De Mattei: "Moderados Não Podem Derrotar o Esquerdismo na Igreja"

O renomado historiador católico italiano Roberto de Mattei escreveu excepcional artigo para a Corrispondenza Romana no qual trata do destruição do Instituto João Paulo II pelo Papa Francisco. O artigo dele foi reproduzido pelo Rorate Caeli em inglês.

De Mattei debate um artigo de George Weigel que relaciona o debate teológico que coloca de um lado João Paulo II e Bento XVI e do outro o Papa Francisco, e relaciona as partes com duas revistas teológicas católicas.

A  Communio, que representaria o pensamento teológico de João Paulo II e Bento XVI e teria um viés moderado em relação ao progressismo, tentando ver o Concílio Vaticano II dentro da Tradição da Igreja. Procurando ver uma "hermenêutica da continuidade" no Concílio Vaticano II, mesmo que o Concílio Vaticano II não condene nem o comunismo.

E a Concilium, que representaria o Papa Francisco, que tem um pensamento teológico de ruptura à esquerda da doutrina da Igreja,sendo uma revista esquerdista, progressista.

A Communio foi fundada em 1967. A Concilium, foi fundada até antes, em 1965. A Communio foi uma ruptura da Concilium, talvez procurando menos radicalismo.

Mas apesar de realmente se diferenciarem no tom em relação à Tradição da Igreja, os teólogos que fundaram e escreveram ambas são praticamente os mesmos: Henri du Lubac, Hans von Batlthasar, Bento XVI e Walter Kasper.

De Mattei fala da semelhança dos autores nessas revistas católicas e centra sua análise no fato que João Paulo II e Bento XVI procuraram afastar a "´péssima teologia" da Concilium apenas por meio de textos teológicos e incentivos a institutos que pregassem a "boa teologia". Eles acharam que a disseminação de uma boa teologia eliminaria naturalmente a péssima teologia. Como de Mattei lembra, eles não observaram o adágio dos economistas que dizem há séculos que é a moeda má que elimina a moeda boa. 

Isto é, João Paulo II e Bento XVI procuraram não entrar em guerra direta contra os péssimos teólogos, deixaram eles livres, usaram apenas o diálogo, achando que isso os silenciaria.

João Paulo II e Bento XVI fugiram do confronto, fizeram apenas uma disputa por meio de artigos e institutos de ensino católico.

Mas de Mattei diz que para se vencer péssimos teólogos que arrastam almas para o inferno é necessários homens de guerra, de homens que os frente à luz do dia, moderados não os vencerão.

Vejam parte do excelente artigo de Roberto de Mattei abaixo:

De Mattei: The John Paul II Institute has fallen. But has it fallen with honour?

Roberto de Mattei

Corrispondenza Romana

August 7, 2019

In the momentous battle presently going on inside the Church a tower has fallen: The Institute of John Paul II.  So as to contextualize the event, the article by George Weigel which carries the title - The Vandals sack Rome again”* is helpful.  According to Weigel, after the Second Vatican Council  a “War of the Conciliar Succession” opened between “two groups of previously-allied reformist theologians”, identified by two periodicals, Concilium and Communio: the former ultra-progressive, the latter moderate. At stake was the battle “for the control of faculty slots in theology departments around the world”.

...

There is a gap however in our friend George Weigel’s construction that that we will try to fill in. First of all, it should be remembered that the twenty-seven years of John Paul II’s pontificate were followed by Benedict XVI’s eight years in the governing of the Church. In all, thirty-five years of ecclesiastic predominance by moderates. How could it happen, notwithstanding this long period of reformist governance, that the Jacobins were able to take power, exercising at present, merciless repression against their adversaries?   

The doubt arises that this was due to the intrinsic weakness of the moderate front. Doctrinal weakness, inasmuch as it was based on the attempt to justify an event at any cost, such as the Second Vatican Council, which bears the most serious  responsibilities, beginning with its failure to condemn Communism at a historical time when this constituted the gravest threat to the Church and the West.  Strategic weakness, given that those who are convinced of defending the truth, cannot tolerate that error has continued to be taught for decades in the ecclesiastic universities and seminaries, as happened during the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. The strategy of promoting the truth, avoiding the condemnation of error, does not pay. The facts have not confirmed this strategy, but they have corroborated the law of Thomas Gresham (1519-1579), whereby bad money drives out good - and not vice-versa.

Benedict XVI’s renunciation of the papacy on February 11th 2013, was, for that matter, the declaration of the completed failure of this strategy. The hermeneutic of continuity proved to be incapable of countering ecclesiastic Jacobinism.. 

Jorge Mario Bergoglio pits his “living magisterium” of the Church, against those who invoke “the living magisterium” of the Second Vatican Council.  If a Council of the Church is always right, how can a Pope be faulted by presenting himself as an incarnation of that event? Pope Francis, for his part, like all Jacobins, detests more than anything the ambiguity and contradictions of the moderates, whereas he respects and fears the coherence of the counter-revolutionaries. Further, if the John Paul II Institute is being sacked today by vandals, it is precisely because it did not resist Pope Francis openly, when it was the time to do so.  

...

On August 3rd, in an interview with La Verità, Monsignor Livio Melina presents himself as a victim of unjust purgation, asserting that he had been struck for interpreting Amoris laetitia in the light of the Church’s Magisterium. The problem is that Amoris laetitia cannot be interpreted in the light of the perennial Magisterium, given that it proposes a new moral paradigm, irreconcilable with Veritatis splendor.  Pope Francis is convinced of it, and so are we. Perhaps even Monsignor Melina is convinced of it too, but he has never said so publically. This silence did not avert his decapitation.  Why be surprised? Hasn’t the history of the French Revolution taught us anything?

Today the battle requires men who fight with clarity pro or contra the Tradition of the Church.

But if it happens that a Pope takes a stand against Tradition, we must respectfully disassociate ourselves from this, remaining firmly inside the Church, from which he, not us, seems to want to separate himself. A gifted theologian like Monsignor Melina has all the intellectual instruments to understand how it is possible to resist the doctrinal and pastoral errors of a Pope without ever lacking in the love and devotion we must reserve for the Cathedra of Peter.  The time for minimalism is over. The time has come when the Truth and error must look each other in the eye, without compromise. This is the only possibility the Truth has of winning. 

We need men who fight and if necessary fall - but with honour.