Impide Fuentes Indeseables


IP Address
by Tejji

lunes, 17 de junio de 2019

 Sobre el infierno 

por James V. Schall, S.J. (1928-2019)

Tomado de: https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2019/02/25/on-hell/
 publicado ahí el lunes, 25 de febrero de 2019
Traducido del inglés por Roberto Hope

Generalmente hablando, el infierno no es un tema del que se guste hablar. Aun cuando no existiera, sigue siendo un tema vedado. Nadie piensa acabar ahí,  especialmente si sus pecados son de color rojo escarlata.

El efecto de la postura de que "nadie merece el infierno" es que hace parecer que nada de lo que hagamos, a nosotros mismos o a otros, hace al final de cuentas una diferencia en el universo. Todos reciben su premio eterno, si es que existe, sólo por ser quien es y no obstante sus creencias y actos.

Leemos en 2 Tesalonicenses que Jesús vendrá  "en medio de una llama de fuego, y tomará venganza de los que no conocen a Dios y de los que que no obedecen al Evangelio de nuestro Señor Jesús. Éstos sufrirán la pena de una ruina eterna, alejados de la presencia del Señor y de la gloria de su poder cuando venga en aquel día a ser glorificado en sus santos" Hablando de un pasaje contra cultural.

Aun cuando pocos parecen reflexionar sobre él, el infierno constituye realmente un buen tema en el cual pensar. Puede pensarse de él aun cuando alguien no acepte o no desee aceptar su realidad. [En mis libros 'The Politics of Heaven and Hell' (La Política del Cielo y el Infierno') y 'At the Limits of Political Philosophy' (En los Límites de la Filosofía Política) pueden hallarse capítulos sobre el infierno y la filosofía política]. Irónicamente, quizas, el infierno puede ser y es una realidad y una enseñanza muy positiva. Su origen no es exclusivamente judeo-cristiano, como lo sabe todo aquél que haya leído el último libro de La República de Platón.

Oímos de opiniones muy extendidas de teólogos sobre este tema, para muchos un tema preocupante. ¿No es Dios cruel con tan sólo mencionarlo? Sin embargo, es difícil leer el Nuevo Testamento (hay quienes lo siguen haciendo) sin acabar concluyendo que Cristo no tenía problema alguno con el infierno salvo por evitarnos llegar ahí. Él también quería salvar a toda persona. Pero sólo podía salvar a todo el que, por la forma en que vivía y por sus propias elecciones, no merecía  llegar ahí.

La sola cosa que ni el mismo Dios puede hacer es crear un ser racional libre y luego darse la vuelta y salvarlo independientemente de lo que éste elija. El mismo punto de vivir la vida interior de la Trinidad, a la cual somos invitados pero no coercionados, es que todo mundo debe llegar ahí por su propio gusto. Ninguna amistad con el hombre o con Dios es posible si es coercionada contra su voluntad. Si el hombre hubiera sido creado simplemente para vivir la vida interior de Dios sin que  tuviera que contribuir a ello, no podría encontrarse una razón para haber sido creado, en primer lugar.

Recuerdo haber leído en algún escrito de Hannah Arendt, que el segundo presidente de los Estados Unidos decía que la doctrina del infierno es la enseñanza cristiana (y platónica) más importante  para la política.

¿Por qué, podríamos preguntarnos, habría dicho Adams algo tan extravagante? Cuando vemos el escenario político de nuestros días, no parece ser tan extravagante. La base de todo orden civilizado ha sido minada por un voluntarismo sistemático que no sólo lo permite todo, excepto quizás la virtud, sino que ha insistido a cada paso en llamar al bien mal.

De hecho, muchos han insistido en cambiar el ser que Dios creó inicialmente, en su propia imagen (la del hombre), una imagen que rápidamente ha eliminado toda inteligibilidad dada al cuerpo o al alma del hombre.

Lo único que hay que agregar es que las colectividades no "pecan." No tienen almas inmortales. Los pecados se cometen solamente por personas individuales que son responsables de rechazar lo que ha sido revelado y lo que puede conocerse con la razón. ¿Estoy argumentando que los pensadores y los políticos individuales en cualquier país, incluyendo el nuestro, que ocasionan estas perversidades están comprendidos aquí? De hecho, sí.

Un parecer popular es que el infierno existe, pero que nadie está ahí. Al fin y al cabo, Dios se las ingenió para salvar a todos a pesar de su historial de pecado y sus actos perversos. Ya que Dios quiere que todos se salven, como lo quiere, debe concluirse que todos son salvados a pesar de ellos mismos. O quizás en la hora cero hasta a los peores pecadores se les dio la gracia para que se arrepintieran, y lo hicieron.

Podemos especular sobre estas opiniones. No son teóricamente imposibles. Pero el autor de Tesalonicenses 2 dijo que si rechazan las Buenas Nuevas, serían perdidos eternamente. La lógica de esta positura implicaría que, si son salvados, de alguna manera, implícita o explícitamente, aceptaron las Buenas Nuevas.

Antes mencioné que la del infierno es una doctrina positiva. ¿Cómo? Cada persona humana es tan importante que quienquiera que peque seriamente contra ella (ver los mandamientos), en cualquier momento o lugar, si no se arrepiente, es merecedor del infierno. Puesto de manera positiva, la realidad del infierno define lo que nuestra relación de unos con otros debe ser; algo noble, sí, algo sin pecado.

sábado, 1 de junio de 2019

Natural Law and Theology

 A Classical Perspective 


By Juan Antonio Widow 
Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez de Viña del Mar (Chile) 

Taken from: Cuestiones Fundamentales de Derecho Natural
Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara, Publisher
Translated from the Spanish by Roberto Hope


This essay is the paper presented by the author at the III Jornadas Hispánicas de Derecho Natural, held in Guadalajara, México on November 26-28, 2008.

1. Revelation and Nature

It is clear that natural law is not a proper object of the faith. Its condition of being natural is itself proof that we are not dealing with a revealed dogma, to which one can only access with the supernatural aid of theological faith. The truths related to natural law are not imposed on assent in the same way as, for instance, the truths of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ our Lord or of the forgiveness of sins are imposed. Which would lead us to hold that the topic of natural law is not a properly theological subject. To this exclusion should be arrived if it is considered that the foundation of theology is what God has revealed; that is, what constitutes the object of the faith, and that theological knowledge would have to confine itself to the formal and express contents of Revelation.

However, the matter is not that simple. It is not that Divine Revelation makes present to us a particular set of truths for us to believe, and that our knowledge, founded upon the faith, should confine itself strictly to that set of truths, without transcending their particularity. It is not a knowledge which should resolve itself only in the personal salvation of he who upholds it. While it is true that Revelation indicates what someone should do to save his soul and that, besides, God, through the Church, gives him the efficacious means for achieving that end, faith in Divine Revelation does not mainly consist of this; that is, it does not reduce itself to presenting particular solutions to solve particular problems.

Theological faith is knowledge. While being it knowledge of certain truths, these, as far as they are truths, are in essential communication with all other truths. If intellectual knowledge were to confine itself to recording the fact or the mere singular act, it would not be properly knowledge, it would be a frustrated kind of knowledge, like someone standing at the door without intending to go in. It would be a knowledge which, because of its sensitive nature, would inevitably degenerate into sentiment or into a strictly subjective phenomenon. Understanding attains its complete form when it opens itself to the universality of its object. This also applies to the knowledge of the faith. and not only to natural reason. In the object of the faith, the Divine Revelation, all truth is implicitly present. To make it explicit is the purpose of theology.

Intellectual knowledge is then, in itself, universal; that is, the perfection to which it naturally tends is to know everything to the extent possible. From its object are not excluded, consequently, any specific realities. However, there is an order in the intellectual knowledge which corresponds to its own essence. There are things the intelligibility of which is dependent on others; for which reason, what is pertinent is that knowledge have, as its main purpose, that which is the source of intelligibility for everything else. For the philosopher, these are the first causes: he is guided to his discovery by the principles of natural reason. In contrast, for the believer, placed in the same attitude of searching for perfect knowledge, that source is also the first causes but already identified with the God of Revelation. It is the faith the one that delivers the key. And in this way, if wisdom, the principles of which are those of natural reason, is the end and perfection of man, by an analogous and higher reason, it is also that knowledge of which the faith is the principle, in which what philosophy knows is known, accepting its concepts, its language, and its argumentations, but introducing itself in the divine intimacy of the first cause, as it is revealed by God Himself. Philosophy, in its principal form, which is metaphysics, and theology are the maximally universal sciences: they know everything in its principle. There is nothing, consequently, which can be excluded from this, which Thomas Aquinas calls the sacred doctrine. In his Summa theologiae, for example, he points out what are the means to mitigate sadness, and he mentions, among others, sleep and bathing; well, this is, materialiter, good psychological perception, but formaliter, is theology, since it touches the topic in what relates to the order by which man, redeemed creature, is disposed with respect to his Creator and Redeemer. 


2. The theological perspective's contribution to natural law.

Thus, both the notion and the reality of natural law have been studied, dealt with and taught by ancient theologians, not as a marginal question, object of some accidental impulse of curiosity as could have been the study of the crab's digestive system or that of the formulas of alchemy. In spite of this, as said before, we would not be able to reject these as entirely foreign topics, since the inquirer in metaphysics considers everything, even the fly that tickles his nose, inasmuch as it is a being, and the theologian also considers that fly inasmuch as it is a creature of God. This could be considered a justification, perhaps, for lovers of persnickety, which, this notwithstanding does not take truth away from what we have said. There will always be some difference between the study of the crab's digestion and of that which is naturally just in man's conduct; this difference lies in the transcendence and universality of the latter topic as compared to the former. It must be presumed, certainly, what is common to both, which is their partaking in the mystery of being. At least the latter and not the former is normally included as part of that set of topics which are covered in a work of universa theologia.

In this manner, then, it can be understood that there have been notable theologians which engaged themselves in the problems related to natural law and that they have addressed them not for reason of them being particular problems, but to the extent that they are part of that whole which is the object of theological sapience. As a source of authority, it behooves us to keep in mind the names of theologians who have dealt with the theoretical and practical problems of natural law: suffice it to mention Thomas Aquinas, Francisco de Vitoria, and Domingo Soto. Thomas, in whom we mainly put our attention in the course of this presentation, deals with questions referring to natural law in works of theology and with theological intention.

Theology has as its formal object, according to what the term expresses, God's being itself, and to that object, human understanding has access through faith; that is, by means of a supernatural assent to what God reveals. However, through Revelation, we know only some, not all, universal truths. They are those, the knowledge of which is necessary for men's eternal salvation. It is not necessary indeed, for the salvation of souls, that God reveal, for instance, the reason for a physical law or of what consists the difference, in essence, between angels and archangels. Now, it has been seen that divine truth is the source and principle of all truth. All truth can, for the same reason, be known inasmuch as it partakes of that source or principle, since, inasmuch as it is truth, it is participation in divine truth. This is why, its knowledge, while not formally of faith, can be a theological knowledge if its truth is recognized as divine truth to the extent it is participated by the creature. This may perhaps be not of immediate interest to homo viator, for whom what is most important are the truths which refer to eternal salvation, but it is to him to the extent he aspires to wisdom; that is, inasmuch as he is a theologian.

But it is necessary to be more precise. Among the truths that can be known through natural reason, it is in philosophical truths where a greater closeness exists to the truths of the faith, due to their universality and to the fact that their object is the first causes, which is to say, the divine truths themselves, even though they are not philosophically known as divine. The existence of a Revelation, though limited to the truths necessary for salvation, shows that divine truth can be revealed and that in such condition, in that of revealable divine truth, all truth is comprised. The divinely revealable and intelligible characters are merged into a single one. Thus, Thomas writes that "what is covered by the diverse philosophical sciences, the sacred doctrine, which is one, can consider under a single reason, that is, of being divinely revealable, so that the sacred doctrine be like an impression of the divine science, which, being one and simple, extends to everything" (Saint Thomas accustoms to say in two lines — sometimes uncomfortably to us, his disciples — and with perfect clarity, what one has tried to explain laboredly and awkwardly in several pages.)

Every revelation, as it is obvious, is ordered to the knowledge of those to whom it is revealed, it is a making known. If the communications medium is not knowable to the intended recipient of the revelation, then the latter simply does not exist. Faith is knowledge and as such resides in man's intelligence: there it is supernaturally infused in such a way that said intelligence is elevated and in that manner accesses the Truth, the knowledge of which exceeds man's natural capability. In no respect does the faith nullify or overwhelm natural intelligence; on the contrary, it is the created intelligence the one which is elevated to the knowledge of the increated Truth. Human intelligence attains its perfection this way, that is, supernaturally, but in accordance with its proper order or in accordance with its nature: it is its perfection as intelligence what is thusly achieved, which is to say, as far as it can attain its proper object, the knowledge of being.

Divine Revelation, consequently, to be revelation, it necessarily has to be given to men in human language; its object, divine truth, cannot manifest itself to us if not by means of notions, judgments, and analogies which are expressed by means of the same language of everyday communication, of the sciences and of philosophy; that is, by means of the language, the only natural bridge between the intelligence of humans which can penetrate the truth of things. If man cannot comprehend what is communicated to him, there is no revelation. Which certainly, as pertains to divine Revelation, it does not exclude mystery, since to comprehend is not the same as to understand. It must be insisted upon, that what is made known to the believer, he understands. An act of faith is an act of understanding since theological virtue is the supernatural partaking in the knowledge through which God is known.

The divine science, which is infused in man by grace, has an infinite reach inasmuch as it is divine, but inasmuch as it is partaken, it necessarily has its limits. If we pay attention to the most incomprehensible doctrines of Christian dogma, we can note that their incomprehensibility makes itself manifest to us precisely in the measure that we understand what understandable is in them. It is not casual that notions so deeply linked to philosophy, such as essence, nature, substance, hypostasis, person, will, etcetera, should have been developed and required in the history of thought precisely inasmuch as they can explain what understood can be of the trinitarian dogma or that of the Incarnation of the Word. It is necessary to understand what these terms mean, to penetrate the mystery. Without this understanding, the mystery is not manifested as a mystery. 

Cardinal Siri, when he was archbishop of Genoa in 1961, published a famous pastoral letter in which he taught that "the terms of language and of thought used in Revelation reflect an objective human philosophy and establish a value relationship in the former, since, if Revelation were to lack such value, it would not be able to serve to express divine things validly. In sum, the use of expressive terms in Revelation presumes a relationship between these, with their own value, and human thought, also with its own value. If it were not that way, if the terms used in Revelation were not to lead to an objective and true knowledge of divine things (even when only in an analogous sense), then God would have not revealed anything, Revelation would have not existed, we would not have attended but to the presentation of an interesting cartoon film without any consistency."

The object of the faith, consequently, is in itself perfectly intelligible, even when it not be perfectly quoad nos. That of faith is in us a knowledge secundum non visum, which is to say, necessarily obscure: it is the assenting to that which someone else, God, knows and reveals. We do not apprehend its object directly, we see it, Saint Paul says, "as in a mirror and in an enigma." But this object is intelligible, and not with any particular intelligibility since it always remits to the source of all intelligibility. This is why the certainty of this knowledge, in spite of the limitation the faith suffers regarding the way of knowing, indirect and obscure, is greater and more perfect than that of any evidence in the order of natural reason.

Because of this, theology, inasmuch as it is the science of divine truth, possesses, as we have seen, the universality which corresponds to the divine science; all truth is divine in its source or origin. This means that all knowledge of natural reason is eminently theological, and it can be converted to formally theological if it is considered under the light of divine truth. For this reason, theology is the perfection of natural or human sciences, since it knows the same as these but by virtue of a different formal motivating object or intellectual light, which allows it to know the natural realities more deeply, given that it knows them in their more proper being, inasmuch as they partake in God's being.

On the other hand, it is also necessary to take into account that some truths of the natural order are reaffirmed by divine Revelation. Those truths, without prejudice to their natural cognoscibility and to their being the object of common sciences, are also revealed. The reason why God reveals to men what they already know or can know is the imbecillitas (weakness, frailty) of human intellect. Revelation of these truths reaffirms a certainty which man's intelligence already has in a natural way, but which, due to his inveterate pusillanimity, he can become separated from them, or doubt them, or not know how to apply them to the practical order, or simply refuse to recognize them. Thus, the precepts of the Decalogue, for example, are all a matter of natural law, but their revelation to Moses on Mount Sinai give them a degree of certainty and a power which they lacked as mere precepts of the natural order. The situation to which man's imbecillitas can lead is pointed out very expressively by Saint Paul at the beginning of his letter to the Romans: "And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents, they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless." This is a collection of epithets which provides a schematic exposition of the consequences of original sin.

There are, accordingly, three features of theology which are essential to it and which have to be taken into account in discussing its relationship with natural law. These are: the kind of language it uses, the universality of its object, and its certainty. In the first place, the language of theology cannot be other than that of philosophy, and not of just any so-called philosophical thought, but that of the philosophy of being, the philosophy of things, of what can be contemplated by intelligence; it is the language proper of human understanding. In the second place, the universality of its object is, precisely, the one expressed in such language: that object is not some particular message, some fact, or sign, or some kerygma, but the essences: that of God in the first place and then of those that can be or are participated in by the creatures. The universal is what is intelligible, and in this way, theology is connected with all human knowledge; for instance, with law, and with the philosophy of law. Universality is that which corresponds to what it is, the object of contemplation. And certainty is that which derives from the act of faith, which it has inasmuch as it is a participation in the certainty which is proper of the divine science itself. Even when it is a certainty in the knowledge of the principles ― the dogmas of faith ― and not of its conclusions, these receive, though in a derivative form, some of that supernatural light thanks to its union with the light of reason. In this fecund light is theology conceived.

Natural law has been expressly reaffirmed in many of its determinations, by Revelation, which has undoubtedly given to it, in the course of the history of Christendom, a recognition and a power that explain its practical validity for centuries. That validity has had as its efficient cause the fear of God. But besides, natural law has been a permanent object of study, in a way such that its reflexive knowledge has allowed to build up criteria and discover its applicability to new fields and circumstances. Now, such study has been developed to the extent that the topics of natural law have been accepted to be an inseparable part of wisdom, or of contemplation of the truth; that is, of the philosophy which has become fecund as theology.


3. The decadence of reason and its negative influence on natural law.

The same way as the theological perspective has given vitality to the study and the practical validity of natural law, its decadence has also influenced negatively on it. To the certainty which faith gives to understanding has followed a doubt, which initially has not been expressed as such, nor has it, probably, been conscious, but which has been manifested as a lack of confidence in intelligence itself in that it is a means of reaching theological conclusions. Following this is a change in the notion of faith itself and with it a reduction of its object to a strictly personal and private sphere. With this, what keeps calling itself theology is transferred to a field proper of autonomous subjectivity, that of sentiment or of personal enlightenment, in which faith ceases to be knowledge to transform itself into purely subjective security about the salvation of self.

All this, obviously, has decisive repercussions in what continues to be called natural law. The disappearance of faith in the order of intelligence of what is real, leads to seek a replacement for the certainty which it used to contribute, and it is thought to be found, for instance, in mathematical axioms. The disappearance of the universal essences, of human nature in its universal reality, gives rise to the inevitable individualism proper of the primacy of the purely subjective rights.

It is necessary, then, to note now, even if with the brevity demanded by this presentation, what has been the itinerary traveled by theology or by what has kept this name, and in what manner it has caused a change in the definition of natural law itself. The degradation of theology due to the reduction of its object to the singular events of a supposedly supernatural kind has its origin in the nominalism which, spreading through the schools of theology in universities since the middle of the fourteenth century, took root in the minds of many pious and well-instructed men. Among them were Peter D'Ailly and Gabriel Biel, men of universally recognized authority, on which works Martin Luther based himself for his lectures in Erfurt and in Wittenberg.

According to the principle that "what is real is only the singular," what is universal is reduced to the purely logical framework which our intelligence erects in the act of understanding. What is real is thus limited to that which the senses perceive and which the intellect would know by means of some intuition, the similarity of which with the sensitive perception induces to uphold its identification. William of Ockham himself, father of nominalism, claims: "the singular which is primarily perceived by the senses  he writes  is the same, and under the same reason, as what the intellect firstly understands in an intuitive way (...) Consequently  he insists  that same thing which is firstly perceived by the senses will be understood by the intellect and under the same reason." What intuition contributes ― the only properly cognoscitive act of the intellect — is organized by the mind by means of logical relationships of universality which lack all foundation or actual correlations.

This way, the great speculative theology suffers a noticeable detriment, and so, what is known as scholastic theology of the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries is, as it appears in Erasmus' Folly, the subtle play of multiple distinctions and abstractions which are processed in an intellect from which all kinds of contemplative activity has been amputated. 


Luther declares to belong to "Ockham's faction." Although sometimes he tones down this adhesion with references to Saint Augustine, it is clear that nominalism and its exclusion of the reality of the universal, marks his conception of the faith and of what could be understood as a theology. Reason cannot take part in the knowledge of what God reveals, since judging on that would be the same as making a judgment on God; it also lacks any faculty to determine what are the duties of a Christian. Reason is "blind, deaf, foolish, impious, and sacrilegious." Consequently, the relation of man with God cannot take place by means of knowledge; and what Luther calls faith does not correspond to theological faith nor can it be expressed in human language for that reason. What he understands by faith is an act of confidence, or rather, of internal security about the salvific result of the action which God carries out in an absolutely arbitrary manner on each of the elected.

Neither the faith nor the theology so conceived by the monk of Wittenberg can substantiate a natural law. This is ratified by the radical exclusion of works  that is, of moral conduct  as regards causes or conditions for salvation. If works are not determined by their moral character, then any norm of conduct lacks, because of this, its reason of being. When Luther explains what he understands by liberty for the Christian, he says that this consists of the complete independence from laws or precepts, including the commandments of the Decalogue. Any intent of justification of man which seeks its cause in objective moral or juridical justifications is not only rejected by doctor Martin but also branded as blasphemy. From Lutheran thinking, the notion of nature is not absent, but even making abstraction of the absolute uselessness of works, it is impossible that such nature, as it is conceived, and due to the intrinsic state of corruption in which original sin has left it, should constitute itself in a norm in some way. "For although God did not make sin,  he writes  yet He does not cease to form and multiply that nature, which from the Spirit being withdrawn, is vitiated by sin, just as if an artisan were to make statues out of rotten wood." Saint Paul, when he enumerated the vices which are the product of original sin, was referring to the fallen nature, but one which conserves its integrity and can, because of that, be redeemed and restored in its perfection; this is not the irremediably rotten nature to which Luther refers.

With Luther, each one's subjectivity gets consecrated as the source of determination of what is morally good or just: "these two formulas  he writes in De servo arbitrio  are true: 'good and just works do not ever make a man good and just, but a good and just man makes good works'. 'Bad works do not make a man wicked but a wicked man does bad works' which means that a person must always be first good and just before carrying out any good deed, and the good deeds will follow and come from a just and good person." With this, a primacy   a subjectivity which imposes itself  of power over reason is established, of force over what is objectively just. The invectives hurled by the reformer against the "murderous hordes" of German peasants and his call to the noblemen to crush them, is a concrete example of the outcome which can reach such primacy of power over reason.

It is known that Calvin does not modify the main theses of Luther; as him, he holds that salvation is through the faith and not through the works, that there is no free will in man, that predestination to hell or to Beatitude is an irrevocable divine predetermination, that the works of the elected are necessarily good and those of the ones destined for reprobation are necessarily bad, and so forth. In contrast to Calvin, in Lutheranism one could still find, nevertheless, some spirit of piety; this disappears in the reformer from Geneva, in whom the community or assembly of the elected is put ahead of personal piety. Apart from that, as could be seen in the organization which the reformer gave to Genevan society, there is for him no difference between such assembly of the saints or of the elected and civil society. To belong to such assembly gives persons security in their condition of elected, since there is an external confirmation of the condition of elected on the part of the rest. The society or church of the saints needs, as does any society, visible and concrete links, without which it cannot subsist. As all rites or liturgical actions have been excluded from the reformed religion, such links are certain common forms of morality, which are to be signified to the rest by means of conventional words, gestures, dress, etcetera, which, in the absence of other sacred signs acquire, however, the necessary character. In such manner, by means of the observance of such conventional forms, the saint acquires the conviction of his own salvation.

God, for the Calvinists, is a severe being, arbitrary, terrible, implacable. There can be no law that can have as its foundation God's arbitrariness. "(He) has decreed once and for all  he writes  in his eternal and immutable counsel, those He has willed to take for salvation and those he has willed to send to perdition." Before this terrible distance from God is man, whose nature is radically corrupted and who cannot even aspire, not even by grace, to an intimate union with God, partaking of divine life, as is taught by Catholic theology. "Children themselves  Calvin does not skimp on ways to inspire the horror proper of predestination  are included in this condemnation (...) Their nature is a seed of sin; for which reason it cannot be other than repugnant and abominable to God."

God's presence among the elected would seem to contradict that insurmountable distance of man from God, or at least that it remedies or mitigates it. Not so, however, it is not that God makes Himself present in the elected and sanctifies him by communicating His own life to him. God does not reveal Himself to man nor does He make Himself be loved by man. What makes itself present in the elected is his sole character of elected, but it is not God. Knowing himself to be elected is certainly a determining psychological factor which will stamp its own character on the saints and on the assembly which congregates them. In this interior conviction, which is the self reaffirmation of being saved, all personal relation of man with God is comprised. "God not only offers salvation  writes Calvin  but He also assigns such certitude, that the effect of the offering cannot be left in suspense or in doubt."

Human destinies are thus resolved at the same time in the remoteness of a God which does not know compassion for human misery, and in the immediate closeness of a subjectivity in which the presence of the divine cannot be distinguished from an interior state marked by the conviction of having been saved (reprobates are uncapable of any true conviction.) Because of this, that double cause is reduced to a single one, to the one which is immediate and subjective, to which the divine character is granted after it has acted. The determining factor is always that interior state of the subject, state which is reinforced and reaffirmed as it is manifested externally and coincides with those of the rest in the same exterior forms, the which would be the unequivocal signs of the sanctity of the members of the assembly,

For Calvinism, and for the postures that have derived from it, law is solely what the will of the elected determine to be such. This power of the elected is more defined than in Luther, for whom it was identified simply with the subjectivity of the Christian. In contrast, in Calvinism, such power is that of the assembly, in which it is exercised of course over its members, in the form of a collective will superior to the particular wills. This idea of the collective will  or general or sovereign, as it will be called afterwards  autonomous and free, has been the archetype of the ideologies upon which modern revolutions have been inspired.

In the social philosophy which developed, mainly in England, in the seventeenth century, the presence of a secularized Calvinism is clear. Clarification: the secularized qualifier is redundant, since, as we have seen, Calvinism in itself consists in the secularization of some of the most outstanding ideas of the Reformation. The multiple sects which have derived from Calvinism share, as a common trait, the constitution of an assembly of their members, the saints or elected, that is the exemplary form of the civil society. This assembly, the covenant, its sanctity guaranteed by the divine election, and presided by the eldest or of greatest dignity of the members, the presbiter, possesses a collective will which always represents in a trustworthy way the individual wills of the members. It is that will, that of the assenbly of saints, the one which rules the life of the community. There is no transcendent norm, not of the eternal law, not of natural law, not of reason. There being no transcendent norm, there being no naturally just, the principle of conduct has to be necessarily immanent, since it does not leave nor is it possible to leave the closed sphere of a subjectivity which extends itself collectively, It is not surprising that, in the absence of a theology in the proper sense of the term, geometry should appear as an exemplary cause in the determination of the law. To it resort, and with this purpose, Grotius and Hobbes.

There is a character in whose thought and in whose works, the currents that stem from nominalism and from the Reformation, secularized by Calvinism, are concentrated. We refer to John Locke. In him, a skepticism, natural consequence of these currents, elevated to the category of dogma and principle of morality, can be found. In his Letter Concerning Toleration, his explanation of the significance of such dogma can be found. It says "toleration is the chief characteristic mark of the true church. Whatever profession of faith we make,  he adds  to whatever outward worship we conform, if we are not fully satisfied in our own mind that the one is true and the other well pleasing unto God, such profession and such practice, far from being any furtherance, are indeed great obstacles to our salvation."

Tolerance constituted in principle cannot be applied, by the way, to those who are intolerant; that is, cohabitation with any creed or religion can be admitted on condition that it does not claim to be the only true one: this is why Locke rejects the possibility of admitting the Catholic Church in this cohabitation of religions. The matter is that he who professes a religion may believe that it is the only true one as long as he believes it only for himself. If he tries to have others share in his belief because his religion is the only true one, he is committing the worst of sins, which is that of intolerance. Truth is only for oneself. The practical and theoretical consequences of a complete subjectivism are evidenced here quite clearly. Thus, it turns out that tolerance is the object of the faith, which can also be expressed by saying that the faith is valid on condition that it has no object; in other words, there is no truth which one has to believe in just because it is true. In connection with the accusation of intolerance made of Catholics, Locke writes that: "These accusations would cease very soon if the law of tolerance would be framed so that it would require all churches to proclaim that tolerance is the foundation of their own liberty, and to teach that liberty of conscience is a natural right of man."

Here we have, in the words of Locke himself, the enunciation of the principle which all subsequent currents that accept the liberal qualifier for themselves draw from: liberty does not consist of free will — the existence of which would have to be denied — but of the absolute independence of man with respect to any principle transcending his sujectivity and in the name of which some  type of obedience could be demanded of him; this is the liberty of conscience which supposes — as can be seen already in Luther — that something is good and true because I judge it to be so, that is, because to me it is good and true but not because in itself it is so. If tolerance is the proper object of the faith — and only in that sense could the faith be considered to be common — it is because the faith in divine Revelation and in theology no longer exists. And if natural law boils down to liberty of conscience, it is also because it no longer exists.

lunes, 29 de abril de 2019

Spain Left to Chance


By José Antonio Primo de Rivera
Taken from Las Cadenas de Obligado
Translated from the Spanish by Roberto Hope

In very few parties is there a lack of a useful man. What there is no remedy for is the party system. We have seen this repeatedly in the succession of experiments which has been our lot to bear, and we will see it again in the next elections.

The experience — which on the other hand has done nothing but to confirm what reason had already announced — can be formulated with the exactitude of a law of mathematics. There is no possible politics, nor possible history nor possible homeland if every two years everything is put to revision motivated by some election.

The great historical architectures have been at least the work of a lifetime of a leader or a king. Most of the time they have been the work of an entire dynasty. In some other places, it has been that of a revolution which has imposed its principles and has stuck to them during forty or fifty years by the succession in power of men anointed by the right of the revolution itself. If it is not that way, all effort is useless, neither two nor five years is time enough to accomplish anything, and it is well known that popular impatience leans every two years or every five to change its posture. There is no time period without some discomfort, and the simple judgment of masses always tends to receive what is good of any period of time as a natural and free thing but to see what is bad a consequence of the ineptitude of the rulers. Rulers are never judged for what they have done but for what they have not done. This way, as there is no one in the world who is capable of doing everything that is imaginable, nobody is free from merciless criticism for everything he has not done.

This criticism of what is lacking, this crying for what remains is the best source for that set of fallacies, injustices, fabrications, called electoral propaganda. The most famous builders of nations would have not concluded their work if every two years or every three, in full effort, when it was still so difficult to glimpse their final outcome would have had to submit themselves to the irresponsible direction of all the demagogues in all the taverns in all the towns.

The suffrage system not only suffers all of the vices of demagogy, but it stimulates them. To gain votes it is necessary to excite the electors. Between one candidate and another, strifes to death are struck: each of the two has to increase the dose of the excitant posed by the rival. When the known reserves are exhausted, it becomes necessary to make use of new venoms not previously tested. There are political drugs such as nationalism, which maybe would never have appeared had they not have been required by some candidate, in an electoral trance, to flagellate the sensibility of the voting masses, perhaps already weakened by the abuse of other worn out drugs. 

There cannot be a single normal man that defends in good faith this diabolical system. Only hating the people can one wish to have a system which turns them into a field of experimentation for all the imbeciles, ambitious, frenzied, spongers, and phonies. On a guileless, tender popular mass, prone to credulity and rage, the storming of all the electoral scum, skilled at the game of torture and deception is allowed. Some candidates will come out triumphant, and others defeated, from the ones and the others little will be known until the next elections; but in their wake will remain, poisoning the souls, enormous stores of rancor without possible relief, because demagogues, in order to feed the rancor, inflame unrealizable appetites.

Why is it that the public sale of drugs or pornographic novels is not tolerated while this free market of political narcotics is tolerated? It is tolerated simply because a State which admits this system does not believe in itself nor in its proper justifying mission and to have the injustice of its existence be forgiven, has to simulate that its own existence is put at stake every two or three years. Our State, which will have the conscience of its great mission at the service of Spain´s eternal unity, will not let Spain be exposed to this turbid fate in the urns.

domingo, 21 de abril de 2019

Las fuerzas de Dios y de los sinDios


Por Gary Potter

Tomado de https://catholicism.org/forces-of-god-and-ungod.html
Traducido del imglés por Roberto Hope

En estos días oímos incesantememte que la nación está dividida, y de hecho lo está. Sin embargo, nunca oímos de la división que más importa en el largo plazo. No es la división entre conservadores y liberales (mucho menos entre los dos lados de una misma moneda que son los Republicanos y los Demócratas) o entre el capitalismo y el socialismo o entre los blancos y la gente de color. La más importante en nuestra sociedad es la que existe entre los bautizados y los no bautizados. Podemos hablar de estos dos bandos como las fuerzas de Dios y las fuerzas de los sinDios.

No debemos pasar por alto que hay cristianos bautizados que son tibios en su práctica de la religión, o que no hacen esfuerzo alguno por practicarla. porque no es importante para ellos. Siendo el Universalismo la herejía dominante de nuestra época, muchos pueden suponer que estas almas están destinadas al Cielo junto con las que son santas, pero en realidad, el Señor reserva sus palabras más duras en la Sagrada Escritura para los tibios y los indiferentes. "Por cuanto son ustedes tibios, y ni calientes ni fríos, los vomitaré de mi boca" (Apocalipsis 3.16). En la política (no la política electoral sino en el sentido de ser el medio por el cual se gobierna la vida de una sociedad) estos bautizados  — estos ateos en la práctica  — no sirven de nada excepto para los sinDios, de los cuales son propiciadores.

El que los sinDios parezcan llevar la ventaja en estos días no es precisamente una ilusión. Después de todo, los frutos de su activismo  — el aborto legal, el divorcio sin justificación, el matrimonio homosexual legal y otros signos de la falsa noción de "progreso"  — abundan. Ya que ése es el caso, podemos preguntarnos por qué recurren cada vez más a la vigilancia total de la ciudadanía, como cuando la Agencia Nacional de Seguridad monitorea todas las llamadas telefónicas y correos electrónicos; y a limitar el discurso público, como cuando los que luchan por defender a la familia natural son etiquetados de "incitadores de odio," de "homófobos," y de "fascistas", y se les impide dar conferencias en los recintos universitarios. Si uno verdaderamente cree que uno y sus ideas son correctas al grado de ser inatacables ¿por qué recurrir a mecanismos de represión? ¿qué tan grave amenaza es para un gobierno la que puede plantear gente tan irrazonable que sostiene que un pueblerino que vivió en Palestina hace dos mil años es Dios?

De hecho, hay buenas razones para que los sinDios se sientan nerviosos aun cuando todavía sigan completando victoriosamente una nueva vuelta al circuito. Basta con que señalemos una. Y es que su laicismo significa su derrota final. Esto lo sabrían excepto que no son meramente ignorantes de las lecciones de la historia, sino que deliberadamente las rechazan. Todo lo que enseña el pasado está fuera de moda a su parecer.

En verdad, lo que la historia enseña es que las grandes civilizaciones que perduran y las sociedades estables que surgen de ellas tienen en su eje una religión. Eso fue así en la gran civilización greco-romana que fue el semillero de la civilización cristiana — en el Oriente al igual que en el Occidente — que siguió a la Encarnación y duró desde Constantino hasta la Ilustración con su racionalismo científico (y el liberalismo político que manó de ella) y está encarnado ahora en el globalismo laicista liberal de los sinDios.

No es necesario consultar la historia para discernir esta Verdad. El comunismo sinDios se hizo del poder en  Rusia en 1917, y en sólo setenta años — en el tiempo de vida de personas que aún viven y que lo vieron con sus propios ojos — se vino abajo.

No nos explayemos en eso de que, con el fin de probar su pretensión de que era posible crear una civilización duradera sin religión alguna, los soviéticos sinDios estaban dispuestos a ver perecer, o mandar a la muerte, a millones de hombres y mujeres, porque ellos, al igual que los globalistas laicistas sinDios, no los percibían como seres humanos, la cúspide de una Creación terrena, llena de significado y propósito divinos. Para los soviéticos sinDios no eran más que simples engranes en la maquinaria económica de un Plan Quinquenal u otro. Para los globalistas liberales laicistas, son simplemente consumidores.

Más que explayarnos en los horrores perpetrados por los Soviéticos sinDios, o desalentarnos  inquietándonos continuamente sobre los éxitos de los globalistas liberales laicistas, miremos hacia las actuales fuerzas de Dios e inspirémonos en ellas. Podemos, por ejemplo, considerar la maravillosa resurgencia del cristianismo en Rusia, una vez que el dominio de los soviéticos sinDios fue roto. El setenta porciento de los rusos de ahora han manifestado a los encuestadores, que son religiosos o muy religiosos. Noventa y cinco porciento afirma que apoyan y respetan a la Iglesia Ortodoxa Rusa. Más de 35,000 parroquias han sido abiertas en los años desde que Vladimir Putin llegó a la presidencia. Seis mil seminaristas están siendo preparados para ser ordenados. La ley rusa refleja el resurgimiento religioso ruso y lo alienta. En 2013, el Presidente Putin promulgó una ley que establece hasta tres años de prisión por ïnsultar los sentimientos de los creyentes católicos." Ese mismo día se promulgó otra ley que prohibe la "propaganda homosexual" en Rusia. Putin tambén ha firmado legislación que prohibe el aborto después de doce semanas de gestación y está trabajando con la Iglesia Ortodoxa Rusa hacia el día en que todo aborto será ilegal.

Muchos, incluyéndome a mí, quisieran que Moscú y Roma estuvieran unidos, pero una persona tendría que estar loca o ser un sinDios para creer que el mundo no está mejor con una vibrante Rusia Ortodoxa en lugar  de la URSS sinDios. En todo caso, el día de la unión no se acercará mientras las palabras más memorables que se han oído de Roma son "¿Quién soy yo para juzgar?" Además, el catolicismo ha tenido su propio resurgimiento en numerosos países, y esto a pesar de lo que exactamente esté pasando en el bando "progresista" en esos días. Este resurgimiento es notable, especialmente en la intersección de la política y la cultura y la religión en esos países.

Un ejemplo sobresaliente es Polonia. En 2016, los obispos de ese país, en una ceremonia a la que asistió, y en su participación orando, el Presidente Andrez Duda, proclamó solemnemente a Nuestro Señor Jesucristo como Rey de esa nación. Naturalmente, las leyes de Polonia reflejan su reinado. Su constitución prohibe el matrimonio del mismo sexo. Las compras en domingo están siendo eliminadas gradualmente y serán abolidas el año próximo cuando todos los negocios serán cerrados en el Sabbath. Contrariamente a ciertos reportes de noticias falsas, las fronteras de Polonia no están cerradas a la inmigración. El país recibe gente de todas las razas, siempre que los inmigrantes estén dispuestos a cumplir y proteger sus costumbres, tradiciones y cultura fundadas en el cristianismo católico.

Qué lástima que los polacos no hayan podido sacudirse de su enemistad histórica hacia Rusia. Esto pone a los dirigentes del Partido Ley y Justicia, que ahora ocupa el poder, en oposición a sus contrapartes de toda Europa: El primer ministro húngaro, Viktor Orban, que describe a su país como una "democracia cristiana;" Marine Le Pen, presidente del Frente Nacional de Francia, quien actualmente está apareciendo en las encuesta adelante del presidente globalsta Emmanuel Macron; el joven y dinámico Canciller de Austria, Sebastian Kurz; Matteo Salvini, de Italia, quizás la estrella más brillante de todo el creciente número de dirigentes nacionalistas y populistas del continente, y hasta Nigel Farage, de Inglaterra, quien acaba de formar un nuevo partido político, el Partido Brexit, para presentar candidatos para las elecciones del Parlamento Europeo del mes que entra — todos ellos expresan admiración por, y se ufanan de tener amistad con, Vladimir Putin.

Sea como fuere, todos ellos, junto con los polacos y otros, están conduciendo el continente, el corazón del cristianismo, hacia una Primavera Europea. Su florecimiento pleno será una gran victoria de la fuerzas de Dios sobre las de los sinDios.

sábado, 6 de abril de 2019

La Pascua es

por Lenora McWhorter
Traducido del inglés por Roberto Hope

La Pascua es el retorno de la primavera
Cuando renace la naturaleza 
Las plantas brotan, las aves cantan
Todo lo que vive vuelve a prosperar

La Pascua es sobre la Cruz en el Calvario
Donde Jesucristo fue crucificado
Cuando Él jamás conoció pecado
Por nosotros fue que sangró y murió a la Cruz clavado

La Pascua nos habla del amor de Dios
Y del sacrificio que Él mismo ofreció
De cómo Dios dio a su Hijo para que muriera
Y así del pecado la deuda pagada fuera 

La Pascua representa la Resurrección
Cuando el precio extremo Buen Jesus pagó 
Para que podamos empezar de nuevo
Todo por el Cristo que resucitó

Elevamos a Dios nuestra alabanza 
Y le damos gracias por así amarnos
Fue la muerte conquistada y la tumba derrotada
Y Jesús vivirá siempre por toda la eternidad

La Nueva Misa Cumple 50 Años


Tomado de https://mundabor.wordpress.com
Traducido del inglés por Roberto Hope

Esta deformación obscena, satánica de la Misa es fruto de la mentalidad — en sí misma obscena y satánica — que quiso renovar lo que había funcionado siempre tan bien hasta entonces; como si estuviéramos en la necesidad de una misa nueva como de un auto nuevo o un nuevo tostador.

Después de 50 años, los resultados del sabotaje están a la vista de todo mundo. La pérdida de lo sagrado de la misa creó una pérdida general del sentimiento religioso. Las payasadas infantiles que ocurren ahora han destruido el sentido de lo sagrado e — igual de importante — de la autoridad. Luego de 50 años, la mayoría de los católicos piensan que es normal que ellos decidan qué está bien y qué está mal de lo que la Iglesia cree. El sentido del pecado ha más bien desaparecido por completo, y reemplazado por un vago sentimiento de creer que Dios les perdonará todo y les dará un pase express al cielo porque aman.

Todo este desorden brota del sabotaje de la misa, y éste, por su parte, se originó de la voluntad de sabotear la Iglesia de Cristo. Francisco es un representante típico de esta era, aunque uno muy perverso. Él simplemente odia el catolicismo y la Iglesia, lo cual no le ha impedido vivir a costa de ella durante toda su condenada y desperdiciada vida.

No se equivoquen, no hubo inocencia en esto. Esto ha sido un sabotaje planificado, perpetrado por hombres perversos que odian todo lo que la Iglesia es y representa; muchos de ellos, por ser homosexuales o de hecho sodomitas; muchos otros, porque han perdido la fe, si alguna vez la tuvieron, y se sienten bien con una existencia cómoda del lado del mundo, con su conformismo, sus errores y sus prejuicios.

La Nueva Misa debe desaparecer, y ser recordada sólo por el atroz e impío acto de rebelión que ella constituye.

No es de sorprender que el Papa que suscribió esta perversidad haya sido canonizado por las fuerzas perversas que están detrás de este movimiento diabólico

Mundabor

lunes, 1 de abril de 2019

The Church at the Present Time


By Father Julio Meinvielle  (Argentinian priest, 1905- 1973)


Conference delivered by Father Meinvielle in Buenos Aires on August 3, 1968. After more than fifty years, It has not lost any of its actuality, and it is useful for us to be able to understand that the current crisis in the Church is not something new, but something that took off with Vatican Council II, though it must have been brewing a few decades before.


Transcribed and translated by Roberto Hope from a recording available in Spanish at https://adelantelafe.com/la-iglesia-la-actualidad-p-julio-meinvielle-conferencia-del-030868/ as well as at http://www.gloria.tv/media/Wzw1aE7TkLx and perhaps some other sites.


Our topic is: 'The Church at the Present Time.' Evidently, this is a topic of great significance in this time of confusion inside the Church. This confusion is already in the dialectics which has tried to enter the Church itself, between the Pre-Conciliar Church and the Post-Conciliar Church. To the Post-Conciliar Church, in the mind of those who call it so, the Pre-Conciliar Church is something that should never have existed. The Church had been wrong until now. With this, they are trying to liquidate and bury two thousand years of Christian history; two thousand years, with its richness of doctrine; its Fathers, its Doctors, Christ Himself. They are trying to liquidate the richness of the Sanctity of the Church, its holy martyrs, confessors, virgins; saints in married life, in all professions of life, which have sanctified her with their heroic virtues. They are trying to liquidate the works of charity and mercy which the Church has practiced in these two thousand years. They are trying to bury the artistic richness of the Church in its liturgy, in art, in architecture, in music.

This is why, ladies and gentlemen, it is necessary to examine the present moment in the Church. First,  in the plans of men, and then, in the plans of God. In the plans of God, I say, because Christ admonished us to look at the signs of the times, to learn from the parable of the fig tree: "when its branches are tender and new leaves grow, you will know that Summer is near." And today, when confusion is invading the Church in a sinister and somber way, something strange from God is about to happen. 

In the first place, ladies and gentlemen, to understand the present Church it is necessary to keep in mind the parable of the grain of mustard seed. Said Christ Himself: "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field; though being it the smallest of all seeds, yet, when it grows, it is the largest of the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds come and perch on its branches.” This is the Church of Christ. It was a seed, quite small, planted by Christ. But of all human institutions, it is the most sublime and glorious with the passing of the centuries. It is the bride of Christ.

The Church, in its life over the course of the centuries, goes carrying out that teaching of Saint John the Apostle to the seven churches of the apocalypse: to the church of Ephesus, to the church of Smyrna, to the church of Thyatira, to the church of Pergamon, to the church of Sardis, to the church of Philadephia and to the church of Laodicea. 

First is the church of Ephesus, the church born impetuous, the church of the Apostles. Ephesus means that: impetus. Already, Paul the Apostle, in year 57 of our era, would write to the Romans, “How! Have you not heard the preaching of the word of Christ?” and he answers, “Certainly yes! Throughout the world. His voice has been spread, up to the confines of its proclamation." All the Roman world and the Greek and the barbarian had learned about the person of Christ.

After the church of Ephesus comes the church of the martyrs, when the great champions of the faith gave witness to Christ. It is the Church of Smyrna. Smyrna means grief. With the grief of their suffering, they bear witness of their knowledge that Christ is God. And the great Bishop Saint Ignatius, being taken in chains from Antioch to Rome toward the end of the first century, to be delivered to the beasts, can clamor “Oh, saving beasts which are prepared for me, when will you come? when will you be let loose? when will it be granted to you to feast on my flesh? I am wheat of Christ, I will be bitten by the fangs of the beasts to be turned into clean bread”. The splendor of the church of the martyrs lasted from Our Lord’s passion through year 300 of our era. It was great and glorious; not just because of the blood that was shed, but for the blood that was shed in honor of Jesus Christ, savior of men, Christ was the first martyr of the Christian faith, shedding the blood that saves humanity.

Next comes, ladies and gentlemen, the church of Pergamon and the church of Thyatira. The church of Pergamon is the church of the doctors, of the great doctors, and the church of Thyatira, the church of the Christian splendor, of the medieval splendor. The church of Constantine inaugurates the public recognition of the Church of Christ, and the two great powers on earth, the political and the religious, are joined together in harmonious unity for the construction of the Christian City. First, of Christian Europe, which will hear the evangelical voice of the Fathers and the Doctors; of Saint Irenaeus, of Saint Basil, of Saint John Chrysostom, of Saint Ambrose, and of the great Saint Augustine. Christian Europe which will live the greatness of the Christian City founded on the two powers. Christian City which will culminate in the splendor of the thirteenth century, the splendor of Christian politics, of Saint Louis, King of France, of the great pontiffs Gregory I, and Innocence III. Christian City which will culminate in the splendor of the Christian philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Christian City which will culminate in the splendor of the medieval art of Fra Angelico, of the Gothic cathedral. Christian City the praise of which has been made by Pontiff Leo XIII in his Immortale Dei, so that it stays firmly engraved, defying the foolishness of the progressivists who abominate Christendom. Says the great pontiff: “Christian Europe civilized the barbarian nations and made them replace their ferocity with docility; their superstition with Truth. It rejected victoriously the invasions of the Mohammedans, and kept the scepter of civilization, and has been accustomed to be the guide to the world on human activity, and teacher of the rest, and has graced the peoples with the true liberty in its varied forms, and very wisely has created numerous works to alleviate the misfortunes of men. That great benefit is due, without possible doubt or discussion, to the religion which backed the initiatives of such great undertakings and contributed in carrying them out. They would have endured certainly”, the pontiff goes on, “even to our day, these same benefits. If both powers had maintained their concord and with much more reason …. If they had embraced the authority, the magisterium and the orientations of the Church with greater loyalty and constancy; the words of Ivo de Chartres to the Roman Pontiff Pasqual II should be respected as a perpetual norm: ‘when the civil power and the priesthood live in good harmony. the world is well governed and the Church prospers and flourishes. But when they are in discord not only the small things do not prosper but also the great things themselves decay miserably.’ Christendom, in the harmony of the priesthood, which lasted over one thousand years. from the time of Constantine and Charlemagne to the Modern Revolution.” Revolution that has been undertaken by the enemies of the Church against the Christian order. Modern Revolution of the Renaissance and of the Reformation, when man no longer wants to adjust his life to the evangelical law, but only to that of pure reason and of nature. Revolution which reaches the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Revolution of man. Revolution for the exaltation of man against God. Humanism against Christocentrism. 

Then the modern revolution of liberal capitalism. The Church of Sardis. Sardis is the place where Croesus was born, the man famous for his riches and for the accumulation of gold in the pagan world. Modern revolution of liberal capitalism, where man no longer wants to adjust himself to the law of plain reason but to that of instinct, of the pure liberty, and of avarice. The accumulation of wealth, and then, the only preoccupation of man becomes accumulating wealth. He no longer fulfills that precept of the Lord: “Seek the kingdom of God and His justice and everything else will be given to you in addition.” What comes first now is the accumulation of capital and, as it is clear, the accumulation of capital in a minority of privileged men has to fall necessarily, in the opposite pole, on the accumulation of misery and ruin of the majority of people. The modern revolution of liberal capitalism has to produce and engender necessarily the third revolution. The communist revolution in which man, ridden of God, ridden of the sensitive enjoyment of liberalism, is adjusted to the slavery of the collective society.

Then we see, ladies and gentlemen, the process of degradation in which man is falling. From the supernatural, he falls into the naturalist city; from this, into the society of capitalism; from the economic society of capitalism into the society of communism. We then find ourselves today at the end of the third revolution, of capitalism and of communism. The last remains of capitalism are being liquidated, and we are entering resolutely into the slavery of the machine society, the technocratic society of perfect functioning in which each man will have his dose of work, his dose of pleasure, his dose of culture. And in the religious, in the cultural, in the political, in the economic realms, he will adjust himself to the functioning of a perfect clockwork. In the current society, man is being conditioned in all aspects, and especially in the psycho-technical aspect: a great function of brainwashing is being fulfilled through the communications media to make of man a simple robot who reacts automatically to the stimuli given to him, to level the thinking of man, the feelings of man, the machine society.  

Christendom, meaning to say the human world under Christ, will then be completely liquidated. The world will live a perfect society, with the perfection of a mechanism, but man will have been turned into a robot. He will go on calling himself free, but he will never have been so much enslaved.

So here, ladies and gentlemen, the development of the World. First, the Church flourishing; then, the Church subdued. But now, at this moment, the struggle which the enemies have undertaken against the Christian world, against Christendom, to create the naturalist society of the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; to create the liberal city of the nineteenth century and the communist city of the twentieth century. Now the blows come against the Church from within the Church itself. This is the significance of the current  progressivism; of the progressivist Church, of what is happening with this phenomenon of the progressivist Church: the Church encouraged by the great theologians, the publicized theologians: the Congars, the Rahners, the Schillebeeckxs, the Hans Küngs; all those theologians who appear in the newspapers, publicized by the propaganda. In progressivism, there are also great cardinals, public figures: Cardinal Suenens of Lowain, Cardinal König of Vienna, Cardinal Bea, of course; the enemies of the Church, Freemasonry and Communism have entered inside the Church. and are committed to the destruction of the Church. In this task are implicated, I repeat again, high cardinals, high bishops, eminent priests, renowned theologians, and prominent laymen.

The struggle is carried out on all fronts and with all weapons; the intention is to liquidate the Church. On the doctrinal front, there is no Catholic truth that stands unquestioned these days.  It is being affirmed that sin no longer exists, that original sin does not exist, that Adam and Eve did not exist, and that man lives in a continuing evolution, from a primeval matter he is ascending to ever higher states of conscience and perfection. Teilhard de Chardin, the spokesman for this evolutionary progressivism is in fashion, as you all know. 

The teaching of Apostle Paul is denied in consequence: “From one man has sin entered the world; from one, Christ, enters grace and life”. In attacking original sin, all Catholic dogmas are attacked, since, if man is not born a sinner, if no sins come to the world, then no need is there for salvation. Christ is superfluous. There is no redeemer. Many theologians question the person of Christ, they question the Incarnation, they question the resurrection. With the famous theory of Bultmann, that everything is a myth, that the miracles are myths, the figures in Scripture are myths, the parables are myths, Christ’s resurrection is another myth, the adorable person of Christ is questioned, the Virgin Mother is questioned, she is dispossessed of her privileges, of her virginity, of her immaculate conception, of her glorious Ascension. And this, not from an isolated theologian, but from many theologians, and that teaching is later repeated in the seminaries, in the houses of formation. That teaching is repeated by the Dutch Catechism, by the French Catechism which was approved by a vote of 104 bishops against one.

Not being there sin, no reason is there for the sacraments, it is not then necessary to baptize children; the sacrament of forgiveness and penance is not necessary; and there are priests who advise people not to go to confession, that fornication is not a sin, that masturbation is not a sin. The Eucharist is questioned, transubstantiation, that is, the change of substance from that of bread to that of the body of Christ and the change of substance from that of wine to that of the blood of Christ. The Holy Mass is not the sacrifice of Christ but a liturgical dinner which gets ever closer to becoming a spectacle or a show. 

This is the situation of the Church. And, so that you don’t think that I am exaggerating, on March 31, 1967, the New York Times reported in this way some of the errors that circulate in the Church nowadays: “Many Dutch theologians hold that the perpetual virginity of Mary is a myth; it is more modern to believe, it is said, that Christ was the Son of Mary and Joseph. The Dominican theologian Edward Schillebeeckx, peritus in the Second Vatican Council, proposes that Christ’s resurrection cannot be the physical recomposition of His body, but a kind of spiritual manifestation, it pleases more to believe that the Resurrection has been the impact of the personality of Christ over His disciples and of His presence in the hearts of Christians.” Of course, in negating so fundamental a dogma as Saint Paul says: “If we do not believe that Christ resurrected, vain is our faith.” What do we believe in, then? Dutch theologians reject original sin as an inherited spiritual stigma, and they say that it has to be seen instead as a symbolic expression of the fact that humanity is sinning and that the world is imperfect. For these reasons, it is that these thinkers question the need of baptism for children. “To say that a human being is condemned or is born condemned is nonsense”, adds lay theologian Daniel de Lange, Secretary of the Ecumenical Center of Holland. "Heaven and Hell", says Dominican Theologian Willem Van der Mark, “this does not worry us at all.”

At the same time, ladies and gentlemen, that doctrine is questioned, the fundamental dogmas of the Church, the corruption of customs is encouraged. Up to now, chastity, virginity, were an adornment of the Catholic Church; priests’ celibacy, virginity in the women religious. All this is now questioned. And you see priests mobilizing for the suppression of celibacy, and women religious mobilizing to introduce sexual topics in their convents. And now Freud enters the Church as a holy father and regulates the sexual doctrine of seminarians, religious and clerics. There is the famous case in Cuernavaca, of an entire Benedictine monastery where Freud’s psychoanalysis was allowed to enter; of course. all that was finished and Le Mercier ended up getting married and having the marriage ceremony held in Cuernavaca itself.

It is affirmed that what matters now is love. Love is the raison d’etre of life, of marriage, Well, what love? Any love, especially that which is most imperious, the purely carnal love. If the reason of being of marriage is love, anti-conception is then justified, since conception is a burden and a strain. Divorce is then justified since, after some time has passed, couples can cease to love each other. Homosexuality is justified since there are men who cannot find love in women but in other men, and there are women who cannot find love but in other women. And this, which seems to be nothing but a whimsical idea, has been taught publicly by a Dominican, Father Pauwels, who has broadcasted it in Lowain through radio and television. And someone gets to say this which I am now about to read textually, taken from Il Borghese review of April 20, 1967: “Today, a new attitude is necessary, even though it has not yet been accepted by the Church. I believe that many theologians and many faithful would wish to advance one step further. True, this new doctrine has not been officially approved, its supporters want to accept and assist homosexuals, as is with all other human beings, in their initiative to live well, as well the ones as the others. I would like to propose to adult homosexuals, as a kind of ideal, to set and attain in their lives a relationship of stable friendship, take care one of the other, assume one the responsibility of the other, in the economic plane and in social life, and also attain a union of sentiments, and also, since it is about men and not of creatures of pure spirit, express those sentiments in the erotic and sexual plane in a manner that is congenial to them.” And you know there has been a case in Holland, of a public celebration in a church, of the union of two homosexuals. The photograph has been published by the Le Figaro daily of Paris. 

One gets stupefied in hearing that a theologian, invoking theology — theology is used for anything these days, except for putting us in communication with God —, can utter these aberrations, and utter them publicly, without anyone calling him to account. This as to what refers to sexual corruption.

There is also social corruption. It is here where another Holy Father has been introduced in the Church: Karl Marx, doctor of the Church’s social doctrine, invoked by revolutionary priests and bishops who, as standard bearers, have Camilo Torres, Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Mao Tse Tung. And this, you can read in the newspapers every day. Revolutionary movements of priests and bishops in Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, in our own Argentina, in all of Latin America. There is also the famous bishop, Helder Camara. Famous also was there one here; better not to name him. 

The most horrifying case of these all is the case of a  French Dominican, Father Chardonnay, of Montpellier, who gets to state that, today, there are no things of faith nor are there things of God. What is important now is that the Church give herself to the masses, to melt with the masses, and work for the liberation of the masses. God, so they say, is nothing other than the divinization of the obscure forces that act on humanity. God is in the workingmen masses which struggle for their liberation. There is God and there is Christ. And the priest must convert himself, then, into a revolutionary. 

I ask where is this Church heading which alters Catholic dogmas; which encourages the practice of free love, since, teaching that the reason of being of marriage is the purely carnal love, is then encouraging free love; which preaches social revolution. Where is this Church heading which has turned itself into a factor of subversion? Because this is the truth; the naked truth. The Church has become a factor of corruption. I feel sorry for the parents of families, who are to send their innocent sons and daughters to religious schools or to parish catechesis, that they should not find there a priest or a nun who exposes their children to lose their innocence. In the past, parents could feel very safe to send their children confidently to catechism in their parish or a religious school. Now they can no longer feel safe. And so you can see I am not exaggerating in this, I will read to you a note on some public actions of the Most Excellent Cardinal Raúl Silva Enríquez and of the order of Saint Ignatius, which damage the Church gravely, compiled by Salvador Valdez Volandés. "Christmas of year 1977. Santiago, Chile." It says, among other things, the following: “We have in our hands Vea Magazine of July 28, 1966, which in full pages, with photographs, deals with a hot topic: Its title is: 'A Sensational System of Sex Education with double effect is being practiced by the elegant Jesuit school of San Ignacio (a kind of our local Colegio del Salvador) with their high school youngsters and their parents to open their children’s eyes' and it goes on: “Mother Georgita, head of the seventh high school at San Ignacio Arriba, tried to explain human reproduction among 11 to 13-year-old children. The principal, Father Santiago Marshall, prefect Francisco Arrau, director of preparatory — not of humanities, and Fathers Conrado and Itakashi formed the robed team, plus the psychologist from Colegio Jaime Moya” then follows a long, crude list of what such persons teach the young children and their parents, since those experts in sexology think they know more about sexuality than the children’s parents themselves. 

At Colegio San Jorge, a high school, they have recently given the students an assignment on the topic of the Ninth Commandment. Since sexual teaching has to be done with pictures, one of the children, sharper perhaps than the rest, painted a couple in bed and a man watching them through the window. This is how they teach them that they shall not covet their neighbor’s wife. By the way, prostitution is a favorite topic in the teaching of congregational schools in our capital city.

The women religious at Colegio Cristiandad have debated in forums of parents, nuns, and students: What is best, to exercise sexual relations before or after marriage? This and other similar or worse topics have produced the natural adverse reactions of the parents, plus the comments which are ignored only by the members of the Catholic Hierarchy. 

In Revista Mensaje, the official organ of the Jesuits in Santiago de Chile, which finances its heavy losses, Father Gerardo Platt, SJ, its deputy director since a few years ago, rates current films and he takes pleasure of intimate scenes of couples in bed in a form proper of an abnormal person. Said father, forming part of a jury to award prizes to the best pictures in contests,  enumerates ten films, almost all of them with sexual and scandalous topics per ratings of Catholic Action. This is to demonstrate that a father or a mother cannot send their children, except with very great scruples, to Catholic schools and parishes. And that which happens in Chile also happens here in many places, 

Where is the Church heading, which has turned into a factor of subversion? It is heading toward a Christianity accommodated to a world which proclaims the death of God. That is, God has died, God does not exist, and so, one has to live the life — even Christian life as if God did not exist or had died. It is no longer necessary to believe in a transcendent God, according to Protestant theologian Tillich; it is not necessary to believe in a supernatural God, according to Protestant theologian Bultmann; it is not necessary to believe in a religious God, according to theologian Bonhoeffer.

Christianity will no longer have to occupy itself with religious issues. The salvation of the soul will no longer be of interest. A short time ago, a church here in Buenos Aires had a sign at the door reading: “Do not occupy yourself with the salvation of the soul. Occupy yourself with the social problems”. And then the Christian will occupy himself with the problem of hunger, with the problem of Vietnam. That is, he will convert himself into a communist revolutionary, but nothing about the salvation of the souls. A Christianity without churches, without a priesthood. 

In the last few years, eighteen thousand churches have been decommissioned in France. This has been just published by Paris magazine Monde & Vie. And it is even being talked about having Chartres Cathedral demolished because it is said to be a triumphalist church, a medieval church.

All this progressivism in doctrine, in sexual and social matters, all this progressivism is boosted by all of the world’s communication media. We can see it at the local level, magazines Panorama, Primera Plana, Confirmado, Extra, Análisis, Selecciones, etc., etc. do nothing but promote progressivism. Television and radio roundtables, Catholic publications, the entire psycho-technical apparatus, all this is strengthening this progressivist church, these priests who now want to make us forget two thousand years of the Church and introduce us in the Post-Conciliar Church.

We are at a decisive moment. We are in the process of liquidation of the Church, we are passing from the Church of Sardis — the Church of which Saint John talks in the Apocalypse — to the Church of Philadelphia, to a new Church. 

Of course, at this moment it is necessary to have, to hold firmly, the teachings of the Pope. The Pope teaches that there are particularly two things that cannot be put into question; Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church, and the constituting laws of the Church, with the consequent abidance of the pastoral government which Christ established and which the wisdom of the Church has developed and widened. 

"In consequence," adds the Pope, and this on May 25, 1968, "while there must be renovation, modernization, dialogue with other Christians, and religious liberty; there can be no alteration in the traditional dogmas, nor free subjective theology, nor embrace other negative principles of other Christian confessions, nor freedom of conscience as a principle of religious truth." Likewise, recently, on June 29, when he reaffirmed the immutability of doctrine and made that amplified creed in which he ratifies the essential truths of the Church.

But above all what I want to stress is the meaning of the last encyclical, Humanae Vitae, which refers, as you all know, to the problem of contraception. A key central problem because it affects what is the most intimate of man, the intimacy of the family. The thesis of contraception had on its favor the report of the majority of great clerics, psychologists, sociologists, publicized theologians, cardinals of great accomplishment in the world, bishops, priests, great laymen, with favorable propaganda in all kinds of environments all over the world. Humanly, the contraception thesis would appear to have come out triumphant: that is, it is now legitimate to use contraceptives to prevent births, the normal fruit of marriage, which are the children. With this, the natural law would have fallen like the relic of the past of a prudish conscience. The immutability of the Teaching of the Church would have also fallen in a similar manner, and the changes of the Post-Conciliar Church were about to win out. Moral changes, doctrinal changes, the evolving church of Teilhard de Chardin would have triumphed. 

With contraception, the world forces which had the Pope and the Church imprisoned, or not imprisoned. but which intended to imprison them, would have also triumphed. And the Pope was not, or would have not been, the Pope of Jesus Christ, but that of the Masonic and Communist forces which had taken over the Church and which directly from Rome were going to dictate the dogma and morality to the New World. 

This is what humanly could have been expected in the Pope’s teaching on this topic. But, lo and behold! God assists the Church with a special protection. And Paul VI, vicar of Christ, overcoming his weakness of the flesh and his pendular character, senses being assisted by the Holy Spirit and, courageously, proclaims that contraception opposes natural law. And the Pope proclaims thus: he who reflects rightly “should also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit the life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design, which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence, to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and, consequently, is in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will.”

With these words of the Pope, not only is the question settled, but it also is that the Church, the Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church arises as a sign of contradiction before the world. The intentions of the enemies of the world to imprison Jesus Christ and His Church are left shattered and in disarray. The Pope is free before the forces of the world. 

And protests start pouring in into Rome; protests of the modern theologians, those so publicized, Hans Küng, the great Swiss theologian; Gregory Baum, who had prominent participation in the declaration in favor of the Jews. Protests of the major world organizations, of the Organization of American States, and of U Thant. But compliance with the moral law, far from bringing misery and hunger as the OAS proclaims, should bring about a reduction of human selfishness, the cause of misery and hunger. Man is today in the technological condition of giving food and shelter to all of the people who populate the earth. If it does not, it is because of the selfishness of a few who, in their desire to accumulate, prevent the satisfaction of the majority. It is then necessary to get to the root of the evil. The root lies in selfishness. And selfishness is also what is explaining all of the proposals for contraception.

We are passing, gentlemen, from the Church of Sardis, the Church of Croesus, the Church of accumulation of wealth; accumulation of the capitalist world; accumulation of the communist world. We are passing to the Church of Philadelphia. In these coming years and coming months, great things will happen in the world. We are heading toward the splendor of the Church. The splendor is announced by the Marian messages. Since 1830, when the Virgin appears in the miraculous medal to Labouré, then in La Salette, then in Lourdes, then in Pontmain, then in Fatima. The Virgin announces always the same: pray, do penance; the great seers of the moment, especially the great seer and miracle worker Father Pio, Don Bosco and Don Orione, Saint Grignion de Montfort, announce that a great time for the Church is coming. Grignion de Montfort speaks to us about saints, great saints who will leave behind the saints we have known, will leave them behind as the cedars of Lebanon leave the smaller trees; that is, a time of very great spiritual intensity in the world will come, when sanctity will flourish, chastity, virginity, and the great virtues of heroism, of which the Church has given example at all times.

Now, the Church has been reduced to silence. I mean the True Church, the Traditional Church, the Church of all the Councils, from the Council of Nicea through Council Vatican II. The Traditional Church is silent. She cannot talk because publicity has her drowned.  Something great is happening because recently the Holy Spirit has given strength to the Holy Father to defy world publicity and speak, and speak clearly, setting forth the doctrine of all times of the Catholic Church.

To conclude, ladies and gentlemen, I am going to read some words by Don Orione, the saint of charity; not yet officially a saint but a very holy soul. Says Don Orione in one of his writings:  “Let us not be among those catastrophists who believe the world is going to end tomorrow. Corruption and moral evil are great indeed. But I hold and firmly believe that the last one to triumph is to be God and that God will triumph using infinite mercy. God has always triumphed that way. We will have new heavens and new earth. The society restored in Christ, and it will appear younger and more brilliant, and it will appear reanimated, renewed and guided by the Church. Catholicism, which has been filled with the Divine Truth, with charity, with youth, with supernatural force will rise in the world and will put itself at the head of the nascent century to conduct it to honesty, to faith, to civilization, to happiness, to salvation.  A great era is about to come, this by the mercy of Jesus Christ our Lord, and by the heavenly and motherly intercession of Most Holy Mary, I see a grandiose monument raising, not founded on sand, a luminous column of the revealed charity over the Church, over the sole and eternal indestructible rock ‘petra autem erat Christus’. To this era, to this grandiose and never before seen triumph of the Church of Christ, we, in spite of our being minimal, must put in the contribution of our whole life. In whatever is in our power, we ought to prepare it, hurry it with unceasing prayer, with penance, with sacrifice, with the transfusion of our faith and our soul, especially to the young generations, in particular that youth which is the child of the common people and which is in greater need of religion, of morality, of being saved.”

That's all.