo em 2002. Sendo solto em 2004 a pedido do governo inglês

Ele então processou o governo inglês alegando maus tratos e recebeu do governo 1 milhão de libras.

Em 2014, Jamil conseguiu ir para a Síria e se juntou ao Estado Islâmico.

Que coisa, heim? E tem gente que diz que o terrorismo é uma questão de pobreza. Nascer em país rico, com várias redes de proteção social e receber um milhão de libras não é suficiente? 


Vejam o relato do jornal The Guardian:


Isis suicide bomber ‘was Briton freed from Guantánamo’
Family identifies Jamal al-Harith, paid £1m compensation by UK government, as man Islamic State says was behind Mosul attack

A suicide attack near the Iraqi city of Mosul, for which Islamic State has claimed responsibility, was carried out by a British former Guantánamo Bay detainee who was paid £1m in compensation by the UK government after his release, according to reports.

Jamal al-Harith, a 50-year-old Muslim convert from Manchester – who was born Ronald Fiddler – was identified by his family as the man Isis claims carried out the attack on coalition forces on Monday.

The terror group released an image of a smiling man, whom it gave the nom de guerre Abu-Zakariya al-Britani. While its claim that he was the attacker has not been verified, al-Harith’s brother confirmed the identity of the man in the picture to the Times.

Leon Jameson told the paper his brother al-Harith had “wasted his life”. He added: “It is him, I can tell by his smile. If it is true then I’ve lost a brother, so another family [member] gone.” The BBC and Channel 4 News also cited unnamed sources as identifying the same man in the picture.

Isis made unverified claims to have caused multiple casualties when its fighters drove a car filled with explosives into a military base outside the city in northern Iraq. It released a video of a vehicle driving away down a road, followed later by a plume of smoke rising in the distance.

Al-Harith was reportedly awarded compensation after claiming that British agents knew he was being mistreated during the time he was held without charge at Guantánamo.

He was taken to the detention centre after being found in a prison in Afghanistanearly in 2002, where he had been placed after being intercepted by the Taliban, who believed him to be a British spy. According to his sister, Maxine Fiddler, he initially believed the Americans to be “his saviours”. However, they imprisoned him after coming to the conclusion that he had tried to join the Islamic fundamentalist group – until they turned on him.

In an interview in 2003, the year before al-Harith’s release, Maxine Fiddler said her brother had converted to Islam in his 20s. She said she believed he had found peace in doing so after a difficult childhood. She described him as “a very smart, a very serious person”, adding that he was gentle and quiet, with a sense of humour.

Al-Harith’s Guantánamo file showed that he was taken to the camp because he was “expected to have knowledge of Taliban treatment of prisoners and interrogation tactics”.

His release was recommended by Guantánamo’s commandant in 2002 “on the assessment that the detainee was not affiliated with al-Qaida or a Taliban leader”. But he was kept in captivity because it was decided he had been involved in a “terrorist attack against the US”, despite the fact he had not been questioned about one.

It was also noted that his “timeline has not been fully established” and that British diplomats who had dealt with him after his release in Pakistan thought he was “cocky and evasive”. He was finally released in 2004 after lobbying by the then home secretary David Blunkett, who said that none of the people whose release from Guantánamo he had secured “will actually be a threat to the security of the British people”.

A decade later, and despite his high profile, al-Harith was able to travel to Syria, one of about 850 individuals of national security concern who have travelled to join the conflict, according to figures published by the government last year. Of those, a little less than half have returned to the UK and about 15% are dead.


terça-feira, 21 de fevereiro de 2017

Padre Diz que Eremita de Loreto Previu nos anos 80 que Trump "Levaria os EUA de Volta para Deus",




No vídeo, acima o padre Giácomo Capoverdi nos fala de uma previsão do eremita de Loreto.

Vou explicar o que ele diz, para aqueles que não entendem inglês.

Loreto é uma cidade italiana nas costas do adriático que possui o Santuário da Santa Casa. É acreditado que a casa que Nossa Senhora viveu em Nazaré foi transportada por anjos para a Itália, depois que os muçulmanos tomaram conta da região. Essa casa acabou se estabelecendo em Loreto. No Santuário, existe uma casa em pedras com características que existiam na época de Nossa Senhora. Foto abaixo:


Em volta desse Santuário vivia um eremita americano. O padre  conta que um médico amigo dele pediu ao padre que quando estivesse na Itália, fosse em Loreto e conversasse com o eremita. O padre assim o fez e ficou maravilhado pelo conhecimento e pela fé do eremita.

Recentemente, o médico contou ao padre que o eremita lhe disse nos anos 80 que Donald Trump seria a pessoa que "levaria os Estados Unidos de volta para Deus" e que inclusive o eremita tinha colocado o nome de Trump na Porta Santa do Vaticano para receber orações. 

O padre diz que lembrou disso ao ver a primeira-dama dos Estados Unidos rezar o Pai Nosso no último comício que Trump fez no sábado passado (vídeo da oração que ela fez abaixo).





Será? Parece uma análise bem apressada, para dizer o mínimo.

Mas que Trump é bem mais cristão que Obama não há a menor dúvida. E nesse sentido, leva os Estados Unidos de volta a Deus.

A primeira coisa que Trump fez foi banir o financiamento ao aborto internacional. Obama fez justamente o contrário nos seus primeiros dias de governo. Trump e seu vice falam contra a lei de aborto dos Estados Unidos. Obama defende o aborto sob demanda e chegou a defender que a criança que sobrevive a um aborto deve ser deixada para morrer de inanição, não deve receber ajuda médica. Trump não defende casamento gay. Obama é líder na defesa do casamento gay. Trump fala em defender os cristãos do Oriente Médio, Obama os abandonou. E por aí vai...

Rezemos por um mundo mais próximo de Deus e não apenas nos Estados Unidos.


segunda-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2017

Dois Vídeos para Papa Francisco. Vídeos de Pessoas que Conhecem o Islã de Perto.



No meu post anterior, eu menciono que o Papa Francisco rasgou meio Velho Testamento e muitas publicações e palavras de diversos santos católicos ilustres, como São Francisco de Assis e São Tomás de Aquino, ao dizer que "não existe povo criminoso" e que "não existe terrorismo islâmico".

Trago hoje dois vídeos, de pessoas que nasceram dentro do mundo islâmico. Eles explicam Islã. O Papa Francisco seria bem mais útil, em suas palavras sobre o Islã, se levasse em consideração o que se fala nesses dois vídeos.

O primeiro, acima, é de Ayan Hirsi Ali. Ela detona a visão esquerdista sobre Islã, que é defendida pelo Papa Francisco.

O segundo, abaixo, é do grande especialista em Islã, o egípcio Raymond Ibrahim. Ele mostra a perseguição a cristãos pelo Islã.

Os dois vídeos têm legenda em português.




No meu post abaixo, eu menciono meu livro, que tratou sobre Guerra Justa. Nele trago a opinião sobre o Islã de de santos, teólogos cristãos, papas e até escritores cristãos. Mas por se tratar de um livro sobre Guerra Justa, que é uma doutrina cristã, eu não entrei no debate sobre o Islã que surge dentro dos próprios muçulmanos. Mas se fosse o caso, em livro sobre o próprio Islã, com certeza Ayan Hirsi Ali e Raymond Ibrahim seriam citados, além dos mencionados no vídeo Tawfiw Hamid, Asra Nomani e Zuhdi Jasser.

Aliás a única coisa que discordo do vídeo de Ayan Ali é quando ela diz que o Ocidente defendeu os dissidentes do comunismo. Eu acho que não. Esses dissidentes também foram renegados na mídia global. Apenas alguns conheciam seus nomes. Por exemplo, eu que estudei quando ainda existia o mundo soviético, nunca tive nenhum professor que mencionasse esses dissidentes, nem nunca li nenhum jornal impresso ou televisivo na época ressaltando a luta deles.

Assistam aos vídeos. Aprendam com quem conhece o Islã desde que nasceu.



sexta-feira, 17 de fevereiro de 2017

Papa Francisco: "Não Existe Terrorismo Islâmico, Porque Nenhuma Religião é Terrorista e Nenhum Povo é Criminoso"


Papa Francisco fez um discurso hoje para uma Reunião de Movimentos Populares. Na oportunidade, ele disse que não existe terrorismo islâmico porque nenhuma religião é terrorista. Também não existe povo criminoso.

Com essa argumentação, eu diria que ele rasgou boa parte do Antigo Testamento, que é pleno de povos criminosos, e rasgou o que disseram inúmeros santos sobre o Islã, desde São João Damasceno, que viu o Islã nascer. 

No meu livro, eu falei dos sete povos que Deus condenou no Antigo Testamento, além de um povo chamado Amalec, que perseguiu Israel.

Como diz Deuterônimo 7:1-2:

"Quando Iahweh teu Deus te houver introduzido na terra em que estás entrando para possuí-la, e expulsado nações mais numerosas do que tu — os heteus, os gergeseus, os amorreus, os cananeus, os ferezeus, os heveus e os jebuseus —, sete nações mais numerosas e poderosas do que tu; quando Iahweh teu Deus entregá-las a ti, tu as derrotarás e as sacrificarás como anátema.”.

E sobre os Amalec (1 Samuel 15:1-3):

“Resolvi punir o que Amalec fez a Israel cortando-lhe o caminho quando subia do Egito. Vai, pois, agora, e investe contra Amalec, condena-o ao anátema com tudo o que lhe pertence, não tenhas piedade dele, mata homens e mulheres, crianças e recém-nascidos, bois e ovelhas, camelos e jumentos."

Sobre o que disseram os santos sobre o Islã, ver no meu livro, hehe, são tantos, como São Francisco de Assis, São Tomás de Aquino e também tem padres, bispos e arcebispos dos nossos dias. Comprem o livro, clicando aqui, e enviem suas questões e críticas que responderei com prazer e carinho.

Abaixo, vai discurso do Papa Francisco, no qual ele defende coisas estranhas à Bíblia e a Doutrina da Igreja em matéria de crime. Para o Papa, o crime parece surgir apenas das desigualdades sociais (um discurso bem marxista) e não do que "está no coração dos homens", como disse Cristo:

Pope Francis: No people is criminal and no religion is terrorist

2017-02-17
FULL TEXT

MESSAGE OF HIS HOLINESS POPE FRANCIS
ON THE OCCASION OF THE WORLD MEETINGS OF POPULAR MOVEMENTS 
IN MODESTO (CALIFORNIA) 16-18 FEBRUARY 2017


Dear Brothers and Sisters,

First of all, I would like to congratulate you for your effort in replicating on a national level the work being developed in the World Meetings of Popular Movements. By way of this letter, I want to encourage and strengthen each one of you, your organizations, and all who strive with you for "Land, Work and Housing,” the three T’s in Spanish: Tierra, Trabajo y Techo. I congratulate you for all that you are doing.

I would like to thank the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, its chairman Bishop David Talley, and the host Bishops Stephen Blaire, Armando Ochoa and Jaime Soto, for the wholehearted support they have offered to this meeting. Thank you, Cardinal Peter Turkson, for your continued support of popular movements from the new Dicastery for the Promotion of Integral Human Development. It makes me very happy to see you working together towards social justice! How I wish that such constructive energy would spread to all dioceses, because it builds bridges between peoples and individuals. These are bridges that can overcome the walls of exclusion, indifference, racism, and intolerance.

I would also like to highlight the work done by the PICO National Network and the organizations promoting this meeting. I learned that PICO stands for "People Improving Communities through Organizing”. What a great synthesis of the mission of popular movements: to work locally, side by side with your neighbors, organizing among yourselves, to make your communities thrive.

A few months ago in Rome, we talked at the third World Meeting of Popular Movements about walls and fear, about bridges and love.[1] Without wanting to repeat myself, these issues do challenge our deepest values.

We know that none of these ills began yesterday. For some time, the crisis of the prevailing paradigm has confronted us. I am speaking of a system that causes enormous suffering to the human family, simultaneously assaulting people’s dignity and our Common Home in order to sustain the invisible tyranny of money that only guarantees the privileges of a few. "In our time humanity is experiencing a turning-point in its history.”[2]

As Christians and all people of good will, it is for us to live and act at this moment. It is "a grave responsibility, since certain present realities, unless effectively dealt with, are capable of setting off processes of dehumanization which would then be hard to reverse.”[3] These are signs of the times that we need to recognize in order to act. We have lost valuable time: time when we did not pay enough attention to these processes, time when we did not resolve these destructive realities. Thus the processes of dehumanization accelerate. The direction taken beyond this historic turning-point—the ways in which this worsening crisis gets resolved—will depend on people’s involvement and participation and, largely, on yourselves, the popular movements.

We should be neither paralyzed by fear nor shackled within the conflict. We have to acknowledge the danger but also the opportunity that every crisis brings in order to advance to a successful synthesis. In the Chinese language, which expresses the ancestral wisdom of that great people, the word "crisis” is comprised of two ideograms: Wi, which represents "danger”, and J, which represents "opportunity”.

The grave danger is to disown our neighbors. When we do so, we deny their humanity and our own humanity without realizing it; we deny ourselves, and we deny the most important Commandments of Jesus. Herein lies the danger, the dehumanization. But here we also find an opportunity: that the light of the love of neighbor may illuminate the Earth with its stunning brightness like a lightning bolt in the dark; that it may wake us up and let true humanity burst through with authentic resistance, resilience and persistence.

The question that the lawyer asked Jesus in the Gospel of Luke (10:25-37) echoes in our ears today: "Who is my neighbor?” Who is that other whom we are to love as we love ourselves? Maybe the questioner expects a comfortable response in order to carry on with his life: "My relatives? My compatriots? My co-religionists? ...” Maybe he wants Jesus to excuse us from the obligation of loving pagans or foreigners who at that time were considered unclean. This man wants a clear rule that allows him to classify others as "neighbor” and "non-neighbor”, as those who can become neighbors and those who cannot become neighbors.[4]

Jesus responds with a parable which features two figures belonging to the elite of the day and a third figure, considered a foreigner, a pagan and unclean: the Samaritan. On the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, the priest and the Levite come upon a dying man, whom robbers have attacked, stripped and abandoned. In such situations the Law of the Lord imposes the duty to offer assistance, but both pass by without stopping. They were in a hurry. However, unlike these elite figures, the Samaritan stopped. Why him? As a Samaritan he was looked down upon, no one would have counted on him, and in any case he would have had his own commitments and things to do—yet when he saw the injured man, he did not pass by like the other two who were linked to the Temple, but "he saw him and had compassion on him” (v. 33). The Samaritan acts with true mercy: he binds up the man's wounds, transports him to an inn, personally takes care of him, and provides for his upkeep. All this teaches us that compassion, love, is not a vague sentiment, but rather means taking care of the other to the point of personally paying for him. It means committing oneself to take all the necessary steps so as to "draw near to” the other to the point of identifying with him: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” This is the Lord’s Commandment.[5]

The economic system that has the god of money at its center, and that sometimes acts with the brutality of the robbers in the parable, inflicts injuries that to a criminal degree have remained neglected. Globalized society frequently looks the other way with the pretence of innocence. Under the guise of what is politically correct or ideologically fashionable, one looks at those who suffer without touching them. But they are televised live; they are talked about in euphemisms and with apparent tolerance, but nothing is done systematically to heal the social wounds or to confront the structures that leave so many brothers and sisters by the wayside. This hypocritical attitude, so different from that of the Samaritan, manifests an absence of true commitment to humanity.

Sooner or later, the moral blindness of this indifference comes to light, like when a mirage dissipates. The wounds are there, they are a reality. The unemployment is real, the violence is real, the corruption is real, the identity crisis is real, the gutting of democracies is real. The system’s gangrene cannot be whitewashed forever because sooner or later the stench becomes too strong; and when it can no longer be denied, the same power that spawned this state of affairs sets about manipulating fear, insecurity, quarrels, and even people’s justified indignation, in order to shift the responsibility for all these ills onto a "non-neighbor”. I am not speaking of anyone in particular, I am speaking of a social and political process that flourishes in many parts of the world and poses a grave danger for humanity.

Jesus teaches us a different path. Do not classify others in order to see who is a neighbor and who is not. You can become neighbor to whomever you meet in need, and you will do so if you have compassion in your heart. That is to say, if you have that capacity to suffer with someone else. You must become a Samaritan. And then also become like the innkeeper at the end of the parable to whom the Samaritan entrusts the person who is suffering. Who is this innkeeper? It is the Church, the Christian community, people of compassion and solidarity, social organizations. It is us, it is you, to whom the Lord Jesus daily entrusts those who are afflicted in body and spirit, so that we can continue pouring out all of his immeasurable mercy and salvation upon them. Here are the roots of the authentic humanity that resists the dehumanization that wears the livery of indifference, hypocrisy, or intolerance.

I know that you have committed yourselves to fight for social justice, to defend our Sister Mother Earth and to stand alongside migrants. I want to reaffirm your choice and share two reflections in this regard.

First, the ecological crisis is real. "A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system.”[6] Science is not the only form of knowledge, it is true. It is also true that science is not necessarily "neutral”—many times it conceals ideological views or economic interests. However, we also know what happens when we deny science and disregard the voice of Nature. I make my own everything that concerns us as Catholics. Let us not fall into denial. Time is running out. Let us act. I ask you again—all of you, people of all backgrounds including native people, pastors, political leaders—to defend Creation.

The other is a reflection that I shared at our most recent World Meeting of Popular Movements, and I feel is important to say it again: no people is criminal and no religion is terrorist. Christian terrorism does not exist, Jewish terrorism does not exist, and Muslim terrorism does not exist. They do not exist. No people is criminal or drug-trafficking or violent. "The poor and the poorer peoples are accused of violence yet, without equal opportunities, the different forms of aggression and conflict will find a fertile terrain for growth and will eventually explode.”[7] There are fundamentalist and violent individuals in all peoples and religions—and with intolerant generalizations they become stronger because they feed on hate and xenophobia. By confronting terror with love, we work for peace.

I ask you for meekness and resolve to defend these principles. I ask you not to barter them lightly or apply them superficially. Like Saint Francis of Assisi, let us give everything of ourselves: where there is hatred, let us sow love; where there is injury, let us sow pardon; where there is discord, let us sow unity; where there is error, let us sow truth.[8]

Please know that I pray for you, that I pray with you, and I ask God our Father to accompany and bless you. May He shower you with his love and protect you. I ask you to please pray for me too, and to carry on.

Vatican City, 10 February 2017

[1] Address to the 3rd World Meeting of Popular Movements, Paul VI Audience Hall, 5 November 2016.
[2] Evangelii Gaudium §52

[3] Ibid. §51

[4] Cf. General Audience, 27 April 2016.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Laudato Si’ §23

[7] Evangelii Gaudium §59

[8] Cf. St Francis of Assisi, Peace Prayer.

quinta-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2017

A Guerra Civil no Vaticano. Papa Francisco e os Seus vs Doutrina Secular da Igreja


Hoje li dois artigos que dão conta de uma guerra civil no Vaticano em disputa que envolve a doutrina secular da Igreja, em especial, em relação ao principal sacramento da Igreja: a Eucaristia.

O Papa Francisco, seguramente, está entre aqueles que querem mudar a doutrina secular (e que foi determinada pelo próprio Cristo) em matéria do sacramento da Eucaristia. Basicamente os cardeais que estão junto com ele e o defendem apoiam essa mudança, que permite a Eucaristia para quem está "obstinadamente em pecado grave", em segundo casamento.

O primeiro artigo saiu no The Catholic Herald e o segundo no site The Catholic Culture.

Vale à pena ler os dois, mas o do jornal inglês The Catholic Herald é mais lido e mais completo.

Aqui vai o texto que saiu nesse jornal da Inglaterra:

The Church is now in a full-blown civil war over doctrine

by 
posted 
A few weeks ago, the Jesuit journal La Civiltà Cattolica published a startling article on women priests. Its arguments were familiar: the author, deputy editor Fr Giancarlo Pani, asked readers to consider whether an all-male priesthood might perhaps be outdated. “There is unease,” Fr Pani wrote, “among those who fail to understand how the exclusion of woman from the Church’s ministry can coexist with the affirmation and appreciation of her equal dignity.”
What is startling is that this appeared in a journal edited by one of the Pope’s closest advisers, Fr Antonio Spadaro; a journal very close to the Holy See – every page is vetted by the Vatican – which the Pope recently praised. It suggests that the Church, even at its highest levels, is now entering a full-blown civil war over doctrine. There was a further example yesterday, when Vatican Radio promoted a new book by Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, the president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts.
Cardinal Coccopalmerio says that the divorced and remarried can receive Communion if they have some wish to change their situation – even if they are not endeavouring to live “as brother and sister”. In some cases, the cardinal says, avoiding sex may be “an impossibility”. He gives the example of a man who is deserted by his wife. The man starts living with another woman. She helps to raise his kids. If the relationship breaks down, the man could be plunged into “deep despair” and the children would be left without a maternal figure. The cardinal writes: “Leaving the union would mean, therefore, not fulfilling a moral duty towards innocent persons.” If avoiding sex would “cause difficulty”, then they should continue having sex to keep the relationship going.
The implications of Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s argument seem at odds with the Church’s doctrine. To take the most obvious point first, the cardinal’s view that an adulterous sexual relationship is compatible with receiving Communion is simply in a head-on clash with Catholic teaching. That the two are incompatible has been taught by Pope St John Paul II in 1981, Benedict XVI in 2007, and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1994, not to mention Popes St Innocent I, St Zachary, St Nicholas I … One could go on.
But this is not the only problem with Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s book. Take his assumption that avoiding sex may be an “impossibility”. It is very hard to square this with the Council of Trent’s declaration: “If anyone says that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to observe, let him be anathema.” That means that God, our loving Father, will never stop helping us out. But Cardinal Coccopalmerio thinks that avoiding sin may sometimes be beyond us.
Again, the cardinal’s conclusions about continence “causing difficulty” seem dubious. St Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, condemned the idea that one could “do evil so that good may come of it”. The Church has interpreted this very strictly. St Thomas Aquinas, following this perennial teaching, said that one should not have adulterous sex even if it could save an entire country from disaster. But Cardinal Coccopalmerio thinks one can have adulterous sex if it would “cause difficulty” not to.
As for the question of Communion itself: clearly, someone in a continuing adulterous relationship is at high risk of being a state of mortal sin. Only God knows, but if someone is committing a grave sin, while “discerning” their path in relation to Catholic teaching, then this is a pretty substantial possibility. And taking Communion in a state of mortal sin is, according to St John Vianney, patron saint of parish priests, the worst sin of all – worse than crucifying Christ. Many of the divorced and remarried stay away from Communion precisely to avoid committing a mortal sin. Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s approach suggests that this risk is, in some cases, too insignificant to be an obstacle.
Now, of course, the cardinal does not say any of this outright. He does not say, “I think John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and the tradition of the Church are wrong. I suspect the moral law may sometimes be impossible to keep. I have no problem, in principle, with doing evil so that good may come of it. And I do not think that receiving Communion in a state of mortal sin is such a terrible sin that we need to take great precautions against it.” But the mere fact that he does not say these things is hardly a comfort.
The less generous interpretation would be that religious error always tries to avoid clarity. Blessed John Henry Newman noted that the Arians used “vague ambiguous language, which … would seem to bear a Catholic sense, but which, when worked out in the long run, would prove to be heterodox”. The more generous view is that the cardinal has not quite thought through his words, and would retract them if he realised what they implied.
Cardinal Coccopalmerio is a senior Vatican figure: his book has appeared with evident support from within the Vatican, and without official contradiction. And his opinion is close to that of many other prelates (such as the bishops of Malta and most of those in Germany). So the debate about Communion can no longer be seen – if it ever could – as a marginal squabble between “liberals” and “conservatives”. Nor can it be framed as a question of whether you prefer a bit more mercy or a bit more justice. It is now, quite plainly, a debate about whether the teaching of the Church is still valid. And that means the debate will run and run.

quarta-feira, 15 de fevereiro de 2017

Reino Unido: Criança de 9 Anos Jurou Fidelidade ao Estado Islâmico em Sala de Aula.


Algumas pessoas que leram meu livro sobre Guerra Justa, já me perguntaram como se faz para derrotar o terrorismo islâmico. Certa vez também um amigo economista renomado me enviou um artigo dele sobre terrorismo, usando "teoria dos jogos" (um método da economia).

Esse meu amigo economista e essas pessoas que após lerem meu livro me perguntam sobre como vencer o terrorismo, em geral, pensam o terrorismo islâmico de forma equivocada. O artigo desse meu amigo, por exemplo estava todo errado em termos do que é terrorismo.

Elas imaginam que esse terrorismo é formado por um grupo de pessoas que habitam determinada região e que precisam ser presas ou até mortas, como se fosse a Coreia do Norte.

Eu começo sempre explicando que deve-se buscar o que alimenta o terrorismo islâmico. O que alimenta o terrorismo islâmico é...o Islã, obviamente. As pessoas devem ler o Alcorão para entender o esse terrorismo. Eu escrevi um artigo publicado no Reino Unido, justamente mostrando a base do Alcorão para o terrorismo.

O terrorismo é alimentado por uma ideologia/religião. Sendo assim, o inimigo pode ser seu vizinho, seu marido, seu filho, sua esposa...

Esse terrorismo é pior do que a ideologia comunista, primeiro, porque o comunista deseja viver para dominar as riquezas do mundo, enquanto a ideologia terrorista prega a própria morte do terrorista, se matar infiéis junto com ele, como meio para alcançar a salvação eterna.

Basta a pessoa ficar convencida pela ideologia, que está disponível na internet para quem quiser. Nesse sentido, só se vence o terrorismo islâmico vencendo a ideologia que o alimenta, declarando-a não apta para a vida em sociedade.

Leio hoje sobre o caso do menino de 9 anos que chegou na sala de aula e pronunciou juramento ao Estado Islâmico no Reino Unido. A escola teve de chamar a polícia e o menino foi colocado em tratamento por um ano. Ele aprendeu sobre terrorismo na internet e se convenceu ao ponto de publicamente defender o Estado Islâmico. Onde estavam os pais dele quando ele se convencia? Será que os agentes públicos no Reino Unido são capazes de convencer que se deixa dominar pela ideologia terrorista? Com que base ideológica farão isso para contrapor a ideologia do Islã?

Se isso acontece no Reino Unido, o que deve acontecer em países muçulmanos?

O artigo que trata do menino fala do caso da Turquia, onde muitas escolas estão sendo investigadas.

Vejam o artigo do Clarion Project.

Nine-Year Old Pledges Allegiance to ISIS in UK

A nine-year-old British boy stood up in class and pledged allegiance to the Islamic State terrorist group, he told the media.
Teachers informed the government’s Prevent program, who came to the school and spent a year holding de-radicalization sessions with the child.
Identified only as Haroon and now aged 10, he told the BBC Radio Four’s Today program how he became entranced with the terrorist group following the Paris attacks in 2015.
Haroon began searching for information about the group over the internet. Initially, he found news stories and a Channel Four documentary, but then accessed Islamic State propaganda material directly, including beheading and torture videos.
He also said he had been bullied at school and called a “terrorist” by his classmates, which drove him to Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) propaganda.
"I saw men with hands behind their backs. They were hit and told to sit down. That's when they cut their heads off,” Haroon said.
"On a weekend, everyone was outside playing, so I would sit freely in the living room with the computer."
Radicalizing children is a top priority for ISIS, which produces carefully-branded propaganda material specifically aimed at children.
Meanwhile, Turkish authorities are investigating a number of schools in Istanbul reportedly set up by ISIS.
In one case, prosecutors say they found discs containing notes of classes teaching ISIS material to students. Police are investigating 35 people in connection with the school.
Among other things, the school was allegedly teaching children that those who celebrate Turkish national holidays are “infidels” and educated them to oppose Turkish institutions such as the courts, military and the entire political system.
According to the indictment, prosecutors are seeking aggravated life sentences for six of the suspects in the case on charges of “attempting to remove the constitutional order.” Other suspects are charged with membership in a terrorist organization for which prosecutors are seeking a prison sentence of 15 years each.
Turkish media has reported that more schools are under investigation.
 

terça-feira, 14 de fevereiro de 2017

Portugal Prepara Documentação para Beatificação da Irmã Lúcia


Ano passado, eu fui a Fátima. Vocês não fazem ideia da minha vontade de voltar lá.  Penso nisso regularmente.

Esse ano é muito especial pois completa-se 100 anos das aparições de Fátima.

Em 13 de maio de 2000, as crianças Francisco e Jacinta foram beatificadas por João Paulo II. A outra vidente, irmã Lúcia, faleceu em 2005.

Li hoje que Portugal preparou documentação de 15 mil páginas em defesa da beatificação de Lúcia, que será encaminhada ao Vaticano.

Na próxima segunda-feira, dia 20, é o dia de celebração de Francisco e Jacinta. Rezemos para que Lúcia, que tanto agiu em vida em defesa do que Nossa Senhora de Fátima pede, se junte a eles.

Vejam abaixo texto do jornal The Catholic Herald.

Church leaders in Portugal present evidence for Fatima nun’s beatification