Background: October 27, 1986 for more orthodox Catholics was a dies horribilis. Just at that instance, the friars of the Sacred Convent of Assisi, while celebrating the religious Meeting of Prayer, made an unusual concession to their fellow pagan priests allowed it to cut the throats of African animists two chickens on the altar of Santa clear, with a result so ecumenical as ambiguous. That the meeting of Assisi was an affront that theologians and Vatican experts most persistent were never able to digest, so much so that the stern Joseph Ratzinger, who that day had already been repelled by vice of Karol Wojtyla, 19 November 2005 to sign a document known as Motu Proprio, which revoked the autonomy to the monks pastoral and they are forced for the first time to follow strictly the directives of the bishop of Assisi.
But to us, historians outsider, we are used to confront the sources-above all, a historic impertinent us, we know well the vision of His Holiness, this fact matters little or nothing. We are interested however, and very, what a radiant Vittorio Messori said after the Motu Proprio, which sanctioned a real settlement of accounts within the Catholic community.
Messori on that occasion, Ratzinger ringalluzzito of decision, took the opportunity to tell his Francis of Assisi, and to reiterate what the monks of the Convent, the desecration of the altar of St. Clare, in his opinion they had violated .
Here is our victory with the post Vatican La Stampa Giacomo Galeazzi, article published on the occasion of the promulgation of the Motu Proprio, November 21, 2005: "The Church has a long memory. E 'from inter-religious meeting of 1986 that Joseph Ratzinger had a score to settle with the friars of Assisi. Now things are in place [...] Ratzinger has not forgiven the Franciscan community the excesses of the first day of prayer by religious leaders with Karol Wojtyla. A carnival, according to many, that forced the hand of the Pope and his brothers were to go far beyond the agreements made. [...] The brothers have abused the so-called spirit of Assisi. In reality they worship a holy and disseminate unlawful romantic and Protestant branch, namely the myth of St. Francis, a village idiot who speaks with wolves and birds, give pats on the back at all. A false vulgate, which devalues \u200b\u200bthe message. The story of Francis, in fact, is the most authentic son of the Church of the Crusades'
right. To say that the saint has been despatched by the friars, at the time, a man of flesh and bone is a dance space. But believe Messori, who holds the keys to the truth I'm afraid it is a little more.
Messori's reasoning reveals, rather, how little of this quixotic clerical secularism is aware of the documents to which appeals in vain. If Francis had seen those animists slaughtered two chickens on the altar of Santa Chiara, the authors of the carnival he would friars promoted, not punished, complete with a pat on the back and a double ration of mostaccioli.
The many sermons to the birds, wolves and made gentle, and healing of cows in Greccio, divination and the Gospel to Verna, what if you are not granted to the wonders of popular witchcraft pagan world of that time to encourage mass conversions?
The sacred groves, so dear Franciscan imagination as to what Celtic, and with the forests and planted dozens of trees around the boots made sacred by the sorcerer of Assisi, what if it were a tear with the transcendent theology of the doctors and the dogmatism of visceral ierocrati?
Not to mention, then, the facts of the streams flowing from the rock and capons miraculously transformed in fish numbers circus that the village idiot Francis knew the contrary, of course, some admirer of his day.
Of course, if Francis is on the side of compromise and 'dialogue' with a vengeance, the true protagonist of the story, that Joseph Ratzinger before that aspire to the throne of Peter was the shyster in a cabinet of Tübingen, reminiscent of a close one of the most bigoted opponents and professorial with which Francis had to do in life, Innocent III. How
teaches us this day our Ratzy, for Lothario dei Conti di Segni was a question of the power hierarchy. And as his brilliant successor, Pope Innocent III also saw with disgust and suspicion all those religious practices that fell outside the orthodoxy of the Vatican and monastic rigor, and that type of mold pauperistic pay. Benedict XVI and Pope Innocent III, in a sense, two drops of water. A split there are 'only', and so to speak, eight hundred years.
only, it is difficult to find a character to be associated to Messori. Of course we must understand our Vittorio, there are no more great battles of the past, if their ancestors could afford to put the stake of Giordano Bruno, Vittorio the poor do is to just pick on two broiler chickens.
But maybe not necessarily in that merry band of Acre who camped under the doors of Damietta there is just no one like him. Pelagius for example! Who? Of course, the nice long insisted that the papal legate to continue the siege when the crusaders, Sultan Malik proposed the armistice and the control of Jerusalem. Man I like him! With a little variation, but ...
It appears that Pelagius had a little ' offended when Francis asked permission to go among the Saracens to preach the Gospel.
" Cardinal (Pelagius) said that, by itself, would never have neither license nor command in that sense, because he would not grant licenses that were marked where they were undoubtedly killed. [...] They said that they did not want to go, if not to accomplish a greater good, that they longed to fulfill. Then the cardinal said they might as well go there if they wanted to, but not by any thought that he was sending them. »See Chronicle Ernoul, ff.2231.
To read the sources, you understand that Cardinal Pelagius was not quite the same estimate Messori for Francis.
But those are just details to be bookworms, and as we said before Messori means of chickens, not mice. To each his own ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment