Showing posts with label Don Antonio Livi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Don Antonio Livi. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 10, 2016

Msgr. Antonio Livi: "This Pope Lets Public Opinion Collapse Within the Church"

The Epistemology Professor Msgr. Antonio Livi, Contributor
to the Encyclical Fides et Ratio (1998), on some questions about
this Pontificate
(Rome) Should the Church apologize to homosexuals, as Pope Francis said in June? What consequences have yet spontaneous and controversial chatter of the Pope with the press? How does one receive Holy Communion? And why doesn't pope  Pope Francis kneel for the consecration? These questions were asked by Msgr. Antonio Livi, who had been involved with  the encyclical Fides et Ratio  (Faith and Reason, 1998) of John Paul II..
Msgr. Antonio Livi was Dean of the Faculty of Arts of the Pontifical Lateran University  where he is professor emeritus of epistemology.  He is president of the International Science and Common Sense Association (ISCA), editor of the theological journals Fides Catholica and Divinitas , president of the Scientific Advisory Board for the publication of the collected works of Cardinal Giuseppe Siri and founder of Unio Apostolica Fides et Ratio for the scientific defense of Catholic truth.

Still  missing in the fourth year of the Argentine pontificate is an official explanation of why Pope Francis does not genuflect during the consecration. It is often heard that it was a health issue, but there is no evidence. The Vatican expert Antonio Socci was even accused of "lying" by other Catholics, as he criticized  Pope Francis for this. Attempts by the Catholic media have published  rebuttal images of the kneeling pope, without realizing that they therefore,  have not weakened doubts about why the Pope does not genuflect even during the Eucharistic Prayer,  but strengthened them. The pope kneels on Holy Thursday at the most "spectacular" Washing feet, he knelt in a prayer meeting of the Charismatic Renewal, he kneels, if he confesses and he has even knelt  at Eucharistic adoration. All the more incomprehensible and oppressive is the question is still asked why he consistently omits the prescribed genuflection in the celebration of Holy Mass.

"Pope flattered the world for self-promotion after"

FQ: In the Return from Armenia Pope Francis said in the traditional flying press conference among others, that the Church should apologize to  homosexuals. What is your opinion?
Monsignor Antonio Livi. I think that is the statement of Pope Francis on this point causes   too many different interpretations and misunderstandings on a pastoral and doctrinal level. Incidentally, what Bergoglio says in a conversation with journalists while returning from an apostolic journey, though interesting and important, yet certainly can not ascribe itself to the value of a magisterial act. Still less is such a discourse that is of such doctrinal soundness, that it could be opposed to the actual documents of the Magisterium. When the Catholic Church officially would take a stand on this issue, they always had - and it has today - a coherent line which is guided by the Word of God and the doctrine which interprets this word in an infallible way. The doctrinal tradition of the Church (the dogma and the moral standards that follow from it) can now be easily gleaned from any Catholic faithful if he has recourse to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, desired and promulgated by St. John Paul II.  Also, in terms of the judgment of the Church on homosexual acts, I would  not have much to add to what we read in the Catechism, which contains a safe, definitive and very clear teaching. The Church has always warned all, who wanted to learn from her the revealed truth of God, about the seriousness inherent in  voluntary and conscious homosexual acts that are and are among the abominations, a sin against nature, according to "which cry out to God for vengeance." It is therefore impossible that the Pope wanted to abolish a conversation on the plane the entire tradition of the Church and the applicable provisions of canon law. Rather, I think that Pope Francis - as usual - might be trying to send a message that is agreeable to the culture, which now occupies a hegemonic position in the Western world, a culture that is characterized by absurd demands for legitimacy, yes to claim that homosexual behavior has public role models, including the imitation of the true, natural marriage. It is obvious that the Pope, in this as in many other occasions, talking to the journalists from the international media, followed criteria that are not expressed by the Magisterium, but only the Vatican diplomacy and the media policy. He wanted to flatter the world. He has said yes,  which these  people like, when you speak politically correctly. It is a kind of self-promotion  by putting down the Catholic Church. From this viewpoint, it is not to dare to say that this Pope (without thereby pointing fingers or trying to assess the non-negotiable decisions of the supreme authority of the Church) is not so much the Church as such, but   public opinion has certainly collapsed within the Church. In fact, this kind of spontaneous speech leaves many people - who now get their information almost solely from secular and Masonic media - think that the Church really has changed opinion on these issues and  has set aside the everlasting doctrine.  But this is not so, because the can not be so.

"Hand Communion is Protestant and to be avoided"


Kneeling Communion under Pope Benedict XVI.

FQ: The Holy Communion: how is it properly received?
Monsignor Antonio Livi. The consecrated Host, which is the body of Christ is to be received in the mouth and while kneeling. It has been prescribed  this way for centuries by the Church. This is the only form that has respect for the sacrament of the Eucharist, the reputation of the liturgy and the feeling of adoration which arises from the true faith in the real presence of Christ, the incarnate God under the species of bread and wine, appropriate when the priest has consecrated it in the Mass. Hand Communion, which is somewhat Protestant (because they wants to emphasize the dimension of the meal, which the Eucharist has) should be avoided, and was in fact granted by Pope Paul VI. only as an exception, to appeal to  some Catholic episcopates in Europe, and Pope Benedict XVI. was clearly against it. The practice of hand Communion trivializes the sacrament, and then sometimes it comes actually leads to mass profanation as has happened in Manila on the occasion of the Mass of Pope Francis, attended by two million people, and reduced the moment of Communion to an indescribable chaos. Communion is to be offered in the mouth and if possible to the faithful, kneeling to receive. By kneeling, we bring all our worship to expression. Today one kneels only slightly because the Lutheran spirit has penetrated, and also because the consciousness of the sacred is disappearing. One forgets that the Gospel says: "Therefore God has highly exalted / and gave him the name, / which is above every name, so that / every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, before name of Jesus and every tongue confess that /, Jesus Christ is Lord' -for the glory of God the Father." (Phil 2:9-11).

"Omission of the genuflection probably not for a health problem"


Kneeling foot washing on Holy Thursday

FQ: Pope Francis omits genuflecting during the consecration: Why?
Monsignor Antonio Livi. One has to ask him. The "sections" of the Roman Missal (also of Paul VI., which is currently in force for the ordinary form of the rite) stipulate that the celebrant after the consecration of the bread and also after the consecration of the wine has to genuflect to mark  worship. No one can deliberately ignore what is required by applicable liturgical rules. It seems to me, at least according to the published images that the show the Pope on Holy Thursday kneeling for the ritual washing of the feet,  makes me think that it is, therefore, not an orthopedic problem, nor is it a matter of health. I fear that this behavior is a bad example, but I'm not going to make a drama out of it and it does not scandalize me. Church history is full of popes in one way or another (always coincidentally, never substantially) gave a bad example. The same Popes also gave at the same time good examples of holiness and especially, they were never lacking because they preserved the despositum fidei  intact, which neither originated with them or was dependent upon them, but the word of God himself, Who loves us and wants our eternal salvation.
Introduction / translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Corrispondenza Romana / Fides et Forma
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches....
AMDG

Tuesday, August 4, 2015

The Dubious Foundation of Kasper's Theology -- Friederich Schelling and The Bishops' Synod

Cardinal Kasper and the foundation of his theoloical
thinking.
(Rome) Don Antonio Livi, the former dean of the Faculty of Arts of the Pontifical Lateran University is concerned with the "dubious basis of Kasper's proposal" ( Disputationes Theologicae ) on the divorced and remarried for the Synod of Bishops on the family in October. Pope Francis opened a games room for German Cardinal Walter Kasper to attack the  teaching and practice of the Church  by attempting to replace it with a new theology. It is a basis enough to illuminate the fundamentals of Cardinal Kasper's theology. 
The first part of Don Antonio Livi's analysis was published on the feast of St. Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit order, to which  Pope Francis belongs, in Disputationes Theologicae entitled "The Eucharist Kasper."
In addition to the danger of profaning the Sacrament of Penance, "we stand before the final attack of Gnostic-Masonic thinking against the Church of Christ", says Disputationes Theologicae . Don Livi is concerned with the implications of the conflict, by exposing the "Eucharistic theology" behind the Kasper-Propsal.

Kasper's writings are "not very" original, suffering from an "obvious lack of proper theological methodology"

Antonio Livi's "first consideration" was to "primarily ecclesiologically and pastorally" find that Kasper's theological creativity shows  "a lack of proper theological methodology evident in them." His theses "rarely" have original features, as Kasper is "content to repeat what was already represented his teachers, especially Karl Rahner."
"In every single one of the theses  advocated by Kasper" there is a lack, viewed from an epistemological point of view,  of "that epistemic consistency indicated by true theology." Kasper's "theological research are not hypotheses (and also don't raise the claim) of offering a scientific interpretation  of the Church through  the Holy Scriptures, the dogmatic doctrines, liturgy and faith." They were "rather an ambiguous expression of a religious philosophy, an expression with which I refer to those arbitrary interpretations of Christianity's own religious terms by the major systems of historicizing idealism like that  Hegel and Schelling brought forth in the 19th century."  Of these systems of thought,  "that are epistemologically, purely philosophical, primarily in the Lutheran milieu in which they have arisen, can be regarded  theologically, to have affected many Catholic theologians including Walter Kasper in the 20th century whose formation was carried out by those at the Tübingen School, as he complacently writes in one of his early works. They have launched "a renewal of theology and of the entire German Catholicism"  in the encounter with Schelling and Hegel, according to Kasper in his book on the absolute in history. Philosophy and Theology of History in the Later Philosophy of Schelling, Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, Mainz, 1965.

Kasper's "Throwback to the ideological positions of theologians condemned by the Holy See in the 19th century"

The so-called "encounter with Schelling and Hegel" was believed by the theologians of the Tübingen School as necessary to "renew" all the "conciliar" theology and with the Church, which is in fact an obscure throwback to the ideological positions that theologians (not coincidentally also German), who were sentenced in the 19th century by the Holy See because of the application  of Hegel's and Schelling's  categories of idealism to theology ".
"The fact that in the 20th century Catholic scholars wanted a struggle against the metaphysical tradition in theology through the systematic adoption of a religious philosophy conflict that was developed in the Lutheran world and always criticized the Catholic, can have no other plausible explanation than in their psychological dependence on the Lutheran theologians, whose hegemony in German culture has always been absolute (Consider that  even Kierkegaard's critique of Hegel emerged and remained within the  Lutheran  religious culture). "Between Hegel and Schelling"  Kasper preferred latter, whom he "called, 'the solitary Great' " 1 , and "from the Gnostic character of his philosophical and religious studies, showed himself intrigued without feeling even any embarrassment because of their clearly pantheistic result.".
Kasper's picking up "specifically Schelling's themes" recalls the analogous methodical decision of another German Catholic theologian, that of Klaus Hemmerle, in whose school Piero Coda has also been formed. This operates as  a "theological method that is radically inconsistent with that of the true theology".

Kasper's Summary of Schelling "a meaningless accumulation of words"

Kasper  "seems to unreservedly want to replace  the inner-worldly premises of the philosophical analysis of the Christian faith with Schelling". In his words, "with whom he is convinced to renew the Catholic theology based on these assumptions,' you can clearly perceive that it lacks that critical sense, the necessary prerequisite of a scientific research, which is why his summary of the religious philosophy of Schelling is a meaningless accumulation of words: "Schelling summarizes namely the relationship between natural and supernatural is not static-metaphysical-over time, but dynamic and historical. The essence of  Christian revelation is just this that it is history. " 2
"What does it mean that the Christian revelation is essentially 'history'? The history of what, history by whom? Is the history of men (what Kasper calls nature) in relation to the action of God (the supernatural)' to understand)? "In this case, said Livi, it was about the theological concept of "salvation history", the salvific Initiative of God, Creator and Redeemer, who was revealed by God Himself to man, first through the prophets, then definitely by the Incarnation of the Word.  "But that can not be Kasper's understanding, because that would correspond to all the traditional theological doctrine which is rejected according to Kasper  but, since it implies a 'static-metaphysical-timeless' way,  'to conceive the relationship between natural and supernatural,'" says Livi. Kasper had admitted "(unconsciously) the distinction between the world (creation) and God (the Creator)" where God can not be equated with the "history", "unless you would ultimately exclude God from theological discourse, and only talk of  the world and its affairs, even when it comes to the religious life and the Church. But that is what Kasper says, as will be shown. "

In a Worldly Ecclesiology there for the Eucharistic mystery not theological place more

"The frequent changes of theological propositions that have characterized the scientific and journalistic work Kaspers' leave, remember that" so much a viable proposal for the interpretation of the dogma of the "ultimate purpose" of his work is driven by the desire of its salvific implementation not in the lives of believers, but the urge to impose public opinion as a leading figure of the progressive wing of contemporary theology, especially in the context of ecumenism, thus the 'dialogue' with the Protestants, overlooking ritual and doctrine for an 'approach' between them and the Catholic Church."
"In any case," Kasper's  constant appeals for "reforms" in the Church - "whether institutional, liturgical, pastoral reforms - miss any necessary relation to the constitutive 'form' of the Church as a divine institution.'" That is clear "from the devaluation of the specifically theological principles of ecclesiology, the first place to the express recognition of the divine nature of Christ as the Incarnate Word,  that the he founded the Church to continue his salvific mission through instructing the faithful preaching of the supernatural mysteries and of sanctifying grace the sacraments."
"The specific theological principles of ecclesiology had been linked in the years before the Council to another theologian of the 20th century, the Swiss Charles Journet, who confirmed  the Christological dogma (and also the Marian)", in his treatise L'Eglise du Verbe incarné 3 whose doctrine gets to be seen for the most part in the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, especially in the eighth chapter, where the Council speaks of Mary, Mother of God and Mother of the Church. 4

The anti-metaphysical struggle of the "conciliar theologian" Kasper

Kasper, who as a "counciliar theologian" presents himself, however, ignoring systematically the specific theological concepts of ecclesiology, but he claimed the Catholic faith of the "forms and formula" to "clean", even though they have just been to the effect solemnly confirmed by the Second Vatican Council, because these forms and formulas' ensure the supernatural (transcendent) character of the divine reality and the worship that pays the Church of Christ, who is God, the eternal Word, 'Who became flesh' in time and truly present in the Eucharist, as it justifies the devotion to Mary, the Mother of God is recognized as since it is true Mother of Christ, who is God. 5
The "struggle for the abolition of the theological concepts with a metaphysical 'taste' that is claimed to be purely pastoral needs (the usual requirement, that  the people of today are allegedly adverse to incomprehensible and unacceptable language), is aimed in reality at the elimination of all basic principles from Catholic ecclesiology starting with the Annunciation, by subjecting them to a systematic, rationalistic criticism, beginning with the phrase, 'Word made ​​flesh.'" Kasper had this reduced this notion in his famous work "Jesus the Christ" 6 to immanent terms, outlining it by "his anti-metaphysical" Christology. "In reality," it was dealing with a reformulation of Christian dogma in the sense of the religious philosophy of Schelling. In this way of thinking is the self-revelation of God, Christ, no longer as a mediator between God and men 7believed and worshiped, but reduced to a historical manifestation of the "economic" Trinity. 8

Kasper is unable to emancipate himself from Schelling - denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ

"Kasper is unable to emancipate himself from Schelling's revelation philosophy, which, however, flourished in the same German environment as Romano Guardini 9, and so he went off track as a Catholic theologian in an absurd work of deconstruction of the traditional Christological dogma. Even the historical evidence of Christ's divinity, whose intention  was to prove his omnipotence  and so to support the faith of his disciples, are subjected by Kasper to  doubt," and finally  "in order to deny what they really are, namely the empirical evidence of divine intervention." "From the implicit denial of the divinity of Christ occurs because the persistent use of the expression Kasper uses, 'God of Jesus Christ', as well as the title of one of his works is (The God of Jesus Christ), and God by separating the name from the name Christ semantically, implies the denial of the divinity of Jesus. " 10
"In fact, Kasper belongs entirely to those ideological current, which was headed by Hans Küng and Karl Rahner, and understands theology as anthropology, by recommending the Church, not so much from God, but to speak of the people. 11  In accordance with this precise speculative orientation, Kasper puts aside the discourse on the dual nature of Christ, the eternal Word,   and reduces Christology to a phenomenological discourse on the conscience of Jesus, as a person who speaks of God,'" said Don Antonio Livi, who was from 2002 to his retirement in 2008, Dean of the Faculty of Arts of the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome.
Introduction / translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Disputationes Theologicae
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...