Posted on 12/08/2020 6:56:31 PM PST by ebb tide
At the age of 96, Eugenio Scalfari continues to bestow his pearls of wisdom upon humanity. And it appears that he wants to continue for a long time, because he is worried that the sun is going to burn out in less than 5 billion years.
In fact, in his writing that ranges from philosophy to literature, from politics to theology, he often ends his columns with a note of alarm that “the Sun – our guiding star – is getting old,” and even if “it will take millennia before we see a darkened sun” he, Scalfari, is worried. Apparently he thinks he will be present at the unpleasant event and is already thinking about what he will do.
Yesterday however he avoided his usual finale about the sun and, after writing about the relationship between Benedict XVI and Pope Bergoglio he ended with a surprise: “This is the future, and let’s not forget the elementary particles that revolve around the prince of Salina. We hope well.”
What does that have to do with anything? Is it an encrypted message? The usual, odd, literary evocation? To tell the truth, the entire article was surreal. However, given the personal relationship that Scalfari boasts of having with Pope Bergoglio (who at times seems to use their conversations to send messages about his highly advanced doctrinal positions), this piece is quite curious, also because Repubblica served it up on the front page with a very promising headline: “That understanding between the two Popes on the great themes of humanity.”
Scalfari opens solemnly: “In these hours an intellectual agreement is being confirmed of great interest in the Catholic Church and not only there. It is an agreement between two Pontiffs: Pope Francis and Pope Ratzinger.”
The article is accompanied by a photo of the two pontiffs at the consistory, but, apart from that photo (which does not mean anything other than a reciprocal courtesy), it is not clear what “confirmation” there was (and where and when) of an “intellectual agreement” since the pontificates of Benedict XVI and Pope Bergoglio are on diametrically opposed tracks, and also the pronouncements of Ratzinger, as pope emeritus, all follow the Catholic line of his pontificate and the pontificate of John Paul II: the polar opposite of the declarations and actions of Bergoglio.
Even “the great issues of humanity” on which, according to Scalfari, they supposedly agree, are not clarified, because they simply do not exist. For Benedict XVI the greatest tragedy of the present time is the cancellation of God, while for Bergoglio it is the climate….What could be more divergent…
Scalfari’s emphasis, however, is curious: Benedict XVI has “resigned from his former functions, but he is still the holder of his theoretical functions that will last as long as his life will allow him.”
I do not know if Scalfari realizes the theological complexity of the argument he enunciates and what a canonical mess it implies, but certainly it is significant if this concept comes from his conversations with Bergoglio.
Because it confirms that with his (mysterious) “step to the side,” Benedict XVI did not renounce the “Petrine munus,” and this opens enormous questions about what the current situation of the Church and the Pope is.
Scalfari even writes that “all the decisions of the highest importance that Popes can take will be and should be agreed to and actuated by both together.” But this has never happened in these eight years, and it would signify a shared papacy, a novelty of epochal importance.
Scalfari continues in an enigmatic way: he says that “a situation of this sort has never happened” (it’s true), but then he cites three names of popes as precedents (unless he is alluding to those of the Western Schism, and then this is a signal that it’s not flour from his own sack [Translator’s Note: i.e., that Scalfari’s material is being given to him by someone else].
He speaks of a “fraternal understanding between the two…already discussed for some time by the two present popes whose equality” would have been “recognized for some time in terms of thought, but not in such a formal and substantial way.” But what is he referring to? He is assertive, but he does not mention any public facts.
Scalfari adds that “today we can almost imagine the presence of two Popes who succeed in facing the great themes of humanity together.” Then he focuses on the theme of the Trinity, with an exhilarating finale about “diverse religions” for which “Francis and Ratzinger will share the task of having contacts.” The examples? “Think of the Waldensians, the Chinese, the Russians, the Irish, the Turks (are the “Irish” or the “Chinese” supposed to be religions?).
It’s difficult to make heads or tails of anything in the midst of such confusion. But perhaps “Cardinal Scalfari” has heard something. Bergoglio in fact has now exhausted his pontificate, which is now engulfed and dramatically divisive within the Church itself. Is it plausible that he is deluding himself with the idea of relegitimizing it in the coming months using the authority of Benedict XVI? Or in Bergoglian circles is there such a great fear of Benedict, whom an ever-greater number of believers sees as the “true pope” and the true lighthouse?
Scalfari reports confusedly on strategies that he has heard talk of, and he refers to the prince of Salina, the protagonist of [Tomasi di Lampedusa’s novel] Il Gattopardo,” which seemed pertinent to him. But what does he mean by “elementary particles?” Is this an allusion to indivisibility? What is happening inside the Vatican?
Translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino
Ping
Boy is the roman church severely phucked up
Yeah, almoat as bad as US elections.
The gates of hell will not prevail. Ask Catherine of Sienna.
When Jesus was suffering in the Garden, it really bothered Him that He was going to suffer for these men of today like Bergoglio and McCarrick. In fact, He was repulsed by the thought. That is when He asked the Father to take the cup away. Then the Father showed Him all the people throughout history who would suffer for Him. That was when He accepted the cup of suffering.
What the Church is going through Our Lord has prepared us for. It has to take place.
Just call me
“Who’s the Boss?...Confused in California”
What is happening in the Church.
What is happening with the election.
And the huge sphere of COVID which encompasses both the Church and the election.
There are reasons for this which Our Lord is revealing to us.
I have never been able to call Bergoglio “Pope.” That title is reserved for Benedict XVI. Bergoglio may have stolen the trappings of the Pope but the only title he has earned is “thief.”
Bergoglio’s election was as honest as Biden’s.
And they complement each other to this day.
Because it confirms that with his (mysterious) “step to the side,” Benedict XVI did not renounce the “Petrine munus,” and this opens enormous questions about what the current situation of the Church and the Pope is.
This essentially means that each man is holding one of the Keys of Peter. Bergoglio is holding the function as Bishop of Rome - the ministerium, which makes him the head of all other bishops. Benedict is holding the key of the teaching authority of Peter - the munis, which is the more important key.
He asked if there was any other way.
There was no other way.
the laity elect no one in the rcc
they cant even control what priest they have
I’m pretty sure I can’t ask her...
In this election we cannot choose either. The senile communist was chosen for us.
no, we chose Trump
many of them chose Biden
but many of them also cheated
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.