In one of the first post
Ratzinger wrote in his critique of the principle and the hope of Broch. A few days after I learn of the "motu proprio" of the Pope and I expect a flood of reactions. But first I read only the Latin Mass which welcomes Ceronetti the columns of "La Stampa", in the face of Latin but hardly full of "ugliness" is used ironically in the Vatican document revealed by Carlo Ossola on the pages of "Sunday" Il Sole 24 Ore ". But the question of Latin is less. Ratzinger's document in this matter closed with the lunatic fringe
of those who wanted a heterodox reading of certain passages of
Gaudium et Spes, where we talk about unity and universality of the Church, Ratzinger resumed some ideas already put forward in August 2000
in a "statement about the uniqueness and salvific universality of Jesus Christ and the Church." After the '68 point of opening centered on the idea of \u200b\u200bits uniqueness and universality. Said in Parliament poor: Jesus came to save everyone, so the church is because you need to identify l'intera umanità.
L'unicità e l'universalità della chiesa dopo il Concilio vennero interpretati come principi di non esclusione degli altri .
Non ci sono i "sommersi e i salvati". Siamo salvi tutti. Ratzinger invece corregge significativamente il tiro bruciando trent'anni di progresso, per cui quelli di "Rocca" e tanta altra sinistra cattolica da Gozzini in avanti dovrebbe mettersi le mani tra i capelli. La Chiesa è unica perchè c'è nè una, ci ricorda Benedetto, e quell'una è la sola chiesa cattolica romana, con buona pace dei fratelli orientali. E poi, è universale non perchè riguarda tutti, ma perchè il suo magistero deve estendersi e valere su tutti: all are called to comply with it is legitimate and that his power extends to the universe-world. Forgive me for the vulgarity of the exhibition is not worthy of the great-grandson of the theologian
translator of the New Dutch Catechism, but I'm sure I do not want my uncle if I try to be clear to the risk of appearing disrespectful. Yes, because the situation is serious. The restoration and closing raise their voices: enough with the postmodern mush where anything goes: "The church is this and do not sweeten the pill. Take it or leave it." If the strategy of John Paul was bringing the Church
the world, opening up to the demands of modernity (if no other communication) and addressing some risk heterodox strategy dell'intelligentissimo Benetto objected, and now winning. This is
bring the world to the Church . It is a play on words specious. Benedict has understood something fundamental, a point that unites and puts it in perfect harmony with many young people of my generation, the now posthumous post-modern have learned the first lesson of relativism, and then from this relativism have taken a force on but indisputable. That is a truth of "particular" memory of Guicciardini. In a world where there is no basis for absolute truth, it is permissible to cheer for, paradoxically, an absolute truth and absolute faith, even if unfounded. Infuse will often die in the name of a faith, and this belief is often for a pennant, a IN VIEW, the top club in a listed company. This belief is irrational but real and factual. Move million. You do not need the enthusiasm for the truth. No need to attack the truth. You do not need any truth to set up power or power that dominates our lives. This is a first point of concern. The second concern I get from politics and the conflict with the judiciary, and I used to refer to the problem of interceptions for Antonveneta to climb but at a resolution unanimously adopted by the Plenum of the Supreme Council of Magistracy and July 4, 2007 too much publicity in proportion to the importance of the news che praticamente ci informava di un pericolo reale per la democrazia: di un conflitto di potere di proporzioni immani. La risoluzione riguarda i servizi segreti e dice che è stato il Sismi in sè stesso e non i “settori deviati” del servizio a svolgere l'attività di spionaggio nei confronti di magistrati. Dell’archivio segreto di Pio Pompa in via Nazionale a Roma è emerso che il servizio segreto ha svolto un’attività “estranea” ai suoi compiti con lo scopo “intimidire” e far “perdere credibilità” ai magistrati. Perchè metto vicini questi due elementi? Perchè se il reciproco controllo che è base dello stato costituzionale di diritto mostra le sue debolezze in una dynamic to discredit or conflict once again to emerge victorious is the charismatic appeal
a position to know says that ethically good, and the face of such disorder, calm, offers us his absolute solutions. Net, simple, apparently not entirely unfair. To think of this tabto Giacomo Leopardi and those wonderful verses and terribiuli
To himself cites where the "ugly / common injury that can conquer ... property where the power of '
enjambenment perfectly balanced between
rejet and contra-rejet seems insensitive question, me and the reader the future, like a sphinx.
In one of the first post Ratzinger wrote in his critique of the principle and the hope of Broch. A few days after I learn of the "motu proprio" of the Pope and I expect a flood of reactions. But first I read only the Latin Mass which welcomes Ceronetti the columns of "La Stampa", in the face of Latin but hardly full of "ugliness" is used ironically in the Vatican document revealed by Carlo Ossola on the pages of "Sunday" Il Sole 24 Ore ". But the question of Latin is less. Ratzinger's document in this matter closed with the lunatic fringe of those who wanted a heterodox reading of certain passages of Gaudium et Spes, where we talk about unity and universality of the Church, Ratzinger resumed some ideas already put forward in August 2000 in a "statement about the uniqueness and salvific universality of Jesus Christ and the Church." After the '68 point of opening centered on the idea of \u200b\u200bits uniqueness and universality. Said in Parliament poor: Jesus came to save everyone, so the church is because you need to identify l'intera umanità. L'unicità e l'universalità della chiesa dopo il Concilio vennero interpretati come principi di non esclusione degli altri . Non ci sono i "sommersi e i salvati". Siamo salvi tutti. Ratzinger invece corregge significativamente il tiro bruciando trent'anni di progresso, per cui quelli di "Rocca" e tanta altra sinistra cattolica da Gozzini in avanti dovrebbe mettersi le mani tra i capelli. La Chiesa è unica perchè c'è nè una, ci ricorda Benedetto, e quell'una è la sola chiesa cattolica romana, con buona pace dei fratelli orientali. E poi, è universale non perchè riguarda tutti, ma perchè il suo magistero deve estendersi e valere su tutti: all are called to comply with it is legitimate and that his power extends to the universe-world. Forgive me for the vulgarity of the exhibition is not worthy of the great-grandson of the theologian translator of the New Dutch Catechism, but I'm sure I do not want my uncle if I try to be clear to the risk of appearing disrespectful. Yes, because the situation is serious. The restoration and closing raise their voices: enough with the postmodern mush where anything goes: "The church is this and do not sweeten the pill. Take it or leave it." If the strategy of John Paul was bringing the Church the world, opening up to the demands of modernity (if no other communication) and addressing some risk heterodox strategy dell'intelligentissimo Benetto objected, and now winning. This is bring the world to the Church . It is a play on words specious. Benedict has understood something fundamental, a point that unites and puts it in perfect harmony with many young people of my generation, the now posthumous post-modern have learned the first lesson of relativism, and then from this relativism have taken a force on but indisputable. That is a truth of "particular" memory of Guicciardini. In a world where there is no basis for absolute truth, it is permissible to cheer for, paradoxically, an absolute truth and absolute faith, even if unfounded. Infuse will often die in the name of a faith, and this belief is often for a pennant, a IN VIEW, the top club in a listed company. This belief is irrational but real and factual. Move million. You do not need the enthusiasm for the truth. No need to attack the truth. You do not need any truth to set up power or power that dominates our lives. This is a first point of concern. The second concern I get from politics and the conflict with the judiciary, and I used to refer to the problem of interceptions for Antonveneta to climb but at a resolution unanimously adopted by the Plenum of the Supreme Council of Magistracy and July 4, 2007 too much publicity in proportion to the importance of the news che praticamente ci informava di un pericolo reale per la democrazia: di un conflitto di potere di proporzioni immani. La risoluzione riguarda i servizi segreti e dice che è stato il Sismi in sè stesso e non i “settori deviati” del servizio a svolgere l'attività di spionaggio nei confronti di magistrati. Dell’archivio segreto di Pio Pompa in via Nazionale a Roma è emerso che il servizio segreto ha svolto un’attività “estranea” ai suoi compiti con lo scopo “intimidire” e far “perdere credibilità” ai magistrati. Perchè metto vicini questi due elementi? Perchè se il reciproco controllo che è base dello stato costituzionale di diritto mostra le sue debolezze in una dynamic to discredit or conflict once again to emerge victorious is the charismatic appeal a position to know says that ethically good, and the face of such disorder, calm, offers us his absolute solutions. Net, simple, apparently not entirely unfair. To think of this tabto Giacomo Leopardi and those wonderful verses and terribiuli To himself cites where the "ugly / common injury that can conquer ... property where the power of ' enjambenment perfectly balanced between rejet and contra-rejet seems insensitive question, me and the reader the future, like a sphinx. 
0 comments:
Post a Comment